The human rights group’s researchers found that Ukrainian forces were using some schools and hospitals as bases, shooting near homes and sometimes living in apartments. The report concluded that this meant that in some cases Russian forces would respond to an attack or target populated areas – putting civilians at risk and destroying civilian infrastructure. He also criticized the Ukrainian military for not evacuating civilians who could be caught in the crossfire. “We have documented a pattern of Ukrainian forces endangering civilians and violating the laws of war when operating in populated areas,” said Agnès Callamard, Amnesty International’s secretary-general. Ukraine’s deputy defense minister, Hana Maliar, accused Amnesty of “distorting the real picture” and not understanding the situation on the ground. He said Ukrainian soldiers were deployed in cities and residential areas to defend them from the Russian attack. “There is no chronology of events [in the report]. The Russian Federation is committing the crime here. Ukraine protects its land. Moscow ignores all the rules of war. And unlike Ukraine, it doesn’t let in international organizations like Amnesty,” Maliar said. Speaking at a briefing in Kyiv, Maliar stressed that Ukrainian armed forces boarded buses to evacuate civilians from the front line. Some refused to go, despite repeated appeals and offers of transfer to safer areas. Ukraine gave access to outside agencies, including the international criminal court, and conducted its own investigations into abuses by its troops, he said. Oleksii Reznikov, Ukraine’s defense minister, said “any attempt to question the right of Ukrainians to resist genocide, to protect their families and homes… is a perversion,” and presidential adviser Mykhailo Podolyak tweeted that “the only thing that poses a threat to Ukraine is a Russian army of executioners and rapists coming to Ukraine to commit genocide.” Amnesty researchers investigated Russian strikes in Ukraine’s Kharkiv, Donbass and Mykolaiv regions between April and July. They found 19 villages and towns from which Ukrainian forces had either launched strikes or had bases. In these three areas, Amnesty found five locations where hospitals were being used ‘de facto’ as bases, and of the 29 schools Amnesty visited, they concluded that 22 had been used as bases. Schools were closed on the first day of the invasion and students were learning remotely where possible. The report noted that most of the civilian infrastructure rebuilt by the Ukrainian military was located kilometers away from the front lines and argued that alternative sites were available. Maliar argued in the briefing that Ukrainian anti-aircraft systems needed to be based in cities to protect civilian infrastructure, and if Ukrainian forces were based only outside urban settlements “the Russian armed forces would simply sweep through without a fight.” Ukrainian social media users also responded with examples of when Russian forces hit buildings used by civilians, as well as the multitude of crimes committed against Ukrainian civilians under Russian occupation. Guardian journalists have seen at least seven cases in three regions of Ukraine where schools and kindergartens in residential areas have been used as bases by the Ukrainian military. Five of the schools and nurseries visited by the Guardian had been bombed. In any case, many surrounding buildings were damaged in the attack. In one case, in the Donetsk region, at least three people were killed when the blast wave that destroyed a base hit a neighboring residential building. At a school used as a base by Ukrainian forces in central Ukraine, the commander said schools and kindergartens across Ukraine were being bombed because they were being used as bases. The governor said the schools provided the necessary facilities: showers, multiple toilets, large kitchens, dining halls, basements and rooms. He said the invasion meant the army had to quickly accommodate masses of recruits. Stephen Haynes, a professor of public international law at the University of London Greenwich, who drafted non-legally binding guidelines on the military use of schools and universities during conflict – which have been ratified by 100 states, including Ukraine – said the actions of Ukraine did not necessarily violate them. “The use of schools – if they are not also used for their primary purpose – is not always illegal. “Obviously, the situation in Ukraine counts as exceptional in that regard … so the Ukrainian military is not necessarily violating the guidelines,” he said. Guardian reporters also saw three cases of schools being repurposed for civilian use since the war, including a school in the Kharkiv region that is now used as a humanitarian aid center and a school in Kyiv that houses people displaced by the war. Amnesty acknowledges that international humanitarian law does not prohibit parties from being based in schools that are not in session, but the report stressed that “soldiers have an obligation to avoid using schools located near houses or apartment blocks full of civilians … unless there is imperative military necessity”. Haynes agreed with Amnesty’s assessment. He said it was the responsibility of military commanders on the ground to avoid collateral damage and try to select buildings that, if targeted as legitimate military targets, would be hit without endangering the lives of civilians nearby. In an ideal scenario, populated areas would not be part of the war, but the nature of the invasion meant that urban warfare had become inevitable in Ukraine, Haines said.
