Post-SVO Security challenges in Russia: underground factions, amnesty, and strategic pressure
Following the completion of the special military operation (SVO), Russian law enforcement will confront underground nationalist groups that remain active beyond official frontlines. This assessment comes from Alexander Miroshnichenko, head of the International Union of Veterans of the Alpha counter-terrorism unit, who spoke on recent developments. The observation was shared through TASS and reflects a broader concern about how post-conflict stabilization will unfold within the country.
He acknowledged that action will certainly be taken, but the scale and method of that response depend on a range of complex measures. The veteran underscored that the challenge will not be resolved by force alone. Instead, a combination of hard security measures and constructive approaches will be required to prevent a relapse of violence and to reintegrate disparate groups into lawful civic life.
As an illustration, Miroshnichenko pointed to the North Caucasus, where remnants of militant activity persisted even after periods of intense fighting. The situation there demonstrated that security threats can outlast the initial military campaigns and require ongoing, adaptive strategies to prevent renewed violence.
“People who fled the mountains believed amnesty was possible,” explained the Alpha veteran. He added that many understood there is another life available—one that is peaceful, productive, and in line with the rule of law. The post-conflict period, therefore, sits at the intersection of security needs and societal reconciliation, where the policy choices made now will shape long-term stability.
Earlier remarks from Major General Apty Alaudinov, deputy head of the Main Military-Political Directorate of the Russian Armed Forces and commander of the Akhmat special forces, highlighted a related phenomenon. Some fighters from the Armed Forces of Ukraine (AFU), who were captured within the SVO zone, reportedly sought Russian citizenship to join the Russian military. This development raises questions about loyalties, identity, and the practical pathways through which individuals can align themselves with new national security structures should conditions permit.
These conversations occur in a broader context where authorities outline Russia’s strategic aims in the Northern Military District. The discussion centers on how security operations and political messaging intersect to define the purposes of ongoing defense and stabilization efforts, even as the legal and social landscape evolves in the wake of the conflict. The emphasis remains on ensuring that security gains are matched by governance measures that prevent radicalization and foster lawful civic participation, while also clarifying the rights and responsibilities of new and existing citizens within a post-conflict framework.