Source: PostPravda.info 22.04.2026.
URL: https://postpravda.info/en/stories/freedom-of-speech-en/the-moment-of-truth-the-war/
URL: https://postpravda.info/en/stories/freedom-of-speech-en/the-moment-of-truth-the-war/
Are the Russians bombing civilians? – The moment of truth: Sloviansk after the bombing on April 15, 2026. Photo: Ukrainian National Police
People view the Russian–Ukrainian war through the lens of their own beliefs and expectations, often assuming that only their perspective is correct. Is there such a moment of truth that would allow us to see the war as it really is, regardless of worldview or the influence of propaganda? This is what Nikolai Karpitsky reflects on, having lived through all four years of the war in the frontline city of Sloviansk.
Why do millions of Russians support the war?
I remember my school years. For the most part, Soviet people did not need ideology to support the invasion of Afghanistan. They relied on an instinct to oppose outsiders, much like a gang of schoolchildren heading to another school to beat someone up. In some people, this instinct manifests in an aggressive form. Later, they actively supported the wars against Chechnya, Georgia, and Ukraine. In others, it takes the form of a desire to align with the majority; they mask their passive support for war with peaceful rhetoric and claims that “no one really knows the truth.”
There are also those who claim to value critical thinking, scientific objectivity, or a connection to a higher religious truth. Among them are people who not only support Ukraine but also feel a sense of shame – though these are rare cases. Far more numerous are those who support the aggressive war, and even more are those who try not to notice it.
A special category includes those who understand the criminal nature of the Kremlin regime and the war it has unleashed, yet declare themselves neutral. One highly educated Vaishnava teacher – a true intellectual who suffered under Russian authorities and was forced to emigrate – fully understands that Ukraine is the victim of the war, yet tried to convince me that it is unacceptable to assess the war from a religious perspective. On the one hand, such a warning is justified, as it helps prevent religion from turning into ideology. On the other hand, if we do not find a moment of truth, such neutrality can turn into tolerance for any political position that justifies crimes, including aggressive war.
In practice, it turns out that, while opposing moral relativism from a religious standpoint, this respected Vaishnava teacher inadvertently arrives at justifying moral relativism in politics. This is illustrated by his polemical statement about the Russian–Ukrainian war during a discussion with me: “Both sides claim they are right and are fighting for their survival, while the other side wants to destroy them. This only adds fuel to the fire of war and leads to new deaths and suffering. From this perspective, it follows that the other side is absolute evil, and the only thing left to do is to fight until either the supposedly ‘good’ side wins or is completely destroyed. This is a dead-end path.” I think most modern Western politicians and religious leaders who sympathize with Ukraine would agree with his words.
Is Death the Moment of Truth?
Over time, my own political views have changed, and I have often been mistaken in my assessments of events and politicians. That is why it is important for me to find a moment of truth – to overcome my own misconceptions. A moment of truth is an undeniable fact that allows one to reassess one’s understanding of what is happening, regardless of personal beliefs or expectations.
For example, I cannot determine who is at fault if a husband and wife in a neighboring apartment are constantly arguing. Each constructs a convincing narrative in which the other is to blame. But if the worst happens – if the husband kills the wife – that becomes a moment of truth for me, independent of whatever justifications the murderer may offer.
Death is an absolute reality, independent of opinions or interpretations. That is why I responded to the respected Vaishnava teacher as follows: “Many things can be obscured by arguments that no one knows the truth – but not death. A person is either alive or dead. I know that if I remain under occupation, I will not survive – and that is the truth of life. Why should I care about intellectual games based on moral relativism?”
Every Step Toward a Larger War Revealed Its Own Moment of Truth
In the autumn of 1999, a series of apartment bombings in various Russian cities became the pretext for a new war against Chechnya. While preparing another attack – the bombing of a residential building – a group of Moscow FSB officers was reportedly caught in the act. This fact is presented as a moment of truth that does not depend on political beliefs. Nevertheless, most Russians ignored it and, six months later, voted for Putin in the presidential election, thereby supporting a security-service takeover in Russia and an aggressive war.
In February 2014, Russia occupied Crimea and began sending organized armed groups into eastern Ukraine to ignite war there as well. This was done under the cover of a propaganda campaign about a “Kyiv junta,” alleged reprisals against Russians, and massive flows of refugees from Ukraine. One may hold different political views and be misled by propaganda, but one cannot ignore the moment of truth – the question of who first brought death to Donbas.
On March 13, 2014, in central Donetsk, pro-Russian militants, after a peaceful rally had ended, stabbed a young man, Dmytro Cherniavsky, to death. This is a moment of truth that does not depend on political beliefs or worldview.
On April 12, 2014, pro-Russian militants led by Igor Girkin seized Sloviansk, while Russian propaganda claimed that it was the residents of Donbas themselves who were rising up against Kyiv. Most people in Russia believed this. I tried to persuade them otherwise, but it was completely futile, because people relied on their beliefs and ignored the moment of truth revealed by a simple question: when did reprisals against peaceful residents of Sloviansk begin – before this event or after?
There are numerous testimonies of torture and killings of civilians by Girkin’s militants, and not a single testimony of comparable crimes from the Ukrainian side. I will cite an account I know from Natalia Bradarska, the wife of a deacon of the Pentecostal church “Transfiguration of the Lord,” who was shot.
On June 8, the feast of Trinity, pro-Russian militants abducted four Christians immediately after the service, right outside the church: two deacons – Viktor Bradarsky and Volodymyr Velychko – and the two sons of the pastor, Ruvym and Albert Pavenko. That same day, the abducted men were brutally tortured, and during the night, they were executed. The occupiers concealed the fact of the killings from the families, but after the liberation of Sloviansk, it became possible to reconstruct the crime in detail.
I told representatives of different religious denominations in Tomsk about this event – people with whom I had previously organized interfaith dialogue. I thought this would be the moment of truth that would force them to reassess the situation in Ukraine. But my former Russian friends ignored my message and did not change their attitude toward the war in any way.
A Distorted Picture of the World and the Reality of War
It would seem that the launch of an unprovoked war of conquest against a neighboring state should have become a moment of truth for the citizens of the aggressor country – but the opposite happened. Many Russians who declared political neutrality in 2014 ultimately locked themselves into their distorted worldview and began to justify the war against Ukraine.
A colleague of mine in Russia, also a Doctor of Philosophy, a scholar of religion, and a Vaishnava – an adherent of an Indian spiritual tradition – recently wrote a comment under my post: “The USSR imposed its ideology, and did so in vain, and lost. Now the United States imposes Pax Americana. They interfered in the peaceful neighborly relations between Ukraine and Russia.” Such a statement is only possible with a complete misunderstanding or disregard for lived experience in Ukraine, when instead of searching for a moment of truth, the assumptions of a distorted worldview are accepted by default. In other words, neither scientific critical thinking nor a sense of connection to a higher religious truth provides sufficient grounding for an adequate perception of reality.
We can all be mistaken, because we interpret events within the framework of our own worldview. In particular, despite the obvious Russian threat, it is difficult for residents of European countries to imagine that their cities could be destroyed by bombardment. It was also difficult for me to imagine that Russia would destroy Ukrainian cities, even though I already knew how Russian forces had destroyed Grozny and Aleppo.
At the beginning of the invasion, the horizon of expectations for Ukrainian residents was very limited – several weeks, or at most a few months. It was too frightening to imagine that the war would last for many years: the psyche’s defense mechanisms do not allow one to fully confront such a possibility. Therefore, it is necessary to rely on moment of truth that help restore an adequate perception of reality, even if doing so is very painful.
We arrive at a moment of truth during war when we discard subjective judgments and expectations and identify what is undeniable. During war, what is undeniable is the proximity of death. That is why I responded to my Russian colleague as follows: “If you were to kill or rape someone, could your actions be justified by claiming that American propaganda destroyed your good neighborly relations with the victim? For four years now, Russians have been trying to kill me, my friends, and my colleagues, and tens of millions support this intention. After that, hearing about good neighborly relations is insulting.”
Random and Inevitable Death
There is no safe place in Ukraine: any resident can be killed at any moment. Random death from a missile threatens even those deep in the rear. However, the more dangerous a place is, the faster you get used to it. It is impossible to constantly think about the threat to your life, and when the bombing stops, you simply forget about the danger.
The full-scale invasion shattered the habitual feeling of life. In the first days, the “fog of war” plunged us into a state of complete uncertainty – it was impossible to adequately assess the immediate threat to our lives. The explosion of a cruise missile right above my home dispelled this fog: random death can strike at any moment. That first time, it was so unfamiliar that I was a few minutes late for a class with my students, which I was conducting remotely. Later, I became so accustomed to such explosions that I stopped paying attention to them.
This became another moment of truth for me: an entire state is working to kill the residents of a neighboring country. Soon, among my friends and colleagues, there were casualties, and through this prism of death, I began to look at my former friends in Russia. The moment of truth revealed the falseness of those who expressed sympathy for Ukraine while claiming that “brotherly nations” had been set against each other by Americans, that all sides were to blame for the war, and that it was not Russia but only Putin who was waging the war against Ukraine.
As I began writing this article, a one-and-a-half-ton aerial bomb was dropped in the center of Sloviansk. Strikes on the city had occurred before, quite regularly, but usually 250-kilogram bombs were used. This one was six times more powerful: two buildings were destroyed, 39 apartment blocks were damaged, and I was left without electricity. When it was restored, I learned that on the night of April 15–16, Russia had carried out a large-scale combined attack across Ukraine. According to preliminary data, 16–17 people were killed and more than 120 were injured. The main strikes hit residential areas: people were killed in their apartments in Kyiv, Odesa, Dnipro, Kharkiv, and other cities.
Russia is a large country, and it is difficult to govern it through precise commands: there is no guarantee that orders will not be distorted as they pass down the hierarchy. Therefore, it is governed through guidelines. The leadership makes clear what it wants, and subordinates try to curry favor, sometimes contrary to expediency and common sense. Russia also wages war in accordance with such guidelines. For example, during the February frosts, there was a guideline to disable the energy system and freeze Ukraine. Now it is spring; the leadership’s interest in this goal has waned, and with it the zeal of those carrying out the orders.
While I was writing this, another heavy aerial bomb was dropped on the center of our city. The electricity went out briefly; when it came back, I continued writing – and then two powerful explosions sounded very close by. All of this suggests that the Russian leadership has issued a new guideline – to deliberately bomb residential neighborhoods. Of course, they were bombed before as well, but now the likelihood of being killed has increased many times over – at least until another guideline is issued.
The Approaching Kill Zone – a Moment of Truth for Those Living in Frontline Areas
Death from shelling is random – it is like “Russian roulette.” Another matter is the wave of occupiers who destroy everything in their path. Even if one manages to survive it, one may end up in an occupied zone – and then it is not just death that threatens, but death after torture.
This summer, Russian forces are again trying to capture Sloviansk; they first attempted this in the summer of 2022. Over the four years of war that I have spent in Sloviansk, an entire technological era of warfare has changed: you no longer see multiple rocket launch systems on the streets, and tanks are perceived like mammoths from a prehistoric age. Now it is a war of drones, robots, and electronic technologies.
In the spring of 2022, I could hear, week after week, the artillery cannonade drawing closer: first somewhere far away – forty kilometers from us – then thirty, then twenty… In the evenings, white flashes could be seen over the horizon – there was fighting there too, but so far away that the sounds did not reach us. The most frightening thing was the information isolation during prolonged power outages, when you do not know what is happening at the front: what if the enemy has already broken through, and it is too late to flee?
Russian forces advanced, creating in front of them a wall of artillery fire that ground everything into dust. It felt as if a wave of orcs was approaching, destroying everything in its path. Appealing to their humanity is pointless, and there is no hope for mercy. This approaching death became a moment of truth, demonstrating that Russia is waging this war for destruction, not for any political gain.
Now it is a different era of war – this is evident if you walk through the city. You no longer encounter armored vehicles crushing the asphalt as in 2022; now the roads look new and are covered with anti-drone nets. There are no warplanes roaring overhead; instead, you increasingly hear the buzzing, humming, and sometimes whistling of deadly drones. You never know whether that sound will be the last you hear in your life. These drones control the territory around the city, and fifteen kilometers to the east begins a continuous kill zone, where everything that moves is destroyed.
So far, it has not been possible to stop the advance of this zone; moreover, Russia is bringing in additional troops in our direction. How the summer battle for Donbas will end is unknown. I hope that Russian forces will not succeed in capturing our city, but the probability that it will end up within the kill zone remains high.
Once, I lived in Russia and communicated with people who seemed intelligent and decent. Back then, they appeared quite normal: some demonstrated critical thinking grounded in culture, while others preached goodness and moral values based on their religious experience. Now, however, they assess the war within their distorted worldview. I cannot draw their attention to the moment of truth – they will neither listen to nor read me. Nevertheless, I share with them a common collective responsibility for their attitude toward the war.
