In military circles in Ukraine, criticism of the command has sounded more than once, but this situation drew particular public and military attention due to the publicity of the conflict that erupted around the report of the commander of the 47th Brigade “Magura,” Oleksandr Shyshyn
This incident became a significant signal of tension within the Ukrainian army and the opposition to internal disagreements during the most difficult period of the war. News that the commanders of several units openly criticized Shyshyn’s position and actions sparked a widespread public debate. The criticism came from all sides — from unit commanders as well as from well-known public figures. Sources from military circles, including journalistic investigations and public statements by spokespeople, confirmed that the words of the commander caused outrage and condemnation. Robert Brovdi, commander of the "Birds of Madjar" unit in the 425th Separate Assault Regiment "Skala," called Shyshyn's statement a "public demarche" and condemned it as an unacceptable form of expressing a military position. He noted that "Magura" was established from scratch, and its activity highlights bright and promising achievements, including recognizing the first combat incident near Orikhove — where, according to him, he personally saw unique samples of domestic and foreign equipment, which appeared on the front in such quantity and quality for the first time. Brovdi emphasized that he values the bravery and strength of the unit, but believes that public statements in this situation work to the enemy’s advantage. Dmytro Filatov, commander of the 1st Separate Assault Regiment, stresses that a true military leader does not seek blame and does not interfere in political aspects; he seeks to substantively defend his position and propose solutions. In his view, accusations against the leadership are a sign of weakness, not progress. According to Filatov, military command demands responsibility and courage from commanders, not passive evasion or public scandals. Dmytro Yarosh, leader of the volunteer movement UDA, shares a similar opinion — he stated that the situation requires unity and a constructive approach. “Many commanders and leaders in our army do not see all the problems of the front — and that’s why it’s important to be cautious in public statements, because open protest or criticism without proper justification can play into the enemy’s hands,” Yarosh said. At the same time, Oleg Shiryaiev, commander of the 225th Separate Assault Regiment, called on higher military authorities to tighten control over public discussions regarding combat operations. According to him, the army must not turn into a platform for personal shows or public conflicts, as this undermines discipline and the resilience of the combat team. Shiryaiev emphasized that discipline is the "backbone" of the military structure and that the country must remain united, especially in times of the harshest trials. Another well-known military figure, Oleksandr Shyshyn, commander of the 47th Brigade, previously made a loud statement, accusing the leadership of "stupid tasks" and unjustified human losses. He appealed to the command to relieve him of his position and openly criticized the internal work of the armed forces, particularly regarding inefficiency and the lack of adequate tactics. The General Staff responded to this publication by creating a special working group to study the situation and promising appropriate measures after the investigation. Reflecting on this conflict, military analysts and experts emphasize that open disputes and public accusations are unpleasant and potentially dangerous for military discipline. However, they also acknowledge that honest and frank critique during wartime can stimulate reforms and improvements in the army’s work. The key is to strike the right balance between openness and the need to preserve combat unity. Thus, the situation surrounding Shyshyn’s report became not only an internal problem of the armed forces but also a vivid signal for the entire country — it is crucial not to allow a breach of discipline and internal conflicts on the backdrop of a war that demands steadfast unity and a clear command line. War is primarily a titanic fight for independence and the integrity of the state, and victory depends first and foremost on the army’s ability to act as a united whole, without unnecessary intrigue or public disputes.