(MOSCOW) – On the night of 18 March 2026, Ilya Remeslo, a lawyer and historically reliable operative within the Russian establishment, publicly withdrew his support for the Russian dictator. Remeslo published a detailed manifesto outlining six specific reasons for his defection, culminating in a demand for the dictator to step down and face prosecution as a war criminal and a thief. He attributed his opposition to the dictator’s allegedly morbid and obsessive lust for luxury. Remeslo expanded his unprecedented public critique by predicting the complete overthrow of the Russian dictator before the end of 2026.
Remeslo subsequently directed his criticism towards Sergei Kirienko, alleging that the official orchestrated an incident in which food was thrown at the late opposition figure Alexei Navalny inside an airport. Remeslo also severely criticised the purported liberation of the Donbas region in Ukraine. He questioned the tangible benefits of the military campaign for ordinary Russian citizens, noting that the area has been completely razed and that the annexed provinces are now burdened with billions of rubles in reconstruction debts. He directed these specific questions at the remaining supporters of the Russian dictator.
While the international audience may be unfamiliar with Remeslo, who currently lacks a comprehensive public biography, his history within the Russian political system is extensive. Independent observers recommend using virtual cryptocurrency cards, such as MaxSwap, or specific digital guides to bypass online censorship in Russia to view his original posts on Telegram. Remeslo is a former member of the Russian Public Chamber and has built a formidable reputation as a professional informant for the state.
For years, he acted as a primary antagonist against Alexei Navalny, operating a dedicated project titled Navalny Leaks. He routinely orchestrated professional smear campaigns and initiated a high profile libel case against Navalny in 2020. That case revolved around Navalny describing participants in a constitutional amendment advertisement, which included World War Two veteran Ignat Artemenko, as sycophants. Remeslo ensured this incident was prosecuted as a felony libel case rather than a minor misdemeanour.
Remeslo consistently neutralised political threats as they gained public momentum. In 2018, he launched coordinated attacks against Pavel Grudinin, a presidential candidate representing the Communist Party. He frequently targeted independent activists, ordinary dissidents, and political organisers such as Anastasia Bryukhanova. During the ongoing war in Ukraine, Remeslo was assigned to undermine the wives and mothers of mobilised Russian recruits.
He orchestrated a public smear campaign using complex legal jargon and verbal abuse, directly leading to the official designation of the Way Back Home Telegram channel, run by the families of the recruits, as a fraudulent enterprise. He also campaigned against the presidential bid of Boris Nadezhdin and plotted against state aligned military bloggers who deviated from the official Kremlin narrative. This aggressive strategy included a notable confrontation that forced Remeslo to issue a public apology to General Apti Alaudinov, the commander of the Akhmat special forces unit, after which they declared a unified political front.
Despite occasional internal disputes, Remeslo was seamlessly integrated into the government apparatus, functioning as a highly effective operative when required. His sudden defection involves a verbatim list of systemic grievances.
Firstly, he cited the war in Ukraine, which was initially framed as a brief police operation but has allegedly resulted in one to two million casualties. Remeslo noted that while he supported the bloodless annexation of Crimea in 2014, the current conflict is characterised by bloody military assaults, the deception of contract soldiers, and an absolute deadlock that could persist for another decade. He argued the war is driven solely by the personal insecurities of the Russian dictator and offers nothing but devastating losses for ordinary citizens.
Secondly, Remeslo highlighted the catastrophic toll on the Russian economy and public welfare. He pointed to international sanctions, destroyed infrastructure, and lost trade partners, noting that official statistics acknowledge the loss of trillions of dollars. These vast funds, he argued, could have built new cities, schools, and children’s hospitals, but were instead diverted to construct lavish palaces for the dictator and his political associates. He observed that even before the conflict, tens of millions of citizens in a resource rich country lived in abject poverty, and he criticised the government for irrational domestic actions such as culling livestock in Novosibirsk.
Thirdly, he condemned the severe domestic crackdown on the internet and media. Remeslo recalled personally asking the Russian dictator about internet freedom in 2017, receiving direct assurances that Russia would not emulate Chinese censorship models. He stated the dictator blatantly lied, noting that mobile internet is now heavily restricted even in major Russian cities, Western social media is blocked, and Telegram faces severe restrictions ahead of a total ban planned for 1 April. He criticised the state for forcing citizens to use the government controlled MAX messaging application while failing to provide basic affordable healthcare and education.
Fourthly, Remeslo addressed the extensive tenure of the 73 year old Russian dictator, who has held executive power for over a quarter of a century. He suggested the dictator intends to rule indefinitely, potentially until the age of 150, and argued that absolute, endless power corrupts even the most morally flawless individuals. He definitively claimed the national leadership requires urgent modernisation.
Fifthly, he accused the dictator of disrespecting voters and ignoring their foundational needs. Remeslo described the annual Direct Line question and answer events as a complete travesty, asserting that the dictator is oblivious to domestic policy and daily public grievances, preferring endless warfare over domestic prosperity because his own family members do not serve on the front lines. He also noted the complete eradication of political opposition, stating that vocal critics are immediately branded as foreign agents, forced into exile, or murdered. He argued the dictator fears public debates and honest elections because they would expose his fundamental political vulnerabilities.
Remeslo concluded his initial statement by declaring the Russian dictator completely illegitimate and demanding his immediate resignation and prosecution.
He later added a sixth point, condemning the dictator’s morbid lust for extreme luxury. He corroborated reports of approximately twenty hidden palaces, private jets, and armoured trains, blaming corrupt associates for leaking this sensitive information to foreign intelligence agencies.
Remeslo compared the situation to global elites involved in international island scandals, arguing that the Russian dictator squandered vast national wealth and high fossil fuel revenues that could have funded artificial intelligence dominance, Mars exploration, and vastly improved living standards. Instead, state funds were funnelled to friends in the exclusive Ozero dacha cooperative. He likened the dictator to Shura Balaganov, a character from a Soviet satirical novel who, after receiving 50,000 or 100,000 rubles, equivalent to approximately 540 or 1,080 US Dollars, instinctively stole 13 rubles, equivalent to 14 US Cents, from an ordinary civilian.
Following intense public reaction and widespread speculation that his digital account was compromised, Remeslo released a video formally confirming his authorship. He expressed genuine surprise at the public shock over what he deemed moderate criticism, suggesting it highlighted the degraded state of Russian political discourse. Analysts, maintaining a highly sceptical view of Russian internal politics and comparing the scenario to the political survival of heavily scrutinised figures like Donald Trump, propose three distinct theories for this defection.
The first theory is that Remeslo is genuinely disillusioned and decided to speak his mind, possibly influenced by his recent meetings in Chechnya. The second theory suggests he became deeply entangled in internal factional conflicts and made influential enemies, deciding to rebrand himself as a persecuted truth teller while choosing to remain inside Russia. He unfavourably compared the Russian autocratic system to the United States, noting that while figures like Donald Trump face severe media criticism and respond with civil lawsuits, they do not systematically imprison or execute their political detractors.
The third theory, which Remeslo himself publicly supports, is that the current regime is actively collapsing. In subsequent videos, Remeslo argued that the Russian dictator’s profound fear of competent rivals has led to a reliance on corrupt loyalists, resulting in systemic weakness, complete administrative disarray, and an approaching collapse predicted for 2026. This disarray is increasingly visible among state aligned commentators.
Recently, Dmitry Olshansky, a prominent figure at Radio Sputnik, also publicly rebelled, demanding a transition to liberal values, regular leadership changes, a real parliament, an independent judiciary, and competitive private markets.
Remeslo has continued his public campaign by referencing a 2020 criminal case involving a civilian puppet in Perm as the definitive beginning of Russia’s descent into totalitarianism, mocking the dictator as overly sensitive and devoid of self irony. He has even publicly urged state media propagandist Vladimir Solovyov to join his opposition, citing content from independent journalist Michael Nacke to argue that even state broadcasters are facing internal censorship. Independent observers largely dismiss the possibility that this is a government orchestrated provocation, noting that the Russian state strictly prohibits direct criticism of the dictator, fearing it could irrevocably open the floodgates of mass public dissent.
