Photo by Immo Wegmann on Unsplash
Modern conflict has evolved beyond the exchange of kinetic energy and territorial attrition, becoming a landscape of data generation, digital traceability, and forensic accountability. The ongoing geopolitical situation in Eastern Europe has created specific intelligence, strategic, and legal gaps that Ukrainian forensic experts are positioned to fill. Operating during active hostilities, Ukrainian state institutes—most notably the Kyiv Scientific Research Institute of Forensic Expertise (KNDISE) and the Kharkiv-based National Scientific Center Hon. Prof. M. S. Bokarius Forensic Science Institute (NSC FSI)—have developed real-time methodological frameworks that transform shattered concrete, intercepted radio frequencies, and downed autonomous systems into court-admissible evidence and strategic intelligence. For Western officials, military planners, and international prosecutors, Ukraine has become a primary testing ground for modern conflict forensics.
Western policymakers are currently focused on specific forensic specialties that provide direct evidence of Russian military technology capabilities, the mechanisms of global sanctions evasion, and the perpetration of war crimes. Because international tribunals and Western intelligence agencies cannot replicate the volume and immediacy of battlefield data in laboratories located in Washington, London, or Brussels, the integration of Ukrainian forensic methodologies into the Western strategic apparatus has become an operational necessity. The ratification of the Rome Statute by Ukraine, which officially entered into force on January 1, 2025, has further catalyzed this relationship, elevating Ukrainian domestic forensic reports to the status of official state-party documentation within the International Criminal Court (ICC) framework.
This post analyzes the critical Ukrainian forensic specialties currently informing Western strategic policy. It examines how technical autopsies of weaponry inform global sanctions regimes, how structural and environmental engineering forensics are pushing the boundaries of international restorative justice, and how specialized military examinations are securing arrest warrants for adversary command structures.
1. Technical intelligence and the enforcement of global sanctions
Western economic and military strategy against the Russian Federation relies on understanding the adversary’s technical capabilities, identifying manufacturing vulnerabilities, and disrupting its supply chains. Ukrainian forensic specialties in weapons examination, materials science, and chemical analysis provide the empirical data required to achieve these objectives.
1.1. Battlefield autopsies of advanced munitions (Specialties 3.5 & 3.6; see appendix below)
The forensic examination of grenade launchers, artillery, and missile weapons, designated under Specialties 3.5 and 3.6, provides the West with technical intelligence regarding the efficacy, range, and failure rates of adversary hardware. Ukraine is currently performing continuous forensic “autopsies” on modern Russian ballistic and cruise missiles—such as the Kh-101, Kalibr, and Kinzhal—as well as North Korean and Iranian ballistic munitions deployed in theater. In targeted areas like the Kharkiv region, experts from the NSC FSI have examined debris from North Korean KN-23/24 (Hwasong-11) ballistic missiles, providing the West with evidence of embedded Western-made electronic components to track proliferation networks.
The forensic teardown of these systems yields detailed data regarding manufacturing tolerances, the degradation of quality control under economic sanctions, and the specific capabilities of terminal guidance systems. For example, forensic analysis of the Russian May 2023 missile campaigns revealed a high failure and interception rate that informed Western assessments of Russian aerospace capabilities. Out of an estimated 563 missiles and kamikaze drones fired during a single month, Ukrainian air defenses intercepted 533—a neutralization rate exceeding ninety percent. Furthermore, Western intelligence, corroborated by Ukrainian forensic site exploitation, has documented intrinsic failure rates of twenty to sixty percent for various Russian air-launched cruise missiles, defining failure as the inability to launch, maintain flight paths, or detonate upon impact.
These findings carry important implications for Western strategic planning. By analyzing the unexploded ordnance (UXO) and guidance modules of North Korean ballistic missiles and Iranian-supplied hardware, Western defense officials can gauge the proliferation threat these states pose to the Indo-Pacific and Middle Eastern theaters. Understanding the terminal guidance vulnerabilities, specific radar cross-sections, and fusing failures of these missiles allows NATO planners to optimize the algorithms of their own integrated air and missile defense (IAMD) systems. Furthermore, examining the metallurgical composition of the rocket motors and the structural integrity of the airframes provides insights into the supply chain bottlenecks constraining adversary defense industrial bases.
1.2. Materials science, chemistry, and sanctions evasion (Specialties 8.9, 8.11, and 8.19–8.21)
To enforce economic pressure and restrict the flow of dual-use technologies, Western officials utilize Ukrainian forensic examinations of metals, alloys, and related products (Specialty 8.9), chemical production substances (Specialty 8.11), and objects with special chemical, biological, or radiation properties (Specialties 8.19–8.21). The extraction and laboratory analysis of components from captured unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) and precision-guided munitions serve as a primary mechanism for mapping global sanctions evasion networks.
Despite multilateral sanctions, forensic teardowns routinely discover high-technology components manufactured by Western and Asian companies within newly produced Russian munitions. Extensive analysis conducted by Ukrainian authorities and the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NAZK) identified roughly 2,500 foreign components in Russian weaponry, with nearly three-quarters originating from United States producers. A prominent example of this forensic tracking is the documentation of the Russian “Kometa” navigation system. Ukrainian intelligence documented the Kometa system in the Geran-3 drone as early as September 2025, and the upgraded Kometa-M12 variant in the Geran-5 by January 2026. This navigation technology has subsequently been discovered inside Iranian weapons fired at NATO-adjacent bases, indicating a technology transfer pipeline between Moscow and Tehran.
Similarly, Ukrainian forensic experts operating under Specialty 10.9 (Digital Examination of Software and Hardware) have uncovered technological adaptations designed to mitigate the loss of imported components. KNDISE analysts discovered that Russian forces embed trackers with independent secondary power sources, utilizing non-Russian microcircuits, inside Orlan-10 reconnaissance drones. This adaptation allows adversaries to locate and recover the assets after they are downed by Ukrainian electronic warfare.
By identifying the specific grade of steel, the chemical composition of solid rocket propellants, or the microscopic serial numbers etched onto field-programmable gate arrays (FPGAs), Ukrainian experts enable the U.S. Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) and the UK’s Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI) to trace components through transshipment hubs. This forensic data directly supports multilateral enforcement actions. For instance, in August 2024, OFAC utilized such intelligence to designate KB Vostok OOO, a Russian UAV developer, as part of an action targeting nearly 400 entities supporting the military supply chain. The forensic identification of these components helps Western regulatory bodies shift from static, entity-based sanctions to dynamic network analysis.
| Forensic Specialty | Operational Focus Area | Western Strategic Application | Output Metric / Evidence Yield |
| 3.5 / 3.6 | Missile & Artillery Autopsies | NATO Air Defense Optimization | Trajectory data, mechanical failure rates, terminal guidance analysis, aerodynamic tolerances. |
| 8.9 / 8.11 | Metals & Chemical Production | Sanctions Enforcement (OFAC/EU) | Supply chain mapping, identification of transshipment hubs, metallurgical origin tracking. |
| 8.19 – 8.21 | Special Chemical/Radiation | CBRN Threat Assessment | Analysis of dual-use industrial chemicals, radiation signatures, biological precursors. |
| 10.9 | Digital Software/Hardware | Network & Intelligence Tracking | GPS logs, telemetry extraction, subverted microchip origins, counter-recovery tracking. |
2. The legal architecture of war crimes and command responsibility
Ukrainian forensic expertise serves as a key element for international justice, bridging the evidentiary gap between a domestic crime scene and a structured trial at the ICC in The Hague. For Western officials and international prosecutors, technical specialties are valuable because they can be translated into legal concepts, such as mens rea (criminal intent), “command responsibility,” proportionality, and “indiscriminate attacks”.
2.1. Establishing mens rea via military examination (Specialty 16.1)
A legally vital category for Western legal experts is Specialty 16.1: Military Examination. This specialty assesses the legality of military orders, actions, and combat regulations to establish command responsibility, helping to outline a sequence of deliberate, legally culpable decisions. To prosecute high-level officials, the ICC must prove that an attack on a civilian target was not an operational error or an intelligence failure, but a deliberate act or the result of criminal negligence ordered or tolerated by the chain of command.
Under the doctrine of command responsibility, codified in Article 28 of the Rome Statute, commanders are criminally liable for the acts of their subordinates if they knew, or should have known, that crimes were being committed and subsequently failed to take measures to prevent or punish them. Ukrainian military forensic experts dissect captured battle orders, decrypted communication logs, standard operating procedures, and tactical doctrines to demonstrate that specific strikes followed a formalized, top-down chain of command. If forensic military analysis reveals that a target was properly identified as civilian infrastructure on adversary operational maps, yet the order to execute the strike was still transmitted and fulfilled, it establishes the “mental element” (mens rea) required for a war crime conviction.
The methodological rigor applied by state institutes like KNDISE and the NSC FSI in military examinations has been critical in overcoming traditional hurdles in international criminal law. The national registry of experts qualified in Specialty 16.1 is concentrated within a restricted pool of professionals belonging to these state bodies, with a critical contingent operating directly out of the NSC FSI. This methodology provided the evidentiary foundation for the ICC arrest warrants issued in June 2024 for former Russian Minister of Defence Sergei Shoigu and Chief of the General Staff Valery Gerasimov. It also supported the March 2024 warrants for Long-Range Aviation Commander Sergei Kobylash and Black Sea Fleet Commander Viktor Sokolov, where forensic experts mapped the launch points and flight paths of cruise missiles from Russian aircraft and ships directly to the units under their command.
2.2. Proving indiscriminate attacks through explosive signatures (Specialties 5.2 & 5.4)
International Humanitarian Law (IHL), specifically Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions and the Rome Statute, prohibits attacks that fail to distinguish between military objectives and civilian populations. Ukrainian experts utilizing Specialties 5.2 and 5.4 (Examination of explosive devices and man-made explosions) document the kinetic “signatures” of restricted munitions to prove violations of the principle of distinction.
The deployment of thermobaric weapons (such as those fired by the TOS-1A heavy flamethrower system) and cluster munitions in populated urban environments provides evidence of indiscriminate attacks. Thermobaric weapons, which utilize a dispersed fuel-air cloud followed by a secondary ignition to create sustained overpressure and vacuum effects, are difficult to contain within a narrow military objective when used in urban centers. The forensic documentation of ruptured alveoli in victims, combined with the blast dynamics that reverberate within enclosed structures, provides the ICC with evidence of the use of weapons that cause unnecessary suffering.
Similarly, the forensic analysis of cluster munition strikes relies on mapping wide-area fragmentation patterns. For example, in the July 2023 attack on the residential district of Lyman, forensic explosive ordnance experts analyzed the remnants and blast patterns to identify the use of a 9M55K-series Smerch cluster munition rocket delivering 72 9N235 fragmentation submunitions. In other sectors, investigators have documented the signatures of the 240mm 3-O-8 mortar bomb, fired from the 2S4 Tyulpan self-propelled mortar, which carries 14 3-O-10 submunitions. By documenting the blast radius and the dispersion pattern of these submunitions, Ukrainian forensic teams provide the ICC with the proof required to secure indictments for launching indiscriminate attacks.
2.3. Acoustic and digital linkage: Identifying the perpetrator
While traditional forensic disciplines such as fingerprinting (Specialty 4.6) and DNA analysis remain relevant for localized atrocities, an emerging focus for high-level war crimes prosecution lies in digital and acoustic evidence.
Phonoscopic Examination (Specialty 7.2): This field involves the identification of a speaker by the physical parameters of their speech. It is used to verify and authenticate intercepted unencrypted radio communications. If a commander is intercepted giving a prohibited order, Ukrainian phonoscopic experts perform voiceprint analysis. This process involves cross-referencing acoustic signals, extracting formant frequencies, analyzing pitch tracks, and identifying known dialectical, anatomical, and biological markers to scientifically prove the identity of the speaker. By utilizing methodologies such as the “Dialect Automated System,” this process transforms audio intercepts into biometric evidence that can withstand defense challenges in international tribunals.
Digital Forensic Examination (Specialty 10.9): The application of the Locard Exchange Principle to the digital realm dictates that operators leave digital traces upon interaction with hardware. Ukrainian experts extract volatile memory (RAM), telemetry data, and GPS logs from captured adversary drones and abandoned command vehicles. Advanced Wi-Fi packet analysis (using tools like Wireshark) and physical data extraction (utilizing FTK Imager and Magnet Axiom Cyber) reveal flight logs, controller locations, and battery voltage correlations. This creates a digital fingerprint of unit movements, helping to show exactly where a unit, a controller, or an operator was positioned geographically when a specific incident occurred. This data also provides counterintelligence value, revealing adversary staging areas.
| Legal Objective | Forensic Specialty Utilized | Mechanism of Proof | ICC Application |
| Command Responsibility | 16.1 (Military Examination) | Analysis of combat orders, command doctrines, and tactical communications. | Links strategic leadership (e.g., Gerasimov, Shoigu) to localized strikes. |
| Indiscriminate Attacks | 5.2 / 5.4 (Explosives) | Mapping blast patterns of 9N235 submunitions and thermobaric overpressure. | Proves weapons deployed lacked distinction capability in urban areas. |
| Perpetrator Identification | 7.2 (Acoustic Voiceprint) | Biological and dialectical analysis of intercepted radio transmissions. | Verifies the exact identity of officers issuing illegal commands. |
| Digital Scene Linkage | 10.9 (Digital Forensics) | Extraction of GPS telemetry, Wi-Fi packet data, and volatile memory. | Places specific units and controllers at the exact coordinates of atrocities. |
3. Structural autopsies and the economics of restorative justice
Beyond the prosecution of individual criminal guilt, international law emphasizes restorative justice. Reparations require precise valuations that meet international accounting and engineering standards. Ukrainian forensic engineering and valuation specialties provide the foundation for calculating the economic damage caused by the destruction of infrastructure, which is a legal necessity for Western officials planning the eventual transfer of frozen Russian sovereign assets.
3.1. Forensic engineering and the “structural autopsy” (Specialty 10.6)
When a missile impacts a civilian apartment block—such as the strikes documented in Kharkiv by the NSC FSI—Ukrainian experts operating under Specialty 10.6 (Examination of real estate facilities and building materials) perform what is functionally a “structural autopsy.” This forensic engineering process involves evaluating the loss of structural integrity, analyzing the transfer of kinetic energy through reinforced concrete, and determining the cause of the structural failure.
The strategic value of this specialty to Western officials lies in its role in countering state-sponsored disinformation. Adversary diplomatic channels frequently claim that civilian casualties and infrastructure damage are the result of Ukrainian air defense missiles malfunctioning, rather than deliberate cruise missile strikes. Structural autopsies differentiate between the localized damage caused by falling shrapnel and the deep-penetration structural failure caused by the direct impact of a ballistic warhead. By combining 3D structural modeling with metallurgical analysis of the explosive residue embedded within the concrete, forensic engineers establish a chain of causation that Western diplomats use to rebut disinformation at multilateral forums.
3.2. Valuation of assets and the Register of Damage (Specialty 12.5)
To transition from the physical documentation of damage to financial reparations, damages must be quantified using recognized economic methodologies. Specialty 12.5 focuses on the valuation of military assets, equipment, and weaponry, while broader asset valuation encompasses commercial, industrial, and residential real estate.
The valuation methodology deployed by Ukrainian appraisers relies on International Valuation Standards (IVS 2022) to establish the pre-war condition, utility, and market value of the destroyed asset. Forensic appraisers utilize the Cost Approach to determine the Reproduction Value (Replacement Cost) and the Depreciated Replacement Cost (DRC), while also applying the Income Approach to calculate the capitalization of lost revenue for commercial entities disrupted by the conflict.
These certified forensic valuations feed into the Register of Damage for Ukraine (RD4U), a mechanism established by the Council of Europe in collaboration with the European Union and allied states. The RD4U integrates with Ukraine’s domestic “Diia” digital government platform, allowing for the secure collection of time-stamped, geolocated photo and video documentation, alongside engineering calculations for restoration costs and extracts from the State Register of Real Property Rights (DRRP).
For Western officials, this pipeline of forensic financial data is highly valuable. While the ICC focuses primarily on individual criminal guilt, its Trust Fund for Victims relies on these valuations to order specific reparations. Furthermore, as the international community debates the legal frameworks required to repurpose immobilized Russian central bank assets, transfers must be backed by a validated forensic report. Ukrainian appraisers ensure that the evidentiary standard required for international claims adjudication is met.
4. The vanguard of international law: Ecocide and energy grid prosecutions
The scale and methods of the campaign have prompted the international legal community to adapt. Ukrainian forensic experts are providing the empirical basis to prosecute systemic attacks on civilian survival systems, pushing international law into new areas regarding environmental destruction, industrial sabotage, and energy infrastructure protection.
4.1. Environmental engineering and the crime of “ecocide” (Specialties 10.15 & 10.19)
There is a mobilized international movement to formalize “Ecocide”—defined as the massive, deliberate, and long-term destruction of ecosystems—as the fifth core international crime alongside genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression. Ukraine currently serves as a primary location for this legal evolution.
The breach of the Nova Kakhovka Dam in June 2023 represents a focal point of this effort. The dam held a basin of 18 cubic kilometers of water, serving as a source for agricultural irrigation, drinking water, and the cooling ponds of the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant. Seismic monitoring, acoustic detection, and structural engineering assessments indicated that explosives caused the breach, resulting in a disaster that United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) rapid assessments concluded will have long-term consequences.
Ukrainian experts operating under Specialty 10.19 (Environmental engineering and technogenic impacts) and related chemical/biological specialties (Specialty 8.10.1 regarding environmental residue) are documenting the downstream dispersion of industrial toxins, the destruction of Emerald Network habitats, and the contamination of agricultural soil. Under the Rome Statute, Article 8(2)(b)(iv) criminalizes intentionally launching an attack with the knowledge that it will cause widespread, long-term, and severe damage to the natural environment which would be clearly excessive in relation to the concrete and direct overall military advantage anticipated. The forensic documentation generated by Ukrainian environmental engineers is being utilized by the ICC Office of the Prosecutor, alongside international forensic experts and the US Environmental Protection Agency, to build a case. This effort could establish a template for prosecuting environmental destruction as a war crime.
4.2. The technological chain of energy infrastructure (Specialties 10.18 & 10.30)
Russia’s strategic bombing campaigns have repeatedly targeted the Ukrainian energy grid with the intent of depriving the civilian population of heat, water, and electricity during winter months. To prosecute these strikes, Ukrainian forensic institutes utilize interagency working groups to analyze the damage through the lens of Specialties 10.18 (Electrical engineering) and 10.30 (Thermal engineering).
Forensic engineers do not merely document individual destroyed transformers; they analyze the entire “technological chain” of the national power system, from primary generation (thermal and hydroelectric power plants) to main transmission lines and distribution networks. By proving structurally that the strikes were calculated to collapse the interdependent system rather than to achieve isolated military objectives, forensic experts help establish that the campaign was aimed at civilian survival.
This macroscopic forensic analysis has yielded tangible legal results. It provided the evidentiary basis for the ICC arrest warrants issued for Sergei Shoigu and Valery Gerasimov for strikes conducted between October 2022 and March 2023. This methodology continues to be deployed to pursue ongoing accountability. On February 25, 2026, Ukrainian Prosecutor General Ruslan Kravchenko submitted a new dossier of evidence to the ICC covering attacks on energy facilities from July 2025 to February 2026. The submission leveraged forensic valuations and engineering reports to demonstrate the intensity and systemic nature of these recent strikes. This data pipeline allows international prosecutors to update indictments against the adversary’s leadership echelons.
5. Institutional paradigm shifts: The Rome Statute ratification
The utility of Ukrainian forensic evidence in Western strategic and legal frameworks underwent a major structural shift at the beginning of 2025. On October 25, 2024, Ukraine officially deposited its instrument of ratification of the Rome Statute with the United Nations. In accordance with Article 126 of the Statute, the treaty officially entered into force for Ukraine on January 1, 2025, making the nation the 125th State Party to the ICC.
5.1. Direct admissibility and chain of custody
Prior to January 2025, Ukraine had accepted the ICC’s jurisdiction on an ad hoc basis via targeted declarations, which allowed preliminary investigations to proceed but left Ukraine outside the formal governance and evidentiary pathways of the Assembly of States Parties. The formal entry into force of the Rome Statute alters the legal status of the forensic methodologies discussed in this report.
Most critically, full membership streamlines the “chain of custody” and simplifies the direct admissibility of evidence submitted to The Hague. Forensic reports generated by state institutions like KNDISE and the NSC FSI now carry the legal and procedural weight of a member state’s official documentation. This reduces procedural friction during pre-trial chambers at the ICC, as the methodologies employed by Ukrainian experts are now structurally integrated into the ICC’s accepted evidentiary mechanisms. The ratification elevates previous cooperation into a codified legal commitment, ensuring that acoustic voiceprints, structural autopsies, and missile teardowns are admissible in international prosecutions.
5.2. Complementarity as cooperation
The ratification also solidifies a model of international justice termed “complementarity as cooperation.” Under the Rome Statute’s principle of complementarity, the ICC acts as a court of last resort. However, given the high volume of potential war crimes, a division of labor has emerged between Kyiv and The Hague.
Ukrainian domestic courts, utilizing the methodologies of Specialty 16.1 (Military examination) and Specialty 10.9 (Digital forensics), handle the prosecution of lower- and mid-level tactical commanders whose actions are forensically linked to local atrocities via GPS logs and intercepted orders. Simultaneously, the Office of the Prosecutor General (OPG) packages the macroscopic forensic evidence—such as the technological chain analysis of the national energy grid or the wide-area dispersion patterns of cluster munitions—and transmits it directly to the ICC to pursue the strategic architects of the aggression.
This synergistic relationship is fueled by financial and technical cooperation between Western forensic laboratories, NATO intelligence units, and the Ukrainian Ministry of Justice. Institutions like the NSC FSI have formally integrated their operations with the European Network of Forensic Science Institutes (ENFSI) and participate in collective investigations supporting the ICC. Joint investigative teams, bolstered by foreign forensic specialists deployed directly to sites like Bucha and Chernihiv, ensure that evidence collection meets the standards required by both domestic appellate courts and international tribunals. The integration of Western analytic tools, combined with the combat data access of Ukrainian experts, has created a significant forensic intelligence capability.
Conclusion
The intersection of kinetic warfare, digital technology, and international law has altered how conflicts are analyzed, prosecuted, and resolved. The forensic methodologies refined by Ukrainian experts under the duress of active hostilities have become important instruments of Western strategic policy and international justice.
Through the technical autopsy of advanced missile systems and the forensic tracking of microelectronics, Ukrainian scientists assist Western capitals in optimizing air defense architectures and enforcing global sanctions regimes. By executing structural autopsies and internationally certified economic valuations, these experts are laying the financial groundwork for future restorative justice and the legal repurposing of sovereign assets to rebuild the nation. Through the application of military examinations, acoustic voiceprint analysis, and environmental engineering, Ukrainian forensics provide the ICC with the evidentiary basis required to prove intent, establish command responsibility, and address ecocide on the global stage.
With the entry into force of the Rome Statute on January 1, 2025, this pipeline of forensic intelligence has been permanently institutionalized within the framework of global justice. For Western officials, military planners, and the international legal community, the insights generated by Ukrainian forensic institutes represent a paradigm shift: the ability to observe, quantify, and prosecute the realities of modern warfare in real-time, ensuring that legal accountability is supported by forensic science.
Works cited
Agapova, Olena. “International Register of Damage: The Guarantee of Recovering Justice in Ukraine.” Journal of Liberty and International Affairs, vol. 10, no. 1, 2024, pp. 97-110.
Amnesty International. “Russia/Ukraine: ICC arrest warrants for senior Russian officials a crucial step towards justice.” 25 June 2024.
Coalition for the International Criminal Court. “Ukraine becomes 125th ICC State Party.” 1 Jan. 2025.
Human Rights Watch. “Ukraine: Apparent Russian Cluster Munition Attack.” 4 Aug. 2023.
Kravchenko, Ruslan. “Ukraine submits evidence of Russia’s most intense energy attacks to ICC.” The New Voice of Ukraine, 25 Feb. 2026.
Schneider, Mark B. “Lessons from Russian Missile Performance in Ukraine.” Australian Naval Institute, 2022.
Shmigel, Pete. “Russia’s Month of Missile Madness: 90% of Projectiles Failed, $1.7 Billion Spent.” Kyiv Post, 31 May 2023.
Simakova-Yefremian, Ella. “Relevant Areas of Expert Research in Ukraine Under Martial Law.” Theory and Practice of Forensic Science and Criminalistics, 2024.
Stewart, Phil. “Debris analysis shows Russia using North Korean missiles in Ukraine, US military says.” Reuters, 2024.
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). Rapid Environmental Assessment of Kakhovka Dam Breach; Ukraine, 2023. 2023.
Appendix (specialities)
List of types of forensic examinations and expert specialties for which forensic expert qualification is awarded to specialists of forensic science institutions of the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine
No responses yet