Comparative Weapon Analysis of Crimea Troops and Eastern Ukraine Militias
In both the Crimea and Eastern Ukraine anti-government troops, without identification on their uniforms, popped up supposedly from nowhere. Nobody had any doubt that the troops in the Crimea where professional Russian soldiers. They were highly disciplined, armed with the latest Russian equipment and well supported. It has been assumed by many that the Eastern Ukraine militias occupying government buildings are also Russian soldiers. Arto Pulkki at Suomen Sotilas, a Finnish Military magazine, makes a compelling case that the Ukraine militias are not Russian troops, but rather an assorted rabble of civilians and retired or reserve soldiers …
Here’s a brief summary of the radical materiel differences between the two cases:
- In Crimea all soldiers used modern small arms (5,45 mm AK74M, 7,62 AKMS, 7,62 mm SVDS, 9,30 mm VSS etc.) as currently issued by Russia, but in East Ukraine you see mainly previous generation AKS74s and AK74s from the 70s and 80s.
- In Crimea half of the soldiers armed with AKs were also issued with GP-series of 40 mm grenade launchers, as expected, but in East Ukraine you see practically none of these.
- In Crimea practically all of the troops, line and special, wore modern ballistic protection for head and upper torso, but in East Ukraine you see practically none.
- In Crimea 25 % of soldiers were armed with excellent 7,62 mm PKP/PKM light machine guns, but in East Ukraine you see no PK-series, only Soviet-era light 5,45 mm RPK74s..
- In Crimea 25–50 % of soldiers were also armed with RPG-series of lightweight disposable anti-armor weapons, but in East Ukraine you see practically none.
The videos comparisons are also convincing. The East Ukrainian militias appear both incompetent and undisciplined, a danger to themselves and any non-combatants around them. These videos are of East Ukrainian militias:
This is a video of troops in the Crimea (skip to about 2:00, its a long video):
Thanks to Pekka for the tip.
I founded TFB in 2007 and over 10 years worked tirelessly, with the help of my team, to build it up into the largest gun blog online. I retired as Editor in Chief in 2017. During my decade at TFB I was fortunate to work with the most amazing talented writers and genuinely good people!
More by Steve Johnson
![[Partner 2025] Zastava M24, Modular Assault Rifle in 5.56x45](https://cdn-fastly.thefirearmblog.com/media/2025/09/28/15571/partner-2025-zastava-m24-modular-assault-rifle-in-5-56x45.jpg?size=350x220)
Comments
Join the conversation
Some of them no doubt are local militia/thugs. But you will notice the way many of them move. How they carry their weapons. Obviously SPEZNATZ.
Why do people seem to always assume it's all one way or the other - as in all the troops are Russian soldiers or they are all local militias?
We know there were BOTH Russian troops and local militias in Crimea and based on what I've seen of the situation in eastern Ukraine so far, I think the situation is similar. However I'm guessing that what the Russian government is doing is having professional troops "disguised" to operate among militia, aid them when necessary and hold key points, while the militia and locals do the general uprising. Since mainland Ukraine is a more touchy issue than even Crimea, I think Putin is making sure to mask his involvement better (although it's still apparent) and make it more difficult for the west to decide which and how many are the professional troops.
These groups sprung up and armed and took control of government buildings very quickly in a nubmer of cities simultaneously. Given Putin's comments over the past few weeks, and years, about Russian empire and expansions etc, and what we know about Crimea now, we would be childishly naive to think they weren't involved. Every powerful country has their nose everywhere that matters to them, including us. Russia is no different, and Ukraine is *very* important to them.