At the beginning of the full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine, I went to Turkey. My task, assigned by the Ukrainian authorities, was to ensure the urgent supply of Turkish weapons to Ukraine, primarily the famous Bayraktar drones, and to explain the essence of the bloody war to the Turkish media.

The first meeting was with the president of the Baykar concern, Haluk Bayraktar.

My team and I gave him a list containing about 20–30 items of the weapons we urgently needed. Haluk Bey, sitting down at the phone, started calling various depots and agencies to find out how much of each weapon they could urgently sell him.

I clearly remember his conversation with his deputy. Haluk Bey asked how many Bayraktars were available for delivery to Ukraine. The deputy named a number.

The president of the concern said that this amount was insufficient and asked him to contact the Ministry of Defense on his behalf to issue the Bayraktars they had in stock, guaranteeing that they would replace the same amount shortly.

The deputy replied: – By the way, the Ukrainians have not yet fully paid for previous deliveries. – Do what you’re told. We’ll sort out the money later. People are dying there now… — Haluk Bey replied irritably.

And then I imagine what impression a publication in the Ukrainian press titled "Minister Umerov’s ‘Ministry of Sabotage’" would make on him, which explains that things are so bad in our Ministry of Defense because people with close ties to hostile Turkey are in charge there.

And it would be very strange if these and similar publications were not immediately exploited by Russian propaganda.

In such moments, you involuntarily ask yourself: is this the authors' oversight or some kind of deliberate order?

It’s not at all about hiding violations and abuses, if they exist, in the defense sector.

On the contrary, because abuses during wartime can cost many of our soldiers their lives. But for investigating abuses, we have many relevant agencies, and, ultimately, the president of the country, to whom one can directly address their thoughts and suspicions — not through the media.

Why the expression “Turkish courtyard” offends Crimean Tatars and is unacceptable

Another unpleasant aspect of the publication was the use of the phrase “Turkish courtyard.” From the text, it looks as if Crimean Tatars, quite possibly implanted in Ukrainian government structures by hostile Turkey, are sabotaging Ukraine’s rear.

The outrage at this phrase was felt not only by me but also by many of our compatriots in occupied Crimea who read the series of publications attempting to discredit Minister Rustem Umerov and his advisors among the Crimean Tatars.

I felt something similar during Viktor Yanukovych’s rule. Since Crimean Tatars and the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people, which I led, were the main force opposing his regime in Crimea, Yanukovych, ahead of the 2012 parliamentary elections, openly told me: “But I can do a lot of harm to you if I want, after all, I have many more opportunities…”

At that time, I did not take his threats seriously. We live in a democratic country, I thought, and if you try to cause harm, you will see a response that will not be weak.

Later it turned out that Yanukovych gave an order to the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) to find any dirt or grounds for arrest against me by any means. They started frantic work, but they did not finish before Yanukovych fled Ukraine at the beginning of 2014.

Since the entire leadership of the SBU in Crimea, and generally 87% of its staff, turned out to be traitors who switched to serve the Russian FSB, they tried to use their “creations” after the occupation of Crimea.

In many Russian publications and sites in early April 2016, when the occupiers were deciding to ban the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people, citing Turkey’s financial assistance to Crimean Tatars (the largest amount was about $2.5 million for restoring the Zindzhirli Madrasa in Bakhchisarai, and about $1 million for holding the World Congress of Crimean Tatars in Ankara in August 2015), and my meetings with various Turkish politicians, it was concluded that I worked for Turkish intelligence.

I counted about a hundred such publications with headlines like “SBU accused Dzhemilev of spying for Turkey and separatism,” “Ukraine declared Dzhemilev a Turkish spy,” “Crimean Mejlis — Turkish agent” on Russian and some pro-Russian Ukrainian websites.

Now I notice very similar narratives in various publications against Umerov. Why else would authors list which Turkish companies the minister cooperated with and who his Turkish business partners were?

I find it hard to judge the successes or failures of the current Minister of Defense Umerov. But according to the media, since his appointment, the defense ministry has been cleaning up corruption schemes.

Domestic arms production, including with foreign investors, has significantly increased. The production of domestic drones has increased manyfold.

What Ukraine’s policy and the population’s attitude should be toward “Russian passports” in occupied Crimea

In publications against Rustem Umerov, emphasis is placed on the fact that “bad advisors” among Crimean Tatars had business in Turkey and even in occupied Crimea and possibly received Russian passports.

But the fact that the FSB is currently hunting them, and if they appear in Crimea, they will be immediately arrested or simply taken away and killed, as often happens there, means nothing to the authors of such materials.

Regarding appointments in the Ministry of Defense: most are made after passing checks by relevant agencies, and if there is suspicion of working for the enemy, an investigation is appointed.

It is one thing if someone living in the free part of Ukraine obtains the passport of the country that attacked us for their business or other reasons — then there are grounds for investigation or at least distrust. But it is quite another when people are forced to take a Russian passport in the occupied part of Ukraine.

In Crimea, if you do not get a Russian passport, you must apply to the occupiers for a “residence permit” in your homeland, in your own home. If the occupiers give such a permit, it is only for 90 days. Then you must leave Crimea and come back to apply again for the next 90 days.

Whether such applications succeed is a big question. People may simply be refused for some contrived reason or, most likely, be found a reason for arrest, especially if they ever said or wrote something negative about the occupiers, Russia, Putin, or his gang, or had contacts with members of the banned in Russia Mejlis, etc.

A person without a Russian passport cannot find a job, cannot send their children even to elementary school, cannot register their property, receive a pension, or even see a doctor, because at clinics you first need to show a passport, and only then: “What is your complaint?”

So there remains only a dilemma: either get their passport or leave the peninsula, which is exactly what the occupiers want from Crimean Tatars. I know a few people with a strong feeling of disgust who live in Crimea and still have not received a Russian passport.

They try to stay home as much as possible and avoid going anywhere because any district policeman can detain them for lack of a residence permit, and then — at least deportation or something worse, as already mentioned.

The authors of “anti-Umerov publications” who mock the fact that some Crimean Tatars living in free Ukraine once received Russian passports probably assume that all Crimean Tatars should have happily left their homeland for the occupiers. Then the occupiers would finally breathe freely. But Crimean Tatars have no intention of giving such pleasure to the occupiers.

Also, they do not consider the fact that if people have not submitted a statement of voluntary renunciation of Ukrainian citizenship, the forced passports imposed on them by occupiers have no legal significance and they remain full citizens of Ukraine.

The authors probably do not realize they themselves assist the propaganda aims of the occupiers, who impose their passports on Ukrainian citizens in the occupied territories (and the procedure of refusing such passports is so complicated that it is nearly impossible).