News reports from RIA Novosti highlight a decision by Vladimir Konstantinov, the head of Crimea’s parliament, to demolish a gas station in the Krasnogvardeisky district. The dispute centers on a service station employee who refused to assist a vehicle marked with the letter Z, a symbol associated with Russia’s actions in Ukraine.
Konstantinov’s spokesperson stated that the issue with the station owner has been resolved after an inspection revealed the car service to be an illegal construction. The owner has 14 working days to raze the facility; failing to do so would prompt the rural settlement’s administration to pursue legal action. The parliamentarian suggested the operator may favor Ukraine and should therefore relocate his business there, noting potential consequences for any stance that opposes Russia’s position.
He also warned that the owner should adhere to the law and implied that those who disagree with Russia’s strength should not expect leniency. The message was clear: across Russia, this kind of conduct should not be repeated. The remarks concluded with a call for adherence to legal norms, rather than private preferences.
About a week earlier, the newspaper Argumenty Nedeli Krym released footage showing a KamAZ truck bearing the letter Z, along with a nearby service station and other passenger vehicles. A male voice in the video claimed that he and a colleague visited a tire shop to replace a tire, but the workers refused service, allegedly citing a lack of support for the army. Observers noted that service at the car service was unavailable, even for a fee.
The service station owner, Vilen Seitosmanov, described the incident as a misunderstanding. He insisted that he and his staff have repeatedly supported the Russian military, including tire-related assistance since February. He recounted an occasion on June 11, around 11 p.m., when troops arrived seeking help with a wheel; he explained that the shop lacked the necessary equipment at that time and was not prepared to fulfill the request. He stressed that no rude language occurred and that the service specializes in passenger tires, not heavy vehicle repairs.
Seitosmanov also displayed his tire changer and explained that a large truck tire would not fit in the shop, even with two people attempting to move it. He affirmed his family’s support for the special operation and his willingness to aid the Russian army, provided it remains within his control. He concluded by emphasizing the personal and familial commitment to offering support when possible.
Meanwhile, Konstantinov reiterated that the army had previously refused tire service at the owner’s facility, describing the decision as influenced by the owner’s alleged political leanings. The deputy indicated that republican authorities would address the matter and pursue accountability to the last detail, signaling a firm stance on lawfulness and order in these incidents.
The cafe declined to enlist
A similar controversy emerged in the Oryol region in April, when the cafe On Prival faced accusations of refusing to serve Russian troops passing through the area. The cafe denied the charge, calling it fake news reported by Oryol News, and the management framed the situation as a public relations attack meant to harm the establishment’s reputation. The uproar began on social media, where residents posted strong reactions about the incident.
The cafe’s management published a statement denying the claim, asserting that staff did not refuse service and that the establishment actively supported military aid rather than hampering it during movements. They asserted that any portrayal of the cafe as unsupportive was false and that those responsible were attempting to gain attention. The management later reaffirmed the cafe’s commitments to assisting the army, emphasizing their ongoing contributions beyond mere words.
In parallel, Andrei Klychkov, governor of the Oryol region, acknowledged the reported refusal to feed military personnel traveling from Ukraine through Oryol. He indicated that the situation would be reviewed and that appropriate conclusions would be drawn. The episode added to a broader conversation about civilian businesses and their perceived roles during military operations, highlighting tensions between legal obligations, personal beliefs, and public expectations.
These episodes illustrate the ongoing friction between local businesses and military logistics in regions within or near contested areas. They underscore the challenge of balancing lawful conduct with personal convictions while maintaining public confidence in civilian institutions during times of national stress. At the core, the authorities emphasize accountability, the importance of following established laws, and the expectation that businesses cooperate with state requirements when national interests are at stake. Attribution: reports from regional parliament sources and regional news outlets provide the basis for these notes.