On March 17, Ilya Remeslo — a blogger, lawyer and former member of Russia’s Public Chamber — posted a manifesto on his Telegram channel titled “Five reasons why I stopped supporting Vladimir Putin.” He declared the war in Ukraine was “failing,” criticized online censorship and the curtailing of freedom of speech, and argued that Putin has been in power for too long, seeming to aim to “remain on the throne for at least 150 years.” He described Putin’s press conferences as a “circus” and labeled the president illegitimate, saying: “Putin must resign and be brought to justice as a war criminal and a thief.”
The day after the manifesto, Remeslo posted videos intended to prove he was still in Russia and said he was ready to go to prison now so he could be seen as a hero after Putin’s fall. The posts caused a stir and appear to have led to his admission to St. Petersburg’s Psychiatric Hospital No. 3. How he came to be there is unclear; contact with him was lost, and questions remain.
Remeslo was previously one of the better-known “Z-bloggers” — patriotic online figures who supported the war in Ukraine and campaigned against dissent. He became prominent for targeting the late opposition leader Alexei Navalny, against whom he campaigned and in whose arrest he played a role, even testifying in courts across Russia. Navalny died in prison in early 2024 while serving a lengthy sentence on charges including extremism.
In an interview given before his hospitalization, Remeslo insisted his shift was voluntary, the result of personal evolution and a new “mission.” He said his views began to change after the 2023 uprising led by mercenary leader Yevgeny Prigozhin and its aftermath. He acknowledged the risks of speaking out but said he would not flee abroad and hoped for political change within the year.
Reactions among his former allies and pro-Kremlin voices were swift and skeptical. Apti Alaudinov, head of a Chechen special forces unit who had worked with Remeslo, said he was “deeply shocked” and suggested Remeslo might have been coerced into making his statements. TV host Vladimir Solovyov suggested Remeslo may have had a “nervous breakdown” caused by the war. Pro-government websites variously dismissed the criticism as an attempt to destabilize Russia or as a deliberate ruse serving someone’s interests.
Analysts were also critical or wary. Ivan Filippov, a researcher on Russian propaganda, called Remeslo an “accomplice in the murder of Alexei Navalny” and warned that calling Putin a “war criminal” and “thief” was unprecedented for a former pro-Kremlin influencer and could lead to arrest. Political scientist Abbas Gallyamov framed Remeslo’s stance as part of a broader shift in Russian media and society driven by war fatigue, economic strain and declining trust in government.
Some observers suggested the authorities had a role in Remeslo’s fate. Dmitry Oreshkin said Remeslo had likely been forced into psychiatric care, arguing the state needed to prevent him from becoming a public martyr and instead humiliate or break him. Oreshkin noted that St. Petersburg’s Psychiatric Clinic No. 3 has a grim reputation dating back to the Soviet era as a facility used for forensic psychiatric purposes. He added that the wide range of reactions to Remeslo — from hysteria to hopelessness and aggression — reflected a society he described as politically inert, where social media outbursts are treated as major events.
This article was originally written in German.