Journalists are heroes. So are the press officers of the Armed Forces of Ukraine
With Russia’s 10-plus-year war of genocide against the Ukrainian people continuing unabated, along with a multitude of ongoing global conflicts afflicting vast numbers of the earth’s populace, the pillars of liberty taken for granted at the beginning of the 21st century are now in peril. Due to the tyrants and despots leading the regimes in Iran, Venezuela, North Korea, and the aforementioned Russia, those practicing possibly the most virtuous of these values, the right to a free press, have come under direct physical assault and seen themselves become the targets of unrelenting psychological warfare operations.
Despite efforts by the enemies of freedom to replace journalism with vacuous slogans and a desire to pull the global community into a void of information emptiness, reporters and correspondents of every medium, speaking and writing in nearly every conceivable language, refuse to be silenced. This defiance alone qualifies journalists to be labeled heroes. When factoring in risks to their freedom along with constant physical danger, there is no question that journalists are heroes.
Yet, during times of war and terrorism, even the most democratic and liberal nations are often accused by these heroes of curtailing their rights to ply their trade. Access limitations, in place due to the need for enhanced operational security, can be viewed as oppressive and punitive by those looking to carry out their duties. In the case of those responsible for facilitating free and fair journalism on behalf of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, the facts of Russia’s ongoing full-scale invasion and regulations imposed by the Rada under the ongoing special law period necessitates any accusations of censorship against the Ukrainian Defense Forces by the independent media to be viewed through a more nuanced reality.
On my recent trip to Chasiv Yar, the directorate of Strategic Communications of the General Staff allowed me to bring along an embedded civilian correspondent. This effort to bring a more comprehensive view of Ukraine’s fight for liberation to a broader audience indicates the championing of free speech by President Zelenskyy and Colonel-General Syrskyi, along with their respective staffs. Although receiving approval to bring this journalist along was an essential first step, the fluid nature of the Eastern front and ever-changing lines of contact meant gaining approval from on-the-ground, in-the-know military press officers representing area tactical groups and individual brigades. Going through the step-by-step process of ensuring our access to the zero-line gave me deeper insight and a much clearer understanding of what military officials balance to allow free speech while remaining focused on troop safety and operational integrity.
That these are thankless positions is an unspoken truth. One mistake and the lives of dozens of soldiers could be lost, and if they do their job correctly, there is no praise as it is simply an expected function of their role. My first sit down with the Lugansk* Operational Tactical Group lead press officials lasted several hours. Sitting around a tight table, drinking bitter coffee along the road to Chasiv Yar, the civilian journalist and I laid out the vision of what we each wished to accomplish and why it made sense that the correspondent be allowed into the most intense area of operations during such fierce fighting. In addition to the general access, I lobbied for the reporter to be given direct embed time with each of the leading brigades fighting around Chasiv Yar. A comprehensive story required a personal connection, which meant being alongside the troops as they carried out their missions. We left the meeting feeling cautiously optimistic but with no promises.
Soon, we were in contact with representatives of the Army’s 5th, 41st, and 56th Brigades. Each peppered us with questions about previous experiences, expectations, and the ability to follow commands under fire. Their concerns were reasonable and boiled down to ensuring our presence would not harm their troops. After gaining each other's confidence, the ensuing week saw us work alongside two of the country’s top recon units and inside one of the nation’s top frontline medical stabilization points.
For over a week, as I carried out multiple roles on behalf of the AFU and made numerous requests to them, these Donbas-based officers morphed from being colleagues in the Armed Forces of Ukraine who saw us united by the same flag and same desire for victory to becoming partners in the battle save not only Ukraine but democracy as a whole. Because of this rapid metamorphosis and the success of our trip, before departing back to Kyiv, I asked them to gather as a group for an informal round table to discuss how they saw their work and how they viewed the mass media as a whole. A short get-together stretched to over three hours as they riffed on multiple topics and offered a plethora of thoughts on what working with journalists means to them.
The word that sticks out is positivity. It led the discussion and was uttered by a Captain with service time predating the ATO's beginning in 2014. In their view, every request begins with the desire to find a positive solution. Another spoke up on the same topic. A Major with nearly a decade of service said they don’t look to say no to any request and that if they did, they felt that it was essential to tell the outlet why they were having a request rejected. When the attendees broached the topic of opsec, the first signs of frustration became apparent. Listing a litany of times when media ignored security protocols or allowed the revelation of sensitive information, the consensus was that despite having the ability to revoke the credentials of an offending party, it was imperative not to let it get that far since any damage caused by sloppy work couldn’t be undone. Two other practices that vexed the group also came up. The first was the propensity for producers or journalists to call for a comment on an issue that was still under investigation and couldn’t be discussed and then not accept that answer. The second complaint involved attempts to go around official channels and speak to soldiers who are either not in the know or are under duress and who get used for clickbait quotes that don’t express the actual sentiment of a unit or company nor what is actually taking place in battle. Our conversation wrapped with a final point subsequently agreed upon by all. That is the need for radical trust to guide the interactions between parties and the outsized influence local producers played to ensure this trust exists.
During my six months as a journalist in Kharkiv at the beginning of the full-scale invasion, I often took press officers to task for what I felt was their failure to appreciate the need for independent coverage in a war zone. In the last week, after more than two years at war, I’ve realized that appreciation has existed among these officers for the entirety of my time here. I simply didn’t recognize it when ensconced in the fog of war. I left for Kyiv, taking two observations with me: Just like journalists, press officers of the Armed Forces of Ukraine are human beings; just like journalists, press officers from the Armed Forces of Ukraine are heroes, too.
Sergeant Sarah Ashton-Cirillo, Armed Forces of Ukraine
Photo credit: Sergeant Sarah Ashton-Cirillo
In the photo: Frontline press officers of the Armed Forces of Ukraine representing the 5th, 41st, and 56th Brigades along with the Luhansk Tactical Operational Group.
(This is the final entry in a series of dispatches by Sergeant Sarah Ashton-Cirillo from the eastern frontlines. You can read the previous entries here and here.)
The author's opinions do not necessarily reflect those of Ukrinform's editorial board.
