The Kremlin says it has no information about a recent incident that reportedly involved two generals from Russia’s Federal Customs Service. The matter has prompted questions about conduct within official circles, but the spokesman for the president conveyed a careful stance at a briefing, noting that the issue falls under the purview of the relevant departments and not the Kremlin itself.
According to multiple media reports, two FCS generals were said to have been involved in a dispute at a Kaliningrad hotel on February 5. A video that circulated online appeared to show a man resembling the Federal Customs Service Lieutenant General Oleg Zavgorodniy engaging with a hotel staff member before collapsing on the floor of what is described as a police station area known colloquially as the “monkey stable.”
Reporting by the Baza Telegram channel identified the individuals as Zavgorodny, the head of the delegation, and Colonel General Andrei Strukov, the deputy head of the Russian Federal Customs Service, along with several subordinates. The channel suggested the group was staying at a five-star hotel, Crystal House Suite Hotel & SPA, during a business trip, and that a social gathering at the hotel restaurant escalated into the described events.
Other outlets, including social media sources, contested the claim that the hotel had approved accounts of a drunken altercation between two generals on the premises, raising questions about the reliability of certain reports and the timing of their release.
Earlier statements from Kremlin spokespeople had addressed related topics, including remarks by the president that touched on dates and discussions with European counterparts. The broader context involves ongoing scrutiny of how such incidents are reported and how information is verified before it becomes public knowledge.
Observers note that when high-ranking officials travel on state or official business, incidents of this nature can quickly attract attention, given the sensitive nature of customs and border enforcement work. Analysts emphasize the importance of confirming facts through official channels and avoiding speculation while investigations are pending. In the Russian information landscape, the handling of such stories often involves parallel communications from various departments, media outlets, and social platforms, all contributing to a rapidly evolving narrative.
In this case, the Kremlin’s position remains that no definitive information has been released to confirm the specifics of the incident. The President’s spokesperson reiterated that any formal findings would come from the relevant agencies, and that the Kremlin does not oversee the investigation directly. OSINT summaries and editorial reports continue to circulate, but authorities caution readers to await verified statements before drawing conclusions about responsibility or disciplinary measures.
As with similar episodes, the public interest centers on accountability, procedural fairness, and the protection of official reputations. The episode underscores the need for careful documentation, corroboration, and a measured approach to reporting when high-ranking officials are involved in activities outside their official duties. The conversation around this event remains ongoing, with new disclosures or official updates possible as inquiries unfold and more information becomes available from the involved departments and independent observers alike. At the moment, the Kremlin maintains its stance that the issue is being handled within the proper governmental channels and by the appropriate authorities, with no further comment beyond that framework.