Recently, President Vladimir Putin named Sergei Surovikin as the commander of Russian forces in Ukraine. In many articles announcing his appointment, military sources (mainly the Ministry of Defense (MOD) in the United Kingdom) state that he is corrupt, brutal, and ruthless on the battlefield. According to the New York Times, he served in Chechnya in the early 2000s and commanded Russian forces in Syria, where numerous human rights violations occurred. Also, according to a report in The Guardian, Surovikin led a rifle division that broke barriers set up by pro-democracy protesters during the 1991 attempted coup by Soviet hardliners and killed three people.

It is much harder to pin him down on any concrete allegations of corruption other than the possibility of weapons dealing. Brokering arms is undoubtedly an unsavory business, but without in-depth evidence, it seems a stretch to label Surovikin as corrupt. This raises the issue of media outlets and other organizations stating that a person may be involved in corruption, but fail to back up such allegations with credible evidence. It seems clear that Surovikin is likely a war criminal, but is he corrupt? It is much more difficult to tell without hard facts.