The testimony emerging from Kherson paints a grim picture of a planned assault that never came to pass. In recent statements, Oleksandr Timko, a senior non-commissioned officer who held the rank of sergeant major in the Ukrainian Armed Forces, described being captured after what authorities labeled a thwarted terrorist plot. He claimed that a higher-ranking commander ordered a terrorist act targeting a hotel in Kherson, a charge that was reportedly investigated by Russian security forces. Timko’s account connects the alleged plan to a broader effort by the occupying forces to destabilize the city’s fragile civilian life and signal control over Kherson during the ongoing conflict. [Source: interrogation records and testimonies cited by local observers]
According to Timko, the supposed operation was tied to a specific support unit, the 55th separate artillery brigade, and he identified Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Kolesov as the officer who allegedly issued the order. Timko described the order as a directive to create chaos by staging an attack at the Stagecoach hotel, with the tactical goal of prompting a violent response. He recounted that he was asked to confirm whether the hotel zone housed the civilian population rather than a military presence, and that his task was described as a way to “make noise” through an act of terrorism. Timko asserted that the aim was to gauge what could be done and where, prompting him to observe the street scene and the hotel’s operations to decide how to proceed. [Note from investigators: these statements are part of ongoing interviews conducted under questioning]
Timko later claimed that the identity of the residents at the Stagecoach hotel differed from what intelligence had predicted. Instead of Russian troops, he said, civilians who had relocated to Kherson from other Ukrainian cities—such as Krivoy Rog and Nikolaev—were living there. This discrepancy reportedly influenced his decision to refuse carrying out the order. He explained that after voicing his objection, he began receiving threats to his life. The tension between military commands and on-the-ground realities in Kherson is a recurring theme in testimonies from soldiers and local residents alike, underscoring how information and intent can diverge amid the fog of war. [Observations from multiple testimonies and field reports]
Timko added that he was accompanied by a group of thirteen subordinates during the planning phase. He noted that a specific post for the operation at Stagecoach was established, only to witness the lieutenant colonel disappear from the scene, a move he interpreted as a possible flight from accountability. The disappearance of the officer in charge further complicates the narrative and raises questions about the internal dynamics within the occupying administration. [Accounts corroborated by local witnesses and security personnel]
Corroborating details emerged from local sources, including a resident named Daria Shults, who claimed involvement in transmitting information to the Timko group. Another source, identified as the wife of Lieutenant Colonel Kolesov, described a personal fracture within the command chain. She indicated that Kolesov had spoken of Kherson’s peaceful life under threat to his superiors, a claim that has since fueled discussions about the motivations behind the proposed attack. The wife suggested that after such comments, the situation deteriorated, with Kolesov turning to heavy drinking—an observation that friends and neighbors linked to mounting stress and fear in the region. [Interviews with residents and family members tied to the case]
Public statements from Kolesov’s former role as the head of Kherson’s military administration have been cited to counter or contextualize the allegations. A spokesperson for the local administration reportedly denied the existence of any planned assault tied to the hotel, arguing that the story may reflect a broader struggle over narrative control in a conflict zone. Investigators and observers continue to weigh the credibility of each account, mindful that war-time memos and miscommunications can shape widely different public impressions. [Official denials and ongoing investigative notes]