Media - Atlantic Council https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/issue/media/ Shaping the global future together Thu, 20 Jul 2023 21:00:43 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.2.2 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/favicon-150x150.png Media - Atlantic Council https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/issue/media/ 32 32 Russian War Report: Wagner is still in business in Africa https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/russian-war-report-wagner-still-in-africa/ Thu, 20 Jul 2023 20:22:35 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=665774 Despite their Russia-based forces being relocated to Belarus after their failed mutiny, Wagner Group is still alive and active in Africa, including ahead of a referendum in the Central African Republic.

The post Russian War Report: Wagner is still in business in Africa appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
As Russia continues its assault on Ukraine, the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab (DFRLab) is keeping a close eye on Russia’s movements across the military, cyber, and information domains. With more than seven years of experience monitoring the situation in Ukraine—as well as Russia’s use of propaganda and disinformation to undermine the United States, NATO, and the European Union—the DFRLab’s global team presents the latest installment of the Russian War Report

Security

Ukrainian attack damages Kerch Bridge

Wagner moves soldiers to Belarus following apparent disbandment in Russia

Wagner vehicle columns are seen driving from Voronezh to Belarus

Tracking narratives

Russian officials and state media change their tune about the Kerch Bridge attack after Kremlin announces terror investigation

Media policy

FSB colonel alleged to be behind popular Telegram channel detained for extortion

International response

Wagner continues to advertise its services in Africa

Wagner troops arrive in Central African Republic ahead of critical referendum

Lavrov to replace Putin at BRICS summit

Ukrainian attack damages Kerch Bridge

Russia accused Ukraine of conducting a drone strike against the Kerch Strait Bridge on July 17. The bridge, also known as the Crimean Bridge, connects Ukraine’s Crimean Peninsula with Russia’s Krasnodar region. The bridge is used for civilian movement and as an essential logistical route for the Russian army.

Explosions were reported at around 3:00 a.m. local time. Footage of the aftermath indicates that a span of the bridge’s road had collapsed while another suffered damage but remained intact. Traffic reportedly resumed several hours after the explosion, but in the interim, occupation authorities asked civilians to consider alternate evacuation routes. Russian Telegram channels reported extensive traffic jams in Crimea’s Dzhankoi area and in the occupied Kherson region towards Melitopol. 

Ukraine defense intelligence spokesperson Andrii Yusov told Suspilne News that damage to the bridge could create logistical difficulties for Russian forces, but said Kyiv would not comment on the cause of the explosion. CNN, citing a source in the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU), reported that the attack on the bridge was a joint operation of the SBU and Ukrainian naval forces. Ukrainian media outlet LIGA also reported that the SBU and Ukrainian naval forces were responsible for the attack, citing sources in the SBU. LIGA also noted that the strike was likely conducted with surface drones. The SBU said that information about the incident would only be revealed once the war ended. Some Russian military bloggers, including former Russian officer and pro-war nationalist Igor Girkin, stated that Russian authorities had focused too heavily on road security and not enough on maritime security. Alexander Kots, another prominent blogger and Kremlin-appointed Russian Human Rights Council member, also blamed Russian authorities for focusing too much on land security.

Natalia Humeniuk, a spokesperson for Ukraine’s Southern Operational Command, speculated without evidence that the attack may have been a provocation by Russia amid talks on prolonging the Black Sea Grain Initiative. The grain deal, brokered by Turkey and the United Nations in July 2022, has been essential for stemming a global surge in food prices. The agreement, necessitated after the Russian navy blocked all Ukrainian ports, permits Ukraine to export products. It has has been prolonged several times, with the last extension expiring on July 17. The Kremlin announced on July 17 that it had suspended its participation in the initiative but claimed that the decision was unrelated to the bridge attack. 

Meanwhile, about twenty-four hours after the attack on the Kerch Bridge, explosions were heard in Odesa in southern Ukraine. Unconfirmed reports claimed the explosions were a response from Russia. The attack on Odesa continued for a second night on July 19, described by Ukrainian officials as “hellish.” Odesa is an essential port for Ukrainian exports and was allowed to remain open under the conditions of the grain deal.

Ruslan Trad, resident fellow for security research, Sofia, Bulgaria

Wagner moves soldiers to Belarus following apparent disbandment in Russia

The Wagner Group appears to have disbanded its operations in Russia and relocated to Belarus, according to footage reviewed by the DFRLab documenting the movements of Wagner military columns in the days following the mutiny through July 18. Additionally, satellite imagery captured the entry of troops and equipment at the Tsel military camp, located near the Belarusian town of Asipovichy.

On July 17, a video shared on Telegram depicted Wagner soldiers taking down the Russian flag and the Wagner flag at the group’s original military base in Molkino, Krasnodar Krai, Russia. In another video published on July 19, Prigozhin addressed Wagner fighters as they left the Molkino base, describing the situation on the front as “a shame.” In addition, he declared that the group is relocating to Belarus and will focus on its activities in Africa. For the time being, he said, Wagner soldiers are no longer participating in Russia’s special military operation in Ukraine, although they “will perhaps return to the special military operation at the moment when [they] are sure [they] will not be forced to shame ourselves.”

Shortly after the mutiny ended, Russian authorities conducted raids on Wagner’s accounting divisions in Saint Petersburg, according to information purportedly shared by the wives and mothers of Wagner fighters in an online forum. Additional raids took place on Prigozhin’s residence. The movements of Prigozhin’s private jet also indicate frequent travel to Belarus over the past three weeks.

An investigation by Belarusian opposition media outlet Motolko.help revealed a photograph of a man resembling Prigozhin in his undergarments allegedly at the Tsel military base, where he reportedly spent the night on July 12. According to flight data posted on the online portal Radarbox, Prigozhin’s personal Embraer Legacy 600 jet, registration number RA-02795, completed four round-trip flights between Belarus’ Machulishchy air base and Russia.

Radar imagery acquired on July 17 also shows the tents where Wagner fighters appear to be housed and several places for vehicles parked inside the military base.

SAR imagery of Tsel military camp in Belarus, taken on July 17, 2023.  (Source: DFRLab via Capella Space)
SAR imagery of Tsel military camp in Belarus, taken on July 17, 2023.  (Source: DFRLab via Capella Space)

Valentin Châtelet, research associate, Brussels, Belgium

Wagner vehicle columns are seen driving from Voronezh to Belarus

On July 16, several videos emerged on Telegram documenting Wagner vehicles departing Voronezh Oblast along Russia’s M-4 Don highway. Utilizing social media footage, the DFRLab determined the location of the vehicles and identified forty registration plates. At least two-thirds of these vehicles displayed military registration plates from the self-proclaimed Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republic. However, the Belarusian monitoring project Belaruski Hajun reported that many other vehicles used tape to cover their registration plates.

The columns are composed of various buses and trucks, of which only a few could transfer construction equipment. Most of the convoys consist of UAZ Patriot pickup trucks, Ural vans, and Lada cars. No heavy military equipment was observed at the time of writing.

Screenshots show a UAZ Patriot pickup truck (top) and a Mitsubishi pickup truck (bottom) bearing military registration plates from the Luhansk People’s Republic. A police car escorted the trucks one hundred kilometers south of Voronezh on July 14, 2023. (Source: Telegram/archive)

Another video shared on the Russian Telegram channel VChK-OPGU revealed a Wagner convoy of soldiers entering Belarusian territory. According to a post by Belaruski Hajun, at least sixty vehicles entered Belarus through Mogilev Oblast in the early hours of June 15 using the R-43 and M-5 roads. A photograph on Telegram showed the Russian and Wagner Group flags flying at a border outpost.

According to Belaruski Hajun, since July 14, nine distinct military convoys have entered Belarusian territory. They are likely located at the Tsel military camp near Asipovichy. The camp is home to military unit 61732 and was previously identified by Verstka Media as a potential site to accommodate Wagner soldiers. Further, the Belarusian military TV channel VoyenTV posted a video on July 14 showing Wagner soldiers arriving in Belarus and training local forces. According to updated estimates from Belaruski Hajun, as many as 2,500 Wagner members may have relocated to the Tsel military camp since last week.

Valentin Châtelet, research associate, Brussels, Belgium

Russian officials and state media change their tune about the Kerch Bridge attack after Kremlin announces terror investigation

In the immediate aftermath of the July 17 attack on the Kerch Bridge, Russian officials and state media were relatively mild in their initial language addressing the incident, referring to it as an “emergency.” However, once Kremlin agencies began referring to the attack as a “terror act,” state media and officials began changing their language to follow the Kremlin.

“Traffic was stopped on the Crimean bridge: an emergency occurred in the area of the 145th support from the Krasnodar territory,” Sergei Aksenov, the Russian-installed head of occupied Crimea, wrote on his Telegram channel at 4:21 a.m. local time. Notably, Aksenov did not use the words “explosion,” “attack,” or “terror” to describe the destruction of the bridge. Two subsequent posts, made at 5:03 a.m. and 6:59 a.m., also avoided these terms. It wasn’t until 1:51 p.m. that Aksenov used the phrase “terror act” to describe the attack.

In between Aksenov’s posts, Russia’s National Antiterrorism Committee reported at 10:04 a.m. that they had assessed the Kerch Bridge explosion as a “terror act,” according to Kremlin-owned news agency TASS. Several minutes later at 10:07 a.m., Russia’s Investigative Committee announced that it would open a criminal case investigating the “terror act” on the Kerch Bridge. 

Several Kremlin-owned Russian media outlets, including RIA Novosti and TASS, also used the term “emergency” (“чрезвычайное прошествие” or ЧП) to first describe the bridge explosion before later pivoting to using “terror act.” Neither outlet referred to the destruction of the Kerch Bridge as a “terror act” prior to the official announcements from the Investigative Committee and Antiterrorism Committee. In the case of RIA Novosti, they published a story using the word “emergency” in the headline at 11:41 a.m., more than ninety minutes after the terror investigation announcement, while TASS used the term as late as 7:31 p.m., even though it had already published a report on the investigation. Similarly, many other Kremlin-controlled media outlets, like Komsomolskaya Pravda, Gazeta.ru, RBC, Lenta.ru, and Izvestiya used both “emergency” and “terror act” in their publications throughout the day interchangeably.

Nika Aleksejeva, resident fellow, Riga, Latvia

FSB colonel alleged to be behind popular Telegram channel detained for extortion

According to Russian media outlet RBC, former Federal Security Service (FSB) Colonel Mikhail Polyakov, the purported administrator of the Telegram channel Kremlevskaya Prachka (“Kremlin Laundress”), was detained for suspected extortion. The press office for the Moscow court released a statement that said Polyakov is “suspected of extorting 40 million rubles [around $440,000] from JSC Lanit, the leader of the Russian industry of information technology.” 

“According to the prosecution, from 2020 to 2023, Polyakov received a large sum of money from a group of IT companies for not publishing information (the so-called ‘negative block’) that could cause significant harm to the rights and legitimate interests of Lanit JSC and the management of Lanit JSC,” the Moscow court continued. The “negative block” is a guarantee that a channel will not mention a particular person or a company in a negative light in exchange for money; this is reportedly a popular practice among Russian Telegram channels.

The independent Russian media outlet Vazhnyye Istorii (“Important Stories”), citing a source close to Russian intelligence services, reported that Polyakov was behind the Kremlevskaya Prachka Telegram channel. According to the outlet, Polyakov supervised an unnamed service at the FSB’s Office for the Protection of the Constitutional Order. In addition, he reportedly oversaw pro-government Telegram channels and was engaged in promoting the Kremlin’s agenda via media and social networks. According to Important Stories, he worked in coordination with Vladimir Putin’s deputy chief of staff, Sergey Kiriyenko.

Important Stories noted that the Telegram channel 112 also named Polyakov as Kremlevskaya Prachka’s administrator, along with the Telegram channels Siloviki, Nezigar, and Brief, which are not as staunchly pro-govern cited by Kremlin propagandists and proxies.

Kremlevskaya Prachka has not posted since the evening of July 13, corresponding with the reported detainment of Polyakov.

Eto Buziashvili, research associate, Tbilisi, Georgia

Wagner continues to advertise its services in Africa

On July 16, the Wagner-affiliated Telegram channel REVERSE SIDE OF THE MEDAL posted an advertisement offering Wagner’s services to African states. The post included an image from the Prigozhin-funded film, Granite, as well as an email address, seemingly for interested African countries to communicate with Wagner. 

In French, the advertisement reads: “PMC Wagner offers its services to ensure the sovereignty of states and protect the people of African from militants and terrorists.” The fine print emphasizes that “various forms of cooperation are possible,” as long as the cooperation does not “contradict Russia’s interests.” Russia’s interests are not specified.

While the Telegram channel claimed the advertisement was replicated on African social media channels, the DFRLab has not found additional evidence to support this claim.

Wagner-affiliated Telegram channel shared an advertisement for Wagner’s services in Africa, claiming it was widely circulated on the continent. (Source: rsotmdivision)

Tessa Knight, research associate, London, United Kingdom

Wagner troops arrive in Central African Republic ahead of critical referendum

Alexander Ivanov, director of the Officer’s Union for International Security (COSI), released a statement on COSI’s Telegram channel regarding the recent arrival of dozens of Wagner operatives in Central African Republic. According to US authorities, COSI is a front company for the Wagner Group in Central African Republic.

In the statement, Ivanov confirmed the Wagner troop rotation while stressing that the new personnel have no contract with Russia’s Ministry of Defense. He reiterated that both in CAR and across the continent, “security work is carried out by private companies that enter into contracts directly with the governments of sovereign states,” and that these private companies have nothing to do with official Russian state entities. Ivanov also indicated that this staff rotation should not impact the activities of Russia in Ukraine, and he claimed to have been in contact with Yevgeny Prigozhin. 

Notably, Ivanov stated that despite the recent changes in the structure of Wagner’s “African business,” Prigozhin “intends not to curtail, but to expand his presence in Africa.” This is somehow consistent with what some analysts are observing: Wagner appears to be trying to expand its presence in West African coastal states increasingly threatened by a spillover of the jihadist insurgency from the Sahel, or possibly taking advantage of upcoming elections in several fragile African countries. 

Although Ivanov has often remarked on Wagner activities in CAR and Africa in the past, this statement, coupled with other recent comments, suggest that the COSI director might be now exercising a wider role as spokesman for all Wagner activity in Africa, as Wagner reorganizes its structure in the wake of last month’s failed mutiny. 

The statement comes as a U-turn in recent communications over Wagner’s presence in CAR. In past weeks both CAR and Russian officials stated that the African republic had an agreement with Russia and not with a private military company. Ivanov seems to be returning to earlier narratives in which Wagner claimed that the CAR government signed an agreement with the PMC and not the Russian government. This narrative seems to confirm DFRLab reporting in the June 30 edition of the Russian War Report, in which we noted that denying direct links to Wagner’s actions in Africa has become more difficult for the Kremlin after recent events damaged the principle of plausible deniability, which had previously been a key aspect of Wagner’s success in Africa. However, Russia does not want to waste the network of influence built by its state proxy forces and is now attempting to reorganize, rebrand and develop a new narrative around Wagner and the Kremlin’s ability to conduct hybrid warfare.

The arrival of dozens of troops from Russia’s Wagner in CAR comes at a critical time as the country prepares to hold a constitutional referendum on July 30 that would eliminate presidential term limits and allow President Faustin-Archange Touadéra to extend his term. The CAR government stated earlier this month that Wagner operatives will help in securing the referendum. This could be seen as a strong signal from Moscow to reiterate the strategic importance of its influence in CAR and reassure local partners of its continued support, while sending a message of continuity and strength to other countries in the region where Wagner operates.

Mattia Caniglia, associate director, Brussels, Belgium

Lavrov to replace Putin at BRICS summit

The Office of South Africa’s Presidency announced on July 19 that Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov would replace President Vladimir Putin at the upcoming Summit of BRICS Nations (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) “by mutual agreement.”

In Russian media, pro-Kremlin and opposition news outlets alike posted articles claiming that Russia had refused South Africa’s proposal to send Lavrov as head of the country’s delegation on July 14. Quoting an interview with South Africa’s deputy president, the Russian pro-Kremlin news outlet RTVI suggested that “negotiations are still ongoing.”

Putin is wanted by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for alleged war crimes committed during Russia’s war in Ukraine. A warrant for the arrest of both the Russian president and Presidential Commissioner for Children’s Rights Maria Lvova-Belova alleges that they were involved in organizing and participating in the deportation of Ukrainian children. As a signatory to the Rome Statute, which established the ICC, South Africa would have been obligated to arrest Putin had he attended the BRICS Summit in August. 

South Africa’s largest opposition party, the Democratic Alliance, took to court in a petition to force the government to arrest Putin if he did attend. In a responding affidavit, South African President Cyril Ramaphosa stated that Russia would view South Africa arresting Putin as a “declaration of war.” 

The Kremlin denied claims that Moscow had threatened South African authorities. However, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said on July 19 that “it is clear to everyone in the world what an attempt to encroach on the head of the Russian Federation means.”

Tessa Knight, Research Associate, London, United Kingdom and Valentin Châtelet, Research Associate, Brussels, Belgium

The post Russian War Report: Wagner is still in business in Africa appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Russian War Report: Russian airstrike hits humanitarian aid station https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/russian-war-report-russian-airstrike-hits-humanitarian-aid-station/ Thu, 13 Jul 2023 19:08:09 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=664012 Russian offensives in Donetsk and Luhansk left several villages damaged from shelling while a Russian airstrike destroyed an aid station in Zaporizhzhia.

The post Russian War Report: Russian airstrike hits humanitarian aid station appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
As Russia continues its assault on Ukraine, the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab (DFRLab) is keeping a close eye on Russia’s movements across the military, cyber, and information domains. With more than seven years of experience monitoring the situation in Ukraine—as well as Russia’s use of propaganda and disinformation to undermine the United States, NATO, and the European Union—the DFRLab’s global team presents the latest installment of the Russian War Report

Security

Russian military chief makes first public appearance since Wagner’s attempted mutiny

War crimes and human rights abuses

Russia strikes humanitarian aid delivery point in Zaporizhzhia Oblast

Russian military chief makes first public appearance since Wagner’s attempted mutiny

Russian forces continue to conduct offensive actions in Donetsk and Luhansk, with Ukrainian armed forces reporting thirty combat engagements between July 10 and 11 near Hryhorivka, Syeverne, Marinka, Krasnohorivka, and Novomykhailivka. According to the same report, Russian forces shelled villages and towns in the direction of Zaporizhzhia, Lyman, Kupiansk, and Kherson. Ukrainian Telegram channels also reported explosions on the morning of July 11 in Novooleksiivka, Kherson Oblast.

The Ukrainian counteroffensive advanced slowly amid heavy fighting along well-fortified Russian positions. On July 8, a video posted by RFE/RL’s Ukraine service showed how fighters from the 47th Separate Mechanized “Magura” Brigade, alongside soldiers from the Zaporizhzhia Brigade of the Territorial Defense Forces, occupied elevated Russian army positions in the direction of Zaporizhzhia near Novodarivka. However, Russia’s use of remote-controlled landmines has made it difficult for Ukraine to advance. Ukrainian Deputy Defense Minister Hanna Maliar announced on July 10 that Ukrainian forces had taken control of elevated positions around Bakhmut, allowing them to establish fire control over Bakhmut. Russian military bloggers have expressed fears that Ukrainian forces could encircle Russian forces in Bakhmut.

The Russian Ministry of Defense published footage on July 10 of Chief of the General Staff Valery Gerasimov, his first public appearance since Wagner’s attempted mutiny. In the footage, Gerasimov receives reports about alleged Ukrainian attempts to strike Russian targets in occupied Crimea, Rostov, and Kaluga. The ministry published the footage the same day the Kremlin acknowledged President Vladimir Putin’s June 29 meeting with Wagner financier Yevgeny Prigozhin. 

On July 11, the Russian Telegram channel Military Informant reported that Ukraine had used British-made Storm Shadow cruise missiles to strike a Russian army post near Berdyansk. The strike killed Oleg Tsokov, deputy commander of the Southern Military District. On the same day, explosions were reported in occupied Tokmak, Skadovsk, and Berdyansk. Also that day, the Russian army shelled Sofiivka, Kherson Oblast, with Grad multiple rocket launcher systems, killing at least one person and wounding another.

Meanwhile, the Ukrainian army is increasingly using equipment created by volunteers and local engineers in an attempt to diversify its supplies. On July 9, a team of Ukrainian engineers known as Immaterium reported that a first-person view (FPV) drone destroyed a Russian observation tower located nine kilometers from the departure point. Immaterium also claimed that the drone strike set a distance record for an FPV drone developed and produced locally. 

Elsewhere, Armin Papperger, head of the German defense company Rheinmetall, said on July 10 that an armored vehicle repair plant would open in Ukraine within twelve weeks. Papperger added that he hopes to increase Rheinmetall’s production of shells within one year so the company can provide Ukrainian forces with up to 60 percent of their needs. Meanwhile, Ukrainian Minister for Strategic Industries Oleksandr Kamyshin said construction was underway on a new plant to produce Bayraktar drones in Ukraine.

Ukraine’s defense ministry announced on July 8 that five former Azov commanders who fought in the battle over Mariupol were released from Turkey and returning to Ukraine alongside Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Ukraine’s ambassador to Turkey, Vasily Bodnar, said that Turkey did not put any conditions on Ukraine for the return of the Azov commanders. Bodnar added that their release was preceded by months of detailed diplomatic work. The commanders ended up in Turkey as a result of a prisoner swap brokered by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. The commanders participated in the Azovstal steelworks plant siege, regarded by Ukrainians as a heroic effort to resist Russian advancements. Russian forces eventually captured the commanders, among the highest-profile fighters to be captured. The commanders have vowed to return to the battlefield. Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov claimed that Ukraine and Turkey had “violated” the prisoner exchange agreement.

Ruslan Trad, resident fellow for security research, Sofia, Bulgaria

Russia strikes humanitarian aid delivery point in Zaporizhzhia Oblast

On June 9, Ukraine’s interior ministry posted footage on Telegram showing the aftermath of a Russian air strike on a humanitarian aid delivery point in Orikhiv, Zaporizhzhia Oblast. The attack reportedly killed at least seven people and injured thirteen. Cross-referencing the shared footage with images posted on Google Maps, the DFRLab determined the location of the incident to be Communal School No. 3, located on the corner of Myru Street and Pokrovska Street. Initial damage analysis, via the images, indicates that the strike destroyed two-thirds of the school’s facilities.

A picture posted by Karyna Ola on Google Maps shows the rear of the school compound, left. A picture posted by the Russian opposition Telegram channel Sota shows the same rear staircase, top right. A picture posted by Ukraine’s interior ministry shows another part of the school compound, bottom right. (Source: Google Maps, left; Telegram/archive, top right; Telegram/archive, bottom right)

Reports from several Russian-speaking news outlets on Telegram confirmed that the school was converted into a humanitarian aid delivery point. Russian opposition media outlet Doxa indicated that a Russian jet may have dropped two guided bombs to attack the delivery point, though this information is not confirmed. According to the office of the prosecutor-general of Ukraine, the attack occurred around 1:30 pm local time.

The following morning, Zaporizhzhia Regional Military Administration head Yurii Malashko shared additional photos from the incident, including one featuring what appears to be a damaged canvas sign featuring the logo for the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR).

(Screenshot of Telegram post, including an image featuring torn canvas with the UNHCR logo clearly visible. Source: zoda_gov_ua/archive)

The Zaporizhzhia Regional Prosecutor’s Office has launched an investigation into the “violation of the laws and customs of war, combined with intentional murder.”

Valentin Châtelet, research associate, Brussels, Belgium

The post Russian War Report: Russian airstrike hits humanitarian aid station appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Russian War Report: Russian conspiracy alleges false flag at Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/russian-war-report-russian-false-flag-zaporizhzhia/ Fri, 07 Jul 2023 18:02:29 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=662365 Allegations of a supposedly US and Ukraine-planned false flag operation on the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant spread across social media ahead of the NATO Summit.

The post Russian War Report: Russian conspiracy alleges false flag at Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
As Russia continues its assault on Ukraine, the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab (DFRLab) is keeping a close eye on Russia’s movements across the military, cyber, and information domains. With more than seven years of experience monitoring the situation in Ukraine—as well as Russia’s use of propaganda and disinformation to undermine the United States, NATO, and the European Union—the DFRLab’s global team presents the latest installment of the Russian War Report

Security

Russian missile strike in Lviv kills ten civilians, injures dozens

Tracking narratives

New narrative accuses US and Ukraine of planning false flag attack on Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant

Media policy

Former employees share details about Prigozhin’s media group and troll farms

Kremlin-owned RT offers jobs to former employees of Prigozhin’s troll factory

Russian missile strike in Lviv kills ten civilians, injures dozens

At least ten people were killed and thirty-seven injured in Russia’s July 6 attack on Lviv, in western Ukraine. Regional Governor Maksym Kozytskyy said that a Russian missile struck a residential building in the city, destroying more than fifty apartments. 

Meanwhile, Russian forces continue to launch offensive actions in Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts. Ukrainian forces reported thirty-eight combat engagements against Russian troops near Novoselivske, Novohryhorivka, Berkhivka, Bohdanivka, Bakhmut, Avdiivka, and Marinka. In the direction of Lyman, Russian forces shelled Nevske, Bilohorivka, Torske, Verkhnokamyanske, and Rozdolivka in Donetsk. Russian aviation conducted an airstrike in Bilohorivka. Russia also attacked villages in Zaporizhzhia and Kherson oblasts, including Levadne, Olhivske, Malynivka, Huliaipole, and Bilohirka. On July 6, Russian troops shelled Chervonohryhorivka and Nikopol, damaging civilian infrastructure.  

On July 5, reports from Russian military bloggers suggested that Ukrainian forces had advanced southwest of Berkhivka, west of Yahidne, and southwest of Bakhmut. The Ukrainian army said it conducted offensive operations south and north of Bakhmut and is moving on Bakhmut’s southern flank. The Russian Ministry of Defense claimed that the Ukrainian army conducted offensive operations near Lyman, Bakhmut, along the Avdiivka front, on the border between Zaporizhzhia and Donetsk, and in western Zaporizhzhia. 

The Ukrainian army appears to have launched a coordinated attack on Russian army logistical and communications hubs. On July 4, Ukrainian forces reportedly struck an ammunition depot in occupied Makiivka, Donetsk. Russian sources claimed without evidence that Ukraine had struck a hospital. Former Russian army commander Igor Strelkov, also known as Igor Girkin, said the attack demonstrates how Ukraine regularly launches missile strikes against Russian rear targets. Other unconfirmed reports from July 5 indicate Ukraine may have struck Russian positions near Debaltseve. Russian sources claimed that Ukrainian forces hit Russian positions near Yakymivka in the Melitopol area and attempted to strike Berdyansk in the Zaporizhzhia region.

Ruslan Trad, resident fellow for security research, Sofia, Bulgaria

New narrative accuses US and Ukraine of planning false flag attack on Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant

Ahead of next week’s NATO Summit in Vilnius, Lithuania, allegations that the United States and Ukraine will launch a false flag operation on the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant are spreading on various platforms, including Twitter, 4chan, and Instagram. The allegations seemingly aim to create panic and, in the event of a future attack on the plant, establish a narrative the West and Ukraine are to blame

On July 3, a post appeared on 4chan from an anonymous user who introduced himself as a US Marine Corps veteran now working for the government in electronic espionage. The user claimed that the Ukrainian and US governments are working together to bomb the Zaporizhzhia power plant. According to the conspiracy theory, after the false flag operation, the United States will be able to use “nuclear warheads” against Russia. At the time of writing, the post had been deleted from 4chan. However, similar posts remain on the platform.

Screencap of an anonymous 4chan post claiming the US and Ukraine are planning a false flag attack. (Source: 4chan)

However, the false flag claims did not originate on 4chan. Russian Twitter accounts posted similar claims building the false flag narrative. After the 4chan post, the claim circulated again on Twitter.  

A similar narrative was also shared by Renat Karchaa, an adviser to Rosenergoatom, a subsidiary of the Russian state nuclear agency Rosatom. Karchaa claimed on Russian state television channel Russia-24 that on the night of July 5, the Ukrainian army would attempt an attack on the Zaporizhzhia plant. Without evidence, he accused the United States and the West of planning a false flag incident to damage Russia’s reputation. The claims were further amplified by Russian state media outlets.  

The allegations escalated on social media after July 4, when Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy repeated Ukraine’s concerns about the status of the nuclear power plant. In an address, Zelenskyy restated that Russia plans to attack the plant and that Russian troops have placed explosive-like objects on the building’s roof. In June, Ukrainian military intelligence made similar claims when it reported that the plant’s cooling pond had been mined by Russian troops.  

On July 5, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said that it was aware of reports that mines and other explosives had been placed around the plant. The IAEA said their experts inspected parts of the facility and did not observe any visible indications of mines or explosives. IAEA Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi added, “The IAEA experts requested additional access that is necessary to confirm the absence of mines or explosives at the site.” On July 7, the IAEA announced that Russia had granted its experts further access, “without – so far – observing any visible indications of mines or explosives.”  

Sayyara Mammadova, research assistant, Warsaw, Poland

Former employees share details about Prigozhin’s media group and troll farms

Several independent Russian media outlets published stories this week interviewing former employees of Yevgeny Prigozhin’s Patriot Media Group, which dissolved on June 30.  

In a video published on Telegram, Yevgeny Zubarev, director of Patriot Media Group’s RIA FAN, said the goal was to “work against the opposition, such as Alexei Navalny and others who wanted to destroy our country.” Zubarev confirmed key details previously reported by independent Russian journalists at Novaya Gazeta in 2013 and the now-Kremlin-controlled RBC in 2017 about the existence of paid commentators and the creation of Prigozhin-affiliated media outlets. Zubarev added that, after Russian President Vladimir Putin’s 2018 re-election, the group hired “foreign affairs observers.” The timing corresponds with attempts by Prigozhin’s Internet Research Agency to meddle in the 2020 US presidential election. 

Further, independent Russian media outlets Sever.Realii, Bumaga, and Novaya Gazeta interviewed former employees of Prigozhin’s media group. Speaking on the condition of anonymity, the former employees confirmed that Prigozhin’s “troll factory” and “media factory” conducted coordinated information attacks on opposition leaders, published fabricated or purchased news “exclusives,” praised Putin, and deliberately ignored particular individuals who criticized Wagner Group. Bumaga and Sever.Realii described a smear campaign against Saint Petersburg Governor Alexander Beglov. In 2019, Prigozhin’s media group supported and promoted Beglov, but in 2021, Prigozhin reportedly launched a smear campaign, as Beglov allegedly prevented him from developing a waste collection business in the city. Novaya Gazeta’s report also provided evidence that Prigozhin’s troll farm activities extended beyond Russia, with employees portraying skinheads and fascists in the Baltic region, specifically in Lithuania. 

In recent years, additional revelations about Prigozhin’s media group have come to light. For example, Bumaga reported that prospective hires had to pass a “lie detector test” in which “security service specialists” asked candidates about their attitudes toward the opposition and Alexei Navalny in particular. Once hired, employees were closely surveilled. One former employee Bumaga interviewed characterized the atmosphere as being in a “closed military company.” Both Bumaga and Novaya Gazeta’s interviewees said that most of the employees did not believe in the mission. In one example, an employee left after refusing to launch a smear campaign against Ivan Golunov, a journalist at the independent news outlet Meduza who was detained in 2019 under false pretenses. Bumaga, citing an unnamed former employee, also reported that at one point an employee had hacked the system, erased a database, and fled to Poland. The same interviewee claimed they employed two Telegram administrators who also administered pro-Ukraine channels.

Nika Aleksejeva, resident fellow, Riga, Latvia

Kremlin-owned RT offers jobs to former employees of Prigozhin’s troll factory

RT Editor-in-Chief Margarita Simonyan offered to hire employees of Yevgeny Prigozhin’s Patriot Media Group, which reportedly housed his troll factories. In the latest episode of the program Keosayan Daily, Simonyan praised the work of “Wagner’s media empire.” She said their work “was super professional” and that anyone left without a job can join “them,” referring to Russian propaganda outlets. She added, “We know you as professional colleagues of ours.” 

The fate of Patriot’s former employees is being actively discussed in Russia. According to Russian outlet Novie Izverstia, Pavel Gusev, editor-in-chief of the pro-Kremlin outlet MK.ru, volunteered to help find jobs for former employees of Patriot. In addition, the chairman of the Saint Petersburg branch of the Union of Journalists of Russia stated that the union would contact the heads of media outlets to help find opportunities for dismissed employees and would provide additional informational support.

Eto Buziashvili, research associate, Tbilisi, Georgia

The post Russian War Report: Russian conspiracy alleges false flag at Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Peterson on the Silicon Curtain: Countering Russian propaganda narratives https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/insight-impact/in-the-news/peterson-on-the-silicon-curtain-countering-russian-propaganda-narratives/ Fri, 07 Jul 2023 15:33:20 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=662438 The post Peterson on the Silicon Curtain: Countering Russian propaganda narratives appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>

The post Peterson on the Silicon Curtain: Countering Russian propaganda narratives appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Wagner putsch is symptomatic of Russia’s ongoing imperial decline https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/wagner-putsch-is-symptomatic-of-russias-ongoing-imperial-decline/ Thu, 06 Jul 2023 20:14:43 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=662113 The attempted putsch by Yevgeniy Prigozhin and his Wagner troops in late June is perhaps best understood as a symptom of Russia’s ongoing imperial decline, writes Richard Cashman and Lesia Ogryzko.

The post Wagner putsch is symptomatic of Russia’s ongoing imperial decline appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
The attempted putsch by Yevgeniy Prigozhin and his Wagner troops in late June is perhaps best understood as a symptom of Russia’s ongoing imperial decline. Much like the invasion of Ukraine itself, it is part of a broader historical process that can be traced back to 1989 and the fall of the Soviet incarnation of the Russian Empire in Central and Eastern Europe.

Anyone looking to make sense of recent events in Russia should begin by noting that Prigozhin’s dramatic actions were not aimed at ending the war in Ukraine or steering Russia away from its increasingly totalitarian course. On the contrary, he sought to correct mistakes in the conduct of the invasion by effecting changes in the country’s military leadership.

This should come as no surprise. The vast majority of Prigozhin’s public statements about the invasion of Ukraine align him with prominent ultranationalists, which in the Russian context translates into imperial reactionaries. This group is demanding a fuller commitment to the war against Ukraine which, with Belarus, it sees as the core of Russia’s imperial heartlands. Ideally, this group wants to see full mobilization of Russia’s citizens and the country’s productive capacity for the war effort.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Prigozhin is not generally regarded as a member of Putin’s inner circle, but he is believed to have supporters within the Kremlin elite, some of whom may have backed or sympathized with his uprising. This support reflects widespread demands among members of the Russian establishment for national leadership that can arrest and reverse the process of imperial retreat which began in 1989.

It is also clear that Prigozhin enjoyed significant backing from ordinary Russians and, probably, ordinary soldiers. Support for Prigozhin amongst the Russian public is rooted in anger over the mismanagement of the invasion and endemic state corruption along with dissatisfaction over the prospect of increasing costs without identifiable gains in Ukraine.

The scale of public sympathy for the putsch could be seen in videos of Rostov-on-Don residents congratulating Wagner troops on capturing the city while bringing them food and water. It was also striking that Rostov-on-Don and its Southern Military District headquarters were seized without a fight, while Wagner troops were able to advance to within two hundred kilometers of Moscow virtually unopposed, despite passing close to numerous Russian army bases. Prigozhin’s tough rhetoric and hawkish attacks on Russia’s military leadership clearly resonate widely among large numbers of ordinary Russians.

Prigozhin’s abruptly abandoned putsch reinforces the lesson that coups are relatively common in Russia, whereas genuine revolutions are not. Vladimir Putin and the clan which took control of Russia at the turn of the millennium in many ways see themselves as the heirs to the 1991 coup plotters who attempted but failed to prevent the unravelling of the USSR. Their own vulnerability to being overthrown in similar fashion has now been laid bare before the Russian public and the wider world.

The course of the war to date, including cross-border incursions by Ukrainian-backed Russian militias into Russia’s Belgorod and Bryansk regions, had already fractured the facade of monolithic strength so carefully projected by the Kremlin throughout Putin’s twenty-three-year reign. Prigozhin’s putsch has further exposed the brittleness of the regime and of the Russian state. It has highlighted the very real possibility of turmoil and transformation within the country, which so many observers previously thought impossible.

Policymakers around the world must now prepare for a range of dramatic scenarios in Putin’s Russia. This planning should involve studying the more than 100 nationalities within the Russian Federation, their cultures and political aspirations, as well as possible fracture lines between regional and business interests.

More specifically, governments must begin to plan for a post-Putin Russia. Putin’s elderly clan represents the last of the Soviet-era elites and their distinct embrace of Russia’s imperial consciousness. That imperial identity will not disappear overnight, but Putin’s obvious overreach in Ukraine and events like Prigozhin’s putsch are likely to engender a less certain sense of imperial destiny.

Putin has emerged from the Wagner putsch a significantly weakened figure, especially among members of the Russian establishment who once saw him as a guarantor of stability. He has also been embarrassed internationally and now looks a far less reliable partner for countries such as China, India, and Brazil that have so far sought to remain neutral over the invasion of Ukraine.

Moving forward, there will be considerable paranoia within the Russian establishment as suspicion swirls regarding potentially shifting loyalties. Rumors continue to circulate regarding measures targeting military and security service personnel who failed to oppose the Wagner uprising. The invasion of Ukraine has already seriously eroded trust within Russian society; Prigozhin’s actions and Putin’s timid response will intensify this negative trend.

Ukraine’s partners cannot control the processes set in train by the Wagner episode, but they can surge military support for Ukraine and embrace bolder policies that reflect the revealed weakness of the Putin regime. The fact that Putin was apparently prepared to strike a deal with Prigozhin further demonstrates that the Russian dictator is inclined to back down rather than escalate when confronted by a resolute opponent or faced with the prospect of possible defeat.

Prigozhin’s putsch was a brief but revealing event in modern Russian history. It hinted at deep-seated dissatisfaction among both the elite and the Russian public over the country’s inability to reclaim what it perceives as its imperial heartlands, and served as a reminder that the imperial Russian state is still collapsing.

The Russian decline that began with the fall of the Berlin Wall is ongoing, with Putin and his clan seeking but failing to reverse the settlement of 1991. This path has led to a war based on imperial fantasies that may now hasten the real end of empire. The Wagner putsch did not bring down Putin’s regime which seeks to maintain empire, but it may come to be seen as the beginning of its end.

Richard Cashman and Lesia Ogryzko are fellows at the Centre for Defence Strategies.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Wagner putsch is symptomatic of Russia’s ongoing imperial decline appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Russian War Report: Kremlin denies that it targeted civilians in a missile attack on a pizza restaurant https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/russian-war-report-missile-strikes-kramatorsk-restaurant/ Fri, 30 Jun 2023 19:00:00 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=661201 A deadly Russian missile strike on a cafe in Kramatorsk leaves a dozen dead and more injured. Post-mutiny, Wagner's future in Africa is up in the air.

The post Russian War Report: Kremlin denies that it targeted civilians in a missile attack on a pizza restaurant appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
As Russia continues its assault on Ukraine, the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab (DFRLab) is keeping a close eye on Russia’s movements across the military, cyber, and information domains. With more than seven years of experience monitoring the situation in Ukraine—as well as Russia’s use of propaganda and disinformation to undermine the United States, NATO, and the European Union—the DFRLab’s global team presents the latest installment of the Russian War Report

Security

Military camps for Wagner reportedly under construction in Belarus

Tracking narratives

Pro-Kremlin sources spreading disinformation to justify missile strike in Kramatorsk

Kremlin blames Colombian victims for the injuries they sustained in the Kramatorsk attack

Media policy

Prigozhin’s online assets reportedly blocked in Russia

International Response

Questions abound over the future of Wagner contracts and Prigozhin-linked businesses in Africa

Analysis: With Wagner mutiny, Russia’s loses plausible deniability about its involvement in Africa

Investigation sheds light on how Putin’s childhood friends allegedly evade sanctions

Military camps for Wagner reportedly under construction in Belarus

Russian independent outlet Verstka reported on the construction of camps for Wagner forces near Asipovichi, Mogilev Oblast, located in Belarus approximately two hundred kilometers from the Ukraine border. According to Verstka’s local forestry source, the area will cover 2.4 hectares (5.9 acres) and accommodate eight thousand Wagner fighters. The source also claimed that there will be additional camps constructed. Family members of Wagner fighters also confirmed to Verstka that they were deploying to Belarus. 

Radio Svaboda, the Belarusian-language edition of Radio Liberty, reviewed satellite imagery from Planet Labs that suggested signs of expansion at the Unit 61732 military camp adjacent to the village of Tsel, twenty kilometers northwest of Asipovichi. The outlet interviewed Ukrainian military analyst Oleg Zhdanov, who suggested it was “too early to tell” as to whether the military camp’s expansion is specifically for Wagner forces. “Very little time has passed to start building a camp specifically for the Wagnerites—it’s unreal,” Zhdanov told Radio Svaboda.

Location of possible construction at the Unit 61732 military camp in Tsel, Belarus. (Source: Planet Labs)

On June 27, in his first speech after the Wagner mutiny, Russian President Vladimir Putin reaffirmed the deal that ended the rebellion on June 24 in which Yevgeniy Prigozhin would relocate to Belarus. Putin praised those Wagner fighters who did not participate in the revolt and said they could sign a contract with the Russian Ministry of Defense of other services. He added that other mercenaries who do not want to join could go either home or follow Prigozhin to Belarus.

Eto Buziashvili, research associate, Tbilisi, Georgia

Pro-Kremlin sources spreading disinformation to justify missile strike in Kramatorsk

Pro-Kremlin sources denied Russia targeted civilians when a missile struck a crowded pizza restaurant in Kramatorsk, killing at least twelve civilians and injuring more than fifty others. According to this narrative, RIA Pizza was actually a military base hosting US and Ukrainian soldiers. To support the claims, pictures taken after the strike were published on Telegram and Twitter.

To support the claim that soldiers of 101st Airborne Division were located at the pizza “military base,” pro-Kremlin sources circulated grisly footage of the attack aftermath recorded by freelance journalist Arnaud De Decker. The clip shows a man wearing a morale patch of a US flag with the words “Always Be Ready: 5.11 Tactical.” 5.11 Tactical is a military apparel company that sells branded merchandise, including morale patches, worn to offer support to various causes and slogans but not used official unit patches. Various types of 5.11 Tactical’s “Always Be Ready” patches are readily available for purchase online.

Top: A 5.11 Tactical morale patch for sale on its website. Bottom: Image taken during the aftermath of the Kramatorsk attack showing a man wearing the same morale patch on his helmet. (Source: 5.11 Tactical/archive, top; @arnaud.dedecker/archive, bottom)

Similarly, another post from Aleksandr Simonov’s Telegram channel that a man wearing an 101st Airborne t-shirt was a member of the US Army division. These t-shirts are also readily available from online retailers.

Montage of three screenshots from online retail websites selling 101st Airborne t-shirts. (Sources: top left, Etsy/archive; bottom left, Predathor/archive; right, Allegro/archive)
Montage of three screenshots from online retail websites selling 101st Airborne t-shirts. (Sources: top left, Etsy/archive; bottom left, Predathor/archive; right, Allegro)

Sayyara Mammadova, research assistant, Warsaw, Poland

Kremlin blames Colombian victims for the injuries they sustained in the Kramatorsk attack

In addition to pro-Kremlin accusations that the Kramatorsk attack targeted a base housing US Army soldiers, Kremlin influencers also targeted citizens of Colombia, three of whom were injured in the attack, for being at the site of the incident. Colombian President Gustavo Petro said the attack targeted “three defenseless Colombian civilians” in violation of the protocols of war and called for the Colombian Foreign Ministry to submit a note of diplomatic protest to Russia. While the Kremlin acknowledged launching the attack, it insisted the assault struck military personnel rather than civilians.

The three Colombian citizens injured in the attack include acclaimed Colombian writer Hector Abad Faciolince; Sergio Jaramillo Caro, who previously led Colombia’s peace negotiations with FARC rebels; and Ukrainian-based journalist Catalina Gomez. According to the New York Times, Abad and Jaramillo were in Kramatorsk “collecting material” in support of their initiative, ¡Aguanta Ucrania! (“Hang On Ukraine!”), which seeks to garner support for Ukraine in Latin America.

Following the attack, Colombian influencers and officials criticized the attack through media outlets and social media accounts in Spanish. Danilo Rueda, Colombia’s current high commissioner for peace, issued a statement expressing support for the victims without mentioning Russia, while the Ministry of Foreign Affairs expressed its “strongest condemnation of the unacceptable attack by Russian forces on a civilian target.” 

Gomez, who was injured in the attack, broadcast a video for France 24 from the site of the explosion. Meanwhile, Abad and Jaramillo conducted interviews with Colombian media outlets such as El Tiempo in which they described the incident.

Actualidad RT, a Russian media outlets with enormous reach in the Spanish-speaking world, insisted that the victims of the attack were mercenaries and instructors of NATO and Ukraine rather than civilians. Actualidad RT quoted statements from Igor Konashenkov, spokesperson for the Russian Ministry of Defense,  and Kremlin spokesperson Dmitri Peskov, who said the attack struck “military targets” and that “Russia does not attack civilian infrastructure.” Actualidad RT promoted its claims via Twitter and Facebook multiple times on June 28.

Colombian radio station WRadio interviewed Kremlin foreign policy spokesperson Maria Zakharova on the morning of June 28. Zakharova stated that the restaurant was a Russian military target and called for an investigation into Victoria Amelina, a Ukrainian writer who was gravely injured while purportedly hosting the Colombians at the restaurant, claiming without evidence that Amelina had prior knowledge that the restaurant was a military target. Zakharova reiterated this statement after a WRadio journalist asked her to confirm the accusation. In contrast, Abad stated that it was Gomez who suggested they visit the restaurant, and that she apologized for doing so after the attack.

The Russian embassy in Colombia amplified Zakharova’s narrative later that same afternoon and evening. On Twitter, the embassy insisted that the city was “an operational and logistical-military hub, not a suitable place to enjoy Ukrainian cuisine dishes.” It also seemed to celebrate that the “reckless trip [of the Colombians] did not turn into an irreparable tragedy.”

Daniel Suárez Pérez, research associate, Bogota, Colombia

Prigozhin’s online assets reportedly blocked in Russia

Over the course of the thirty-six-hour Wagner mutiny, the Kremlin attempted to limit information about Yevgeniy Prigozin on Russian social media and search engines, eventually blocking websites affiliated with Prigozhin. On June 24, the Telegram channel of Russian state-owned propaganda outlet RT reported that several Prigozhin-controlled media outlets including RIA FAN, People’s News, and Patriot Media Group were no longer accessible in parts of Russia. RT added that the reason for their disappearance was unknown. Similar reports appeared in Mediazona and several Telegram channels

The DFRLab used the Internet censorship measurement platform OONI to verify the claim and check the accessibility of RIA FAN within Russia. OONI detected signs that riafan.ru was blocked in the country. 

Internet censorship measurement platform OONI detected the apparent blocking of Prigozhin-owned media outlet RIA FAN. (Source: OONI)

On June 29, independent Russian outlet The Bell claimed the Kremlin was searching for a new owner for Patriot Media Group, which includes media assets associated with Prigozhin. The following day, multiple Russian outlets reported that Prigozhin had dissolved Patriot Media Group.

Eto Buziashvili, research associate, Tbilisi, Georgia

Questions abound over the future of Wagner contracts and Prigozhin-linked businesses in Africa

For years, Wagner has acted as Russia’s primary form of influence in Africa—spreading disinformation and propaganda, securing military contracts, and exporting natural resources to support Putin’s war effort. Following Prigozhin’s attempted mutiny, the future of Wagner’s operations on the continent has come into question. While it is highly unlikely the Kremlin would willingly abandon its influence in Africa, if Wagner is retired or its troops absorbed into the Ministry of Defense, it is uncertain who would maintain the group’s operations on the continent.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov confirmed that Russia’s work in Africa will continue. In a TV interview with Russia Today, Lavrov said, “In addition to relations with this PMC the governments of CAR and Mali have official contacts with our leadership. At their request, several hundred soldiers are working in CAR as instructors.”

A top advisor to Central African Republic President Faustin-Archange Touadéra appeared unconcerned about the weekend’s events. Speaking of Wagner’s military instructors, Fidèle Gouandjika said, “If Moscow decides to withdraw them and send us the Beethovens or the Mozarts rather than Wagners, we will have them.” In a statement released to its Telegram channel, the Officer’s Union for International Security—a US-sanctioned Wagner front company operating in CAR—claimed CAR’s defense minister had apologized for Gouandjika’s remarks. It quoted Defense Minister Claude Rameaux Bireau as saying, “The people of the CAR are grateful to the Russian instructors of Wagner, ask any Central African on the streets of Bangui or in the village of the CAR—he will confirm my words.”

In Mali, where Wagner forces have taken over responsibility for pushing back jihadists after the departure of French forces, the online outlet Mali Actu reported that the situation could dramatically impact Mali. “This situation raises major concerns about the security, stability and sovereignty of Mali, as well as the impact on the local population and counter-terrorism efforts,” it wrote.

Tessa Knight, research associate, London, United Kingdom

Analysis: With Wagner mutiny, Russia loses plausible deniability about its involvement in Africa

While Wagner’s future in Africa remains uncertain, it is important to consider that the Wagner Group not just a paramilitary force. It is also a conglomerate of companies active in different sectors, from mining and logistics to political warfare and moviemaking, able to travel the spectrum between private entrepreneurism to state proxy. This flexibility has previously allowed Moscow to deploy Wagner to act as a force multiplier in Africa while simultaneously denying Russia’s direct presence on the continent. In Africa, Russia has used Wagner multiple times as part of a strategy to help authoritarian leaders stay in power and gain a pro-Russian military presence on the ground, all while maintaining plausible deniability. Until now, the positive outcomes of this strategy have far exceeded the costs for the Kremlin, as Russia has built a strong network of African influence with relatively little effort, securing concessions in strategic extractive industries, and expanding military-to-military relations on the continent.

However, this principle of plausible deniability, which made Wagner so successful and so useful for Moscow as an extension of its foreign policy and influence, is now damaged. As previously noted, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, as well as Putin, publicly confirmed direct links between Wagner and the Russian state apparatus.

Africa is intimately linked to Wagner: In the wake of Wagner’s involvement in Syria, Africa became the scene of the group’s expansion. Engaging in Sudan, the Central African Republic, Libya, Mozambique, Madagascar, and Mali, Wagner employed an opportunistic strategy of supplying security while taking concessions to mine natural resources. While its forces were in most cases invited to stabilize fragile states, its actions actively invited further instability, creating more opportunities and a greater demand signal for its services, ultimately granting renewing opportunities to Moscow to reinforce its footprint in the continent.

While denying direct links to Wagner’s actions in Africa might have become more difficult for the Kremlin, Russia is unlikely to waste the network of influence built by the group in recent years. Instead, Moscow will likely continue to deploy hybrid tools such as Wagner, although organized in different shapes and forms, so Russia can continue displacing Western influence, exploiting natural resources, and evading sanctions through dozens of front companies.

Mattia Caniglia, associate director, Brussels, Belgium

Investigation sheds light on how Putin’s childhood friends allegedly evade sanctions

On June 20, the Organized Crime and Corruption reporting project (OCCRP) published a series of investigations titled “The Rotenberg Files” that shed light on the business dealings and alleged sanctions evasion attempts of Boris and Arkady Rotenberg, close friends of Russian President Vladimir Putin. The report is based on fifty thousand leaked emails and documents, examined by journalists from seventeen outlets. The OCCRP said the leak came from a source who worked for the brothers at a Russian management firm. The OCCRP investigation was conducted in partnership with the Times of London, Le Monde, and Forbes, among others.

Boris and Arkady Rotenberg are childhood friends of Putin. The billionaire brothers faced Western sanctions amid Russia’s 2014 annexation of Crimea, but their lavish lifestyles do not appear to have been impacted. 

According to the OCCRP, the leaked documents demonstrate how the Rotenberg brothers allegedly used Western lawyers, bankers, corporate service providers, and proxies to evade sanctions. 

One of the report’s findings also alleges the brothers maintain business links to Prince Michael of Kent, a cousin of the late Queen Elizabeth II who was previously accused by the Sunday Times and Channel 4 of profiting off close access to the Kremlin. According to the latest investigation, “Prince Michael distanced himself from earlier ties to the Putin regime in the wake of the 2022 invasion of Ukraine. But leaked emails and corporate records show he co-owns a company with two Russian businessmen who helped billionaire oligarch and Putin ally Boris Rotenberg dodge Western sanctions.” 

Another investigation from the Rotenberg files reported that Putin’s eldest daughter regularly visited a holiday property financed by Arkady Rotenberg in an exclusive Austrian skiing destination. Documents reviewed by the OCCRP suggest that the house was purchased by a Cypriot company in 2013 with a loan from a bank then owned by Arkady, using funds invested by another company he owned. Other records suggested that the former romantic partner of Putin’s daughter is connected to the company that owns the Austrian property. Residents claim to have seen Putin himself at the Kitzbühel residence, though this has not been confirmed. 

The Rotenberg brothers and Prince Michael declined to comment to the OCCRP investigative consortium.

Ani Mejlumyan, research assistant, Yerevan, Armenia

The post Russian War Report: Kremlin denies that it targeted civilians in a missile attack on a pizza restaurant appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Russian War Report Special Edition: Prigozhin and Wagner forces mutiny against Moscow https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/russian-war-report-wagner-mutiny/ Sat, 24 Jun 2023 17:04:28 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=658931 A special edition of the Russian War Report on Wagner Group's mutiny against the Russian military and occupation of Rostov.

The post Russian War Report Special Edition: Prigozhin and Wagner forces mutiny against Moscow appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
On the evening of Friday, June 23, Wagner Group founder Yevgeny Prigozhin effectively broke ties with Moscow and initiated a mutiny against the Russian military, successfully occupying Rostov. Russian President Vladimir Putin condemned Prigozhin’s actions in an address to the nation as Russian authorities secured Moscow and reportedly engaged Wagner forces around Rostov. At the time of writing on the afternoon of Saturday, June 24, Prigozhin appears to have accepted a pause in further escalation, stating that Wagner forces will return to base. Today’s special edition of the Russian War Report provides an overview of the last thirty-six hours, including details on how Prigozhin’s rhetoric escalated into open conflict, open-source analysis of the latest footage, and a review of some of the competing narratives on Telegram and across the Russian information ecosystem.

Tracking narratives

How Prigozhin used Telegram to declare war on the Russian Ministry of Defense – and then suddenly pull back

Putin calls Prigozhin’s “criminal adventure” an “armed mutiny” and “treason”

Security

Wagner forces enter Rostov, occupy Russian Southern Military District headquarters

Wagner forces emerge south of Moscow in Lipetsk

Explosion at oil depot in Russian city of Voronezh

Media policy

Amid chaos in the Russian information space the Kremlin attempts to limit information on Prigozhin

How Prigozhin used Telegram to declare war on the Russian Ministry of Defense – and then suddenly pull back

The Russian-founded messaging platform Telegram, which became a primary tool circulating pro-Kremlin narratives throughout Russia’s war in Ukraine, achieved an unprecedented level of influence on June 23, with Prigozhin wielding it to vent his rage at the Russian defense establishment and launch a mercenary mutiny. For months, Prigozhin has engaged in rhetorical warfare against his rivals in the Kremlin, in particular Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu and Armed Forces Chief of Staff Gen. Valery Gerasimov. The Wagner founder blamed them for ineptitude over the course of the war in Ukraine, including a months-long public argument about supplying his forces with adequate munitions during its siege of Bakhmut. 

Prigozhin’s one-man war against the Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) reached new heights in a series of Telegram posts that began on Friday, June 23, and continued into Saturday. At 10:50 am Moscow time, he posted a thirty-minute video to his Prigozhin Press Service Telegram channel excoriating the MoD, accusing its leadership of deceiving Putin and the Russian public in early 2022 into believing that Ukrainian aggression was imminent, and that Russia had no choice but to invade Ukraine. 

Sitting in a chair in front of a Wagner Group flag pinned to an otherwise blank wall, Prigozhin proceeded to make his case against the MoD and its entire war effort. “Right now, the [MoD] is trying to deceive society and the president and tell a story that there was insane aggression from the Ukrainian side and they were going to attack us together with the whole NATO bloc,” Prigozhin said effectively undermining the Kremlin’s entire case for war. “Therefore, on February 24, the so-called special operation was launched for completely different reasons.” He described Russia’s invasion of Ukraine as a “monstrous shame show” and an “incompetently planned operation” conducted by “a bunch of creatures” and “mentally ill scum” who “don’t have the balls” to fight aggressively with the necessary decisiveness to win the war, including their unwillingness to use tactical nuclear weapons. “The grandfathers are rather weak. They cannot get out of their comfort zone,” he added.

“A handful of dipshits decided for some reason that they were so cunning that no one would realize what they were doing with their military exercises, and nobody would stop them when they went to Kyiv,” Prigozhin said. He went on to blame Shoigu for killing thousands of capable Russian soldiers, and he directed his ire at Russian oligarchs enriching themselves on the war while seeking to return former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev to power. “Our sacred war against those who wrong the Russian people has turned into racketeering, into theft,” he said.  

Prigozhin later added that he would follow up the video with a second “interview,” but this would turn out to be a gross understatement, as the initial video was merely the first of more than a dozen messages he would post to his Prigozhin Press Service Telegram channel over the next thirty-six hours. 

Later in the day at 5:10 pm Moscow time, Prigozhin amped up his criticism of the MoD even further with a Telegram audio post in which he accused it of committing “genocide” against Russians. Calling out Shoigu and Gerasimov directly, Prigozhin said “they should be held responsible for the genocide of the Russian people, the murder of tens of thousands of Russian citizens, and the transfer of Russian territories to the enemy.” 

As angry audio clips of Prigozhin continued to appear into the evening, multiple pro-Wagner Telegram channels circulated a video around 9:00 pm Moscow time purporting to document the aftermath of a Russian airstrike on a Wagner encampment. The video shows scenes of a wooded area lined with stone paths subjected to a moderate amount debris and several fires burning in trenches; a body is briefly seen towards the end of the clip. It is unclear where or when the footage was filmed, and it brought to mind similar suspicious footage contextually devoid footage circulated prior to the February 2022 invasion accusing Ukraine of engaging in sabotage and other aggression against Russia.

Within ten minutes, Prigozhin posted another angry statement, this time accusing the MoD of attacking his forces at the camp. “Today, seeing that we aren’t broken, they decided to launch rocket attacks on our rear camps,” he exclaimed. “A huge number of fighters were killed, our comrades in arms. We’ll decide how to respond to this atrocity. The ball’s in our court.”  

Approximately fifteen minutes later, Prigozhin effectively declared war against the MoD in another Telegram audio clip. “The Wagner Group commanders’ council has made a decision,” he announced. “The evil that the country’s military leadership is carrying out must be stopped. They neglect soldiers’ lives. They’ve forgotten the word ‘justice’ and we’re bringing it back. Those who destroyed our guys today, those who destroyed many tens of thousands of Russian soldiers’ lives will be punished.” Later, he described his forces as “25,000 strong,” adding, “We’re going to get to the bottom of the lawlessness in this country.” 

As Prigozhin continued posting additional threats and taunts on Telegram, the MoD described the alleged footage circulated on pro-Wagner channels as fake, while Russia’s National Anti-Terrorism Committee announced that the Federal Security Service, or FSB, would initiate a criminal case against Prigozhin “on the fact of calling for an armed rebellion.”

Prigozhin continued posting on and off throughout Saturday as his forces advanced north in the direction of Moscow. Then just before 8:30pm local time, he uploaded another message, stating he would return Wagner forces to their camps. It remains unclear whether he intends to keep that promise.

Andy Carvin, managing editor, Washington, DC

Putin calls Prigozhin’s “criminal adventure” an “armed mutiny” and “treason”

After spending Friday night away from cameras, Putin released a televised statement late Saturday morning. Addressing the Russian public as well as the armed forces and security personnel “who are now fighting in their combat positions, repulsing enemy attacks,” Putin described Prigozhin’s actions as a “criminal adventure” and an “armed mutiny.”  

“Today, Russia is waging a tough struggle for its future, repelling the aggression of neo-Nazis and their patrons,” he stated. “The entire military, economic, and informational machine of the West is directed against us. We are fighting for the lives and security of our people, for our sovereignty and independence, for the right to be and remain Russia, a state with a thousand-year history.” 

“This battle, when the fate of our nation is being decided, requires consolidation of all forces,” Putin continued. “It requires unity, consolidation, and a sense of responsibility, and everything that weakens us, any strife that our external enemies can use and do so to subvert us from within, must be discarded. Therefore, any actions that split our nation are essentially a betrayal of our people, of our comrades-in-arms who are now fighting at the frontline. This is a knife in the back of our country and our people.” 

Comparing the mutiny to 1917, when “Russians were killing Russians and brothers were killing brothers,” Putin declared, “We will not allow this to happen again. We will protect our people and our statehood from any threats, including from internal betrayal…. Inflated ambitions and personal interests have led to treason—treason against our country, our people and the common cause which Wagner Group soldiers, and commanders were fighting and dying for.” 

“Once again, any internal revolt is a deadly threat to our statehood and our nation. It is a blow to Russia, to our people,” he continued. “Our actions to defend the fatherland from this threat will be harsh. All those who have consciously chosen the path of betrayal, planned an armed mutiny, and taken the path of blackmail and terrorism, will inevitably be punished and will answer before the law and our people…. Those who staged the mutiny and took up arms against their comrades—they have betrayed Russia and will be brought to account. I urge those who are being dragged into this crime not to make a fatal and tragic mistake but make the only right choice: to stop taking part in criminal actions.” 

“I am certain that we will preserve and defend what we hold dear and sacred, and together with our motherland we will overcome any hardships and become even stronger,” Putin concluded. 

Andy Carvin, managing editor, Washington, DC

Wagner forces enter Rostov, occupy Russian Southern Military District headquarters

Over the course of Prigozhin’s Telegram posts, he boasted that his “25,000 strong” Wagner forces had marched across the border from Ukraine into Russia before claiming they had shot down a Russian armed forces helicopter before entering the city of Rostov. For many hours overnight, he provided no evidence to back his claims. This finally began to change as footage emerged on Russian Telegram, ultimately confirming that Prigozhin had indeed occupied Rostov. 

At 3:47 am Moscow time, the pro-Wagner channel VChK-OGPU posted a video in which a helicopter can be heard circling over Rostov at night. The channel noted, however, “No one has yet seen the video of the Wagner PMC column and the battles with the Ministry of Defense.” Two minutes later, the channel changed its tune by sharing a second video appearing to show rocket fire and bursts of assault rifles, describing it as the “first video reportedly showing fighting between PMC Wagner and Ministry of Defense units.” The footage circulated widely on Telegram but remained unverified. 

Less than twenty minutes later, at 4:09 am, VChK-OGPU shared a third clip showing what appeared to be a convoy of Wagner tanks, trucks, and other vehicles crossing a checkpoint without any opposition. Unlike the previous clips, however, the footage was easily visible, as it appeared to have been recorded during the pre-dawn twilight. According to open-source sun-tracking data, the sun rose in Rostov this morning at 4:25 am, with twilight commencing at 3:50 am, putting the video’s release squarely in the middle of pre-dawn twilight. The exact location of the footage is still under review and cannot be confirmed. 

At 5:01 am, not long after sunrise, the Verum Regnum Telegram channel circulated video clips of what appeared to show Wagner forces arriving in central Rostov, just outside the MoD’s Southern Military District headquarters at the intersection of Pushkinskaya Ulitsa and Budonnovskiy Prospekt. One of the videos appeared to show forces beginning to set up a perimeter around the MoD building.

Telegram footage allegedly of Wagner forces in central Rostov. (Source: Verum Regnum/archive)
Telegram footage allegedly of Wagner forces in central Rostov. (Source: Verum Regnum/archive)
Top: Highlights from the video showing a tank in front of the southwest corner of Pushkinskaya Ulitsa and Budonnovskiy Prospekt (top left) and a man recording footage on his phone in front of the intersection’s northwest corner in front of the MoD’s Southern Military District building (top right). Bottom: Google Street View of the same intersection facing westward, where both corners are visible. (Source: Verum Regnum/archive, top left and top right; Google Street View/archive, bottom)
Top: Highlights from the video showing a tank in front of the southwest corner of Pushkinskaya Ulitsa and Budonnovskiy Prospekt (top left) and a man recording footage on his phone in front of the intersection’s northwest corner in front of the MoD’s Southern Military District building (top right). Bottom: Google Street View of the same intersection facing westward, where both corners are visible. (Source: Verum Regnum/archive, top left and top right; Google Street View/archive, bottom)

A second clip showed how that presence had expanded with the placement of additional armored vehicles blocking the entire intersection from vehicle traffic.

Wagner soldiers (left) and armored vehicles (center and right) block the intersection in front of the Southern Military District building in Rostov. (Source: Verum Regnum/archive)
Wagner soldiers (left) and armored vehicles (center and right) block the intersection in front of the Southern Military District building in Rostov. (Source: Verum Regnum/archive)

Around 7:30 am Moscow time, a pair of videos appeared on the WAGNER Z GROUP/Z PMC WAGNER’Z Telegram channel and Prigozhin’s press channel respectively. The first video showed Prigozhin and his entourage entering the inner courtyard of the Southern Military District building. Prigozhin is later seen bragging about his successes with Deputy Defense Minister Yunus-bek Yevkurov while demanding that Yevkurov speak to him respectfully. In the second video, he addressed the camera and bragged that he had captured Rostov without firing a single shot.

Later, prior to 2:00 pm Moscow time, new footage emerged showing people running from the neighborhood of the MoD building. Initial reports suggested it was a Russian Armed Forces attack within the vicinity, but this has not been confirmed.

The many civilians running from the sound of an explosion were likely due to the crowds that came out to observe Wagner’s occupation of the MoD building. In one video, people can be seen chatting with Wagner soldiers and thanking them.

Andy Carvin, managing editor, Washington, DC

Wagner forces emerge south of Moscow in Lipetsk

The governor of Lipetsk, Igor Artamonov, announced Saturday afternoon that Wagner forces had entered the region, approximately 400 km south of Moscow. The Associated Press noted that the governor added, “The situation is under control.” Meanwhile, footage emerged that appeared to show excavators destroying the highway between Lipetsk and Moscow. 

At the time of writing there were conflicting reports as to whether the Wagner convoy had traveled from Rostov or was comprised of defectors from the Russian Armed Forces. 

Andy Carvin, managing editor, Washington, DC

Explosion at oil depot in Russian city of Voronezh

On June 24, videos depicting an explosion at an oil depot in the region of Voronezh were widely circulated online. The DFRLab identified the precise location of the explosion and confirmed the videos as authentic. 

The video published online was captured from buildings in close proximity to the Leroy Merlin store in Voronezh, as clearly observed in the footage. The DFRLab also corroborated the location of the oil depot Red Flag Oil Combine (Комбинат Красное знамя) and identified approximate coordinates for the area where the video was recorded. Below, the screenshot on the left is extracted from the video, while the image on the right is from Google Maps, illustrating the precise positions of the oil depot, store, and the recorded video.

Photo shows the locations of oil depot, store, recorded video, marked as blue, yellow, red respectively.  (Source: Left Twitter/archive, Right Google Maps/archive)
Photo shows the locations of oil depot, store, recorded video, marked as blue, yellow, red respectively.  (Source: Left Twitter/archive, Right Google Maps/archive)

Additional footage documented the shelling of a residential area in Voronezh. The footage reveals visible damage to cars. In order to verify the location of the building, the DFRLab utilized reverse image search via Google and Yandex, then cross-referenced the results with Google Maps, verifying the location of the shelling.

Imagery from Google Maps (left) shows the location of residential area in Voronezh (center and right). (Source: Google Maps/archive left; RtrDonetsk/archive, center; @christogrozev/archive, right)
Imagery from Google Maps (left) shows the location of residential area in Voronezh (center and right). (Source: Google Maps/archive left; RtrDonetsk/archive, center; @christogrozev/archive, right)
The location of residential area as seen on Yandex Maps. (Source: Yandex/archive)
The location of residential area as seen on Yandex Maps. (Source: Yandex/archive)

Sayyara Mammadova, research associate, Warsaw, Poland

Valentin Châtelet, research associate, Brussels, Belgium

Amid chaos in the Russian information space the Kremlin attempts to limit information on Prigozhin

According to TASS, Russian social network VKontakte (VK) and search engine Yandex are blocking content related to Prigozhin. Reportedly, instead of Prigozhin’s statement that was published on June 23 at 9:52 pm Moscow time, a VK page for Prigozhin’s Concord company displayed a message that the material was blocked on the territory of Russia on the basis of the decision of the Prosecutor General’s Office. At the time of the writing, Prigozhin’s posts on Concord VK page were available, though none of them correspond to 9:52 pm Moscow time. TASS added that the Yandex search results for Prigozhin notifies a reader that some of the search results are hidden in accordance with federal law. Using a virtual private network (VPN), the DFRLab replicated the search of the content mentioned by TASS and found that they are accessible from other locations. The restrictions seem to be geofenced to Russia. 

Separately, TASS reported that there are Telegram-access disruptions detected in various Russian cities, including Moscow, St. Petersburg, Voronezh, and Volgograd Oblasts. 

Russia’s internet regulator Roskomnadzor warned that the government can place internet performance restrictions in locations where counter-terrorist operations might take place, such as Moscow, Voronezh, or Rostov. Roskomnadzor also added that the use of Telegram is not limited for now.  

Meanwhile, the Telegram channel Faridaily reported that residents of Moscow and the surrounding region are receiving calls from unknown mobile numbers with messages from Wagner. According to the Telegram post, one person received a call on their Viber messenger with a recording of Prigozhin’s appeal about “restoring justice.” Another person received a call on behalf of Wagner with an automated voice encouraging them to join Wagner when their units move toward Moscow.

Meanwhile, footage from Russian state media Rossiya 24 surfaced online showing a confused news anchor. Apparently lacking instructions from the Kremlin on how to report about the armed insurrection in Russia, they said, “Next we are going for short commercial and then… commercial.”

Eto Buziashvili, research associate, Tbilisi, Georgia

The post Russian War Report Special Edition: Prigozhin and Wagner forces mutiny against Moscow appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Russian War Report: Wagner attempts to draft gamers as drone pilots https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/russian-war-report-wagner-drafts-gamers/ Thu, 22 Jun 2023 18:12:27 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=658059 Russian PMC Wagner Group is encouraging gamers to apply to serve as drone pilots in the war against Ukraine while Ukrainian forces advance on the eastern front.

The post Russian War Report: Wagner attempts to draft gamers as drone pilots appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
As Russia continues its assault on Ukraine, the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab (DFRLab) is keeping a close eye on Russia’s movements across the military, cyber, and information domains. With more than seven years of experience monitoring the situation in Ukraine—as well as Russia’s use of propaganda and disinformation to undermine the United States, NATO, and the European Union—the DFRLab’s global team presents the latest installment of the Russian War Report

Security

Ukrainian counteroffensive sees advances in Zaporizhzhia and eastern Ukraine

Wagner attempts to draft gamers as UAV pilots

Tracking narratives

Deripaska blames hackers after his website briefly takes credit for potential war crime

Rumors of alleged death of popular pro-Kremlin war correspondent gain traction on Twitter

Ukrainian counteroffensive sees advances in Zaporizhzhia and eastern Ukraine

On June 19, Ukrainian forces launched counteroffensive actions in at least three areas and appear to have made gains in Zaporizhzhia and eastern Ukraine. The Telegram channel of Russian military blogger WarGonzo reported that Ukrainian forces continued attacks northwest, northeast, and southwest of Bakhmut and advanced near Krasnopolivka. Ukrainian Deputy Defense Minister Hanna Maliar announced that over the past week Ukrainian troops advanced up to seven kilometers in the direction of Zaporizhzhia and retook 113 square kilometers of territory. Russian Telegram channels also reported that fighting was ongoing south and southwest of Orikhiv on June 19. Zaporizhzhia and Donetsk oblasts continue to be the most active areas of the frontline, as the Ukrainian army attempts to advance in the directions of Novodarivka, Pryutne, Makarivka, Rivnopil, Novodanylivka, and Robotyne.

On June 17, the Russian Ministry of Defense claimed that Ukrainian forces conducted ground attacks west and south of Kreminna. It also stated that the Russian army had repelled Ukrainian attacks on the Avdiivka-Donetsk sector. Meanwhile, Ukrainian forces continued operations around Velyka Novosilka near the border between Donetsk and Zaporizhzhia oblasts. 

According to Ukrainian forces, Russian forces conducted offensive actions in Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts. The Ukrainian military reported forty-five combat engagements with Russian forces near Yampolivka, Torske, Hryhorivka, Spirne, Avdiyivka, Krasnohorivka, Marinka, Pobieda, Novomykhailivka, and Donetsk’s Dibrova and Orikhovo-Vasylivka. According to Ukraine, the Russian army continued to shell villages in the direction of Marinka, Zaporizhzhia, Kherson, Lyman, and Kupiansk. Ukraine also alleged that Russian forces launched Kalibr cruise missiles from a submarine in the Black Sea and Shahed drones from the eastern coast of the Sea of Azov.

On June 20, Kyrylo Budanov, chief of the Main Directorate of Intelligence for the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine, alleged that Russian troops mined the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant’s cooling pond, which is necessary for the safe operation of the plant. According to Budanov, if Russia triggers an explosion, there is a “high probability that there will be significant problems.” Budanov did not provide any evidence to support the allegation, and the statement cannot be independently verified at this time. If true, however, it would put the nuclear plant at greater risk of a significant accident. The power plant complex, Europe’s largest, has been under occupation since February 2022.

On January 22, the governor of Russian-occupied Crimea accused Ukraine of targeting a bridge that connects the peninsula to Kherson Oblast, near the village of Chonhar. In a Telegram post, Vladimir Sal’do alleged that Ukraine struck the bridge with “British Storm Shadow missiles,” creating a hole in the middle of the bridge.

As fierce hostilities continue in eastern and southern Ukraine, there are signs of a new wave of arrests in Russia, including of people with ties to Ukraine. On June 20, Russian state media outlet RIA Novosti announced that a woman of Ukrainian origin was detained in Saransk and charged with treason.

Ruslan Trad, resident fellow for security research, Sofia, Bulgaria

Wagner attempts to draft gamers as UAV pilots

A June 19 Telegram post from Russian opposition news outlet Verstka claimed that Wagner Group is encouraging gamers to apply to serve as unmanned aerial vehicle pilots in the war against Ukraine. The media outlet reported that no prior military experience was required to apply for the position. Posts from Wagner emerged on Vkontakte the same day, inviting gamers with experience in “manipulating joysticks in flight simulators” to enroll.

Wagner ad recruiting gamers as UAV pilots. (Source: VK)
Wagner ad recruiting gamers as UAV pilots. (Source: VK)

Verstka, which contacted a Wagner recruiter as part of its reporting, stated that the campaign aims to recruit soldiers to pilot “copters and more serious machines.” In this particular context, “copters” (коптеры) is a reference to commercial drones that are sold to the public and have been widely used in the war against Ukraine. A May 19 investigation published by the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project found that Chinese manufacturers have reportedly continued to provide Russian armed forces with DJI drones through third parties in Kazakhstan. 

Verstka also noted that in 2022, the Russian defense ministry attempted to recruit gamers with a targeted ad campaign that invited them to play “with real rules, with no cheat codes or saves.”

Valentin Châtelet, research associate, Brussels, Belgium

Deripaska blames hackers after his website briefly takes credit for potential war crime

The Russian-language website of Russian industrialist and US-sanctioned oligarch Oleg Deripaska briefly displayed an article appearing to take credit for deporting Ukrainian children to Russian-occupied Crimea in partnership with Kremlin official Maria Lvova-Belova, who is already facing an International Criminal Court arrest warrant for allegedly deporting children. 

Yaroslav Trofimov, chief foreign affairs correspondent at the Wall Street Journal, noted the article’s appearance and disappearance in a June 15 tweet. Trofimov shared screengrabs of the article, which by that time had already been deleted from Deripaska’s Russian-language website, deripaska.ru. A complete copy of the article can be found at the Internet Archive.

Later in the article, it added, “Separately, the Fund and personally Oleg Vladimirovich [Deripaska] express their gratitude to Maria Lvova-Belova and her project ‘In Hands to Children,’ which not only provided methodological materials, but also found an opportunity to send employees for psychological work with affected babies.” In March 2023, the ICC issued an arrest warrant for Lvova-Belova and Russian President Vladimir Putin, alleging they are responsible for unlawful deportation and transport of children from Russian-occupied parts of Ukraine to the Russian Federation.

In a response to Russian independent news outlet Meduza, which also covered the incident, a team of representatives for Deripaska called the article a “gross fake press-release” and blamed hackers for the article’s appearance. “The team added that Deripaska ‘unequivocally condemns the separation of children from their parents’ and that he is ‘one of the very few prominent Russian industrialists who openly criticizes the fratricidal war and consistently advocates for peace in Ukraine, as well as a reduction in global military spending,’” Meduza noted.

Eto Buziashvili, research associate, Tbilisi, Georgia

Rumors of alleged death of popular pro-Kremlin war correspondent gain traction on Twitter

Rumors are spreading online that claim Ukrainian forces killed pro-Kremlin war correspondent Semyon Pegov, who operates an influential group of social media accounts under the name Wargonzo. The rumor first spread on Twitter on June 19 following the release of a graphic video from the 73rd Naval Center of Operations documenting how Ukrainian special forces unit had shot Russian soldiers in trenches. On June 19, Pegov’s Twitter account disregarded the allegations as fake. Wargonzo’s Telegram account has continued to operate as usual.

DFRLab analysis conducted with the social media monitoring software Meltwater Explore revealed that the most retweeted tweet came from the pro-Ukraine Twitter account @GloOouD, which stated, “LOOKS LIKE RUSSIAN TERRORISTS AND WAR REPORTER SEMEN PEGOV WAS KILLED BY UKRAINIAN SPECIAL FORCES.” The account shared a screenshot of a low-quality video frame depicting a red-bearded man that bears resemblance to Pegov.

Screenshot of @GloOouD’s tweet suggesting that Semyon Pegov was killed by Ukrainian special forces. (Source: @GloOouD/archive)
Screenshot of @GloOouD’s tweet suggesting that Semyon Pegov was killed by Ukrainian special forces. (Source: @GloOouD/archive)

The DFRLab confirmed that the video frame depicting Pegov’s look-alike was extracted from the graphic video posted posted by the 73rd Naval Center of Operations. The video’s metadata indicates the clip was created on June 18, 2023, at 22:16:07 GMT+0300. However, the video shows events occurring in daylight.

Pegov’s most recent public appearance was on June 13 during a meeting between Putin and Russian war correspondents. The Kremlin-controlled Channel One Russia broadcast the meeting on June 18.

Comparison of the red-bearded man from the 73rd Naval Center of Operations’ video and Pegov talking at a press conference. (Source: @ukr_sof/archive, top; Perviy Kanal/archive, bottom)
 
- Nika Aleksejeva, Resident Fellow, Riga, Latvia
Comparison of the red-bearded man from the 73rd Naval Center of Operations’ video and Pegov talking at a press conference. (Source: @ukr_sof/archive, top; Perviy Kanal/archive, bottom)

Nika Aleksejeva, resident fellow, Riga, Latvia

The post Russian War Report: Wagner attempts to draft gamers as drone pilots appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Ukraine’s counteroffensive is a marathon not a blitzkrieg https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/ukraines-counteroffensive-is-a-marathon-not-a-blitzkrieg/ Thu, 22 Jun 2023 17:44:48 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=658184 Ukraine's summer counteroffensive has barely begun and already some are dismissing it as a failure due to lack of immediate progress. In reality, the unfolding campaign is a marathon and not a blitzkrieg, writes Peter Dickinson.

The post Ukraine’s counteroffensive is a marathon not a blitzkrieg appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Less than two weeks since he first confirmed that Ukraine’s long-awaited counteroffensive was finally underway, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy already finds himself forced to hit back at criticism over the pace of military operations. “Some people believe this is a Hollywood movie and expect results now. It’s not,” he told the BBC on June 21. “Whatever some might want, including attempts to pressure us, with all due respect, we will advance on the battlefield the way we deem best.”

Zelenskyy’s comments reflect frustration in Kyiv over reports in the mainstream international media and widespread claims on social media platforms suggesting Ukraine’s counteroffensive is already floundering. Ukrainian presidential advisor Mykhailo Podolyak was one of many Ukrainian commentators to suggest this trend is part of a coordinated Kremlin disinformation operation. In a June 20 post, he accused Moscow of fueling media hysteria about the alleged failure of Ukraine’s counteroffensive in order to secure a ceasefire and “freeze the conflict at any cost.”

Kremlin-tied or Russia-friendly sources are likely to be behind at least some of the recent criticism over the initial pace of Ukraine’s counteroffensive. At the same time, negative assessments are also a consequence of the unrealistically high expectations that built up in the half-year period prior to the start of the campaign.

In the final months of 2022, the Ukrainian military stunned the watching world by liberating large areas of the country from Russian occupation. A lightning September offensive saw most of northeastern Ukraine’s Kharkiv region de-occupied, while a more methodical push in the south eventually resulted in the liberation of Kherson. These successes encouraged many to expect similarly rapid progress during the current campaign. In reality, Ukraine’s summer 2023 counteroffensive represents a far greater challenge in almost every sense.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Ukraine must overcome a vast Russian invasion force strengthened by 300,000 mobilized troops that is dug in behind successive lines of sophisticated defensive fortifications stretching for over one thousand kilometers. They must do so without air superiority and while outgunned by Russian artillery at many points along the front. Nor can they count on the element of surprise. This incredibly ambitious task would challenge the world’s most powerful militaries. Understandably, Ukrainian commanders are adopting a methodical approach to the campaign.

Progress so far has been very slow but steady. During the first few weeks of the counteroffensive, Ukraine claims to have liberated at least eight settlements. While most represent sparsely populated frontline villages with little strategic value, the sight of the Ukrainian flag raised in liberated communities provides all Ukrainians with a massive morale boost. Meanwhile, the big battles still lie ahead.

For now, the Ukrainian military is focusing on probing attacks at numerous points along the front in order to identify weaknesses and thin out Russian defenses. Ukraine is also carrying out a comprehensive campaign of airstrikes against Russian military and logistical targets deep inside occupied territory. Britain’s May 2023 decision to provide Ukraine with long-range Storm Shadow cruise missiles is playing an important role in these air attacks, making it possible to hit targets virtually anywhere in occupied Ukraine. For example, Storm Shadow missiles are believed to have been used in the June 22 attack on a strategically important bridge connecting Crimea with Russian-occupied southern Ukraine.

These tactics are reminiscent of the early stages of last year’s ultimately triumphant Ukrainian campaign to liberate Kherson. At the beginning of August 2022, Ukraine very publicly signaled the start of a counteroffensive to free the southern port city and surrounding region. Progress was initially slow, leading to widespread criticism and pessimistic forecasts. However, Ukraine’s strategy of systematically targeting key bridges across the Dnipro River which Russian troops relied upon for resupply eventually paid off. Hemmed in and cut off, Russian commanders ordered a humiliating retreat in early November. 

While the Kherson counteroffensive was on a far smaller scale than the current operation, it offers perhaps the best guide to Ukraine’s current objectives and envisioned timeline. The campaign to liberate Kherson involved tens of thousands of troops and took approximately three months to complete. Today’s counteroffensive involves hundreds of thousands of troops on both sides, with an area equal to a medium-sized European country at stake. It may be months before Ukraine’s commanders feel the conditions are right to attempt a major push to achieve a comprehensive breakthrough.

Ukraine’s international partners seem to appreciate the need for patience and are now emphasizing a long-term commitment to Ukraine that goes far beyond the current counteroffensive. At the Ukraine Recovery Conference in London on June 21, British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak reiterated his promise to “stand with Ukraine for as long as it takes.” Other Western leaders have made similar pledges in recent weeks.

These statements are particularly important at a time when Russian hopes of rescuing their faltering invasion increasingly hinge on a weakening of Western resolve and a reduction in support for Ukraine. Despite the many setbacks of the past sixteen months, Putin and other senior regime figures in Moscow are apparently still convinced they can ultimately outlast the democratic world in Ukraine. European and American leaders are attempting to dampen such expectations by signaling the strength of their commitment to Ukrainian victory.

As international anxiety grows over the perceived lack of progress in Ukraine’s big summer counteroffensive, it is vital that this message of Western unity and resolution remains clear and unambiguous. The campaign to defeat Russia’s invasion is a marathon not a blitzkrieg, but it has every chance of success as long as Ukraine and the country’s partners are unwavering in their commitment.

Peter Dickinson is the editor of the Atlantic Council’s UkraineAlert service.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Ukraine’s counteroffensive is a marathon not a blitzkrieg appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Ukraine’s counteroffensive will likely create new reintegration challenges https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/ukraines-counteroffensive-will-likely-create-new-reintegration-challenges/ Sun, 11 Jun 2023 23:58:10 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=654161 If Ukraine's summer counteroffensive is successful, Kyiv will be faced with the significant challenge of reintegrating communities that have lived under Russian occupation for extended periods, writes Lesia Dubenko.

The post Ukraine’s counteroffensive will likely create new reintegration challenges appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
As Ukraine’s long anticipated counteroffensive gets underway, international attention is firmly fixed on military developments. If the Ukrainian Armed Forces are able to achieve significant advances, the authorities in Kyiv will also be faced with the challenge of reintegrating communities that have lived for more than a year, and in some cases over nine years, under Russian occupation.

The obstacles to successful reintegration should not be underestimated. Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine first began in 2014, Moscow has prioritized control of the information space and has subjected the population in occupied regions of Ukraine to relentless propaganda. Nevertheless, there is good reason to believe that the communities living in occupied Ukraine can be successfully reintegrated following liberation if the right policies are adopted.

Much to the Kremlin’s disbelief, Ukrainian national identity has proven far stronger than anyone in Moscow anticipated in 2014. Similarly, it should now be abundantly clear that the percentage of Ukrainian citizens who speak Russian in their daily lives or embrace aspects of Russian popular culture is in no way indicative of political loyalty to the Kremlin.

Even in regions of Ukraine where the Russian language remained dominant in everyday life following the Soviet collapse, and where cultural connections to post-Soviet Russia appeared strongest, there has also been significant exposure to Ukrainian culture, language, and national identity since the 1990s. For many years, everything from TV advertising to movies have been broadcast in Ukrainian, while education has predominantly been in Ukrainian as the official state language. An entire generation of Russian-speaking Ukrainians grew up and reached adulthood with an awareness of their Ukrainian identity prior to the initial Russian invasion of 2014.

Policymakers in the Kremlin appear to have bet that historic ties to Russia would trump any emerging sense of Ukrainian identity. This confidence was no doubt reinforced by Russia’s prominence in Ukrainian popular culture, with Russian pop singers, film stars, comedians, and literary figures all enjoying widespread popularity. However, the rapid decline since 2014 of Russian cultural influence in parts of Ukraine not subject to direct Kremlin control has illustrated the fragility of Russia’s informal empire.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Since the full-scale invasion began in February 2022, Ukraine has consistently stated that it will settle for nothing less than the liberation of the entire country within the international borders recognized in 1991. This is a massive military undertaking that will involve defeating a Russian invasion force numbering in excess of 300,000 soldiers. Beyond that, Ukraine must also reintegrate perhaps five million people who have spent an extended period living under Russian occupation.

While millions of Ukrainians fled Russia’s initial invasion in 2014 and the subsequent full-scale invasion of 2022, many more remained behind. They have been fed a diet of Kremlin propaganda portraying Ukraine as both a Nazi state and a puppet of the West. Russia has focused particular attention on indoctrinating young Ukrainians to convince them that their future lies with Moscow.

Despite these challenges, there is reason to believe that Russia’s efforts will ultimately fail. Ukrainians as a whole have been subjected to many decades of russification but have demonstrated in recent years that they are not convinced by the Kremlin’s anti-Ukrainian messaging. Indeed, the past nine years of Russian aggression have sparked a sharp rise in Ukrainian patriotism across the country, particularly in regions previously regarded as being highly russified. The shared sense of Ukrainian identity forged since 1991 has proven far stronger than the Kremlin had anticipated, while Russian aggression has had a powerful unifying impact on Ukrainian society.

Crucially, none of the Russian-occupied regions of Ukraine has been fully cut off from the rest of Ukraine since 2014. Until the launch of the full-scale invasion in February 2022, regular interaction across the front lines in Crimea and eastern Ukraine was the norm. Even the intensification of hostilities over the past 16 months has not led to a complete breakdown in communication.

Victims of Russian aggression will have a key role to play in the reintegration process. In every region liberated from Russian occupation, Ukrainian officials have uncovered evidence of widespread war crimes including summary executions, torture, sexual violence, abductions, and mass deportations. It is vital that survivors share their experiences with their wider communities to underline the horrors of the Russian occupation. Local residents will be seen as far more credible than government officials.

It will also be important to communicate in Russian as well as Ukrainian. While growing numbers of Ukrainians are embracing the Ukrainian language, many communities in southern and eastern Ukraine remain predominantly Russian-speaking and have been cut off from the Ukrainian language by Russia’s invasion. They will likely be far more receptive to Russian-language messaging, especially during the initial period following de-occupation, regardless of their personal attitudes toward issues of national identity.

It goes without saying that Ukraine’s top priority is to win the war. At the same time, military victories will prove hollow if the Kyiv authorities are unable to successfully reintegrate millions of Ukrainian citizens who have spent extended periods living under Russian occupation. In order to win hearts and minds, it is vital to underline to liberated communities that they are coming home to a nation that values and embraces them.

Lesia Dubenko is a Ukrainian analyst and journalist. Her articles have appeared in the Financial Times, Politico Europe, New Eastern Europe, and the Atlantic Council.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Ukraine’s counteroffensive will likely create new reintegration challenges appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Russian War Report: Satellite imagery analysis captures flood threat after dam’s destruction https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/russian-war-report-satellite-dam-destruction/ Thu, 08 Jun 2023 12:00:00 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=653048 Satellite imagery of the Nova Kakhovka dam's collapse reveals the extent of the damage caused by extreme flooding in Kherson Oblast.

The post Russian War Report: Satellite imagery analysis captures flood threat after dam’s destruction appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
As Russia continues its assault on Ukraine, the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab (DFRLab) is keeping a close eye on Russia’s movements across the military, cyber, and information domains. With more than seven years of experience monitoring the situation in Ukraine—as well as Russia’s use of propaganda and disinformation to undermine the United States, NATO, and the European Union—the DFRLab’s global team presents the latest installment of the Russian War Report. 

Security

Nova Kakhovka dam rupture floods acres of civilian settlements in Kherson Oblast

Fighting between Russian volunteers and Russian army escalates in Belgorod Oblast

Interference on satellite imagery points to enhanced military activity on the border between Belgorod and Kharkiv prior to saboteur raid

Tracking narratives

Pro-Kremlin sources contradict each other in laying blame for Nova Kakhovka dam destruction

Deepfake impersonating Putin ‘declares’ martial law in Russian regions bordering Ukraine

Russia recycles false narrative that Ukraine plans to use a ‘dirty bomb’

Nova Kakhovka dam rupture floods acres of civilian settlements in Kherson Oblast

On June 6, satellite imagery published by Maxar confirmed the collapse of the Nova Kakhovka dam in Ukraine. The dam is located downstream of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, and upstream of the city of Kherson, in southeast Ukraine. Ukraine and Russia continue to blame each other for its destruction.

For months, Russian and Ukrainian armed forces have been facing each other on either side of the riverbank, as Ukraine retook the city of Kherson after Russia claimed to have evacuated the city as “a gesture of good will.” The contents of the Kakhovka reservoir have been flowing downstream into the Kherson region ever since the dam’s rupture, resulting in the flooding of acres of civilian settlements stretching from near the dam down to the mouth of the river along the Black Sea.

The DFRLab collected data from MapZen using Sentinel’s EOBrowser platform. The imagery notably contains a digital elevation model enabling the DFRLab to model high risk areas subject to floods. Using geographic analysis relying on raster calculations, a technique for mapping individual pixels to altitude data, the DFRLab assessed two scenarios of potential flooding downstream of Nova Kakhovka. This information was cross-referenced with other data posted by Russian opposition Telegram channel Agentstvo to assess the extent of the flood.

An animated map showing potential locations subjected to flooding hazards as a result of the rupture of the Nova Kakhovka dam. (Source: MapZen via ESA/Sentinel EOBrowser, annotations: DFRLab)
An animated map showing potential locations subjected to flooding hazards as a result of the rupture of the Nova Kakhovka dam. (Source: MapZen via ESA/Sentinel EOBrowser, annotations: DFRLab)

Agentstvo geolocated footage taken by civilians on either side of the river. The DFRLab added these locations to the above map in an attempt to compare the modeled area to the actual reported locations of flooding. As of June 6, the mapped locations are consistent with areas that would flood if the river rose by just two meters. Footage shows parts of Kherson also subjected to inundation.

Additionally, security concerns are growing as mines located on both sides of the riverbank are at risk of exploding as a result of the rising water level. The Ukrainian Independent Information Agency reported that some Russian mines had already detonated. Villagers and inhabitants on alluvial islands and in Kherson were forced to leave their homes. Furthermore, Russia and Ukraine are blaming one another for the destruction of the dam. While Ukrainian officials accused Russia of bombing the Kakhovka dam to undermine Ukraine’s counteroffensive efforts, Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu said Ukraine committed a “terrorist attack” to “prevent a Russian attack.”

Valentin Châtelet, research associate, security, Brussels, Belgium

Fighting between Russian volunteers and Russian army escalates in Belgorod Oblast

The fighting continues in Russia’s Belgorod Oblast, a short distance from Ukraine’s northeastern border, but details about the situation remain murky. The Russian Volunteer Corps, an anti-Putin military unit made of Russian pro-Ukrainian partisans, and the Freedom of Russia Legion said they carried out a number of attacks in the region, while Moscow claims to have repelled several attacks.

The Freedom of Russia Legion announced it had destroyed two Russian army tanks, one BMP infantry fighting vehicle, and one BRDM armored vehicle near the Shebekino border crossing in Belgorod on the night of June 4. The veracity of the claim has not been independently verified, however. On June 4, another unconfirmed report appeared on the Telegram channel of Ukrainian journalist Andrii Tsaplienko, citing an unnamed military officer, claiming the Russian army shelled a settlement in the Belgorod region. There have been signs of fighters from the Russian Volunteer Corps being active in Belgorod, so shelling the region could signal an escalation. In addition, the Russian Telegram channel Brief reported that the Ukrainian army shelled Novaya Tavolzhanka in Belgorod Oblast on June 5; this too has not been confirmed. Another Russian Telegram channel reported explosions in Grayvoron, Belgorod Oblast that same day. 

One day earlier, the Russian Volunteer Corps said on Telegram that a Polish volunteer unit has been fighting “shoulder-to-shoulder for the freedom and independence of Ukraine for several months.” According to the statement, Russian and Polish fighters jointly carried out “a number of operations” in the areas of Orikhiv, Zaporizhzhia, and Bakhmut. The Polish unit, known as the Polish Volunteer Corps (Polski Korpus Ochotniczy), has published videos of its operations in Bakhmut and Zaporizhzhia on their Telegram channel, which was created in February 2023. According to the Russian Volunteer Corps, the Polish fighters are providing military and medical logistics only within the state borders of Ukraine. The information published by the two military units on Telegram have not been verified independently. 

The Polish government has denied it has any involvement with Polish volunteer units. Stanisław Żaryn, the secretary of state for the chancellery of the prime minister of Poland, said on Twitter that the Polish Volunteer Corps are “in no way associated with the Polish Armed Forces or any Polish institution.” According to Polish media outlet Defence 24, the Polish Volunteer Corps was created in February 2023 and operates as part of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. The Polish Volunteer Corps reportedly posted on its Telegram channel that they participated in the combat mission in Belgorod alongside the Russian Volunteer Corps. The Telegram post reportedly argued that “all returned from the mission safely. The task was completed successfully.” However, it appears that the post was later removed, as there are currently no posts in the Telegram channel containing information about the participation of Polish units in the Belgorod raid. 

Russian Volunteer Corps fighters also claimed to be holding captive Russian soldiers who were handed over to Ukrainian forces because authorities in Belgorod had shown no desire to retrieve them. At the 1:26 mark in a video posted on June 4 to the Telegram channel of the Russian Volunteer Corps, a dozen men in Russian uniforms are seen. It is possible the men were captured during fighting between the militants and the Russian army in the village of Novaya Tavolzhanka in Belgorod Oblast, though this is unconfirmed. According to The New Voice of Ukraine, the volunteer fighters reached out to Belgorod Governor Vyacheslav Gladkov with an offer to return the captured soldiers as a goodwill gesture. In return, they asked for a private audience with the governor to discuss the present state of the region. The governor has reportedly not responded to the request. Previously, Gladkov described the fighters as “those fascists,” and said they were responsible for “daily civilian deaths.” The Freedom of Russia Legion also claimed to be holding Russian soldiers captive in a video published on their Telegram channel on June 5.

Meanwhile, the Armed Forces of Ukraine stated that Russian forces on June 4 and 5 conducted offensive actions in the Donetsk and Luhansk Oblasts, with the Ukrainian military fighting the Russian army near Novoselivske and Bilohorivka in Luhansk and Ivanivske and Marinka in Donetsk. Ukrainian forces also alleged that a Russian saboteur group attempted to infiltrate the border near Zelene in Kharkiv Oblast. Ukraine added that settlements in Kharkiv, Chernihiv, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson were shelled by Russia, including a building belonging to Kherson State University. 

Meanwhile, Sky News obtained a purported arms contract detailing a purchase agreement between Russia and Iran. According to the contract, Iran supplies Russia with tank and artillery ammunition, as well as barrels for T-72 tanks and howitzers. The sixteen-page document, which has not been independently verified, is dated September 14, 2022, and presents samples of variously sized artillery and tank shells and rockets worth just more than one million dollars.

Ruslan Trad, resident fellow for security research, Sofia, Bulgaria

Givi Gigitashivili, research associate, Warsaw, Poland

Interference on satellite imagery points to enhanced military activity on the border between Belgorod and Kharkiv prior to saboteur raid

A map showing interference patterns caught on SAR Imagery by Sentinel-1 on May 18, 2023 (Source: ESA/Sentinel-1, annotations: DFRLab)

Satellite Aperture Radar (SAR) imagery from May 18 released by the European Space Agency’s Sentinel-1 satellite shows massive levels of interference in Russia’s Belgorod Oblast. The DFRLab previously reported on similar interference patterns observed in the Black Sea and in Belgorod throughout April 2023. The May 18 imagery indicates that more prominent interference activity took place in Belgorod Oblast, with patterns stretching several hundred kilometers. The imagery was obtained just after midnight local time that morning as the satellite was flying over the border with Kharkiv. 

Simultaneously, consistent reports of aerial activity in Belgorod, including missile launches, emerged on Telegram. These patterns were observed nearly one week prior to the Russian Volunteer Corps’ raids in Russia’s border outposts of Shebekino and Grayvoron.

Several smaller interference patterns also stretch east of Kharkiv in Ukraine. These could also be consistent with reports from the Telegram channel Kharkiv Live which indicated Russian aviation raids and artillery rocket launches between 11:58 pm and 12:31 am local time. Local authorities issued an air raid alert between 12:31 and 1:01 am.

Valentin Châtelet, research associate, Brussels, Belgium

Pro-Kremlin sources contradict each other in laying blame for Nova Kakhovka dam destruction

Pro-Russian Telegram channels, sometimes referred to as “Z channels,” began reporting on the Nova Kakhovka dam around 3:00 am Moscow time, stating that the shelling of the Kakhovka hydroelectric power plant occurred at 2:35 am. Initially, Vladimir Leontev, the Russian-installed mayor of occupied Novaya Kahovka, denied any explosion, shelling, or damage to the dam. In an interview with Kremlin-owned RIA Novosti, Leontev said, “That’s bullshit! Everything is fine, everything is fine everywhere; I just got on the [police] radio. Everywhere everything is normal in the city; everything is quiet and calm.” Further, Kremlin-owned TASS quoted an unnamed source from the Russian authorities as saying, “It was quiet at night. There was no shelling. The dam could not stand, one support collapsed, and flooding began.”

Later, the narrative changed. In a video, Leontev said, “At about 2:00 am there was shelling on Kahovka dam and its valves were destroyed.” RIA Novosti blamed the Armed Forces of Ukraine for the damage that caused the “unregulated discharge of water.” The pro-Kremlin Telegram channel Swodki commented, “Russian positions are located on the lower Dnipro riverbank. The flow of water can erode the line of [Russian] defense on the coast and prevent and repel a potential boat landing of an aircraft of the Armed Forces of Ukraine.” In addition, former Russian commander Igor “Strelkov” Girkin, who played a crucial role in forming the separatist movement in the Donbas, suggested that the dam’s destruction helped Ukrainian forces advance militarily. 

The exact cause of its destruction remains unknown. The New York Times reported that some experts believe it was “probably breached” by an “internal blast,” but acknowledged this assessment should be treated “cautiously.” Pro-Ukraine social media pointed fingers at Russia causing the breach, but at times the debate was muddled due to sharing of old footage capturing the explosion of a bridge adjacent to the facility in November 2022. 

Meanwhile, some social media posts from pro-Kremlin fighters suggested the dam’s destruction benefits Russia. For example, Russian solider Yegor Guzenko suggested on his Telegram channel Separ13_13 that the destruction of the dam was in Russia’s favor. In one video, he said, “Whoever did it, it is good if no Russian Army soldier suffers. Then it does not matter who did it even if it were [Ukrainians] themselves.” Later, he posted about why the destruction might have been in Ukraine’s favor.

Nika Aleksejeva, resident fellow, Riga, Latvia

Deepfake impersonating Putin ‘declares’ martial law in Russian regions bordering Ukraine

On June 5, Russian television and radio stations broadcast a clip featuring a deepfake of President Vladimir Putin. In the fabricated “emergency address,” the impersonated Russian president reportedly declared, “Ukrainian troops, armed by the NATO bloc with the consent and support of Washington, invaded the territories of the Kursk, Belgorod, and Bryansk regions.” The Putin deepfake then “announced” martial law in these regions and said that he plans to sign an executive order declaring a general mobilization throughout the country. 

The incident was reported in the Russian oblasts of Voronezh, Bryansk, and Belgorod. These regions sit along the border with Ukraine, where frequent drone attacks are reported and armed group incursions forced some to evacuate in May. Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov declared that Putin did not address the nation and confirmed that “a hack occurred in several regions.” According to Peskov and information posted on the Telegram channel Ukraine Informer, radio stations also broadcast the same message.

Russian State Duma members of parliament have set out to draft a law enforcing the labeling of content created by neural networks.

Valentin Châtelet, research associate, Brussels, Belgium

Russia recycles false narrative that Ukraine plans to use a ‘dirty bomb’

On June 6, the same day the Novo Kakhovka dam was destroyed, Russia shared a new iteration of its narrative that accuses Ukraine of planning to use a “dirty bomb” against Russia.

Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB) published a statement in which the agency claimed to have “received additional information on the involvement of the Ukrainian special services in the planning and preparation of acts of international terrorism.” The FSB claimed that Ukraine created an air unit to supply “sabotage and reconnaissance groups on Russian territory” with “dirty bombs.” The statement alleged that Ukraine planned to place dirty bombs in various places, detonate them simultaneously, and “make areas [in Russia] unsuitable for human habitation.”

The DFRLab has previously covered Russian attempts to spread similar disinformation in order to prime audiences for the February 2022 invasion of Ukraine and justify the war. Since then, the DFRLab have observed multiple instances of Russian officials accusing Kyiv of plotting to use a “dirty bomb.”

Eto Buziashvili, research associate, Tbilisi, Georgia

The post Russian War Report: Satellite imagery analysis captures flood threat after dam’s destruction appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Russian War Report: Belgorod incursion brings deluge of online mockery of Russia’s defenses https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/russian-war-report-trolls-belgorod/ Thu, 25 May 2023 19:09:42 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=649635 After an anti-Putin Russian volunteer military unit attacked Belgorod, trolls and bloggers online viciously ridiculed Russian defenses.

The post Russian War Report: Belgorod incursion brings deluge of online mockery of Russia’s defenses appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
As Russia continues its assault on Ukraine, the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab (DFRLab) is keeping a close eye on Russia’s movements across the military, cyber, and information domains. With more than seven years of experience monitoring the situation in Ukraine—as well as Russia’s use of propaganda and disinformation to undermine the United States, NATO, and the European Union—the DFRLab’s global team presents the latest installment of the Russian War Report. 

Tracking narratives

Belgorod raid sparks trolling activity on social media

Russian pro-war military bloggers criticize the handling of Belgorod incursion

Russian media spins Australian solidarity rally for Julian Assange as an anti-NATO event

International response

US sanctions Armenian company for helping Russia evade sanctions

Belgorod raid sparks trolling activity on social media

Drone imagery from a burning border control outpost in the Russian region of Belgorod sparked a frenzy on social media this week. According to Riga-based Russian news outlet Meduza, members of the Russian Volunteer Corps and other Russian nationals crossed from Ukraine into Belgorod Oblast and attacked a border outpost in Grayvoron. The Russian Volunteer Corps, an anti-Putin military unit made of Russian pro-Ukrainian partisans, claimed responsibility for the attack; the Free Russia Legion also claimed responsibility.

An assessment by Russian news outlet RBC regarding the broader situation in Belgorod indicated an armed incursion, with shelling and artillery fire reported. On the evening of May 22, Russian government declared a state of counterterrorist emergency in Belgorod Oblast. Although the governor of the oblast did not officially issue an order to evacuate the civilian population immediately, footage and photographs posted on social media indicated that at least some residents evacuated to other areas in the region. Meduza also reported several drone strikes on the city of Belgorod itself.

Conflicting reports emerged on May 23 after Russian officials lifted the counterterrorist alert. While the Russian Ministry of Defense claimed to have “liquidated” around seventy “saboteurs,” reporting from the news outlet Mash indicated the deployment of additional Russian law enforcement in nearby Bryansk Oblast. In an effort to support their assertions of having eliminated the insurgency, Russian news outlets also released photos of military-class vehicles allegedly used by the insurgents stuck in the mud; some open-source analysts, however, questioned the authenticity of the photos. Russian media chased these reports with claims of destroyed Ukrainian tanks, while the Russian Volunteer Corps posted footage to Telegram seemingly showing intact military equipment.

Shortly after the news broke out, footage of a drone attack on the local Russian border outpost, APP Grayvoron, appeared on the outpost’s Google Maps profile, though it was later deleted. At the time of writing, it had been replaced with footage showing a convoy of vehicles, one flying the flag of the Russian Volunteer Corps.

The Google Maps profile for a Russian border outpost in Belgorod featured a video of a mechanized convoy flying the flag of the Russian Volunteer Corps. (Source: Google Maps/archive)
The Google Maps profile for a Russian border outpost in Belgorod featured a video of a mechanized convoy flying the flag of the Russian Volunteer Corps. (Source: Google Maps/archive)

Simultaneously, trolling reviews appeared on the border outpost’s Google Maps profile, calling the border guards “friendly” and the facilities “understaffed.” These too have been deleted, though not before they were documented by the Saint Javelin Twitter account and other Twitter users.

Trolls post mocking reviews of Russia’s Belgorod border post. (Source: @SaintJavelin/archive)
Trolls post mocking reviews of Russia’s Belgorod border post. (Source: @SaintJavelin/archive)

Other trolls took to Twitter, where members of the NAFO meme movement, a pro-NATO and pro-Ukrainian community on the platform, renamed their account to “Government of The Bilhorod’s Peoples Republic” as a joking reference to the self-proclaimed Donetsk and Luhansk Peoples Republics. “Bilhorod” is the Ukrainian name for Belgorod.

NAFO meme account @nitro19820 changes its Twitter name and bio to joke that it now represented a new “People’s Republic” in Belgorod. (Source: @nitro19820/archive)
NAFO meme account @nitro19820 changes its Twitter name and bio to joke that it now represented a new “People’s Republic” in Belgorod. (Source: @nitro19820/archive)

Valentin Châtelet, research associate, Security, Brussels, Belgium

Russian pro-war military bloggers criticize the handling of Belgorod incursion

Following the apparent border incursion into Belgorod Oblast and subsequent attacks on the region, pro-war military bloggers condemned Moscow’s handling of the war in Ukraine, including its border defenses.

Telegram channel Vоенкор Котенок Z (“Milblogger Kitten Z”) criticized the Kremlin for being late in declaring a counterterrorism operation in Belgorod and not knowing how to fight “for real.” “There is a war, and in Russia … they are afraid to call the war a war,” stated the Telegram post.

The channel ДШРГ Русич (“DShRG Rusich”) questioned “commanders of all levels” on how the incursion happened. It also blamed Russia’s intelligence services for failing to reveal “plans of an enemy.” The channel added that as long as there is no photographic evidence of corpses or burned equipment, “the enemy has no losses, and the [Russian] propagandists crapped themselves a little, saying that everything is fine.”

The Kotsnews Telegram channel addressed pro-Kremlin pundits who dismissed military blogger concerns as “hysteria” by insisting that the threat to Russian territory is real and that there are uncomfortable questions around Russia’s defensive capabilities that nobody wants to ask. “What is happening with our technical equipment at the border, surveillance systems, tracking, motion detection?” the channel asked. “What about the mining of potentially dangerous areas? What about anti-tank weapons? Why did the enemy armored group calmly penetrate deep into our territory?”

As Russia’s war against Ukraine has dragged on, the frequency and intensity of pro-war military bloggers’ criticism have increased and become bolder. The DFRLab has previously covered how Russian military bloggers criticized Russian President Vladimir Putin and the Ministry of Defense.

Eto Buziashvili, research associate, Tbilisi, Georgia

Russian media spins Australian solidarity rally for Julian Assange as an anti-NATO event

On May 20, a series of so-called “World Wide Freedom Rallies” took place in many cities around the world. The Telegram account for Simeon Boikov, a pro-Kremlin activist and blogger in Australia, claimed to have organized the Sydney edition of the rally, part of a decentralized movement that originated in 2021 to express dissatisfaction with COVID security measures. Boikov promoted a poster for the event on April 6, a day before the event announcement on the movement’s official Telegram channel. 

The rally ostensibly focused on demanding the release of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, who is currently being held in London facing potential extradition to the United States. After the event, however, Boikov highlighted a speech by Assange’s father, John Shipton, in a video showing scenes from the rally and emphasized that Shipton was wearing a “double headed eagle and St George’s ribbons,” both of which are Russian symbols. Additional videos and images from the rally showed many people carrying Russian flags and wearing pro-Kremlin symbols. 

Kremlin-controlled media outlets emphasized in their headlines not just the pro-Russia nature of the event, but also claims of anti-NATO sentiment, which appear to have been exaggerated. Reviewing footage from the event, the DFRLab identified only one instance of someone sporting anti-NATO messaging. Nonetheless, Russian media embraced the event as specifically anti-NATO, including state outlets Gazeta.ru, TASS, RIA Novosti, and Komsomolyskaya Pravda, and pro-Kremlin media such as News Front, Inforeactor, Ekonomika Segodnya. Additionally, The Eastern Herald, an Indian media outlet, and Belarus state-controlled television both framed the event as anti-NATO in their English-language publications.

Nika Aleksejeva, resident fellow, Riga, Latvia

US sanctions Armenian company for helping Russia evade sanctions

On May 22, the US Department of Commerce announced that it had amended its list of sanctioned entities and individuals by adding seventy-one entities that the US government had determined to be acting “contrary to [US] national security or foreign policy interests.” Alongside Russian companies, one Kyrgyz company, Tro.Ya LLC, and one Armenian company, Medisar LLC, were included in the amended list. According to the Department of Commerce, both companies engaged in conduct that “prevented the successful accomplishment of an end-use check.” In other words, the Department of Commerce suspected that the final destination for the products was Russia but the companies themselves had obfuscated this information.

Medisar LLC, which was registered in Armenia in 2001, is an importer of chemicals and laboratory equipment. The company is one of the thousand largest taxpayers in Armenia, paying about one million dollars in taxes in 2022. It also has a longstanding trade history with Russian companies. On its website, Medisar indicates that one of its trading partners, dating back to 2011, is Russian company Minimed.

Screenshot from the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project’s (OCCRP) Aleph database, made available through Friends of OCCRP access, about Medisar’s trade. The third and fourth companies on the list are both OOO Minimed, a Russian company with a long-term trading relationship with Medisar. (Source: DFRLab via OCCRP)

On May 20, Armenian investigative website Hetq reported that data obtained from the country’s customs service showed that in 2022, Medisar exported equipment from Armenia to Russia, including electronic integrated circuits, diodes, transistors, and similar semiconductor devices.

A company executive who did not want to be identified acknowledged to RFE/RL that Medisar imported chemicals and laboratory equipment from the United States and the European Union and re-exported them to Russia.

Medisar is the second-largest company registered in Armenia to be sanctioned by the United States. The US Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) sanctioned the other firm, TAKO, in April. The company is in the wholesale of electronic and telecommunications equipment and parts. TAKO, spelled TACO in Armenia’s legal entities register, was registered in May 2022 in Armenia and is fully owned by a Russian citizen, according to public registry records.

On April 18, the New York Times reported that in 2022, Armenia imported 515 percent more chips and processors from the United States and 212 percent more from the European Union than in 2021, and that Armenia exported 97 percent of those same products to Russia.

During a May 22 press conference, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan said that despite Armenia’s “strategic” relationship with Russia and membership in the Russian-led Eurasian Economic Union, the country “cannot afford to come under Western sanctions.” Pashinyan underscored that if Armenia faced sanctions, “it wouldn’t be good for any of our allies, while we would ruin our relations with our Western partners.”

A joint “compliance note” issued on March 2 by the US Departments of the Treasury, Justice, and Commerce, titled “Cracking Down on Third-Party Intermediaries Used to Evade Russia-Related Sanctions and Export Controls,” mentioned Armenia, along with China, Turkey, and Uzbekistan, as “transshipment points commonly used to illegally redirect restricted items to Russia or Belarus.”

According to the Statistical Committee of the Republic of Armenia, Russian-Armenian trade soared in 2022, including exports to Russia, which nearly tripled to $2.4 billion.

Ani Mejlumyan, research assistant, Yerevan, Armenia

The post Russian War Report: Belgorod incursion brings deluge of online mockery of Russia’s defenses appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
New Bernard Henri-Lévy documentary challenges Ukraine fatigue https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/new-bernard-henri-levy-documentary-challenges-ukraine-fatigue/ Thu, 18 May 2023 16:06:51 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=647131 For anyone seeking to make sense of Russia’s war in Ukraine, viewing French public intellectual Bernard Henri-Lévy’s new feature-length documentary “Slava Ukraini” (“Glory to Ukraine”) isn’t an option. It’s a must.

The post New Bernard Henri-Lévy documentary challenges Ukraine fatigue appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
For anyone seeking to make sense of Russia’s war in Ukraine, viewing French public intellectual Bernard Henri-Lévy’s new feature-length documentary “Slava Ukraini” (“Glory to Ukraine”) isn’t an option. It’s a must. A gritty, intense, and probing examination of the impact of the war, it offers what is surely the ultimate antidote to Ukraine fatigue.

As he pondered the course of the war, Henri-Lévy came to the conclusion that the best way to combat the West’s mounting impatience with the 15-month war and counter the push for preliminary negotiations was to show rather than tell. Instead of writing an essay, the 74-year-old French filmmaker and philosopher took to the road to illuminate the bravery of ordinary Ukrainians against what he calls the “master terrorist” in the Kremlin.

The film, which carefully traces Henri-Lévy’s journey across Ukraine, is about far more than jerky shots of the Frenchman and his crew dodging bullets and drone attacks. It is about Ukraine’s defiance of Putin’s attempt not simply to wage a war of territorial conquest, but to efface the idea of Ukrainian nationhood itself. “If I dare to give a certain logic to this crazy war, it is in the logic of the denial of Ukrainian identity,” he says. “This barbarity matches the logic of denying the very existence of Ukraine.”

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

As he journeys from Ukraine’s capital to the east, Henri-Lévy captures the dignity of the Ukrainian people through short vignettes that remain with you long after the credits roll. The Frenchman focuses on ordinary Ukrainians like the elderly woman who appears in the documentary engaged in the quotidian task of stirring a steaming pot of borscht and pleads for an end to the constant violence that has upended her life. She hopes to make it to her seventieth birthday, she says.

In Kyiv, after another Russian air strike hits a woman’s apartment, she apologizes profusely to Henri-Lévy for wearing a dirty black coat. Her kitchen is unusable after the bombing and her crockery is battered, but she’s more focused on the state of her appearance. She takes the French filmmaker to her makeshift bed, a chair inside a bathroom tub where she waited out the aerial assault, and smiles with pride at her ability to snatch a few hours of sleep.

Another scene captures everyday life for those who couldn’t leave cities and towns that Russia has pounded relentlessly in the east. A man who appears to be approaching pension age tries to chop wood with an axe, complaining that it’s warmer outside than inside.

In Pavlograd, the French filmmaker dons a hard helmet and overalls to cover his black designer suit and spotless white shirt as he descends below ground to watch Ukrainian miners drill iron ore. The precious ore is eventually made into bullet-proof vests for soldiers at the front. After the steel miners are done for the day, they carry on packing care boxes of food and medicine for displaced families.

Henri-Lévy observes that every steelworker is a hero, just like the brave men and women on the front lines. In one of his characteristic meditative asides, he observes that the Greeks and Romans admired heroes in part because they were so rare. “In Ukraine, heroes are everywhere,” he says. The Frenchman confesses that he keeps coming back to Ukraine because it is rare in history to see so many people embody heroism in one place.

The documentary also features moments of exhilaration. Henri-Lévy captures joyous scenes from recently liberated Kherson, where hundreds mill in the main square, some searching for power to recharge their phones and tell their loved ones they are still alive. Perhaps the hardest and most powerful scene comes when Henri-Lévy visits a torture cell that still has fresh blood on the floor. The Russians never actually appear on film, but their depraved conduct casts a dark shadow over the documentary.

This film is anything but neutral and Henri-Lévy makes no attempt to disguise his sympathies. “I am partisan. I don’t give five minutes to the Jews and five minutes to the Nazis,” he says.

The Frenchman has consistently refused to engage in bogus moral hand-wringing when it comes to the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Instead, he is clear about which side he’s on, as viewers of “Slava Ukraini” will no doubt recognize. “I want the Ukrainians to win,” he commented on May 11 at a screening of the documentary at the E Street Cinema in Washington, DC.

Melinda Haring is director of stakeholder relations and social impact at the Superhumans Center. Jacob Heilbrunn is Editor of the National Interest. Haring and Heilbrunn are both non-resident senior fellows at the Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center. “Slava Ukraini” was shown at a series of screenings in May organized with the Ukrainian American charity Razom. It can be viewed on Apple TV and YouTube.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post New Bernard Henri-Lévy documentary challenges Ukraine fatigue appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Wagner chief’s rants highlight Russian infighting ahead of Ukraine offensive https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/wagner-chiefs-rants-highlight-russian-infighting-ahead-of-ukraine-offensive/ Mon, 15 May 2023 13:51:14 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=645541 Wagner chief Yevgeny Prigozhin's public rants against Russia’s military leadership point to mounting infighting within Putin’s invading army as it prepares to face a potentially decisive Ukrainian offensive, writes Olivia Yanchik.

The post Wagner chief’s rants highlight Russian infighting ahead of Ukraine offensive appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
The head of Russia’s Wagner mercenary group has launched a series of outspoken attacks on the country’s military leadership in recent weeks that point to mounting internal divisions within Putin’s invading army as it prepares to face a potentially decisive Ukrainian counteroffensive.

In one of his most recent rants, Wagner chief Yevgeny Prigozhin mocked Russian Defense Ministry claims of a “redeployment to defensive positions” near to the hotly contested city of Bakhmut and warned that in reality, the front was in danger of collapsing. “The Defense Ministry’s attempts to cover up the situation will lead to a global tragedy for Russia,” he stated on May 12. “They must stop lying immediately.”

This was the latest in a series of public statements by Prigozhin accusing the Russian army and defense ministry of failing to provide his Wagner troops with sufficient front line support. He had earlier threatened to withdraw his forces from Bakhmut altogether due to alleged ammunition shortages.

In his many video addresses, Prigozhin has sought to burnish his own credentials as a straight-talking military man while attacking members of the Russian military establishment. Speaking in the wake of recent Russian retreats from the flanks around Bakhmut, he declared: “Soldiers should not die because of the absolute stupidity of their leadership.”

He also raised eyebrows last week by referring mockingly to a “happy grandpa,” which many assumed was a reference to Putin himself. This was clearly too much even for Prigozhin, who quickly released a new statement clarifying that the “grandpa” in question may have been a number of military leaders including chief of the Russian general staff Valery Gerasimov, but was most certainly not Putin.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Prigozhin’s public attacks on Russia’s military leadership reflect his rising profile and growing swagger. The Wagner mercenary group he leads first came into being nine years ago during the initial stages of Russia’s military invasion of eastern Ukraine, at a time when the Kremlin was eager to maintain a degree of plausible deniability. Subsequent roles in Syria and Africa allowed Wagner to expand significantly, but it was the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 that transformed the fortunes of the mercenary force and thrust it into the international limelight.

Over the past fifteen months of the Ukraine invasion, Wagner has emerged as the only group within the Russian military to meet or surpass expectations. While units of the regular army have been decimated and forced into a series of humiliating retreats, Wagner has achieved numerous grinding advances in eastern Ukraine. This has given Prigozhin the confidence and the clout to name and shame his superiors for their alleged shortcomings. Such attacks have only added to his popularity among Russian audiences.

Prigozhin’s criticisms are in a sense hypocritical, given the notoriously high casualty rates among his own soldiers. Indeed, the brutal tactics adopted by Wagner forces in the Battle of Bakhmut have led many to describe the battle as a “meat grinder.” According to US officials, around half of the estimated 20,000 Russian soldiers killed in Ukraine since December 2022 have been Wagner troops fighting in and around Bakhmut.

Ukrainian sources have also questioned the credibility of Prigozhin’s efforts to praise the valor of his Wagner forces while accusing regular Russian troops of abandoning their positions. “The first soldiers to flee were Wagner,” a Ukrainian commander who took part in early May engagements near Bakhmut told CNN. This and other similar accounts may indicate that Prigozhin is lashing out at the army high command from a position of weakness as Wagner’s earlier exploits risk being overshadowed by more recent setbacks.

Why has Putin not intervened to end the increasingly bitter public feud between Prigozhin and Russia’s military leadership? Some see it as a sign of the Russian dictator’s own growing weakness, while others argue that it may be a deliberate ploy to position the likes of Defense Minister Shoigu and army chief Gerasimov as scapegoats for a coming defeat. At the very least, Prigozhin’s attacks on military commanders serve to deflect the blame for the failing invasion away from Putin himself.

While Prigozhin’s headline-grabbing rants may help to protect Putin from criticism on the domestic front, they also risk further undermining morale among Russian forces in Ukraine. The issue of demoralization is already posing major challenges for Russian commanders, with more cases of desertion recorded in Russian military courts in the first four months of the current year than during the whole of 2022. Recent months have also seen a sharp rise in video addresses posted to social media by Russian soldiers complaining of suicidal “human wave” tactics and catastrophic battlefield losses.

With Ukraine expected to launch a major counteroffensive in the coming weeks, Russian military morale will likely soon face its stiffest test since the invasion began in February 2022. Major question marks remain over the ability of Russian troops to stand their ground, particularly given the Kremlin’s growing reliance on poorly trained conscripts drafted into the military late last year as part of Russia’s first mobilization since World War II.

These mobilized troops proved highly ineffective during Russia’s failed winter offensive, suffering high casualties while making almost no progress. They must now prepare for defensive operations against a Ukrainian force that has been training for the coming offensive for the past six months. Russia has also been digging in and preparing sophisticated defenses, but morale will be a huge factor during what many observers predict will be some of the most intense battles of the entire war. Prigozhin’s frequent public criticism of Russian troops and commanders is unlikely to boost fighting spirit at this critical moment for Putin’s invasion.

Olivia Yanchik is a program assistant at the Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Wagner chief’s rants highlight Russian infighting ahead of Ukraine offensive appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
How strong is Russian public support for the invasion of Ukraine? https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/how-strong-is-russian-public-support-for-the-invasion-of-ukraine/ Tue, 02 May 2023 18:56:56 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=641835 The Kremlin has worked hard to create the impression of overwhelming public support for the invasion of Ukraine but it remains difficult to gauge true levels of pro-war sentiment in today's Russia, writes Sviatoslav Hnizdovskyi.

The post How strong is Russian public support for the invasion of Ukraine? appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Ever since the full-scale invasion of Ukraine began on February 24, 2022, the Kremlin has worked hard to create the impression of enthusiastic support for the war among the Russian population. However, many continue to question the true scale of this public backing. In order to get a sense of Russian attitudes toward the invasion, we need to go beyond official statements and explore everything from online activity and fundraising initiatives to psychological factors that may be shaping opinion in Putin’s Russia.

Polling data remains the most commonly cited evidence of widespread Russian support for the invasion of Ukraine. However, such indicators must be treated with a high degree of skepticism due to the obvious risks inherent in expressing anti-regime opinions in an authoritarian state such as modern Russia. Over the past year, various polls have identified strong levels of public support ranging from 55% to 75%, with relatively little fluctuation. The Levada Center, which is regarded by many international observers as Russia’s only legitimate independent pollster, has conducted monthly polls since the beginning of the invasion that have consistently indicated public backing of over 70%.

While opinion polls indicating pro-war sentiment must be treated with caution, there is very little evidence of any active opposition to the invasion within Russian society. In the weeks following the outbreak of hostilities, relatively small protests took place in a number of Russian cities, but this trend failed to gain momentum. Despite awareness of the atrocities taking place in Ukraine and the Russian military’s unprecedented losses, there remains no real anti-war protest movement in Russia.

This absence of anti-war activity is perhaps unsurprising. The Kremlin has adopted a series of draconian laws in the wake of the invasion that criminalize any criticism while outlawing use of the word “war” in favor of the euphemistic “Special Military Operation.” As a result of these legislative changes, numerous high-profile opposition figures have been given long prison sentences for their anti-war stances. At the same time, it is important to note that although more than one million Russians have fled the country in response to the invasion of Ukraine, very few have taken advantage of their newfound freedoms to stage anti-war rallies outside Russia.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Public support for the invasion can be seen in the many examples of ordinary Russians mobilizing to back the war effort. Across the country, large numbers of fundraising initiatives have emerged to help supply Russian soldiers with everything from drones and radios to food and warm clothing. These grassroots efforts are entirely voluntary and point to high levels of public sympathy for the Russian soldiers currently serving in Ukraine.

A further indication of pro-war sentiment within Russia is the revival of Stalin-era denunciations targeting anyone seen as critical of the war. There have been numerous high-profile instances of colleagues, teachers, and even family members reporting people to the authorities for voicing anti-war opinions. During the first half of 2022 alone, Russian media and information space regulator Roskomnadzor reportedly received 144,835 individual denunciations.

Social media remains comparatively free in today’s Russia and provides important insights into the public mood. Young supporters of the war have largely congregated on TikTok, where they often form pro-war groups and post messages celebrating the Russian army.

Telegram has emerged as a key platform for Russian audiences seeking to follow the invasion. There are a substantial number of military-themed accounts offering some of the most credible coverage of the war, often including remarkably frank criticism of the Russian establishment. These pro-war accounts have gained considerably in status since February 2022 and have attracted millions of followers.

Research conducted by Ukraine’s Open Minds Institute has identified widespread pro-war sentiment on Russian social media. While it is important to acknowledge that the Kremlin is believed to invest heavily in bot farms and troll armies, the vast majority of the accounts studied by the Open Minds think tank appear to represent real people with their own wide-ranging interests and long histories of posting on different topics.

Support for the war on Russian social media tends to be expressed in abstract terms relating to national pride rather than any concrete benefits deriving from the invasion. Accounts based in Moscow demonstrate the lowest levels of interest in the war, while regions closest to Ukraine are the most negative. Meanwhile, areas of Russia furthest from the conflict tend to be more positive. Posts and comments closely mirror changing events on the ground and typically reflect the latest developments in Ukraine, indicating high levels of awareness regarding the current status of the invasion.

While it is impossible to determine exact levels of pro-war sentiment within Russian society, it is clear that the invasion of Ukraine enjoys considerable backing. What is fueling these positive attitudes toward a war that has horrified global audiences?

A combination of factors have shaped Russian public opinion in favor of the invasion. Propaganda has played a central role in this process, with Russian audiences subjected to years of relentless messaging throughout the Kremlin-controlled mainstream media preparing the population for war with Ukraine.

Many Russians appear to be driven by feelings of faith and obedience toward the authorities. Other factors include notions of national identity rooted in the imperial past and a strong desire to belong. Many Russians may be choosing to adopt pro-war positions in order to associate with like-minded people and demonstrate their own patriotism. Others may be motivated primarily by a desire to avoid accusations of disloyalty.

Unfortunately, such conformity often comes at the expense of critical thinking or moral constraints. This has made it possible for millions of otherwise unremarkable people to support the largest European war of aggression since the days of Hitler and Stalin. Some observers speculate that much of this support is insincere and would soon evaporate if circumstances within Russia changed. Nevertheless, the currently available evidence indicates overwhelming acceptance of the invasion, at the very least.

Sviatoslav Hnizdovskyi is founder and CEO of the Kyiv-based Open Minds Institute.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post How strong is Russian public support for the invasion of Ukraine? appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is also being fought in cyberspace https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/russias-invasion-of-ukraine-is-also-being-fought-in-cyberspace/ Thu, 20 Apr 2023 16:30:09 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=638524 While the war in Ukraine often resembles the trench warfare of the twentieth century, the battle for cyber dominance is highly innovative and offers insights into the future of international aggression, writes Vera Mironova.

The post Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is also being fought in cyberspace appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
The Russian invasion of Ukraine is the first modern war to feature a major cyber warfare component. While the conventional fighting in Ukraine often resembles the trench warfare of the early twentieth century, the evolving battle for cyber dominance is highly innovative and offers important insights into the future of international aggression.

The priority for Ukraine’s cyber forces is defense. This is something they have long been training for and are excelling at. Indeed, Estonian PM Kaja Kallas recently published an article in The Economist claiming that Ukraine is “giving the free world a masterclass on cyber defense.”

When Russian aggression against Ukraine began in 2014 with the invasion of Crimea and eastern Ukraine’s Donbas region, Russia also began launching cyber attacks. One of the first attacks was an attempt to falsify the results of Ukraine’s spring 2014 presidential election. The following year, an attempt was made to hack into Ukraine’s electricity grid. In 2017, Russia launched a far larger malware attack against Ukraine known as NotPetya that Western governments rated as the most destructive cyber attack ever conducted.

In preparation for the full-scale invasion of 2022, Russia sought to access Ukraine’s government IT platforms. One of the goals was to obtain the personal information of Ukrainians, particularly those working in military and law enforcement. These efforts, which peaked in January 2022 in the weeks prior to the invasion, failed to seriously disrupt Ukraine’s state institutions but provided the country’s cyber security specialists with further important experience. “With their nonstop attacks, Russia has effectively been training us since 2014. So by February 2022, we were ready and knew everything about their capabilities,” commented one Ukrainian cyber security specialist involved in defending critical infrastructure who was speaking anonymously as they were not authorized to discuss details.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Ukrainian specialists say that while Russian hackers previously tried to disguise their origins, many now no longer even attempt to hide their IP addresses. Instead, attacks have become far larger in scale and more indiscriminate in nature, with the apparent goal of seeking to infiltrate as many systems as possible. However, the defenders of Ukraine’s cyberspace claim Russia’s reliance on the same malware and tactics makes it easier to detect them.

The growing importance of digital technologies within the Ukrainian military has presented Russia with a expanding range of high-value targets. However, efforts to access platforms like Ukraine’s Delta situational awareness system have so far proved unsuccessful. Speaking off the record, Ukrainian specialists charged with protecting Delta say Russian hackers have used a variety of different methods. “They tried phishing attacks, but this only resulted in our colleagues having to work two extra hours to block them. They have also created fake interfaces to gain passwords and login details.”

Ukrainian security measures that immediately detect and block unauthorized users requesting information have proved effective for the Delta system and similar platforms. Russian hackers have had more success targeting the messaging platforms and situation reports of various individual Ukrainian military units. However, due to the fast-changing nature of the situation along the front lines, this information tends to become outdated very quickly and therefore is not regarded as a major security threat.

Ukraine’s cyber efforts are not exclusively focused on defending the country against Russian attack. Ukrainians have also been conducting counterattacks of their own against Russian targets. One of the challenges they have encountered is the comparatively low level of digitalization in modern Russian society compared to Ukraine. “We could hack into Russia’s railway IT systems, for example, but what information would this give us? We would be able to access train timetables and that’s all. Everything else is still done with paper and pens,” notes one Ukrainian hacker.

This has limited the scope of Ukrainian cyber attacks. Targets have included the financial data of Russian military personnel via Russian banks, while hackers have penetrated cartographic and geographic information systems that serve as important infrastructure elements of the Ukraine invasion. Ukrainian cyber attacks have also played a role in psychological warfare efforts, with Russian television and radio broadcasts hacked and replaced with content revealing suppressed details of the invasion including Russian military casualties and war crimes against Ukrainian civilians.

While Ukraine’s partners throughout the democratic world have provided the country with significant military aid, the international community has also played a role on the cyber front. Many individual foreign volunteers have joined the IT Army of Ukraine initiative, which counts more than 200,000 participants. Foreign hacker groups are credited with conducting a number of offensive operations against Russian targets. However, the large number of people involved also poses significant security challenges. Some critics argue that the practice of making Russian targets public globally provides advance warning and undermines the effectiveness of cyber attacks.

Russia has attempted to replicate Ukraine’s IT Army initiative with what they have called the Cyber Army of Russia, but this is believed to have attracted fewer international recruits. Nevertheless, Russia’s volunteer cyber force is thought to have been behind a number of attacks on diverse targets including Ukrainian government platforms and sites representing the country’s sexual minorities and cultural institutions.

The cyber front of the Russo-Ukrainian War is highly dynamic and continues to evolve. With a combination of state and non-state actors, it is a vast and complex battlefield full of gray zones and new frontiers. Both combatant countries have powerful domestic IT industries and strong reputations as hacker hubs, making the cyber front a particularly fascinating aspect of the wider war. The lessons learned are already informing our knowledge of cyber warfare and are likely to remain a key subject of study in the coming decades for anyone interested in cyber security.

Vera Mironova is an associate fellow at Harvard University’s Davis Center and author of Conflict Field Notes. You can follow her on Twitter at @vera_mironov.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is also being fought in cyberspace appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Human wave tactics are demoralizing the Russian army in Ukraine https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/human-wave-tactics-are-demoralizing-the-russian-army-in-ukraine/ Sat, 08 Apr 2023 20:41:38 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=634125 Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine has not gone according to plan but he still hopes to win a long war of attrition. However, Russia's reliance on human wave tactics risks undermining morale within his invading army, writes Olivia Yanchik.

The post Human wave tactics are demoralizing the Russian army in Ukraine appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
It is no secret that the Russian invasion of Ukraine has not gone according to plan. Nevertheless, with the conflict now in its second year, Vladimir Putin still hopes to break Ukrainian resistance in a long war of attrition.

This may be easier said than done. While Russia enjoys significant demographic, industrial, and economic advantages over Ukraine, questions remain over the ability of the once-vaunted Russian military to achieve the Kremlin’s goals. Crucially, an apparent reliance on human wave tactics during Russia’s recent winter offensive has led to catastrophic losses which threaten to undermine morale within the ranks of Putin’s invading army.

There is currently no confirmed data regarding losses on either side of the Russo-Ukrainian War. At the same time, most independent sources agree that fighting in recent months has resulted in some of the worst carnage of the entire war. In mid-February, Britain’s Ministry of Defence reported that during the previous two weeks, Russia had likely suffered its highest rate of casualties since the initial stages of the invasion almost one year earlier.

Russia’s heaviest losses in recent months are believed to have occurred in battles for control over strategic towns in eastern Ukraine such as Bakhmut and Vuhledar, with Ukraine claiming to have killed or wounded tens of thousands of Russian soldiers. While unconfirmed, these figures are supported by extensive battlefield footage, much of which appears to show Russian troops engaged in reckless frontal assaults on entrenched defensive positions.

The human wave tactics on display in eastern Ukraine reflect Russia’s narrowing military options following a year of embarrassing battlefield setbacks. The Russian military entered the current war with a reputation as the world’s number two army, but has performed remarkably poorly in Ukraine. With many of his most experienced units and elite regiments decimated, Putin now hopes to grind down Ukraine’s resources and outlast the country’s Western backers by relying on superior numbers. In the final months of 2022, he bolstered his invasion force with an additional 300,000 troops via Russia’s first mobilization since World War II.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Human wave tactics are not new and typically involve soldiers conducting direct attacks in large numbers with the objective of overwhelming an opposing force. Such troops are often regarded as “single-use soldiers,” with each wave suffering heavy casualties as it attempts to move the front lines further forward. This is not the first time Russian troops have been called upon to conduct such attacks. During WWII, Soviet commanders often ordered Red Army soldiers into frontal assaults that resulted in exceptionally high death tolls.

In the present war against Ukraine, the Kremlin may see human wave tactics as an effective way of overcoming determined Ukrainian resistance. It allows Russia to wear down Ukraine’s numerically fewer but battle-hardened troops, and can be implemented using a combination of easily replaced forces including recently mobilized soldiers and former convicts serving in the Wagner private military company.

This approach allows Russia’s more experienced soldiers to be held in reserve and used to exploit emerging weak points in the Ukrainian defenses. So-called “blocking units” are also reportedly being deployed behind the front lines to ensure Russian troops do not try to flee. According to numerous battlefield accounts, any Russian soldier who attempts to retreat from a human wave attack faces the prospect of being shot by their own side.

Although grisly, Russia’s human wave tactics are producing results. However, any advances during the past three months in Bakhmut and at other points along the 600-mile front line have been modest in scale and have come at a high cost. In an interview with Current Time on the front lines of Bakhmut, one Ukrainian soldier described the horrors of Russia’s frontal assaults. “The Russian soldiers face certain death in these attacks, but they are not retreating,” he commented. “You can shoot his head off, but his comrade will keep coming. Their own commanders will kill them if they don’t attack.”

The brutality of Russia’s human wave attacks is leading to growing signs of demoralization among front line troops. Since the beginning of 2023, dozens of video appeals have been posted to social media featuring Russian soldiers in Ukraine complaining to Putin or other state officials about human wave tactics and high death tolls. Russian media outlet Verstka reported that since early February, Russian soldiers from at least 16 different regions of the country have recorded video messages in which they criticize their military commanders for using them as cannon fodder.

Footage has also emerged of Russian soldiers refusing to follow orders after suffering heavy losses during the recent winter offensive in eastern Ukraine. While details remain unconfirmed, most of these incidents appear to have involved recently mobilized Russian troops who found themselves rushed into battle, often after having received minimal training.

In a further worrying sign for the Kremlin, Ukrainian officials have reported a record number of calls in March 2023 to the country’s “I Want to Live” initiative, which helps Russian troops surrender to the Ukrainian military. All this points to the conclusion that human wave attacks could be compounding Russian morale issues and further accelerating the buckling of front line offensives.

At this stage, there appears to be little prospect of a sudden collapse throughout the Russian military comparable to the disintegration of Afghanistan’s security forces during the 2021 US withdrawal. While the demoralization issues facing the Russian army appear significant, recent steps to introduce draconian penalties for Russian soldiers found guilty of disobedience, desertion, or surrender represent a powerful deterrent. The continued domestic strength of the Putin regime and its control over the information space also serve to hold Russia’s army together in Ukraine.

The Kremlin may now have recognized that it must address widespread anger and alarm over the military’s use of human waves. In early April, Russian General Rustam Muradov was reportedly dismissed from his post as commander of the Eastern Group of Forces in Ukraine following his disastrous handling of the recent failed assault on Vuhledar, which resulted in “exceptionally heavy casualties.” Muradov had been widely criticized by his own troops along with many members of Russia’s vocal pro-war blogger community, making him an unofficial symbol of the army’s human wave tactics.

If confirmed, Muradov’s departure may indicate a coming change in tactics. This would arguably be long overdue. If Russia is hoping to outlast Ukraine in a war of attrition, Putin’s generals will need to move beyond a reliance on costly human waves and demoralizing frontal assaults.

Olivia Yanchik is a program assistant at the Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Human wave tactics are demoralizing the Russian army in Ukraine appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Anti-war Russians struggle to be heard https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/anti-war-russians-struggle-to-be-heard/ Thu, 06 Apr 2023 18:12:04 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=633443 The Kremlin has worked hard to create the impression of overwhelming Russian public support for the invasion of Ukraine but anti-war sentiment may become more visible if Putin's army suffers further battlefield defeats, writes Christopher Isajiw.

The post Anti-war Russians struggle to be heard appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Ever since the full-scale invasion of Ukraine began on February 24, 2022, the Putin regime has worked hard to present the impression of overwhelming Russian domestic support for the war effort. This has involved everything from celebrity endorsements and relentless pro-war coverage in the Kremlin-controlled mainstream Russian media, to online flash mobs and carefully choreographed mass rallies in central Moscow.

Meanwhile, a ruthless clampdown has made it increasingly difficult and dangerous for dissenting voices to be heard. Nevertheless, opposition figures continue to question the true levels of public backing for the invasion, while insisting that large numbers of Russians are either opposed or indifferent. The real situation within Russian society is certainly far more complex than the Kremlin would like us to believe, but today’s suffocating atmosphere means there is little reason to expect an increase in visible anti-war activity any time soon.

Officially at least, Putin’s approval rating has increased significantly since the start of the full-scale invasion just over one year ago. According to Russia’s only internationally respected independent pollster, the Levada Center, the Russian President’s rating rose from 71% on the eve of the invasion to 82% in March 2023. The same source indicates consistently high levels of support for the invasion of Ukraine, with over 70% of respondents expressing their approval in every single survey conducted throughout the past thirteen months.

These figures point to strong levels of public support for the war but they must be viewed in context. Critics question the validity of any public opinion polling in a dictatorship such as Putin’s Russia, where people are legally obliged to call the invasion a “Special Military Operation” and can face criminal prosecution for social media posts. This is worth keeping in mind when analyzing surveys of Russian opinion.

Many poll respondents may be inclined to demonstrate their patriotism and their support for the Russian military while being less enthusiastic about the invasion itself or the Kremlin’s war aims. Others may have become swept up in the relentless flow of pro-war propaganda or cut off from alternative sources of information. It is also important to acknowledge that a large majority of people refuse to participate in polling of this nature. They may choose to decline for a wide range of reasons, but it is possible that many simply prefer not to share anti-war opinions with strangers.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

What evidence is there of anti-war sentiment in today’s Russia? When the invasion of Ukraine began in February 2022, efforts to claim strong public backing for the war were hampered by a series of protests in cities across the country involving mainly young Russians. However, these public demonstrations failed to reach any kind of critical mass and were fairly rapidly suppressed by the authorities with large numbers of detentions.

Other Russians have voted with their feet. A mass exodus of Russian nationals began during the first weeks of the war, with a second wave starting in September 2022 in the wake of Russia’s first mobilization since World War II. Hundreds of thousands of military-age Russian men fled to neighboring countries in the last four months of the year, leading in some cases to massive queues at border crossings.

This outflow of people has had a considerable negative demographic impact on Russia, but it would not be accurate to claim that everyone who has left the country during the past year holds anti-war views. Many chose to leave in order to avoid military service, while others feared the inconvenience of wartime conditions. Thousands of wealthy Russians have relocated to destinations like Dubai, where they can manage their Russian businesses while distancing themselves physically and psychologically from the war.

For those who remain in Russia, it is still possible to live a fairly normal life despite the imposition of sanctions and the departure of many high-profile Western brands. Meanwhile, some members of Russia’s billionaire elite are believed to oppose the war, but most see their fortunes as tied to Putin and are fearful of the consequences if they break with the regime publicly.

There are indications that the war is becoming less and less popular among the very troops charged with leading the invasion. The refusal of many contract soldiers to extend their service has forced the Russian authorities to introduce legislative changes, while in recent months there has been a sharp increase in video addresses on social media featuring mobilized Russian soldiers complaining about suicidal tactics and high death tolls. At the same time, there is little indication yet that mounting demoralization on the front lines is shaping the public mood back in Russia itself.

What of Russia’s beleaguered political opposition? For more than twenty years, the Putin regime has sought to silence any genuine opposition forces via increasingly direct means. These efforts have intensified since the onset of the Ukraine invasion, with independent media outlets shut down and many of the country’s relatively few remaining opposition figures either jailed or forced to flee. Some have attempted to speak out against the war while in exile, with others who left Russia in previous years such as Gary Kasparov and Mikhail Khodorkovsky serving as vocal opponents of the invasion.

The most prominent opposition figure in today’s Russia, Alexei Navalny, remains in prison. Navalny has managed to issue a number of statements from jail condemning the war. In February 2023, he published a fifteen-point plan calling for the Russian military to withdraw completely from Ukraine and arguing that Russia must accept Ukraine’s internationally recognized borders. While many have welcomed Navalny’s unambiguous opposition to the invasion, others remain wary due to his ties to Russian nationalism and earlier reluctance to back the return of Crimea to Ukraine.

At this point, extreme Russian nationalism appears to pose a far greater threat to the Putin regime than liberal anti-war sentiment. A new class of pro-war bloggers has emerged over the past year and has become a powerful force within the more active segments of Russian society. Hardliners such as Wagner chief Yevgeny Prigozhin and Chechen leader Ramzan Kadyrov have gained in stature thanks to their prominent roles in the invasion and have engaged in rare public criticism of key establishment figures.

The authoritarian nature of the Putin regime makes it almost impossible to accurately gauge levels of anti-war sentiment in today’s Russia. It may take a decisive military defeat before many of those who oppose the war dare to speak up and demand change. In a sense, this is exactly what Putin is fighting against. He invaded Ukraine primarily because he feared Ukrainian democracy would serve as a catalyst for similar demands inside Russia itself. So far, he has managed to prevent anti-war or pro-democracy movements from gaining momentum. However, if his invading army’s battlefield fortunes continue to deteriorate in Ukraine, those who dream of a different Russia may finally find their voices.

Christopher Isajiw is an international relations commentator and business development consultant to private, governmental, and non-governmental organizations.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Anti-war Russians struggle to be heard appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Russian War Report: A new private military company emerges in Crimea https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/russian-war-report-a-new-private-military-company-emerges-in-crimea/ Fri, 31 Mar 2023 20:29:11 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=631303 Plus, Russia and its political allies in Moldova are inflaming the information space around Transnistria.

The post Russian War Report: A new private military company emerges in Crimea appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
As Russia continues its assault on Ukraine, the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab (DFRLab) is keeping a close eye on Russia’s movements across the military, cyber, and information domains. With more than seven years of experience monitoring the situation in Ukraine—as well as Russia’s use of propaganda and disinformation to undermine the United States, NATO, and the European Union—the DFRLab’s global team presents the latest installment of the Russian War Report. 

Security

Russia escalates attacks in Avdiivka as new private-military-company unit launches in Crimea

Tracking narratives

Russia and its political allies in Moldova continue to inflame information space around Transnistria

Putin and Lukashenka announce plans to deploy tactical nuclear weapons to Belarus after news of UK uranium-depleted ammo transfer

Secretary of Kremlin Security Council accuses NATO of being “party to the conflict” in Ukraine

Documenting dissent

New audio allegedly documents Russian elites criticizing Putin for war in Ukraine

Russia escalates attacks in Avdiivka as new private-military-company unit launches in Crimea

Russian forces continue their attempts to break through Ukrainian army defenses in several directions. Russian units attacked Ukrainian positions in Pervomaisk, and conducted strikes on Zaporizhzhia and Kharkiv. On March 30, at least ten Iranian-made Shahed drones targeted Ukrainian territory as Russian aviation dropped guided bombs on Lvove village in Kherson Oblast.

The Russian army continues to pressure Ukrainian forces in the direction of Avdiivka, where fighting has recently escalated. Ukraine’s 36th Marine Brigade, active in Avdiivka, has been successful in countering Russian attacks. However, Russian Telegram channels claimed that incendiary shells struck Ukrainian positions around the Avdiivka Coke and Chemical Plant.

On March 29, Russia claimed that Ukraine had struck a railway depot in the Russian-occupied city of Melitopol, located deep behind the front line, knocking out power. Ukraine’s exiled mayor of the city also confirmed the explosions. Footage published online shows explosions lighting up the night sky. Melitopol is located on the edge of the range of Ukraine’s HIMARS multiple rocket launchers but is within reach of newer weapons, including air-launched joint direct attack munitions and ground-launched small-diameter bombs (GLSDB). The strike could disturb Moscow’s logistics at a time when Kyiv has suggested it could soon launch a counterattack.

On March 28, Russia reported for the first time that it had shot down a GLSDB. The Russian Ministry of Defense also claimed that air defenses had shot down a new Ukrainian Hrim-2 ballistic missile in the area of Novoandriivka, Donetsk Oblast.

Meanwhile, the Kremlin-installed head of occupied Crimea, Sergey Aksyonov, has created his own Wagner-like military unit. To lead the group, dubbed “Convoy” (Конвой), Aksyonov has recruited Konstantin Pikalov, a former Wagner commander who served in Africa. The mercenary unit is said to be composed of three hundred fighters and has reportedly already deployed to occupied parts of Kherson Oblast. On March 16, Aksyonov spoke about the “professional military unit” on Crimean television. “The guys who have gone through everything that is possible,” he said, discussing military honors they had received. “The leaders have several Orders of Courage; the chief of staff is a Hero of Russia.”

A video published on the Convoy Telegram channel showed Aksyonov inspecting the positions of the new unit. The channel was created last November and heavily features Russian Orthodox imagery and icons. It also refers to Ukrainians as “satanists.”

Vladimir Osechkin, the founder of the Russian human-rights organization Gulagu, said the new private military contractors are designed to replace Wagner units on the frontlines. He said the new unit could be expected to operate alongside the Russian army in Zaporizhzhia, Donetsk, and areas just north of Crimea.

Convoy’s training grounds are located in the village of Perevalne, southeast of Simferopol, according to the independent Russian news outlet Important Stories. This village has existing military infrastructure from the Cold War era, including the 165th Training Center, used for the training of foreign military personnel. A January 2023 Convoy ad recruiting snipers on Telegram offered room and board at the training center, as well as clothing, equipment, and a scholarship worth 100,000 rubles ($1,286).

Convoy sniper recruitment poster circulated on Telegram, January 17, 2023. (Source: @lobaev_vlad/archive)

The ad included a contact email address with the domain conwoy.org; according to a WHOIS search, the domain was registered on June 15, 2022, by “’Military Security Company Convoy’ Limited Liability Company” in Leningrad Oblast.

Ruslan Trad, resident fellow for security research, Sofia, Bulgaria

Russia and its political allies in Moldova continue to inflame information space around Transnistria

In an interview with the Russian state-owned news outlet TASS, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov alleged Ukrainian interference in the unrecognized breakaway region of Transnistria, saying Ukrainian leadership “[demonstrates] in every way its readiness to interfere in this process, including with the use of force.” Lavrov accused Ukraine of playing an “extremely negative, subversive role” in the “5+2” negotiation format, a diplomatic platform designed to settle the Transnistria conflict. The minister said that by clearly siding with Chisinau, “Kyiv authorities support its belligerent, destructive policy towards Transnistria.” Lavrov also emphasized Russia’s responsibility for the security of Transnistria, which according to him, is “in full accordance” with the mandate of Russian troops.

Earlier, Marina Tauber, vice president of the pro-Russian Moldovan opposition party Sor, claimed that Moldovan authorities were preparing a military provocation near the border of Transnistria, scheduled for April 17, after the Easter holidays. “[Moldovan President] Maia Sandu and [Moldovan Prime Minister] Dorin Recean are preparing a military provocation on the border with Transnistria,” Tauber claimed, citing “international intelligence services.” Tauber further asserted that Moldova had sent ten thousand uniforms to Romania for the Romanian security forces, with the goal of involving them in a military conflict. She also claimed that authorities had ordered three thousand coffins.

Moldovan government spokesperson Daniel Voda dismissed Tauber’s claims, saying, “Tauber’s statements are false and are part of a constant discourse promoting fear and division in society.”

The Russian Defense Ministry had previously alleged that Kyiv was preparing an armed provocation against Transnistria, which Kyiv and Moldova have denied.

Victoria Olari, research assistant, Chisinau, Moldova

Putin and Lukashenka announce plans to deploy tactical nuclear weapons to Belarus after news of UK uranium-depleted ammo transfer

The Kremlin may be exploiting a March 20 announcement by the United Kingdom concerning the transfer of depleted uranium armor-piercing rounds to Ukraine, using it as an excuse to allegedly deploy tactical nuclear weapons to Belarus.

Despite the fact that depleted uranium rounds do not actually contact radioactive elements, state-owned Russian news outlets claimed the ammunition could indeed contain radioactive uranium, which fueled a Kremlin-led narrative advocating for deploying tactical nuclear weapons to Belarus as retaliation. Putin said the transfer of weapons by the West containing “nuclear components” called for “an adequate answer.” State-owned news outlet TASS reported that Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov called the transfer of these rounds a further escalation of the conflict, and claimed without evidence that the use of them would contaminate Ukraine’s food supply.

In a March 23 video on the Russian military TV station Zvezda News, Belarusian President Alyaksandr Lukashenka said that if Russian forces are targeted by Ukrainian depleted rounds, “the response will be terrifying, it will be a lesson for the whole planet.” On his personal Telegram channel, Lukashenka noted that discussions about the transfer of nuclear weapons took place in November 2021.

In a March 25 interview on Rossiya 1, Putin announced plans to relocate tactical nuclear weapons to Belarusian territory. He said that Belarus was already equipped with ten bomber aircrafts as well as Iskander systems compatible with nuclear-class weapons. The Russian president insisted the weapons would be deployed to Belarusian “territory.” Using this wording indicates that Putin is trying to avoid being accused of nuclear proliferation to a neighboring country.

According to a report by the Belarusian website Motolko Help citing Putin’s interview, Russia will reportedly build storage facilities for tactical nuclear weapons in Belarus by June 1. Citing a video posted on the Belarusian YouTube channel ONT, Motolko also assessed that the 465th Missile Brigade in Osipovichi district—the only missile brigade in Belarus—was likely already equipped with Iskander missile systems. This claim has not been independently verified.

Motolko also reported that Lukashenka recently announced that additional SU-25 fighter jets would undergo “reequipment” to adapt their technical capabilities to carry nuclear payloads. However, the Belarusian president also made similar claims in June and August 2022.

Valentin Châtelet, research associate, security, Brussels, Belgium

Secretary of Kremlin Security Council accuses NATO of being “party to the conflict” in Ukraine

On March 27, Nikolai Patrushev, secretary of the Kremlin Security Council, said that NATO is a party to the war in Ukraine. The government newspaper Rossiyskaya Gazeta quoted Patrushev saying, “in fact, NATO countries are a party to the conflict. They made Ukraine one big military camp. They send weapons and ammunition to the Ukrainian troops, provide them with intelligence.”

On March 21, at a meeting in Ulyanovsk, Russia, Patrushev said that foreign intelligence agencies are trying to “stir up protest and separatist sentiments in Russia,” with the support of “pseudo-political structures” located abroad and foreign nongovernmental organizations. The remarks were made amid ongoing military setbacks by the Russian military in eastern Ukraine and internal problems within the officer corps fueled by a power struggle in the Kremlin that has been on display since the early months of the full-scale invasion.

Patrushev, a close ally of Putin, previously served as the head of the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB). He has served in the powerful role of secretary of the Kremlin Security Council since 2008. The anti-NATO remarks are the latest in an ongoing campaign of narratives that the Kremlin has utilized to justify its war on Ukraine.

Ruslan Trad, resident fellow for security research, Sofia, Bulgaria

New audio allegedly documents Russian elites criticizing Putin for war in Ukraine

On March 7, audio emerged online purporting to capture a phone call between Russian music producer Iosif Prigozhin and Farhad Akhmedov, the Azerbaijan-born billionaire and former Russian senator, in which they criticized Putin for the war in Ukraine. The audio did not gain traction until March 24, when Ukraine’s Channel 5 published the conversation.

During the alleged call, Prigozhin seems to refer to Kremlin leaders as “criminals.” He then appears to claim that former Russian Prime Minister Igor Sechin, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, and National Guard Director Viktor Zolotov are “united” and “blame everything” on Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu. “Putin is pinning everyone against each other to save himself,” Prigozhin allegedly added. Akhmedov, in turn, appears to say that Putin would not be able to save himself and would be held accountable for his actions.

The independent Russian media outlet Important Stories reported that the audio was genuine, citing an anonymous source in Russian intelligence services. According to the source, “the leadership of the FSB recently held a meeting and instructed subordinates to take action.”

When the audio first gained attention, Prigozhin shared a video on his Telegram channel insisting the audio was fake. “This recording is a symbiosis of spoken phrases and those that were generated, they were never spoken,” he insisted.

Wagner Group founder Yevgenzy Prigozhin, who bears no relation to the music producer, called Iosef Prigozhin “impudent, aggressive, and quick-tempered.” He speculated that whoever recorded the call may have thought that they had been recording the Wagner Group leader instead of the music producer.

Ani Mejlumyan, research assistant, Yerevan, Armenia

The post Russian War Report: A new private military company emerges in Crimea appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Putin’s plan for a new Russian Empire includes both Ukraine and Belarus https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/putins-plan-for-a-new-russian-empire-includes-both-ukraine-and-belarus/ Wed, 29 Mar 2023 14:45:58 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=629541 A leaked document detailing Russia's plans to absorb Belarus highlights the scale of Vladimir Putin's imperial ambitions and provides insights into the true objectives behind the invasion of Ukraine, writes Taras Kuzio.

The post Putin’s plan for a new Russian Empire includes both Ukraine and Belarus appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Over the past year, Vladimir Putin has compared himself to empire-building eighteenth century Russian Czar Peter the Great, and has attempted to annex entire regions of Ukraine while declaring that he is “returning historically Russian lands.” A recently leaked document purportedly detailing Russian plans to absorb neighboring Belarus now provides further insight into the imperial ambitions that are also driving the invasion of Ukraine.

Allegedly produced by Putin’s Presidential Administration with input from the Russian intelligence services and armed forces, the 17-page internal strategy paper was made public in early 2023 by an international consortium of journalists. It serves as a comprehensive guide to the unofficial annexation of Belarus via a combination of economic, military, political, and social measures, with the objective of full absorption into a so-called “Union State” with Russia by 2030.

The Russian takeover of Belarus as outlined in the document appears to closely mirror Moscow’s plans for Ukraine, albeit by less direct means. “Russia’s goals with regard to Belarus are the same as with Ukraine. Only in Belarus, Russia relies on coercion rather than war. Its end goal is still wholesale incorporation,” commented Michael Carpenter, the US Ambassador to the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, following publication of the leaked document.

The strategy document for Belarus envisions the comprehensive russification of Belarusian society along with a sharp reduction in the influence of nationalist and pro-Western forces, which are viewed by Russia as virtually indistinguishable in relation to both Belarus and Ukraine. The Belarusian political, financial, business, and education systems would be fully integrated into Russia, with a network of pro-Russian media, NGOs, and cultural institutions established to aid this integration process.

In the military sphere, the Belarusian army would become de facto part of the Russian military, with Belarus increasing the number of Russian bases in the country and allowing Moscow to dramatically expand its military presence. Putin’s recently announced intention to base Russian tactical nuclear weapons in Belarus are an indication that this plan is already advancing.

The publication date of this alleged Russian blueprint for the takeover of Belarus is particularly interesting. It was reportedly produced in summer 2021 at a time when Putin’s mind seems to have been turning toward grand visions of imperial conquest. Increasingly isolated due to the Covid pandemic and surrounded by a shrinking circle of imperial hardliners and sycophants, Putin appears to have made the fateful decision in mid 2021 to extinguish Belarusian and Ukrainian independence once and for all.

Efforts to unofficially annex Belarus were well underway by this point. Belarusian dictator Alyaksandr Lukashenka was already heavily reliant on Russia following a Kremlin intervention to prop up his tottering regime in the wake of nationwide protests over the country’s rigged August 2020 presidential election.

As Kremlin officials were busy drawing up plans to incorporate Belarus, Putin himself was penning a 6000-word treatise outlining his denial of Ukraine’s right to statehood and his insistence that Ukrainians were really Russians (“one people”). Putin’s July 2021 essay was widely seen as a declaration of war against Ukrainian independence. His lengthy article laid the ideological foundations for Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, which began seven months later.

Putin’s plans for a subjugated Ukraine share many common features with his vision for the takeover of Belarus. Following the anticipated military conquest of Ukraine, Russia intended to install a puppet ruler in Kyiv who would replace Zelenskyy and play the same role as Lukashenka in Belarus. For both countries, Moscow’s ultimate goal is the same: Complete absorption into a new Russian Empire.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Putin’s dreams of a new Russian Empire have been evident since his first term in office but became more obvious following his formal return to the presidency in 2012. From this point onward, Putin began to openly embrace an imperialistic brand of nationalism that positioned him as the latest in a long line of Kremlin rulers celebrated as “gatherers of Russian lands.” In the contemporary context, this meant incorporating fellow East Slavic states Belarus and Ukraine into a new Russia-led union.

The idea of a union between Russia, Belarus, and Ukraine was not new and first gained prominence during the collapse of the USSR when promoted by Soviet dissident Alexander Solzhenitsyn. East Slavic unity had both ideological and practical appeal for Putin. It would secure his place in Russian history while also creating a solid basis for the Eurasian Economic Union (EEU), Putin’s alternative to the EU.

Initially, Putin hoped to absorb Ukraine without a fight. Indeed, in 2012 and 2013, the Kremlin adopted many of the same tactics later used in Belarus to strengthen Russia’s grip on the country. However, post-Soviet Ukraine had a far stronger sense of national identity than Belarus, with a majority of Ukrainians seeing themselves as Europeans and embracing the country’s fledgling democratic traditions. This was to prove a major obstacle for Putin’s imperial project.

As Ukraine prepared to sign a long-anticipated Association Agreement with the European Union in last 2013, Moscow unleashed a trade war and began pressuring Ukraine’s pro-Kremlin president Viktor Yanukovych to reject Brussels in favor of Moscow. When Yanukovych attempted to do so, mass protests erupted in Ukraine that escalated into a full-scale revolution in support of democracy and European integration. Within three months, Yanukovych found himself deserted by his allies and escaped to Russia.

Russia responded to the success of the Euromaidan Revolution by occupying Crimea and attempting to orchestrate uprisings throughout southern and eastern Ukraine. Targeted regions of Ukraine were rebranded by the Kremlin using the old Czarist-era imperial term of “Novorossiya” or “New Russia.” This strategy was only partially successful, with Kremlin-backed uprisings defeated in most major Ukrainian cities except for Donetsk and Luhansk in eastern Ukraine’s Donbas region, where Kremlin control was secured with the assistance of the invading Russian army.

Over the next eight years, Putin attempted to rebuild Russia’s political influence inside Ukraine while pressuring the country to accept a Kremlin-friendly interpretation of the February 2015 Minsk Accords, which had brought the worst of the fighting to an end in eastern Ukraine without establishing a durable peace. Moscow’s vision for the implementation of the Minsk Accords would have transformed Ukraine into a dysfunctional Russian satellite, but this outcome met with resistance from successive Ukrainian presidents.

By early 2021, Putin had come to the conclusion that his strategy was failing and appears to have recognized that Ukraine was slipping irreparably out of the Russian orbit. At this point, he and other Kremlin leaders began referring to Ukraine as an “anti-Russia” and portraying the country as an intolerable outpost of NATO and US interests on Russia’s borders. The available evidence suggests that by the time Putin published his notorious essay in summer 2021, he was already fully committed to crushing Ukrainian independence by military means.

In a clear echo of the strategy adopted for Belarus, Russia’s FSB security service was tasked in 2021 with preparing plans for the military occupation and pacification of Ukraine. However, a combination of FSB corruption, wishful thinking, and misplaced stereotypes about modern Ukraine resulted in a series of disastrous miscalculations.

Collaborators within the Ukrainian government told FSB agents what they wanted to hear with no regard for the realities on the ground, while the Kremlin’s networks of Ukrainian informants, NGOs, and other “experts” assured their Russian colleagues that the invading Russian army would be welcomed. Meanwhile, FSB officers confidently predicted that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy would soon be captured or forced to flee, with organized Ukrainian resistance unlikely to last longer than a few days.

These intelligence failures persuaded Putin to embark on the biggest gamble of his presidency with a wholly inadequate force of less than 200,000 troops. This was regarded as sufficient to install a pro-Russian regime and place Ukraine on the same path as Belarus toward absorption into the Russian Federation.

Captured documents, prisoner accounts, and the actions of the Russian occupation forces in regions of Ukraine under Kremlin control now make it possible to produce a comprehensive picture of Russia’s plans for the subjugation of the country. These plans share many features with Moscow’s approach to the creeping annexation of Belarus, while employing infinitely more direct and brutal methods.

The events of the past year make clear that Russia’s stated invasion objective of “de-Nazification” actually means the execution, imprisonment, deportation, or otherwise silencing of anyone deemed to be a Ukrainian patriot. Those targeted since the invasion began in February 2022 have included elected officials, civil society activists, educators, journalists, army veterans, and cultural figures.

The systematic suppression of Ukrainian national identity has been undertaken alongside intensive russification efforts, including the introduction of a Kremlin-approved Russian school curriculum and the promotion of an imperial identity. In parallel, local businesses have been forced to integrate into the Russian economy, with the wider population in occupied Ukraine obliged to accept Russian citizenship.

The obvious similarities between the Kremlin’s long-term Belarus strategy and the tactics being employed in occupied Ukraine undermine Russian efforts to portray the ongoing invasion as a defensive measure driven by valid security concerns. Instead, a picture emerges of Vladimir Putin’s overriding ambition to absorb both countries and secure his place in history as a “gatherer of Russian lands.”

While his approach to each country may currently differ in the details, Putin clearly aims to bring both Ukrainian and Belarusian independence to an end, and has placed these imperial ambitions at the heart of his entire reign. This makes a mockery of calls for a compromise with the Kremlin. Instead, Western leaders must recognize that peace in Europe will remain elusive until the Russian dictator is forced to abandon his dreams of empire.

Taras Kuzio is professor of political science at the National University of Kyiv Mohyla Academy and author of the newly published “Fascism and Genocide. Russia’s War Against Ukrainians.”

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Putin’s plan for a new Russian Empire includes both Ukraine and Belarus appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Russian War Report: Kremlin edits footage of Mariupol visit to remove women shouting at Putin https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/russian-war-report-kremlin-edits-footage-of-mariupol-visit-to-remove-women-shouting-at-putin/ Fri, 24 Mar 2023 15:57:24 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=628171 After Putin was yelled at in Mariupol, the Kremlin cut the exchange from their official video. RIA Novosti published the whole interaction.

The post Russian War Report: Kremlin edits footage of Mariupol visit to remove women shouting at Putin appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
As Russia continues its assault on Ukraine, the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab (DFRLab) is keeping a close eye on Russia’s movements across the military, cyber, and information domains. With more than seven years of experience monitoring the situation in Ukraine—as well as Russia’s use of propaganda and disinformation to undermine the United States, NATO, and the European Union—the DFRLab’s global team presents the latest installment of the Russian War Report. 

Security

Ukraine likely preparing counteroffensive as Russia diverts forces from Bakhmut

Missile strike on residential building in Zaporizhzhia caught on camera

Tracking narratives

Kremlin edits footage of Mariupol visit to remove women shouting at Putin

Russian ministry reports 5,000 offenses related to the spread of “fakes” about the Russian Army

New poll suggests support for the war in Ukraine remains high among Russians

International response

Armenia ratifies Rome Statute in the wake of Putin’s ICC arrest warrant

Ukraine likely preparing counteroffensive as Russia diverts forces from Bakhmut

After months of heavy fighting in which Russian forces failed to fully capture Bakhmut, the Ukrainian army is likely preparing its counteroffensive. Ukrainian ground forces commander Oleksandr Syrskyi said on his Telegram channel that Russian forces “are losing considerable strength and are running out of steam” and “very soon we will take advantage of this opportunity.” The DFRLab has observed indications of a Ukrainian counterattack and is closely monitoring the developments.  

Meanwhile, Russian forces continue to exert pressure on Ukraine. Ukrainian military intelligence reported that Russian troops will likely focus on targets of military importance in their next missile strikes. Particular attention is being paid to areas with troop concentration, oil depots, airfields, supply routes for military equipment from allied countries, and other logistical facilities. In addition, the possibility of repeated attacks against energy infrastructure or other objects of significant economic importance for Ukraine cannot be ruled out. 

A Russian slowdown in Bakhmut could mean that Moscow is diverting its troops and resources to other regions. Russian troops have made gains further north, partially regaining control over the axis to the town of Kreminna. Intense battles have also been underway in the south. Further, Russian forces have become more active in the regions of Kharkiv, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson. Russian troops are conducting offensives in the direction of Avdiivka with the aim of establishing control over Avdiivka and Marinka.  

In the occupied Crimean town of Dzhankoi, an explosion reportedly destroyed cruise missiles utilized by Russia’s Black Sea navy to target Ukraine, according to a March 21 statement from Ukrainian military intelligence. The strike appeared to have originated from a drone. A video of the explosion published on March 20 shows the blast was immediately preceded by a loudly buzzing engine which bears audio similarities to the sound made by Iranian-made drones. The DFRLab cannot confirm whether an Iranian drone caused the blast.

Ruslan Trad, Resident Fellow for Security Research, Sofia, Bulgaria

Missile strike on residential building in Zaporizhzhia caught on camera

Video footage of a missile strike against a nine-story residential building in the center of Zaporizhzhia emerged on Telegram on March 29. The DFRLab identified the location of the missile strike and the apartment complex it struck using geolocation and geospatial analysis. As Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy described in a tweet, the strike occurred near a residential area near a mall. 

Geolocated images of the residential apartment building in Zaporizhzhia struck by a Russian missile. (Source: Valentin Châtelet)
Geolocated images of the residential apartment building in Zaporizhzhia struck by a Russian missile. (Source: Valentin Châtelet)

A photograph shared online indicates that an S-300 missile system fired the missile from the Russian-occupied southern bank of the Dnipro River. This location was corroborated by other open-source investigators, including the GeoConfirmed project, which reported that the missile likely came from the southeast direction. Reports claimed the attack caused the death of seven people. 

Later that same day, counternarratives emerged on the pro-Kremlin English-language Telegram channel Slavyangrad and spread to a French-language channel. The narrative claimed that the strike resulted from a Ukrainian S-300 system failure while attempting to intercept a Russian missile. Russian news outlets and pro-Kremlin amplification channels have repeatedly used similar narratives to obfuscate Russian culpability in incidents involving civilians.

Roman Osadchuk, Research Associate

Valentin Châtelet, Research Associate, Security, Brussels, Belgium

Kremlin edits footage of Mariupol visit to remove women shouting at Putin

Following the International Criminal Court issuing an arrest warrant for Russian President Vladimir Putin, the Kremlin leader paid a defiant visit to the occupied Ukrainian city of Mariupol. The Kremlin shared a thirty-minute video of the visit, which reportedly took place on March 18. During the visit, Putin reportedly examined restoration work under way in the city. Approximately twenty minutes into the footage, Putin has a short conversation with individuals described as residents of Mariupol.  

Footage of the visit published by state-owned news outlet RIA included frames cut out of the Kremlin video. The RIA footage includes an extended version of Putin’s interactions with alleged residents. During the filmed conversation, an unidentified female voice can be heard in the background shouting at Putin, approximately eighteen seconds into the clip. Meduza reported that the woman yelled, “This all is not true! It’s all for a show!” While the women’s comments do sound similar to Meduza’s interpretation, the voice is muffled and difficult to interpret with certainty. Immediately after the woman shouts, the officials accompanying Putin react and begin to look around the streets. The Kremlin version of the video cuts away approximately four seconds earlier, switching to another woman speaking with Putin.


A woman can be heard yelling in the background eighteen seconds into this video clip, causing Putin’s entourage to look around for her. (Source: RIA Novosti) 
The Kremlin version of the video cuts away approximately four seconds before the woman starts yelling. (Source: Kremlin.ru)

According to Meduza, a Russian journalist described the district visited by Putin as “virtually the only one rebuilt” in the city destroyed by Russia. 

Eto Buziashvili, Research Associate, Tbilisi, Georgia

Russian ministry reports 5,000 offenses related to the spread of “fakes” about the Russian Army

On March 20, Vladimir Kolokoltsev, the head of Russia’s interior ministry, said that in 2022, “Particular attention was paid to preventing the discreditation of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation.” The ministry reported that last year police documented five thousand offenses and forty-one crimes related to the spread of “fakes” about the Russian Army. In addition, they documented almost ninety cases of “deliberate false publications” about the Russian military.  

“In cooperation with Roskomnadzor, the dissemination of about 160,000 false and other prohibited information was stopped,” Kolokoltsev added. 

The DFRLab has previously reported on Russian attempts to tighten control of the internet in order to prevent the spread of content the Kremlin considers undesirable.

Eto Buziashvili, Research Associate, Tbilisi, Georgia

New poll suggests support for the war in Ukraine remains high among Russians

According to independent Russian pollster Levada, 77 percent of Russians supported the war in February 2023, the highest level of public support since March 2022. Only 17 percent of Russians currently disapprove the war, Levada reported.  

The number of people supporting the continuation of hostilities has steadily increased since October 2022 “as the shock of the announcement of partial mobilization passed,” Levada concluded.  

Seventy-one percent of Russians perceive the return of Luhansk and Donetsk to Ukraine as unacceptable conditions for a peace treaty, while 67 percent see the return of Zaporizhzhia and Kherson regions as unacceptable. In addition, 76 percent of respondents perceive Ukraine’s accession to NATO as unacceptable.  

Since November 2022, the share of respondents who believe that the “special military operation” is advancing successfully increased from 54 to 65 percent.  

The Levada research center, labeled a foreign agent by Russia, published its assessment on March 13. Russia has cracked down on public dissent since the start of the war; it remains unclear whether this crackdown impacted Levada’s poll results. 

Eto Buziashvili, Research Associate, Tbilisi, Georgia

Armenia ratifies Rome Statute in the wake of Putin’s ICC arrest warrant

On March 24, the Armenian Constitutional Court gave its blessing to the parliament’s ratification of the Rome Statute, noting that the country’s obligations to the International Criminal Court do not contradict the national constitution. The decision is final and went into effect immediately. 

Armenia’s plans to ratify the Rome Statute had been complicated by the International Criminal Court’s recent decision to issue an arrest warrant for Vladimir Putin. On December 29, 2022, Armenian parliament approved the draft law, “On Ratifying the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court,” which then made its way to the constitutional court. Armenia signed the statute in 1999 but did not ratify it at the time.  

Armenia’s recent push to ratify the ICC charter appears motivated by the ongoing conflict with Azerbaijan. Armenia initiated the ratification to take Azerbaijan to the ICC over alleged war crimes committed by Azerbaijani troops during the September 2022 invasion, but some observers thought the constitutional court would rule against it due to the Putin arrest warrant. 

Human rights defender Artur Sakunts told Caucasus news outlet Jam News that Armenia would end up in a “miserable position” if it did not continue on course to ratify the statute. “We will remain in the status of an ally of a fascist regime – where Belarus is now,”  Sakunts added. “And such regimes have no allies, they only have subordinates, colonies, zones of influence.” 

Armenia’s Speaker of Parliament, Alen Simonyan, told reporters on March 20 that Armenia had begun the ratification process months before the ICC decision. When asked about the possibility of arresting Putin on a visit to Armenia, Simonyan said, “First, let’s ratify the Rome Statute for now, and then we’ll decide what to do next. I wonder what they will do in other countries in case of his arrival. I just physically can’t imagine it [the arrest].”

Ani Mejlumyan, Research Assistant, Yerevan, Armenia 

The post Russian War Report: Kremlin edits footage of Mariupol visit to remove women shouting at Putin appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Shahid quoted in Article 14: How Indian media mainstreamed the ‘Land Jihad’ propaganda https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/insight-impact/in-the-news/shahid-quoted-in-article-14-how-indian-media-mainstreamed-the-land-jihad-propaganda/ Fri, 17 Mar 2023 16:59:00 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=652493 The post Shahid quoted in Article 14: How Indian media mainstreamed the ‘Land Jihad’ propaganda appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>

The post Shahid quoted in Article 14: How Indian media mainstreamed the ‘Land Jihad’ propaganda appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Russian War Report: DFRLab confirms aerial strikes on industrial plants north of Bakhmut https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/russian-war-report-dfrlab-confirms-aerial-strikes-on-industrial-plants-north-of-bakhmut/ Fri, 17 Mar 2023 14:07:42 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=624882 As Russian forces continue their offensive on Bakhmut, the DFRLab examined satellite imagery to reveal the potential of missile attacks.

The post Russian War Report: DFRLab confirms aerial strikes on industrial plants north of Bakhmut appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
As Russia continues its assault on Ukraine, the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab (DFRLab) is keeping a close eye on Russia’s movements across the military, cyber, and information domains. With more than seven years of experience monitoring the situation in Ukraine—as well as Russia’s use of propaganda and disinformation to undermine the United States, NATO, and the European Union—the DFRLab’s global team presents the latest installment of the Russian War Report. 

Security

DFRLab confirms aerial strikes on industrial plants north of Bakhmut

Battle for Vuhledar highlights tensions between Wagner and Russian defense ministry

Tracking narratives

Russian channels amplify Quran desecration video

International response

European allies train Ukrainian forces on tank operation

DFRLab confirms aerial strikes on industrial plants north of Bakhmut

Russian armed forces continue their offensive inside the contested city of Bakhmut. At the time of writing, the western part of Bakhmut remained under Ukrainian control, with the Bakhmutka River acting as a buffer zone between the artillery and infantry forces deployed on either side of the waterway. Russian missile and aerial strikes targeted intermediary positions to push back Ukrainian armed forces, from Yahidne in the north towards Bakhmut industrial plants. 

The DFRLab collected open-source satellite imagery dating back to the first two weeks of March to document missile strikes on an industrial plant in the north of Bakhmut. The imagery was collected from the European Space Agency’s Sentinel hub using images provided by satellite constellation Sentinel-2. 

Analysis of the damage inflicted on buildings in the area reveals that potential missiles struck buildings belonging to two different industrial plants. The easternmost plant is the Bakhmut non-ferrous metals factory.  

Satellite imagery showed the factory’s main building was destroyed, with a second building damaged. Traces of burns on the roof of the building can be seen from an explosion. This building belongs to the Makiivka metal construction plant.

Sentinel-2 satellite imagery north of Bakhmut released on March 4, 2023, annotated by the DFRLab. (Source: ESA/Sentinel-2, Ukraine Control Map)
Sentinel-2 satellite imagery north of Bakhmut released on March 4, 2023, annotated by the DFRLab. (Source: DFRLab via ESA/Sentinel-2, Ukraine Control Map)
Sentinel-2 satellite imagery north of Bakhmut released on March 14, 2023, with DFRLab annotations. Dark spots on the bottom show a damaged building belonging to the metal construction factory. Destroyed houses seen in the top left part of the image are where the non-ferrous metal factory once stood. (Source: ESA/Sentinel-2, Ukraine Control Map)
Sentinel-2 satellite imagery north of Bakhmut released on March 14, 2023, with DFRLab annotations. Dark spots on the bottom show a damaged building belonging to the metal construction factory. Destroyed houses seen in the top left part of the image are where the non-ferrous metal factory once stood. (Source: DFRLab via ESA/Sentinel-2, Ukraine Control Map)

Valentin Châtelet, Research Associate, Security, Brussels, Belgium

Battle for Vuhledar highlights tensions between Wagner and Russian defense ministry

Eastern Ukraine continues to be a key arena for clashes as Russian forces attempt to advance in the directions of Vuhledar and Bakhmut. Ukrainian forces are using remote mining near Vuhledar, according to a March 16 report from UK defense intelligence. The remote anti-armor mine system (RAAMS) makes it possible to create an anti-tank minefield up to seventeen kilometers away from the firing unit. The United Kingdom reported that Ukraine was also firing the mines behind advancing Russian forces, leading to additional losses in the event of a retreat. The United Kingdom also reported that there is a “realistic possibility” that Russia’s push for Vuhledar is driven by the Russian defense ministry’s desire to produce better results than Wagner, who are driving Russia’s tactical progress towards Bakhmut.  

The UK report supports the DFRLab’s analysis that the ongoing offensive operations in eastern Ukraine are provoking a competition between the different military units, particularly Wagner and the Russian defense ministry. In the direction of Bakhmut, Wagner’s forces continue to be the primary units fighting within the city. However, the combat has been difficult, and the urban environment makes progress challenging. In addition, Chechen forces in Bakhmut continue to fight alongside the Ukrainian army against Russian positions.  

Russian forces are also having issues restoring tanks, according to a report published by Ukrainian outlet Defense Express. The 103rd armored repair plant in Russia has reportedly not been able to restore T-62 tanks under the terms originally contracted, which would have required the plant to restore twenty-two to twenty-three tanks per month. According to Defense Express, however, the real capacity of the plant is likely around seven tanks per month. On March 6, UK defense intelligence reported that Russia was deploying outdated T-62 tanks to the battlefield due to major losses in armored equipment.  

Acts of sabotage against occupying Russian forces continue in the direction of Kherson. On March 11, the Telegram channel of the pro-Ukraine resistance movement Atesh reported that its members blew up a railway line in the Kherson region, between Radensk and Abrykosivka. This appears to be an attempt by Atesh partisans to impede logistics for the Russian troops deployed in the area.  

Ukraine has also reported new arrests of alleged Russian infiltrators. On March 16, the Security Service of Ukraine reported the detention of two women accused of tracking the movement of Ukrainian equipment in the interest of Russian intelligence. The women also allegedly photographed the results of attacks on Ukrainian facilities. One of the women reportedly worked as a nurse in Ukraine’s territorial defense combat unit. 

Ruslan Trad, Resident Fellow for Security Research, Sofia, Bulgaria

Russian channels amplify Quran desecration video

Footage emerged online on March 15 showing the burning of the Islamic holy book, the Quran. Russian social media channels shared the one minute and six second video, accusing Ukrainian soldiers of being behind the desecration. The video sparked a wave of reactions on social media, particularly on Twitter, where a TikTok version of the video went viral. The TikTok video has since been removed.  

The video is difficult to analyze and cannot be verified. It does not show the faces of the alleged Ukrainian soldiers. The people in the video are speaking broken Ukrainian and use a Russian military knife, said Oleg Nikolenko, a spokesperson for Ukraine’s foreign ministry.

A screenshot of the video, published in the Readovka Telegram channel on March 15, shows a knife allegedly used by the Russian army. (Source: Readovkanews/archive)
A screenshot of the video, published in the Readovka Telegram channel on March 15, shows a knife allegedly used by the Russian army. (Source: Readovkanews/archive)

The video was denounced as a provocation by Said Imagilov, Mufti of the Spiritual Administration of Ukraine’s Muslims, as well as the Ukrainian military and Ukrainian officials

Ukraine’s army has Muslim soldiers in its ranks, and Imagilov is an active participant on the frontlines defending Kyiv. The Ukrainian army is also supported by several Chechen units, the most well-known of which are the two volunteer battalions, the Dzhokhar Dudayev Battalion and the Sheikh Mansur Battalion. Chechens are among the most active defenders of Bakhmut, with their Adam special unit operating behind Russian army defense lines.  

The provenance of the video remains unknown.

Ruslan Trad, Resident Fellow for Security Research, Sofia, Bulgaria

European allies train Ukrainian forces on tank operation

Ukraine’s Western allies are continuing to help strengthen Kyiv’s defense against Russia by training Ukrainian troops on tank operation and trench warfare. Thierry Breton, European Commissioner for Internal Market, is visiting EU countries in a bid to shore up more ammunition for Ukraine. His first visit was to Bulgaria. This visit came as the  Slovak news outlet Pravda published data on March 15 showing that, in the year since the February 2022 invasion of Ukraine, Slovakia has doubled its ammunition production and plans to double it again from current levels.  

Meanwhile, Greece and the United States agreed to a deal that will see the US transfer 300 M2 Bradley fighting vehicles to the Greek army as part of a modernization program, according to Greek media reports on March 10. Greece is expected to send Ukraine BMP-1 vehicles and M113 armored carriers in exchange for the purchase of the Bradleys. 

On March 13, Spain’s Ministry of Defense announced that ten Ukrainian crews completed training in Spain on operating Leopard 2 tanks. Along with fifty-five servicemen, fifteen Ukrainian technicians also received training. According to El Periódico, “These fifty-five soldiers – some professionals and other reservists – were already on the front line, and their four-week training lasted twelve hours a day.”  

In addition, the German army announced it was training Ukrainian troops on the Leopard 2 tanks in Germany. “Training on the weapon systems is not just about how to use it, but also about tactics so that the Ukrainians can achieve the greatest possible effect against their opponents,” said Colonel Heiko Diehl. 

Ukrainian servicemen in the United Kingdom also completed training in conducting trench combat in realistic conditions. The program was led by the 5th Battalion of the Royal Australian Regiment of the 1st Brigade of the Australian Defense Forces.  

Earlier this week, Polish President Andrzej Duda announced that his country would send Ukraine thirty MiG 29 fighter jets. These are essential as Russia strives to achieve air dominance and has increased its aerial strikes throughout Ukraine. On March 14, a video emerged on Twitter showing Ukrainian soldiers taking part in trainings in the French military camp of Canjuers in the south of the country. The soldiers were reportedly training with the AMX-10RC armored personnel carriers. Minister of the Armed Forces of France Sebastien Lecornu confirmed during a defense commission hearing on March 15 that the carriers are already being delivered to Ukraine. 

On March 15, the Israeli government approved licenses to export electronic warfare equipment to Ukraine that will help counter Iranian drones.

Valentin Châtelet, Research Associate, Security, Brussels, Belgium

Ruslan Trad, Resident Fellow for Security Research, Sofia, Bulgaria

The post Russian War Report: DFRLab confirms aerial strikes on industrial plants north of Bakhmut appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Ukraine must do more to counter Russian narratives in the Global South https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/ukraine-must-do-more-to-counter-russian-narratives-in-the-global-south/ Tue, 14 Mar 2023 19:24:38 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=623472 While Ukraine enjoys overwhelming support from the West, the Global South remains reluctant to oppose or even criticize Russia's ongoing invasion. Ukraine must do more to influence opinion in Asia, Africa, and Latin America.

The post Ukraine must do more to counter Russian narratives in the Global South appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
More than one year since Vladimir Putin launched the full-scale invasion of Ukraine, international reaction to the war remains sharply divided. While much has been made of Western unity in support of Ukraine, the rest of the world has been largely unwilling to oppose or even condemn Russia in any meaningful way.

This is not just a matter of winning UN votes and scoring political points at international forums. The reluctance of countries throughout the Global South to join Western sanctions significantly undermines efforts to isolate Russia, while providing Moscow with the financial and material lifelines to maintain the war in Ukraine indefinitely.

Attitudes in the Global South toward Russia’s Ukraine invasion are being shaped by a range of factors including economic and geopolitical interests along with widespread suspicion of American foreign policy and historic anti-Western sentiment dating back to the colonial era. Russia has skillfully exploited this post-colonial perspective by framing the invasion of Ukraine as a reaction to what it terms as yet more expansionist Western interference. As the war enters its second year, Ukraine should be doing much more to engage these non-Western audiences and make its voice heard.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Ukraine has limited experience of rallying international support and has previously focused its efforts almost exclusively on the West. In the three decades since the country regained independence, Ukrainian politicians, activists, and journalists have spent comparatively little time communicating with people in Latin America, Africa, and Asia, where awareness of Ukraine is still often minimal. Ukraine now needs to develop a strategy that can rally the nations of the non-Western world to its side.

First of all, it is absolutely crucial to keep Ukraine at the heart of the debate. Across the Global South, it is common to witness public discussions about the Russian invasion that barely address Ukraine at all. Instead, the focus is frequently on Western colonialism, globalization, and other broad geopolitical themes. Ukrainians should not hesitate to insist that conversations about their country’s plight not get sidetracked by extraneous historical grievances.

Over the past year, Ukraine’s limited efforts to influence opinion in the Global South have concentrated on highlighting the imperial ambitions underpinning Putin’s current invasion while raising awareness of Russia’s own long history of colonialism as a major European empire. This approach certainly makes some sense, but too much emphasis on Russia’s colonial past risks shifting the conversation away from today’s Ukraine.

Another important ingredient shaping the debate in the Global South is the role played by the Soviet Union as a supporter of anti-colonial liberation movements during the second half of the twentieth century. Putin’s Russia has made much use of this favorable Soviet legacy, using it to garner goodwill and to emphasize its own anti-Western credentials. This ignores the obvious imperialism of the USSR itself, and overlooks the fact that Soviet-era Ukraine also contributed significantly to liberation movements throughout Africa and Asia.

While it is essential for Ukrainians to correct the historical record regarding Russian imperialism, it is also vital to stress Ukraine’s current importance for the Global South. First and foremost, this means highlighting Ukraine’s status as one of the world’s emerging agricultural superpowers and a major prewar contributor to global food security.

As Ukraine seeks to influence opinion among non-Western audiences, the country must make maximum use of its limited resources. For example, officials in Kyiv should be doing much more to engage with the thousands of professionals throughout Africa, Asia, and Latin America who studied at Ukrainian universities before going on to have careers in their homelands. This pool of alumni is a potentially significant but largely untapped resource that could bring a degree of authenticity to the debate due to their personal experience of Ukraine.

Ukrainian nationals with family ties to the Global South can also contribute to greater international understanding of the issues at stake in today’s Ukraine. As one of the most prominent members of the Afro-Ukrainian community, politician and Olympic champion wrestler Zhan Beleniuk traveled to Africa in late 2022 as part of Ukraine’s fledgling outreach efforts. Others with similar backgrounds should be encouraged to speak up on behalf of Ukraine.

Ukraine’s success in shaping opinion throughout the Global South will hinge largely on the country’s ability to engage with the media. This is one area where the Kremlin enjoys overwhelming advantages. While Russia’s RT and Sputnik platforms have limited reach and minimal credibility among Western audiences, they enjoy considerable prominence and are often well-received in much of Asia, Africa, and Latin America.

Ukraine cannot hope to compete with the Kremlin’s billion dollar media budgets and must instead build relationships with existing local mainstream media. Brazil’s TV Globo is the second-largest commercial TV network in the world and can bring Ukrainian perspectives to huge domestic Brazilian audiences. Likewise, engagement with Spanish-language channels can help reach millions across Latin America. A comprehensive media strategy is needed in order to close the information gap and counter the current dominance of Russia’s narratives in the non-Western information space.

Ultimately, the truth is on Ukraine’s side. The good news it that there is very little evidence of actively anti-Ukrainian sentiment in today’s Global South. It should be entirely possible to persuade far more people that Ukraine’s cause is righteous and worthy of support. However, this will require a concerted effort that is currently lacking. Simply telling non-Western audiences that the Russians are also imperialists may be satisfying, but it is not nearly enough.

Mitchell Polman is a public diplomacy and international relations commentator.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Ukraine must do more to counter Russian narratives in the Global South appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Amid Pakistan’s political and economic turmoil, risks to curbs on digital freedoms grow https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/southasiasource/amid-pakistans-political-and-economic-turmoil-risks-to-curbs-on-digital-freedoms-grow/ Mon, 06 Mar 2023 17:57:22 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=619804 Growing polarization and instability in Pakistan have increased the likelihood that as elections draw near, curbs on speech, largely limited thus far to television channels, may extend to internet platforms like YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter.

The post Amid Pakistan’s political and economic turmoil, risks to curbs on digital freedoms grow appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
On March 5, 2023, the Pakistan Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA) banned television channels in the country from broadcasting former prime minister Imran Khan’s speeches and news conferences, arguing that he was “attacking the state’s institutions and promoting hatred.” Only hours later, Khan challenged the decision through the Lahore High Court, arguing that the ban was “in excess of the jurisdiction vested in it and without having regard to the constitutional rights guaranteed under Articles 19 and 19-A of the Constitution.”

These developments come amid ongoing instability in the country, with the former prime minister continuing to criticize retired army chief General Qamar Javed Bajwa, who Khan argues played a role in ousting him from power in April 2022. Khan has stated a desire to engage with Pakistan’s current military chief General Asim Munir “for the betterment of the country.” 

This is not the first time that television channels have been barred from airing speeches made by Khan or other political leaders: a similar order banning his speeches was issued in November 2022; former prime minister Nawaz Sharif’s speeches were banned in October 2020; and former president Asif Ali Zardari’s interview was taken off air in July 2019.

Growing polarization and instability in the country have increased the likelihood that as elections draw near, curbs on speech, largely limited thus far to television channels, may extend to internet platforms like YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter.

For example, on September 6, 2022, YouTube encountered disruptions across Pakistan ahead of Khan’s speech at a rally. This was not the first such disruption—NetBlocks confirmed that a similar disruption also occurred on August 21, 2022, when Imran Khan was making another public speech. In addition, Wikipedia was blocked (and subsequently unblocked) by the Pakistan Telecommunications Authority (PTA) a few weeks ago for its failure to “remove or block allegedly sacrilegious content.” 

Other notable examples in the recent past include TikTok, which has been banned and unbanned on numerous occasions, and YouTube, which was blocked in the country back in 2012 and was only unblocked by the PTA more than three years later.

These developments make clear that the PTA indeed has the capability to disrupt internet services across Pakistan on a whim, something that journalist Abid Hussain pointed out as far back as April 2021 on Twitter. To further control access to the internet, the PTA has also been seeking to limit the use of virtual private networks in the country.

As the conflict between the current government, the military establishment, and Imran Khan’s Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf party sharpens ahead of elections—Punjab, Pakistan’s most populous province, is expected to go to elections on April 30—further curbs on expression and disruptions to the internet, especially platforms like YouTube, Twitter, WhatsApp, and Facebook, cannot be ruled out.

In recent months, US companies and US government stakeholders have often chosen not to react to these developments, preferring to adopt a wait-and-watch approach. In addition, they have followed a strategy to engage privately and discreetly, hoping to positively influence government stakeholders through private conversations.

As the crisis in Pakistan deepens, it is time for diplomatic and business stakeholders with an interest in strengthening its democracy and maintaining a largely open internet in the country to shift their approach. 

Given the evolving situation, these stakeholders should consider the following steps to proactively deter further curbs on expression on the internet in Pakistan:

  1. Enhance level of engagement with domestic civil society: Recent weeks have seen a flurry of concerning developments in Pakistan, with the recent PEMRA order being the key development. US companies and diplomats must deepen conversations with civil society stakeholders, especially the digital rights community that has been voicing these concerns for years.
  1. Proactively communicate concerns to Pakistani government officials: Ongoing diplomatic conversations between Islamabad and Washington have focused on the potential for deepening investment in the country’s technology sector. The PTA’s recent and past actions, however, undermine confidence in Pakistan’s internet economy and it is important that the negative economic impact of arbitrary bans and disruptions to the internet is clearly communicated to Pakistani stakeholders.
  1. Build new alliances with the technology and content creator ecosystem: In private conversations, members of Pakistan’s burgeoning technology and content creation ecosystem continue to express growing concern over curbs on freedom of expression. These stakeholders are domestic allies for companies like Meta, Google, and Twitter. However, limited interactions and collaboration with these stakeholders mean that more often than not, a united front is not presented to deter Pakistani government stakeholders from taking adverse actions that curb expression, undermine democracy, and hurt confidence in the country’s digital economy.

The coming months will be a challenging period for Pakistan’s flawed and floundering democracy. This challenge will be compounded by the state’s own capabilities and predilections to curb expression both in the traditional  media and the internet. 

With the PTI and Imran Khan possessing a strong advantage in their ability to digitally percolate party messaging through Pakistani society, the government and its institutions may be incentivized to take drastic measures to disrupt internet services and platforms that allow Khan to bypass television channels who may not air his speeches. As elections draw near, the likelihood of such actions is increasing. For this reason, it is important for US stakeholders—including private sector companies—to proactively monitor the evolving situation and develop strategies to deter such actions. 

Doing so may perhaps safeguard Pakistan’s internet economy, its democracy, and the global reputation of internet platforms that are vital to public discourse within and outside Pakistan.

Uzair Younus is director of the Pakistan Initiative at the Atlantic Council’s South Asia Center. He also is the Vice President at The Asia Group.

The South Asia Center serves as the Atlantic Council’s focal point for work on the region as well as relations between these countries, neighboring regions, Europe, and the United States.

The post Amid Pakistan’s political and economic turmoil, risks to curbs on digital freedoms grow appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Russia’s invasion one year on: Ukraine is stronger than ever https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/russias-invasion-one-year-on-ukraine-is-stronger-than-ever/ Tue, 28 Feb 2023 13:32:38 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=617743 Vladimir Putin expected a short and victorious war that would extinguish Ukrainian independence and force the country back into the Russian orbit. One year on, Ukraine has never been stronger, writes Vitaly Sych.

The post Russia’s invasion one year on: Ukraine is stronger than ever appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
When my family and I left Kyiv on the first morning of Russia’s full-scale invasion last February, we had no idea if we would ever be able to return home or whether Ukraine itself would survive. In the following days, as the biggest European conflict since World War II continued to unfold, this sense of dread only deepened.

One year on, I can now look back with slightly less emotion and a sense of cautious optimism that is rooted in the remarkable resilience of the Ukrainian nation. Ukraine has not only survived, but has actually achieved a number of landmark battlefield victories over Putin’s invading army and has proven to international audiences that Russia can be beaten.

On the personal front, I have been back in Kyiv since May 2022, although my wife and two children remain among the millions of Ukrainians currently living in exile. Thankfully, they are able to visit.

Life in wartime Ukraine can be extremely stressful but Ukrainians have proven themselves far tougher and more resourceful than almost anyone could have imagined. For those living in Kyiv and other Ukrainian cities far from the front lines, the greatest threat has come from frequent Russian missile and drone attacks. This airstrike campaign began on October 10 and has since become a feature of daily life.

During those initial October air raids, I found myself in our makeshift neighborhood bomb shelter for the first time, huddled in an underground car park together with 100 other people and their assorted pets. More recently, if I am at home when an attack takes place, I can often see explosions from my apartment window and feel the impact of incoming missiles through the shaking walls of the building.

Russia’s air campaign brought the war closer for millions of Ukrainians, creating a sense of heightened physical danger along with frequent blackouts. The whole of Ukraine spent the winter season with severely limited access to light, electricity, heating, water, and internet. I often had to walk up 20 flights of stairs just to reach my apartment. For people with mobility issues or families with small children, that is simply not an option.

Despite these hardships, Russia’s air attacks have failed to break Ukraine’s spirit. While everyone inevitably talks about the many inconveniences these attacks bring, nobody really complains. Instead, there is an understanding that this is part of the price we must pay for finally saying goodbye to Russia, and a determination to get on with our lives. After the first major attacks, people were shocked and discussed the implications for days on end. But after a few weeks, cafes and restaurants would fill up again within hours of each new bombardment.

Over the past five months, Ukrainians have acquired vast quantities of generators to provide power for businesses, homes, and public services. Each time a blackout begins, an orchestra of generators starts to play. This rumbling of engines has served as the background soundtrack to the winter season in wartime Ukraine. Meanwhile, we have all learned to keep our gadgets fully charged and to have power banks at the ready, just in case. Life goes on.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Winter is now coming to an end and Ukrainians have not been frozen into submission. Indeed, there have been very few blackouts in recent weeks as Ukraine’s heroic air defense forces and power sector professionals continue to perform miracles. Putin’s bombing campaign is the latest in a long line of unsuccessful Russian efforts to undermine Ukrainian morale.

Surprisingly, the Kremlin-controlled Russian media openly boasted of targeting civilian infrastructure in Ukraine. Prior to the onset of the air attacks in late 2022, Kremlin propagandists had consistently insisted that the Russian army only struck military targets. However, it seems that a series of embarrassing military defeats in Ukraine left the Putin regime in desperate need of victories. It says much about the state of Russia’s war effort that the only victory Moscow could hope to deliver was news that Ukrainian civilians were being plunged into freezing darkness in the depths of winter.

The defiant Ukrainian response to Moscow’s terror-bombing tactics reflects the mood in the country as the war enters its second year. It also underlines the counter-productive nature of Putin’s invasion. The Russian dictator wanted to wipe out Ukrainian identity entirely. Instead, he has achieved the exact opposite.

Throughout the country, Ukrainian national identity is visibly strengthening. Many people are switching from Russian to the Ukrainian language in their everyday lives. Monuments to Soviet figures are being removed from public spaces, and streets honoring Russian writers are being renamed. After decades of domestic geopolitical divisions, Ukrainian support for EU and NATO membership has rocketed to over 80% and is backed by strong majorities in every part of the country.

Whereas Ukrainian public anger following the initial Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2014 was largely directed against the Russian political leadership in the Kremlin, we are now witnessing demands for the wholesale de-russification of Ukraine. Most Ukrainians have been sickened by the atrocities of the Russian army and horrified by the obvious popularity of the war among the Russian public. They no longer wish to have anything in common with a nation that destroys entire cities and commits countless war crimes.

Ukrainians also understand perfectly well that when Russians talk about “Ukrainian Nazis” and call for the “de-Nazification” of Ukraine, they actually mean the de-Ukrainianization of Ukraine and the permanent return of the country to Russian control. The atrocities committed by Russian forces in occupied areas of Ukraine have brought home the horrors that would await the rest of the country if Ukrainian resistance were to crumble.

This has helped fuel a national outpouring of volunteerism as everyone has sought to contribute to victory. Ordinary Ukrainians have donated billions of dollars to help fund the country’s defense. People give whatever they can, with some contributing large sums and others handing over their last pennies. One day recently, three young boys approached my car selling home-made bracelets to raise funds for the army. Similar scenes can be encountered in towns and cities across Ukraine every day.

I recently attended a press conference in Kyiv to mark US President Joe Biden’s surprise visit to the Ukrainian capital. Biden made a point of expressing his admiration for Ukraine’s astounding resilience. The reason is simple: we know that our country is currently engaged in an existential fight for survival. If we stop fighting, we will simply disappear. If the Russians stop fighting, the war will end.

As things currently stand, the invasion is far from over. The military situation is complex and unpredictable. Ukraine enjoys strong morale following a series of battlefield successes and is also benefiting from a steady flow of modern weapons from the country’s Western partners. Meanwhile, Russia has strength in numbers thanks to the country’s first mobilization since World War II, while Putin appears to be preparing domestic audiences and the Russian economy for a long war. Ukrainians remain confident of ultimate victory, but there is also widespread recognition that the journey will be long and difficult.

Despite this uncertainty, there are reasons to look ahead with a sense of confidence. One year ago, Kyiv was supposed to fall within a matter of days. Instead, the Ukrainian capital has become a global symbol of courage and freedom. Over the past year, Ukraine has earned the respect of the watching world. Indeed, no country has ever undergone such a complete image transformation in such a short space of time. Once known primarily for corruption and poverty, Ukraine is now a byword for bravery.

For the first time in my life, I firmly believe Ukraine has a realistic change of joining the European Union. When this finally happens, it will confirm a civilizational shift that has been underway for the past few decades as Ukraine has struggled to shake off the shackles of empire and shed the country’s post-Soviet legacy. Despite the horrors of Russia’s ongoing invasion, I am convinced Ukraine is now moving toward better times. Most of all, I am absolutely sure this bright future is thoroughly deserved.

Vitaly Sych is Chief Editor of NV media house which includes a weekly magazine, national talk radio station, and news site NV.ua.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Russia’s invasion one year on: Ukraine is stronger than ever appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Russian War Report: DFRLab releases investigations on Russian info ops before and after the invasion https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/russian-war-report-dfrlab-releases-investigations-on-russian-info-ops-before-and-after-the-invasion/ Fri, 24 Feb 2023 16:01:41 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=616516 On the week of the one year anniversary of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, the DFRLab released two new reports on narratives tracked used to justify the war both pre- and post invasion.

The post Russian War Report: DFRLab releases investigations on Russian info ops before and after the invasion appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
As Russia continues its assault on Ukraine, the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab (DFRLab) is keeping a close eye on Russia’s movements across the military, cyber, and information domains. With more than seven years of experience monitoring the situation in Ukraine—as well as Russia’s use of propaganda and disinformation to undermine the United States, NATO, and the European Union—the DFRLab’s global team presents the latest installment of the Russian War Report. 

Tracking narratives

DFRLab releases investigations on Russian information operations before and after the invasion

Putin reshares narratives used to justify war of aggression in anniversary speech

Russia accuses Ukraine of plotting an invasion on Transnistria

Security

Ukraine prepares for Russian offensive on Vuhledar as Prigozhin accuses Russian command of lying

Prigozhin’s verbal attacks on Russian army leadership shed light on how Russian authorities supported Wagner Group

DFRLab releases investigations on Russian information operations before and after the invasion

This week, our team at the DFRLab released two investigative reports on how Russia employed information operations before and after its invasion of Ukraine one year ago today. The first report, Narrative Warfare: How the Kremlin and Russian news outlets justified a war of aggression against Ukraine, examines how the Kremlin and its media proxies employed false and misleading narratives to justify military action against Ukraine, mask the Kremlin’s operational planning, and deny any responsibility for the coming war. Collectively, these narratives served as Vladimir Putin’s casus belli to engage in a war of aggression against Ukraine. 

To research this report, we reviewed more than 350 fact-checks of pro-Kremlin disinformation published from 2014 to 2021 to identify recurring anti-Ukraine rhetoric, then collected more than ten thousand examples of false and misleading narratives published by fourteen pro-Kremlin outlets in the ten weeks leading up to the invasion. This allowed us to produce a timeline showing how Russia weaponized these narratives as its actions on the ground escalated toward war. When Vladimir Putin announced the invasion one year ago today, these narratives effectively served as his talking points, recurring more than 200 times during his remarks.

The second report, Undermining Ukraine: How the Kremlin employs information operations to erode global confidence in Ukraine, compiles some of our most important findings on Russian information operations identified over the last year in our Russian War Report. Once the war began in earnest, Russia expanded its information strategy with an additional emphasis on undermining Ukraine’s ability to resist in hopes of forcing the country to surrender or enter negotiations on Russia’s terms. This strategic expansion included efforts to maintain control of information and support for the war effort at home, undercut Ukrainian resistance, derail support for Ukrainian resistance among allies and partners, especially in the immediate region, and engage in aggressive information operations internationally to shape public opinion about Russia’s war of aggression, including in Africa and Latin America. 

We will continue marking the first anniversary of the war next week with the publication of the DFRLab Cyber Statecraft Initiative report, A Parallel Terrain: Public-Private Defense of the Ukrainian Information Environment. A Parallel Terrain analyzes Russia’s continuous assaults against the Ukrainian information environment, not only striking though but attempting to contest and claim this environment in parallel with its conventional invasion. It examines how Russian offensives and Ukrainian defense move through this largely privately owned and operated environment, and how this war has highlighted the growing role that private companies play in conflict. This report will be published February 27. 

Andy Carvin, Managing Editor, Washington, DC

Putin reshares narratives used to justify war of aggression in anniversary speech

On February 21, Vladimir Putin delivered an address to the Russian parliament that regurgitated many of the same narratives previously used to justify the invasion of Ukraine, which we explored in our Narrative Warfare report. The speech attempted to depict Putin as innocent of the bloodshed he started one year ago today. Putin spoke of a self-sufficient Russia and urged entrepreneurs to give up investments from overseas. Putin also urged Russian parents to protect their children from the “degradation and degeneration” of the West, one of the recurring themes we documented in Undermining Ukraine. Putin also said that the Sea of Azov “again became Russia’s landlocked sea” and added that Russia would develop the ports and cities in the area; he did not provide a timeline for this endeavor, however.  

Putin also announced the creation of a special fund to compensate and assist those involved in the war and the relatives of the dead and wounded, as well as an additional fourteen days of annual leave for combatants to be with family and loved ones.  

Putin delivered his speech just hours before US President Joe Biden delivered an address in Warsaw.

Ruslan Trad, Resident Fellow for Security Research, Sofia, Bulgaria

Russia accuses Ukraine of plotting an invasion on Transnistria

On February 23, the Russian defense ministry claimed that Ukrainian armed forces were planning a provocation against the breakaway Moldovan region of Transnistria “with the involvement of the nationalist Azov battalion.” The ministry added that Ukraine plans to stage an attack by Russian forces in Transnistria as a “pretext to invade.” To accomplish this, Ukrainian soldiers would allegedly dress in Russian military uniforms. Several pro-Russian Telegram channels circulated pictures alleged to show military equipment along the border of Transnistria. These accusations are eerily similar to ones made by leaders the breakaway Ukrainian regions of Donetsk and Luhansk, which Putin used as a pretext for Russia’s February 2022 invasion of Ukraine. 

In light of these allegations, the Moldovan government issued a statement on February 23 denying the Russian defense ministry’s claims and urged the population to remain calm and follow credible sources. 

Later that evening, the Russian defense ministry released another statement claiming there was “a significant accumulation of personnel and military equipment of Ukrainian units near the Ukrainian-Pridnestrovian border, the deployment of artillery at firing positions, as well as an unprecedented increase in flights of unmanned aircraft of the Armed Forces of Ukraine over the territory of the PMR [Pridnestrovian Moldavian Republic].” These claims were shared without any evidence. According to the statement, these purported plans represent a direct threat to the “Russian peacekeeping contingent legally deployed in Transnistria,” and Russia will “adequately respond to the impending provocation of the Ukrainian side.” 

It should be noted that both statements referred to the unrecognized Transnistria region as the “Pridnestrovian Moldovan Republic,” the pro-Russia separatist name for Transnistria. Russian authorities previously referred to the area as Pridnestrov’ye, the Russian word for Transnistria, which tacitly acknowledged it was a part of Moldova, while “Pridnestrovian Moldovan Republic” implies it is an independent entity. 

On February 22, Putin revoked a 2012 decree that contained a clause stipulating Russia’s commitment to search for ways to settle the Transnistrian conflict “with respect to Moldova’s sovereignty, territorial integrity, and neutral status.” The Kremlin warned that relations between Russia and Moldova are “extremely tense,” accusing the Moldovan government of having an anti-Russian agenda. Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov recommended that Moldovan authorities “be cautious” in their assessments of the Transnistrian settlement.

Victoria Olari, Research Assistant, Moldova

Ukraine prepares for Russian offensive on Vuhledar as Prigozhin accuses Russian command of lying

Ukrainian intelligence reported on the movement of Russian convoys not bearing identification marks headed toward the Chernihiv region. The troops reportedly wore uniforms resembling those of the Ukrainian army. Ukrainian military bloggers also reported that a Russian reconnaissance drone was detected in the Sumy region. Low-res satellite imagery indicates there may be renewed activity at the Zyabrovka airfield in Belarus, located north of Chernihiv, as movement was detected on February 18. In February 2022, before the invasion, Zyabrovka served as the site of joint air drills with Russia. Poland-based Rochan Consulting also reported that S-300 systems facing Chernihiv were deployed last month. 

On February 21, Vadym Skibitsky, deputy head of Ukrainian military intelligence, said that Russia intensified its operations earlier this month in the directions of Luhansk, Donetsk, and Zaporizhzhia. Skibitsky said Russia is concentrating military efforts on capturing Kupyansk, Lyman, Bakhmut, Marinka, Avdiivka, and Vuhledar. On February 23, the United Kingdom’s Ministry of Defense also reported on heavy fighting near Bakhmut, but said Ukrainian forces have managed to keep a key supply route in the western direction open despite Russia’s attempts at encirclement over the last six weeks. The UK ministry confirmed Vuhledar is under heavy shelling and said there is a “real possibility that Russia is preparing for another offensive in this area.” 

On February 17, the Russian Ministry of Defense announced new commander roles, with Andrey Mordvichev leading the Central Military District (TsVO), Sergey Kuzovlev leading the Southern District (YuVO), Yevgeny Nikiforov leading the Western District (ZVO), and Rustam Muradov maintaining command of the Eastern District (VVO), which is responsible for operations in Vuhledar. Muradov is the commander who ordered the frontal assault on Vuhledar from February 8 to 10, which resulted in the defeat of the 155th Marine Corps of the Russian Navy. On February 20, Russian Minister of Defense Sergei Shoigu presented epaulets to senior officers at the National Center of Defense Management in Moscow.  

Meanwhile, the internal power struggle between Russian defense officials and Wagner Group founder Yevgeny Prigozhin continues. In a series of audio clips, he accused the Russian defense ministry of lying about supplying Wagner troops with requested artillery munitions, claiming soldiers received only twenty percent of the artillery ammunition promised to them. Prigozhin urged the ministry to fulfill its promises instead of “lying” to the Russian public. Russian military bloggers defended and amplified Prigozhin’s claims, accusing the defense ministry of failing to support Russia’s most effective forces. 

On February 23, the Russian army shelled Liubotyn in Kharkiv oblast with a Tornado-S multiple-launch rocket system, resulting in damaged buildings. Damage was also reported in Lemishchyne and Morozova Dolyna, also in Kharkiv oblast, due to Russian artillery shelling. In Kupiansk, two people were reportedly buried under rubble after a Russian S-300 missile strike. Observers also reported explosions in Kramatorsk. 

That same day, Polish Defense Minister Mariusz Błaszczak announced the “preventive expansion of security measures” along the country’s borders with Belarus and the Russian territory of Kaliningrad, where the first fortifications are already underway. 

According to a Reuters report, the European Union will develop and implement a program for the joint purchase of artillery shells for Ukraine. This will enhance coordination and facilitate investment in new production facilities. 

Ruslan Trad, Resident Fellow for Security Research, Sofia, Bulgaria

Prigozhin’s verbal attacks on Russian army leadership shed light on how Russian authorities supported Wagner Group

As previously noted, Wagner Group founder Yevgeny Prigozhin published multiple audio recordings lashing out at Russian military leadership for not adequately supplying a Wagner Group division with artillery munitions. The audio recordings revealed the model of collaboration between the Wagner Group and Russian Army according to Prigozhin. 

On February 20, in reply to a media inquiry by RT correspondent Konstantin Pridybaylo about insufficient ammunition supplies, Prigozhin said that “there is ammunition in the country” and “the industry is producing as much as needed, even with oversupply,” but “no decisions are made” to supply the Wagner Group. “No one understands where alleged limits are coming from, where procedures to receive [ammunition] are coming from, no one knows the ways one or the other documents are signed,” he added. “Everyone is showing me upwards saying: ‘You know, Yevgeny Viktorovich, you have complicated relationships up there….You need to go, apologize, and obey. Then your fighters will receive ammunition.’”  
 
In another audio recording on February 21, Prigozhin went further, stating “The Chief of General Staff [Valery Gerasimov] and the Minister of Defense [Sergei Shoigu] are handing out commands to the right and left not only to not give ammunition to the Wagner Group, but also to not provide help via air transport….This is direct opposition that is nothing short of an attempt to destroy the Wagner Group. It can be equated to treason.” In another audio recording that day, Prigozhin said that “other divisions are in constant undersupply of ammunition.” He claimed that “a bunch of near-the-war functionaries” are “trying to twist intrigues” by “calling Telegram channels and telling them, ‘Do not publish Prigozhin. Write that he – I don’t know – eats ammunition or sells it to Americans.'” By the end of the day, the Russian Ministry of Defense denied that it was blocking ammunition supply to “voluntary assault squads.” In return, Prigozhin accused the ministry of lying about ammunition supplies to Wagner Group forces fighting near Bahkmut.  
 
The next day, on February 22, Prigozin continued to pressure defense ministry decisionmakers to supply Wagner Group with ammunition by forwarding a graphic image showing dozens of dead men lying on the snowy ground, as well as a screenshot of an ammunition request dated February 17 addressed to Chief of Staff Gerasimov. In an audio recording posted around the same time, Prigozhin stated, “The final signature needs to be made by either Gerasimov or Shoigu. None of them want to make the decision. I’ll explain. The Wagner Group allegedly does not exist. Previously, we received ammunition via some military divisions that are allegedly taking Bakhmut instead of us. But there is no one else and everyone knows about it by now.”  
 
He also mentioned that a call to “give shells to the Wagners” (“Дайте снаряды Вагнерам”) had been “launched on social media.”  Wagner accounts on VKontakte and pro-war Telegram channels amplified variants of the slogan.

Wagner campaign image using a variant of Prigozhin’s slogan, “give shells to the Wagners” (“Дайте снаряды Вагнерам”). It warns that not supplying Wagner forces with sufficient ammunition is “criminal” and either “a mistake or a betrayal.” (Source: VK/archive)
Wagner campaign image using a variant of Prigozhin’s slogan, “give shells to the Wagners” (“Дайте снаряды Вагнерам”). It warns that not supplying Wagner forces with sufficient ammunition is “criminal” and either “a mistake or a betrayal.” (Source: VK/archive)

The DFRLab also identified a petition on Change.org with the slogan; it was deleted by February 24.

Screenshot of Google Search result showing the now-deleted Change.org petition. (Source: Change.org/archive)
Screenshot of Google Search result showing the now-deleted Change.org petition. (Source: Change.org/archive)

Finally, in an audio recording on February 23, Prigozhin announced, “Ammunition shipment begins…on paper for now, but the most relevant papers are already signed.”

Nika Aleksejeva, Resident Fellow, Riga, Latvia

The post Russian War Report: DFRLab releases investigations on Russian info ops before and after the invasion appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Aziz in Dawn: Banistan: Ignorant leaders, absurd regulation https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/insight-impact/in-the-news/aziz-in-dawn-banistan-ignorant-leaders-absurd-regulation/ Fri, 10 Feb 2023 19:50:00 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=653113 The post Aziz in Dawn: <a href="https://www.dawn.com/news/1736201/banistan-ignorant-leaders-absurd-regulation">Banistan: Ignorant leaders, absurd regulation</a> appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>

The post Aziz in Dawn: <a href="https://www.dawn.com/news/1736201/banistan-ignorant-leaders-absurd-regulation">Banistan: Ignorant leaders, absurd regulation</a> appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Russian War Report: DFRLab confirms Russia’s push to encircle Bakhmut https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/russian-war-report-dfrlab-confirms-russias-push-to-encircle-bakhmut/ Fri, 10 Feb 2023 17:38:29 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=611186 Wagner Group soldiers are attempting to encircle Bakhmut, Ukraine. Meanwhile on the southern flank, Russian armed forces are trying to consolidate their progression towards Ivaniske.

The post Russian War Report: DFRLab confirms Russia’s push to encircle Bakhmut appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
As Russia continues its assault on Ukraine, the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab (DFRLab) is keeping a close eye on Russia’s movements across the military, cyber, and information domains. With more than seven years of experience monitoring the situation in Ukraine—as well as Russia’s use of propaganda and disinformation to undermine the United States, NATO, and the European Union—the DFRLab’s global team presents the latest installment of the Russian War Report. 

Security

Wagner forces attempt to encircle Bakhmut and cut off vital Ukrainian supply routes

Alleged Russian agent captured as Moscow restarts offensives on the Kreminna-Svatove line

Tracking narratives

Russia claims ‘panicked West’ sent tanks to Ukraine

Media policy

New Russian maps redraw borders to include eastern Ukraine

Wagner forces attempt to encircle Bakhmut and cut off vital Ukrainian supply routes

After gaining control over Soledar in mid-January, Wagner Group soldiers are attempting to encircle Bakhmut. The DFRLab confirmed the progression of a bloc of forces that includes Wagner, the People’s Militia of the Donetsk People’s Republic, and Russian armed forces. At the end of January, Wagner shared a photo of its soldiers standing in front of a sign reading “Blahodatne” as evidence they had seized the village of the same name. On February 7, the Russian MoD also stated that it had seized Blahodatne. The small village is strategically located on the key Ukrainian E40 highway, which serves as a supply route to Krasna Hora and Bakhmut. A photo of a burning Russian tank geolocated by OSINT researcher @Neonhandrail suggests that attempts to cut off the supply route have thus far been unsuccessful. 

Meanwhile on the southern flank, Russian armed forces are trying to consolidate their progression towards Ivanivske. Only one division of the Ukrainian army, the 30th Mechanized Brigade, has had to repel a Russian incursion on the road between Bakhmut and Sloviansk.

On Telegram, a post by WarDonbass speculated that Wagner could have gained control over two southern supply routes to Bakhmut. However, there is no evidence to support this claim. Inside the city of Bakhmut, footage released by the Georgian legion of the Ukrainian army indicates that Ukraine is strengthening its defensive positions.

Further south, the DFRLab geolocated footage published by the Telegram channel ColonelCassad, which was then reposted on Wagner’s own Telegram channel. Videos of drone strikes on the northern and eastern part of Marinka indicate a violent escalation on the southern flank. The footage also shows rubble where a hospital once stood. 

Geolocated footage of Russian strikes on World War II Veteran Hospital (purple square) near the Osykova River, Mariinka, Donetsk oblast. Additional polygons identify ground features appearing in each image. (Source: ColonelCassad, left; Valentin Châtelet,/Google Earth, right)
Geolocated footage of Russian strikes on World War II Veteran Hospital (purple square) near the Osykova River, Mariinka, Donetsk oblast. Additional polygons identify ground features appearing in each image. (Source: ColonelCassad, left; Valentin Châtelet,/Google Earth, right)

Valentin Châtelet, Research Associate, Brussels, Belgium

Alleged Russian agent captured as Moscow restarts offensives on the Kreminna-Svatove line

Ukrainian military intelligence announced on February 6 the capture of a Russian agent who allegedly leaked information about Ukrainian military operations in “a strategically important sector of the front.” The suspect was an official in a Ukrainian military unit. He was allegedly recruited by Russia after the start of the invasion.

Elsewhere, the Russian army launched limited offensives on February 7 along the Kreminna-Svatove line. Russian forces have made gains in the Dvorichna area, northwest of Svatove. Units that have been spotted on this front include regular units, special intelligence units, regiments from the 144th and 3rd Motor Rifle Division, a regiment from the 90th Tank Division, and the 76th Airborne Division. On February 9, Ukrainian forces appear to have destroyed a Russian BMPT Terminator armored vehicle near Kreminna, according to a visual report published by the UNIAN Telegram channel. If confirmed, this would be the first documented loss of such a vehicle, which is only available in limited supply. Days earlier, on February 6, Russian pro-government media published footage showing how Russian units in the area used these vehicles in a local counter-offensive in Kreminna.

Russian forces continue to attack towns across Ukraine, with Russian channels reporting missile attacks in Kramatorsk and Sloviansk. On February 9, Ukrainian media reported that drones over Dnipro were downed

Ukrainian parliament voted in favor of bills N8360 and N8361-d, which provide an exemption from taxes and duties for drones, thermal imagers, collimators, walkie-talkies, and night vision devices. Yaroslav Zhelezniak, deputy head of the Verkhovna Rada Committee on Tax and Customs Policy, clarified on his Telegram channel that radios were added to the bills after appeals from volunteer organizations. The adopted bills will remove import restrictions, allowing for the express shipment of some military equipment.

Ruslan Trad, Resident Fellow for Security Research, Sofia, Bulgaria

Russia claims ‘panicked West’ sent tanks to Ukraine

Following the decision from Western allies to provide armored tanks to Ukraine, there has been an increase in Russian narratives opposing the decision. The state-owned news outlet RIA Novosti published an article aimed at ridiculing Ukrainian Defense Minister Oleksiy Reznikov. The article’s banner photo depicts Reznikov holding a model tank with the accompanying headline, “Germany handed over toy Leopard 2 to Ukraine.” The narrative appears aimed at casting doubt on the efficacy of Germany’s Leopard 2 tanks.

RIA NOVOSTI depicting Ukrainian Defense Minister Oleksiy Reznikov holding a toy tank (right) alongside German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius (left) under the headline “Germany handed over toy Leopard 2 to Ukraine.” (Source: RIA Novosti/archive)
RIA NOVOSTI depicting Ukrainian Defense Minister Oleksiy Reznikov holding a model tank (right) alongside German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius (left) under the headline “Germany handed over toy Leopard 2 to Ukraine.” (Source: RIA Novosti/archive)

Along with the heightened focus from Russian media on the transfer of tanks, other narratives presented the latest military aid package as a reaction from a panicked West due to the successes of the Russian “special military operation.” The pro-Kremlin journal International Affairs referred to Germany’s decision to send in tanks as capitulation to external pressure and a rash political decision arising from the tensions caused by Russia’s military successes. In addition, Ukraine’s latest round of anti-corruption measures resulted in speculation about the possible resignation or dismissal of Defense Minister Reznikov. Major Kremlin-backed publications, including TASS, have directly followed the developments, highlighting corruption problems in Kyiv. Other narratives have outlined Reznikov’s alleged refusal to resign amid the corruption charges as a result of his purported blackmail capabilities against the top echelons of the Ukrainian military and defense leadership, while also casting into doubt Ukraine’s entire leadership and ability to function as a government.

Kateryna Halstead, Research Assistant, Bologna, Italy

New Russian maps redraw borders to include eastern Ukraine

The Kremlin-approved media outlet RBC reported on February 8 that Russian bookstores are selling new maps that include Crimea, Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson oblasts as part of Russia. The DFRLab found a version of this map for sale on the website of the Russian publishing company Atlas Print. 

Atlas Print selling a “big wall map of Russia with new territories 3.00 x 1.60 m, laminated” for approximately USD $47. (Source: Atlas Print/archive)
Atlas Print selling a “big wall map of Russia with new territories 3.00 x 1.60 m, laminated” for approximately USD $47. (Source: Atlas Print/archive)

Atlas Print Director Yuri Sukhanov spoke to RBC about how a bill in the Russian Duma “on countering extremist activity” prevented retailers from selling previous maps. The bill, which passed its first reading on December 20, 2022, stipulated that “extremist materials will include cartographic and other documents and images intended for distribution and public demonstration that dispute the territorial integrity of Russia.” The new maps appear to have been printed in response to the bill. According to Sukhanov, “There are large retail chains that are ready to sell only updated maps with the new borders of Russia.”

On September 23, 2022, Russia launched rigged referendums in Ukraine’s Luhansk, Donetsk, Kherson, and Zaporizhzhia oblasts. Russian President Vladimir Putin then signed decrees to recognize Kherson and Zaporizhzhia as independent and held a ceremony to incorporate all four oblasts into Russian territory. The newly printed maps do not correspond with the reality on the ground. On November 12, 2022, Ukraine forced Russian troops out of Kherson as it regained control over the area.

Nika Aleksejeva, Research Fellow, Riga, Latvia

The post Russian War Report: DFRLab confirms Russia’s push to encircle Bakhmut appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Karatnycky in the American Spectator: Tucker Carlson and Ukraine: Undoing the Reagan Legacy https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/insight-impact/in-the-news/karatnycky-in-the-american-spectator-tucker-carlson-and-ukraine-undoing-the-reagan-legacy/ Mon, 30 Jan 2023 18:49:58 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=607029 The post Karatnycky in the American Spectator: Tucker Carlson and Ukraine: Undoing the Reagan Legacy appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>

The post Karatnycky in the American Spectator: Tucker Carlson and Ukraine: Undoing the Reagan Legacy appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Nawaz honored with Columbia Journalism School 2023 alumni award https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/insight-impact/in-the-news/nawaz-honored-with-columbia-journalism-school-2023-alumni-award/ Thu, 26 Jan 2023 17:40:34 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=608294 Shuja Nawaz was honored with the Columbia Journalism school’s 2023 alumni award. He is the founding director of the Atlantic Council’s South Asia Center in Washington, D.C. He now serves as a Distinguished Fellow at the Center. Mr. Nawaz has worked with leading think tanks on projects dealing with Pakistan and the Middle East. He […]

The post Nawaz honored with Columbia Journalism School 2023 alumni award appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>

Shuja Nawaz was honored with the Columbia Journalism school’s 2023 alumni award. He is the founding director of the Atlantic Council’s South Asia Center in Washington, D.C. He now serves as a Distinguished Fellow at the Center.

Mr. Nawaz has worked with leading think tanks on projects dealing with Pakistan and the Middle East. He has also advised or briefed senior government and military officials and parliamentarians in the US, Europe, and Pakistan.

Mr. Nawaz was a newscaster and news and current affairs producer for Pakistan Television from 1967 to 1972 and covered the western front of the 1971 war between Pakistan and India. He has worked for The New York Times, the World Health Organization, and has headed three separate divisions at the International Monetary Fund. He was also a director at the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna 1999-2001, while on leave from the IMF.

He is the author of a new book The Battle for Pakistan: The Bitter US Friendship and a Tough Neighbourhood (Penguin Random House, and Liberty Books, Pakistan 2019 and Rowman & Littlefield 2020), and Crossed Swords: Pakistan, its Army, and the Wars Within (Oxford University Press 2008 and 2018).

I am delighted to be honored by my fellow alumni of the Columbia J School and to be in such august company. At heart, I remain a journalist. Asking questions and questioning authority. All for the public good. That’s what Columbia taught me.

Shuja Nawaz

More about our expert

The post Nawaz honored with Columbia Journalism School 2023 alumni award appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Putin is facing defeat in the information war https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/putin-is-facing-defeat-in-the-information-war/ Tue, 24 Jan 2023 21:36:06 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=605197 Russia's entire invasion of Ukraine has been built on a web of deceit but Putin is now facing defeat in the information war as the gap between the Kremlin's alternative reality and the real world becomes too big to bridge.

The post Putin is facing defeat in the information war appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
As the world prepares to mark International Holocaust Remembrance Day on January 27, the European Union has accused Russia of “trampling on the memory” of the six million Jews who perished in the Holocaust. This rebuke came following controversial recent comments by Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, who compared Western support for Ukraine to the Nazi genocide of European Jewry.

Speaking on January 18, Lavrov claimed a coalition of Western countries led by the United States was following in the footsteps of Napoleon and Hitler with the goal of destroying Russia. “They are waging war against our country with the same task: the final solution of the Russian question,” he said in direct reference to Hitler’s infamous “final solution” of the Jewish question.

Lavrov’s Holocaust comparison was met with widespread international criticism. In a strongly worded statement, EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell said his Russian counterpart’s comments were “entirely misplaced, disrespectful, and trample on the memory of the six million Jewish people, and other victims, who were systematically murdered in the Holocaust. The Russian regime’s manipulation of the truth to justify their illegal war of aggression against Ukraine has reached another unacceptable and despicable low point.”

The Israeli Foreign Ministry branded Lavrov’s remarks “unacceptable,” while French diplomats said the Russian foreign minister’s attempt to compare international opposition to the invasion of Ukraine with the Holocaust was “outrageous and disgraceful.” Meanwhile, UK Foreign Secretary James Cleverly called Lavrov’s comments “totally abhorrent” while noting, “Russia is not the victim. Russia is the aggressor.”

In the US, national security spokesperson John Kirby expressed indignation at Lavrov’s attempt to draw parallels between the Nazi genocide and the response to Russia’s attack on Ukraine. “How dare he compare anything to the Holocaust, let alone a war that they started,” he told reporters at the White House. “It’s almost so absurd that it’s not worth responding to, other than the truly offensive manner in which he tried to cast us in terms of Hitler and the Holocaust.”

This was not Lavrov’s first flirtation with anti-Semitic historical distortions. During an appearance on Italian TV in spring 2022, Russia’s top diplomat sparked outrage by repeating the notorious anti-Semitic trope that Hitler was Jewish. When asked why Russia insists on calling Ukraine a “Nazi state” despite the fact that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is Jewish, Lavrov replied that Nazi leader Adolf Hitler “also had Jewish blood.”

The fallout from Lavrov’s very public descent into the squalid world of anti-Semitic conspiracy theories was predictably severe. Following a chorus of international condemnation led by Israel, Vladimir Putin was eventually obliged to intervene. In early May, the Russian dictator called the Israeli Prime Minister to personally apologize on behalf of his foreign minister.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

The international backlash over Lavrov’s blunders illustrates the limitations of the propaganda narratives developed by Moscow to justify the invasion of Ukraine. While captive audiences inside Russia have been largely convinced by attempts to blame hostilities on “Ukrainian Nazis” and the “Russophobic West,” these unsubstantiated arguments have proven far less persuasive internationally and have served to further undermine the Kremlin’s dwindling credibility.

Russian attempts to portray Ukrainians as Nazis are nothing new and can be traced back to Soviet wartime propaganda. The tactic has been enthusiastically revived by the Kremlin in recent years to dehumanize Ukrainians and legitimize attempts to extinguish Ukrainian independence. This plays well in modern Russia, where the Putin regime has fostered a cult-like reverence for the Soviet role in World War II that includes the demonizing of all opponents as “fascists.” However, the lack of any actual evidence to support these poisonous allegations has left outside observers deeply skeptical.

As Lavrov himself discovered during last year’s disastrous Italian TV interview, most people living beyond the suffocating confines of the Kremlin propaganda bubble regard the election of Ukraine’s Russian-speaking Jewish President Volodymyr Zelenskyy as convincing proof that Ukraine is anything but a Nazi state. Likewise, the consistent failure of Ukraine’s far right parties to secure more than 2% of the vote in national ballots makes a mockery of Moscow’s entire “Nazi Ukraine” narrative. In the eleven months since the full-scale invasion of Ukraine began, Russia has yet to identify any of the “Nazis” it claims to be fighting or define exactly what the stated war aim of “de-Nazification” means in practice.

Lavrov’s lurid allegations of anti-Russian plots suffer from similar problems. While domestic audiences in Russia have been conditioned for decades to view their country as a blameless victim of irrational Western Russophobia, there is a growing consensus in the wider world that the international community has actually been much too slow to react to the mounting threats posed by Putin’s Russia.

Far from pursuing the destruction of Russia, the West responded to Moscow’s wars of aggression in Georgia and Ukraine with a series of misguided resets and endless policies of appeasement. Indeed, it was not until Putin launched the biggest European conflict since World War II last February that Western leaders finally and reluctantly acknowledged the necessity of countering the Kremlin. Even now, as Russia’s invasion approaches the one-year mark, the debate over Western support for Ukraine remains dominated by excessive caution and a debilitating desire to avoid escalation. These are self-evidently not the actions of an international coalition seeking “the final solution to the Russian question,” as Lavrov so absurdly claims.

It is still far too early for Ukraine to declare victory in the information war. Russian disinformation narratives continue to resonate on the vocal fringes of Western society while also appealing to widespread anti-Western sentiment in much of Asia, Africa, and South America. Nevertheless, the wholesale revulsion over Lavrov’s recent Holocaust remarks is a timely reminder of the increasingly unbridgeable gap separating Russia’s alternative reality from the real world.

Almost one year since the full-scale invasion of Ukraine began, only a handful of fellow pariah states are still prepared to stand with Russia on the global stage as international audiences reject Kremlin claims of phantom fascists and anti-Russian conspiracies. Instead, there is growing recognition that the war in Ukraine is an act of naked imperial aggression that threatens to destabilize the wider world.

Russia’s attack on Ukraine has been built on an unprecedented web of deceit and distortion. As these lies lose their power and the reality of Putin’s genocidal agenda becomes impossible to ignore, a consensus is emerging that the war in Ukraine will only end when Russia is decisively defeated.

Peter Dickinson is Editor of the Atlantic Council’s UkraineAlert Service.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Putin is facing defeat in the information war appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Russian War Report: Russian hacker wanted by the FBI reportedly wins Wagner hackathon prize  https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/russian-war-report-russian-hacker-wanted-by-the-fbi-reportedly-wins-wagner-hackathon-prize/ Fri, 13 Jan 2023 19:04:07 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=602036 In December 2022, Wagner Group organized a hackathon that was won by a man wanted by the FBI for his connection to computer malware.

The post <strong>Russian War Report: Russian hacker wanted by the FBI reportedly wins Wagner hackathon prize</strong>  appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
As Russia continues its assault on Ukraine, the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab (DFRLab) is keeping a close eye on Russia’s movements across the military, cyber, and information domains. With more than seven years of experience monitoring the situation in Ukraine—as well as Russia’s use of propaganda and disinformation to undermine the United States, NATO, and the European Union—the DFRLab’s global team presents the latest installment of the Russian War Report. 

Security

Russian forces claim control of strategic Soledar

Tracking narratives

Russian hacker wanted by the FBI reportedly wins Wagner hackathon prize

Frenzy befalls French company accused of feeding Russian forces on New Year’s Eve

Former head of Russian space agency injured in Donetsk, mails shell fragment to French ambassador

Sputnik Lithuania’s former chief editor arrested

International response

New year brings new military aid for Ukraine

Ukrainian envoy to Georgia discusses deteriorating relations between nations

Russian forces claim control of strategic Soledar

Russia said on January 13 that its forces had taken control of the contested city of Soledar. Recent fighting has been concentrated in Soledar and Bakhmut, two cities in the Donetsk region that are strategically important to Ukrainian and Russian forces. Moscow has been trying to take control of the two cities since last summer. Over the past week, Russia has increased its presence on the fronts with the support of Wagner units. Russia wants control of the Soledar-Bakhmut axis to cut supply lines to the Ukrainian armed forces.  

On January 10, Russian sources claimed that Wagner forces had advanced into Soledar. Interestingly, Wagner financier Yevgeny Prigozhin denied the claim and said the forces were still engaged in fighting. Wagner’s presence was established in a camp near Bakhmut. Soldiers from the Wagner Group and other special forces deployed to Bakhmut after other military units had failed to break through the Ukrainian defense.  

On January 11, Ukrainian Deputy Defense Minister Anna Malyar said that heavy fighting was taking place in Soledar and that Russian forces had replaced the unit operating in the city with fresh troops and increased the number of Wagner soldiers among them. The same day, Prigozhin claimed that Wagner forces had taken control of Soledar. The Ukrainian defense ministry denied the allegation. On January 12, Ukrainian sources shared unconfirmed footage of soldiers driving on the main road connecting Bakhmut and Soledar with Sloviansk and Kostyantynivka to as evidence that the area remained under Ukrainian control.  

Elsewhere, on January 11, the Kremlin announced that Valery Gerasimov would replace Sergei Surovikin as commander of Russian forces in Ukraine. The unexpected move could be interpreted as evidence of a struggle for influence in Russian military circles. Surovikin is considered close to Prigozhin’s entourage, which has criticized senior officers recently, including Gerasimov. Some analysts believe that the change signals a possible military escalation from Russia. 

Furthermore, on January 8, Ukrainian forces repelled a Russian offensive the vicinity of Makiyivka and Stelmakhivka. Further north of Lysychansk, on January 11, Ukraine also repelled an attack on the city of Kreminna. In the neighboring Kharkiv region, aerial threats remain high. On the southern front, the city of Kherson and several cities across the Zaporizhzhia region remain targets of Russian attacks.  

Lastly, a new Maxar satellite image from nearby Bakhmut exemplifies the brutality of war on the frontline in Donetsk. The image shows thousands of craters, indicating the intensity of the artillery shelling and exchange of fire between Ukrainian and Russian forces.

Valentin Châtelet, Research Associate, Brussels, Belgium

Ruslan Trad, Resident Fellow for Security Research, Sofia, Bulgaria

Russian hacker wanted by the FBI reportedly wins Wagner hackathon prize

In December 2022, the Wagner Group organized a hackathon at its recently opened headquarters in St. Petersburg, for students, developers, analysts, and IT professionals. Wagner announced the hackathon on social media earlier that month. Organizers created the promotional website hakaton.wagnercentr.ru, but the website went offline soon after. A December 8 archive of the website, accessed via the Internet Archive Wayback Machine, revealed that the objective of the hackathon was to “create UAV [unmanned aerial vehicle] positioning systems using video recognition, searching for waypoints by landmarks in the absence of satellite navigation systems and external control.” Hackathon participants were asked to complete the following tasks: display the position of the UAV on the map at any time during the flight; direct the UAV to a point on the map indicated by the operator; provide a search for landmarks, in case of loss of visual reference points during the flight and returning the UAV to the point of departure, in case of a complete loss of communication with the operator.   

On December 9, Ukrainian programmers noticed that hakaton.wagnercentr.ru was hosted by Amazon Web Services and asked users to report the website to Amazon. Calls to report the channel also spread on Telegram, where the channel Empire Burns asked subscribers to report the website and provided instructions on how to do so. Empire Burns claims hakaton.wagnercentr.ru first went offline on December 9, which tallies with archival posts. However, there is no evidence that reporting the website to Amazon resulted in it being taken offline.   

Snapshots of hakaton.wagnercentr.ru from the Wayback Machine show the website was created in a Bitrix24 online workspace. A snapshot captured on December 13 shows an HTTP 301 status, which redirects visitors to Wagner’s main website, wagnercentr.ru. The Wagner website appears to be geo-restricted for visitors outside Russia. 

On December 23, a Wagner Telegram channel posted about the hackathon, claiming more than 100 people applied. In the end, forty-three people divided into twelve teams attended. The two-person team GrAILab Development won first place, the team SR Data-Iskander won second place, and a team from the company Artistrazh received third place. Notably, one of Artistrazh’s co-founders is Igor Turashev, who is wanted by the FBI for his connection to computer malware that the bureau claims infected “tens of thousands of computers, in both North America and Europe, resulting in financial losses in the tens of millions of dollars.” Artistrazh’s team comprised four people who won 200,000 Russian rubles (USD $3,000). OSINT investigators at Molfar confirmed that the Igor Turashev who works at Artistrazh is the same one wanted by the FBI.  

Wagner said that one of the key objectives of the hackathon was the development of IT projects to protect the interests of the Russian army, adding that the knowledge gained during the hackathon could already be applied to clear mines. Wagner said it had also invited some participants to collaborate further. The Wagner Center opened in St. Petersburg in early November 2022; the center’s mission is “to provide a comfortable environment for generating new ideas in order to improve Russia’s defense capability, including information.”

Givi Gigitashvili, DFRLab Research Associate, Warsaw, Poland

Frenzy befalls French company accused of feeding Russian forces on New Year’s Eve

A VKontakte post showing baskets of canned goods produced by the French company Bonduelle being distributed to Russian soldiers on New Year’s Eve has sparked a media frenzy in France. The post alleges that Bonduelle sent Russian soldiers a congratulatory package, telling them to “come back with a win.” The post quotes Ekaterina Eliseeva, the head of Bonduelle’s EurAsia markets. According to a 2019 Forbes article, Eliseeva studied interpretation at an Russian state security academy.  

Bonduelle has issued several statements denying the social media post and calling it fake. However, Bonduelle does maintain operations in Russia “to ensure that the population has access to essential foodstuff.”  

French broadcaster TV 5 Monde discovered that Bonduelle’s Russia division participated in a non-profit effort called Basket of Kindness, sponsored by the Fund of Presidential Grants of Russia. Food and supplies were gathered by food banks to be delivered to vulnerable segments of the population. However, during the collection drive, Dmitry Zharikov, governor of the Russian city of Podolsk, posted on Telegram that the collections would also serve military families.   

The story was shared on national television in France and across several international outlets. The Ukrainian embassy in France criticized Bonduelle for continuing to operate in Russia, claiming it was “making profits in a terrorist country which kills Ukrainians.”

Valentin Châtelet, Research Associate, Brussels, Belgium

Former head of Russian space agency injured in Donetsk, mails shell fragment to French ambassador

Dmitry Rogozin, former head of the Russian space agency Roscosmos, said he was wounded in Ukrainian shelling on December 21, 2022, at the Shesh hotel in Donetsk while “celebrating his birthday.” In response, Rogozin sent a letter to Pierre Lévy, the French ambassador to Russia, with a fragment of the shell.   

In the letter, Rogozin accused the French government of “betraying [Charles] De Gaulle’s cause and becoming a bloodthirsty state in Europe.” The shell fragment was extracted from Rogozin’s spine during surgery and allegedly came from a French CAESAR howitzer. Rogozin requested the fragment be sent to French President Emmanuel Macron. His message was relayed by Russian news agencies, and on Telegram by pro-Russian and French-speaking conspiracy channels.  

At the time of the attack, Rogozin was accompanied by two members of his voluntary unit, “Tsar’s wolves,” who were killed in the attack, according to reporting from RT, RIA Novosti, and others.  

Valentin Châtelet, Research Associate, Brussels, Belgium

Sputnik Lithuania’s former chief editor arrested

On January 6, Marat Kasem, the former chief editor of Sputnik Lithuania, was arrested in Riga, Latvia, on suspicion of “providing economic resources” to a Kremlin propaganda resource under EU sanctions.  

The following day, pro-Kremlin journalists held a small demonstration in support of Kasem in front of the Latvian embassy in Moscow. Russian journalist Dmitry Kiselyov and politician Maria Butina attended the event. 

The demonstration was filmed by Sputnik and amplified with the Russian hashtag  #свободуМаратуКасему (#freedomForMaratKasem) on Telegram channels operating in the Baltic states, including the pro-Russian BALTNEWS, Своих не бросаем! | Свободная Балтика!, and on Butina’s personal channel. The news of Kasem’s arrest also reached the Russian Duma’s Telegram channel, which re-shared Butina’s post. 

Valentin Châtelet, Research Associate, Brussels, Belgium

New year brings new military aid for Ukraine

International efforts in support of Ukraine are continuing in full force in 2023. On January 4, Norway announced it had sent Ukraine another 10,000 155mm artillery shells. These shells can be used in several types of artillery units, including the M109 self-propelled howitzer. On January 5, Germany confirmed it would provide Ukraine with Marder fighting vehicles and a Patriot anti-aircraft missile battery. German news outlet Spiegel also reported that talks are underway to supply Ukraine with additional Gepard anti-aircraft guns and ammunition. 

In addition, UK Foreign Secretary James Cleverly said the British government would supply Ukraine with military equipment capable of delivering a “decisive” strike from a distance. At the end of 2022, UK Defense Secretary Ben Wallace discussed the possibility of transferring Storm Shadow cruise missiles, with a range of up to 250 kilometers. Finland also reported that it is preparing its twelfth package of military assistance to Ukraine.  

US aid to Ukraine is also being reaffirmed with a $2.85 billion package on top of weapon deliveries. Additionally, the US plans to deliver fourteen vehicles equipped with anti-drone systems as part of its security assistance package. The company L3Harris is part of the Pentagon’s contract to develop anti-drone kits. This equipment would help protect Ukrainian civil infrastructure, which has been a frequent Russian target since October 2022.  

On January 6, French President Emmanuel Macron announced that France would supply Ukraine with units of the light AMX-10RC armored reconnaissance vehicle. These vehicles were produced in 1970 and have been used in Afghanistan, the Gulf War, Mali, Kosovo, and Ivory Coast. The French defense ministry also announced that the country was to deliver twenty units of ACMAT Bastion armored personnel carriers. 

On January 11, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy met with Presidents Andrzej Duda of Poland and Gitanas Nauseda of Lithuania in Lviv. During the visit, Duda announced that Poland would deliver fourteen units of the much-awaited German Leopard combat tanks, and Nauseda announced that his country would provide Ukraine with Zenit anti-aircraft systems. 

Meanwhile, the largest manufacturer of containers for the transport of liquified natural gas has ceased operations in Russia. French engineering group Gaztransport & Technigaz (GTT) said it ended operations in Russia after reviewing the latest European sanctions package, which included a ban on engineering services for Russian firms. The group said its contract with Russian shipbuilding company Zvezda to supply fifteen icebreakers to transport liquefied natural gas was suspended effective January 8.

Valentin Châtelet, Research Associate, Brussels, Belgium

Ruslan Trad, Resident Fellow for Security Research, Sofia, Bulgaria

Ukrainian envoy to Georgia discusses deteriorating relations between nations

On January 9, Andrii Kasianov, the Ukrainian Chargé d’Affaires in Georgia, published an article discussing the deteriorating relationship between the two countries. The article stated that the top issues affecting relations were military aid to Ukraine, bilateral sanctions against Russia, visa policies for fleeing Russians, and the legal rights of Mikheil Saakashvili, the imprisoned third president of Georgia, who is also a Ukrainian citizen. 

Kasianov noted that Tbilisi declined Kyiv’s request for military help, specifically for BUK missile systems, which were given to Georgia by Ukraine during Russia’s 2008 invasion. The diplomat said that the weapons request also included Javelin anti-tank systems supplied to Georgia by the United States.  

“Despite the fact that the Georgian government categorically refused to provide military aid, Ukraine opposes the use of this issue in internal political disputes and rejects any accusations of attempts to draw Georgia into a war with the Russian Federation,” Kasianov said. 

Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the Georgian Dream-led government has accused Ukraine, the US, and the EU of attempting to drag Georgia into a war with Russia.  

Eto Buziashvili, Research Associate, Tbilisi, Georgia

The post <strong>Russian War Report: Russian hacker wanted by the FBI reportedly wins Wagner hackathon prize</strong>  appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Putin’s faltering Ukraine invasion exposes limits of Russian propaganda https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/putins-faltering-ukraine-invasion-exposes-limits-of-russian-propaganda/ Tue, 10 Jan 2023 21:10:33 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=600650 Putin’s invasion of Ukraine was supposed to be a short and victorious war. Instead, it has transformed him into a pariah and shattered Russia’s reputation as a military superpower. How could he have got it so wrong?

The post Putin’s faltering Ukraine invasion exposes limits of Russian propaganda appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
As the Russian attack on Ukraine approaches the one-year mark, it is increasingly clear that Vladimir Putin’s decision to invade was one of the biggest geopolitical blunders of the modern era. The Russian dictator initially expected a short and victorious war. Instead, Putin’s faltering invasion has transformed him into an international pariah and shattered Russia’s reputation as a military superpower. How could he have got it so wrong? 

The scale of the miscalculations that led to the invasion was laid bare in a recent New York Times article entitled: “How Putin’s war in Ukraine became a catastrophe for Russia.” This lengthy report featured details of the often wildly unrealistic objectives set for the invading Russian army, with specific units expected to advance hundreds of kilometers through hostile country and occupy towns deep inside Ukraine within a matter of days.

The orders handed out on the eve of the invasion confirm that Russian military planners dangerously underestimated Ukraine’s ability to fight back. At first glance, this makes little sense. By early 2022, Ukraine had already been at war with Russia for eight years and boasted a battle-hardened army of more than 200,000 personnel along with hundreds of thousands of highly motivated reservists with combat experience. This force was also relatively well-armed and led by an emerging generation of generals who had absorbed the lessons of the simmering conflict in eastern Ukraine.

And yet we now know from leaked and captured documents that Russia’s military and political elite anticipated only minimal organized resistance in Ukraine. Rather than preparing for a major war, they genuinely believed a large proportion of the Ukrainian population would greet them as liberators. Strikingly, they also doubted whether the country’s military had the stomach for a serious fight.

These absurd expectations were shaped by decades of misleading Kremlin propaganda. For generations, the Russian state has denied Ukraine’s right to exist and questioned the existence of a separate Ukrainian national identity. Putin has been a particularly prominent advocate of such arguments and has frequently claimed that Ukrainians are in fact Russians (“one people”). In the years between the 2014 occupation of Crimea and the full-scale invasion of February 2022, he repeatedly branded Ukraine an artificial country that had been unjustly separated from its rightful place as part of historical Russia.

Russian state propagandists have also long sought to discredit Ukraine’s post-Soviet transition toward Euro-Atlantic integration by dismissing it as a foreign plot. Rather than acknowledge the Ukrainian people’s right to determine their own future, the Kremlin has consistently insisted that the vast majority of Ukrainians see themselves as Russians but are victims of an extremist fringe acting in the interests of outsiders.   

Such delusions seem to have penetrated the upper echelons of the Russian leadership. At no point in the lead-up to the war does anyone in the Kremlin appear to have taken the idea of Ukrainian agency seriously. Instead, they assumed the 2022 invasion would be a repeat of the spring 2014 takeover of Crimea, which saw Russian troops rapidly seize the Ukrainian peninsula amid post-revolutionary political paralysis in Kyiv. This was to prove an extremely costly mistake.

From the very first hours of the invasion, Russian troops ran into fierce Ukrainian resistance and began suffering heavy losses. Just over a month after the first columns of Russian tanks had crossed the border, Putin was forced to admit defeat in the Battle of Kyiv and withdraw from northern Ukraine entirely. His army has yet to regain the initiative, and has since retreated from Kharkiv region in eastern Ukraine and Right Bank Kherson in the south.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

As well as fatally underestimating Ukraine’s military capabilities, Putin also wildly overestimated the strength of his own army. Like many senior figures in Moscow, he took Russia’s military superpower status for granted and did not seriously consider the possibility of defeat at the hands of a minor state such as Ukraine. This confidence was shared by most Russians, who have traditionally embraced notions of their country’s military might with the zeal of religious dogma.

Despite a series of embarrassing setbacks in Ukraine, large numbers of Russians remain in denial and cling to the hope that Russia has yet to deploy its full military potential. Putin himself has fueled such wishful thinking by declaring that he has “not yet begun” to wage a real war in Ukraine. However, this bravado cannot disguise the significantly less imposing reality of a depleted and demoralized Russian army that is increasingly dependent on mobilized troops, outdated armor, and Iranian drones.

Putin has recently adopted a somewhat strange war strategy that appears primarily designed to appease domestic audiences. Since early October, Russia has been focusing on the mass aerial bombardment of Ukrainian cities and civilian infrastructure. This air war is hugely expensive and offers minimal military advantages. However, it is psychologically effective in convincing Russian audiences that their cause is not yet lost.

The Kremlin’s carefully curated propaganda machine works hard to amplify the impact of these airstrikes while exaggerating the hardships experienced by the Ukrainian civilian population. Likewise, state media also trumpets every minor gain achieved by Russian troops on the ground in eastern Ukraine, even when these advances are measured in meters. This creates the impression that Russia has stopped trying to win the war and is merely attempting to demonstrate that it is not losing.

The war is far from over, of course. In September 2022, Putin demonstrated his resolve by ordering Russia’s first mobilization since World War II. Many international observers expect him to mobilize a further 500,000 troops in the coming weeks. This massive increase in Russian military manpower is already reducing Ukraine’s ability to advance and could allow Moscow to regain the initiative in the months ahead.

At the same time, the damage to Russia’s reputation has already been done. Russia’s global standing has always relied heavily on international perceptions of the country as a major military power. This myth has now been ruthlessly exposed on the battlefields of Ukraine. Countries which had earlier felt obliged to remain on good terms with Russia now understandably feel they have little to fear, while those who previously saw Moscow as a powerful partner have been forced to rethink this relationship.

Domestically, the consequences may be even more critical for Putin. Belief in Russia’s military strength served as the foundation stone of the country’s modern national identity. It was a source of patriotic pride that helped justify the often harsh living conditions and limited individual rights that all Russian citizens are forced to accept. This entire facade is now in danger of collapsing.

The failing invasion of Ukraine is not only exposing the relative weakness of the Russian military; it is revealing the rot at the heart of the Russian state and the emptiness of the Kremlin’s imperial posturing. This raises a number of grave questions about the future of the Russian Federation that Putin is unable to answer. For the past 22 years, he has succeeded in creating a parallel propaganda universe, but reality is now rapidly closing in. 

Victor Tregubov is a Ukrainian political activist and commentator.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Putin’s faltering Ukraine invasion exposes limits of Russian propaganda appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Russian War Report: Russian military bloggers criticize Putin’s Orthodox Christmas ceasefire announcement https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/russian-war-report-russian-military-bloggers-criticize-putins-orthodox-christmas-ceasefire-announcement/ Fri, 06 Jan 2023 19:31:12 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=599769 In the first days of 2023, Russia shelled civilian infrastructure in Ukraine before Russian President Putin called for a 36 hour ceasefire to observe Orthodox Christmas.

The post Russian War Report: Russian military bloggers criticize Putin’s Orthodox Christmas ceasefire announcement appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
As Russia continues its assault on Ukraine, the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab (DFRLab) is keeping a close eye on Russia’s movements across the military, cyber, and information domains. With more than seven years of experience monitoring the situation in Ukraine—as well as Russia’s use of propaganda and disinformation to undermine the United States, NATO, and the European Union—the DFRLab’s global team presents the latest installment of the Russian War Report. 

Security

Russia admits losses in Makiivka attack, retaliates by striking empty Ukrainian ice rink

Russian military bloggers criticize Putin’s Orthodox Christmas ceasefire announcement

Russia admits losses in Makiivka attack, retaliates by striking empty Ukrainian ice rink

Ukraine’s first days of 2023 saw Russian shelling of civilian infrastructure and Ukrainian precision attacks on Russian positions. 

Just prior to the new year, Russian forces launched sixty-nine cruise missiles and twenty-three drones, of which Ukrainian air defenses reportedly shot down fifty-four missiles and at least eleven drones. The attacks primarily struck infrastructure facilities in Lviv, Kyiv, Odesa, Kharkiv, and Donetsk, causing widespread disruptions to energy, heating, and water supplies. Russian forces also hit targets across Ukraine, including Sumy, Chernihiv, Zhytomyr, Vinnytsia, Khmelnytskyi, Ternopil, Ivano-Frankivsk, Poltava, Dnipro, and Zaporizhzhia. The Ukrainian Air Force Command claimed that Russian forces launched sixteen Shahed-131 and -136 drones on the night of December 29. 

On New Year’s Eve, Ukraine’s army attacked Russian army headquarters in the occupied village of Makiivka, Donetsk. In a rare admission of casualties, the Russian Ministry of Defense confirmed eighty-nine soldiers were killed in the strike. Ukrainian armed forces, in contrast, reported 400 killed and 300 wounded. Ukrainian forces also shared a graphic video showing the aftermath of the shelling. On the evening of January 1, pro-Russia military blogger Vladimir Romanov reported that Ukraine had struck nineteen vocational schools, which commanders had “compactly populated” with recruits mobilized from the Saratov region. Romanov claimed 200 soldiers died in the attacks. On January 4, the Russian defense ministry stated, “It is already obvious that the main reason for what happened was the inclusion and massive use, contrary to the ban, by personnel of mobile phones in the reach of enemy weapons.” British intelligence assessed that someone placed ammunition inside the building, the detonation of which led to destruction and deaths.

In the Donetsk region, the Russian military is fighting for the ground between Bakhmut and Soledar, with Russian forces positioned to possibly encircle Soledar. A Wagner Group unit remains heavily active in the fighting across the zone around the Bakhmut frontline. To the northeast of the city, their forces advanced along the Svitlodarsk-Sloviansk highway and reached the southern outskirts of Pidhorodne. Ukrainian officers and British military intelligence stated that Russia is no longer hitting Bakhmut with the same ferocity as it had during the previous month, instead repositioning armored vehicles and artillery fire toward the nearby town of Soledar. Meanwhile in Bakhmut, Russian sources claim that units including Wagner detachments are advancing simultaneously in several directions. 

To curb the backlash after Ukraine’s strike on Makiivka, Russia claimed it had killed “many” soldiers and foreign mercenaries “from Ukraine and NATO” in a January 3 strike on an ice rink in Druzhkivka, Donetsk. A French journalist witnessed the attack during a live report. The Ice Hockey Federation of Ukraine later stated the facility “was completely empty.”

On January 2, the village of Vyazovoe in the Belgorod region of Russia came under fire. On January 4, the Ukrainian army targeted the military commandant’s building in Vasylivka, Zaporizhzhia, used by the Russian armed forces to house personnel. Five people were killed and fifteen injured, according to Yevgeny Balitsky, acting governor of the occupied territory. 

Against this background, Russia is trying to fill the losses in its arsenal. According to Ukrainian intelligence, Russia can produce about thirty Kh-101 cruise missiles and about twenty Kalibr missiles per month. Russian stockpiles of these missiles are extremely depleted, so in subsequent strikes, the Russian military may try to combine attacks using precision cruise missiles, S-300 anti-aircraft missiles against ground targets, Iranian kamikaze drones, and Soviet Kh-22 missiles. According to some estimates, Russian forces have about 160 Kh-22 missiles, but their range is only 350 kilometers. Russia has already used about 660 of the 1,750 Shahed drones ordered from Iran, but Iran is expected to send another batch of 250 to 300 units, along with improved drones and ballistic missiles.

According to Ukrainian military intelligence, six sabotage actions against Russian railways caused logistical problems in the first four days of 2023. In 2022, there were about forty railway sabotage actions reported in Russia. 

On January 4, a fire was reported in a tent camp for mobilized units in the Siberian region of Tomsk. The Russian army uses tents to accommodate mobilized soldiers in an area of Siberia where, at this time of year, the temperature is between -10 and -20 degrees Celsius. Many units use heaters that can be dangerous and unstable in such conditions.

Ruslan Trad, Resident Fellow for Security Research, Sofia, Bulgaria

Russian military bloggers criticize Putin’s Orthodox Christmas ceasefire announcement

On January 5, Russian President Vladimir Putin called for a thirty-six-hour ceasefire in Ukraine to observe Orthodox Christmas. Kyiv rejected Putin’s proposal, stating that Moscow’s aim was to stop Ukrainian advances in the Donbas. Putin’s ceasefire announcement was met with criticism from Russian military bloggers, with some even calling the proposal “madness.”

The pro-Kremlin Telegram channel Rybar called Putin’s suggestion “a beautiful political gesture” that “nobody cares about” and said that Russians want to rapidly end the war “with at least some logical conclusion.” Another military blog, Военный Осведомитель (“Military Informant”), called the decision “madness,” adding that Ukraine would not accept the offer.

Boris Rozhin, a pro-war military blogger, accused Russian officials of not learning any lessons from eight years of Minsk agreements “that nobody was fulfilling.” Rozhin added, “The decision is obviously unlikely to be very popular, even despite the efforts of official propaganda on this matter.” The post was amplified by multiple pro-war Telegram channels.

Igor Girkin, a former Russian Colonel turned ultranationalist, sarcastically stated on his Telegram channel that Putin took “a bold and decisive step towards defeat and surrender.” He added, “The Hague applauds and begins to prepare the camera.”

Criticism from pro-war military bloggers has increased in recent months in both scale and boldness. Military bloggers slammed the Kremlin for military failures, incompetence, and for rejoining the Ukraine grain deal.

Eto Buziashvili, Research Associate, Tbilisi, Georgia

The post Russian War Report: Russian military bloggers criticize Putin’s Orthodox Christmas ceasefire announcement appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Putin is preparing for a long war https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/putin-is-preparing-for-a-long-war/ Wed, 04 Jan 2023 01:37:20 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=599013 Vladimir Putin used his traditional New Year address on December 31 to mobilize the Russian public for a long war in Ukraine while warning that the West is intent on "destroying Russia," writes Alexander Motyl.

The post Putin is preparing for a long war appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Vladimir Putin has just admitted Russia is in serious trouble. A comparison of his recent New Year address with the speech he delivered just one year earlier reveals a dramatic change in tone, focus, and language that hints at mounting alarm behind the scenes in the Kremlin over the rapidly unraveling invasion of Ukraine. Gone, too, was the Moscow skyline setting that typically serves as the backdrop for this keynote annual address. Instead, a somber-looking Putin spoke while flanked by rows of soldiers in uniform.

This symbolism matters. In modern Russia, the head of state’s New Year speech is an important tradition that seeks to set the tone for the coming year. On this occasion, the mood Putin sought to convey was of a country facing the prospect of a long and difficult war. After months spent downplaying the invasion of Ukraine as a “Special Military Operation,” he was now belatedly acknowledging the severity of the situation.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Back on December 31, 2021, Putin had been far more upbeat. “We are united in the hope that changes for the better lie ahead,” he said. “As we ring in the New Year, we hope that it will bring new opportunities for us. Of course, we hope luck will be on our side, but we understand that making our dreams reality primarily depends on us.” The final line of his address was downright soppy: “May love fill every heart and inspire us all to achieve our goals and scale the greatest heights. For the sake of our loved ones and for the sake of our only country, our great Motherland.”

Could this really have been the same Vladimir Putin who was already planning to unleash a full-scale invasion of Ukraine and plunge Europe into its largest conflict since World War II? In fact, despite the massive Russian military build-up on Ukraine’s borders in late 2021 and Moscow’s visibly worsening relations with the West, neither of these important developments was mentioned at all.

What a difference a year makes. In a nine-minute New Year speech that was reportedly the longest of his 22-year reign, Putin marked the arrival of 2023 by lashing out at the Western world and warning that the fate of Russia was at stake. “The West lied about peace,” Putin declared. “It was preparing for aggression, and now they are cynically using Ukraine and its people to weaken and split Russia. We have never allowed this, and never will allow anybody to do this to us.”

Domestic opponents were also targeted. In an apparent reference to the large numbers of military-age Russian men who chose to flee the country in the second half of 2022 rather than join the invasion, he noted that the past twelve months had “put a lot of things in their place, clearly separating courage and heroism from betrayal and cowardice.”

The speech concluded on a defiant and ominous note, with Putin indicating that Russia’s survival as an independent state was now under threat. “Together, we will overcome all difficulties and preserve our country’s greatness and independence,” he said. “We will triumph, for our families and for Russia.”

There was no frivolous talk of love, trust, and hope as in December 2021. No dreamy wishes, no hopeful expectations. This time, Putin was sounding the alarm bell. Naturally, the West was at fault and the Russian dictator himself bore absolutely no responsibility for the mess his country currently finds itself in.

Putin seems to believe, or at least wants the Russian public to believe, that Russia is tottering on the edge of a precipice with its very existence as a coherent state now in danger. In his address, he spoke several times of the need to defend and preserve Russia’s independence. This was new and noteworthy.

For many years, Putin has consistently expressed his commitment to maintaining Russia’s Great Power status and its prominent role in the international arena. He has frequently accused the West of wanting to subvert Russia. But fear of losing independence was a problem for Ukrainians, Balts, and Russia’s other neighbors. It was not something for Russians to worry about.

Can Putin be serious? Of course, he may simply be trying to terrify his domestic audience and thereby prepare the Russian public for further sacrifices in the futile and unwinnable war against Ukraine. Alternatively, he and his colleagues in the Kremlin may really sense that, their publicly expressed bravado notwithstanding, the writing is on the wall for Russia.

More than ten months since the invasion of Ukraine began, very few analysts still see a clear path to victory for Russia. On the contrary, there is broad agreement that Putin’s options are narrowing as his military fortunes decline. Russia has already been noticeably weakened by the failing invasion. Defeat in Ukraine could lead to the break-up of the Russian Federation itself, or turn the country into a vassal state of China or the West.

Putin’s speech was an unambiguous attempt to mobilize Russian society and place the whole country on a war footing. It is not yet clear whether this was successful. One thing is for sure: if the coming year turns out to be anything like 2022 for Russia, there is little chance that Putin will still be around to deliver another New Year address on December 31, 2023.

Alexander Motyl is a professor of political science at Rutgers University-Newark.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Putin is preparing for a long war appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
2022 REVIEW: Russia’s invasion has united Ukraine https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/2022-review-russias-invasion-has-united-ukraine/ Wed, 21 Dec 2022 17:05:20 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=597387 The February 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine was meant to extinguish Ukrainian statehood but Putin's plan has backfired disastrously and united Ukraine as the country fights for its right to exist, writes Taras Kuzio.

The post 2022 REVIEW: Russia’s invasion has united Ukraine appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Ever since Ukraine regained independence in 1991, Western coverage of the country has tended to exaggerate regional differences, creating the impression of a weak state with divided loyalties. Misleading portrayals of Ukraine as a nation split between pro-Russian east and pro-European west have had a profound impact on outside perceptions, leading many international observers to believe that much of the local population in eastern Ukraine would actively support Russia’s 2022 invasion or at least remain neutral.

Such thinking can be traced back to Russia, which has long promoted the idea of modern Ukraine as an artificial state with a large ethnic Russian minority in need of Moscow’s protection. For years, Vladimir Putin denied Ukraine’s right to statehood while insisting Ukrainians were really Russians (“one people”). He openly accused Ukrainians of occupying historically Russian lands and declared Ukraine to be “an inalienable part of Russia’s own history, culture, and spiritual space.”

These distorted perceptions of Ukraine’s history and national character meant that few expected the country to survive against the full might of the Russian military. On the eve of this year’s invasion, there was general agreement in Moscow and most Western capitals that Ukraine would be defeated within a matter of days. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy was not seen as a credible wartime leader and was widely expected to abandon Kyiv. Likewise, the military prowess of the Ukrainian army and fighting spirit of the Ukrainian nation were also underestimated.

Inside the Kremlin, it appears that Putin’s decision to invade was influenced by a combination of faulty intelligence and over-consumption of his own anti-Ukrainian propaganda. The Russian dictator seems to have genuinely believed myths about an oppressed pro-Russian minority in Ukraine who would welcome his invasion and rise up in support of the advancing Russian army. Rarely in international affairs has anyone ever been so mistaken.

In fact, no Ukrainian region welcomed Putin’s invading army. While instances of collaboration have been recorded throughout the occupied regions of southern and eastern Ukraine, these have proved to be the exception rather than the rule. Indeed, the number of people prepared to collaborate has been dwarfed by the sheer scale of Ukraine’s resistance to the Russian occupation. Russian troops who were told they would be treated as liberators have been shocked and distressed to find themselves acting as occupiers in hostile territory. Meanwhile, Ukrainians from all regions have been brought together by the common cause of defeating Russia. An invasion that was meant to extinguish Ukrainian statehood has inadvertently united the country.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Ukraine’s nation-building journey did not begin overnight with the advent of this year’s Russian invasion, of course. A modern Ukrainian national identity has been gradually evolving throughout the three decades following the collapse of the Soviet Empire. Key milestones in this journey include the 2004 Orange Revolution, the 2014 Euromaidan Revolution, and the shock waves caused by the subsequent Russian invasions of Crimea and eastern Ukraine. Nevertheless, the significance of the changes that have taken place within Ukrainian society since February 24 cannot be overstated. Crucially, attitudes toward key issues of national identity and foreign policy have become aligned throughout the country.

The biggest changes have taken place among Russian-speaking Ukrainians living in regions of southern and eastern Ukraine that have suffered most from Russian aggression. It is one of the bitter ironies of the invasion that the devastation inflicted by Putin’s troops has fallen disproportionately on the regions of Ukraine that Moscow claims to be protecting. The Russian army has reduced dozens of towns and cities throughout southern and eastern Ukraine to rubble and killed thousands of civilians. Millions more have been subjected to a brutal occupation regime marked by executions, abductions, terror tactics, and forced deportations.

Until 2022, these Ukrainian regions had traditionally been more sympathetic to the Soviet past and tended to favor pro-Russian politicians. Many openly embraced Soviet myths of Russians and Ukrainians as “brotherly peoples.” However, the horrors of the invasion have forced a radical rethink and led to the widespread rejection of Russia.

The rift caused by the current invasion has moved beyond far politics. Following the 2014 Russian seizure of Crimea and invasion of eastern Ukraine, most Ukrainians expressed negative views of Russia’s leadership while remaining largely positive toward the Russian people. This is no longer the case. Ukrainians have noted that the vast majority of ordinary Russians appear to support the war or at least refrain from criticizing it. Millions of Ukrainians with Russian relatives have experienced this phenomenon for themselves in painful telephone conversations.

As a consequence, most Ukrainians no longer draw any meaningful distinction between the Russian state and the Russian people. An August 2022 poll conducted by Ukraine’s Rating Agency found that only 3% of Ukrainians held positive views of Russians while 81% regarded Russians negatively. This negative rating was almost double the 41% recorded just four months earlier. Ukrainian antipathy towards Russians will only deepen as the war takes a greater toll in civilian lives, military casualties, and physical destruction.

Ukraine’s fundamental break with Russia has impacted every aspect of the country’s social, cultural, and religious life. The Russian language is now noticeably in decline among Ukrainians because it is negatively viewed as the language of military aggression. Many Ukrainians who grew up predominantly speaking Russian are becoming bilingual or switching to speaking Ukrainian.

There is growing public support across the country for policies of de-Russification. Almost three-quarters of Ukrainians (73%) back the idea of renaming streets and public places commemorating Russian historical figures and events, including two-thirds of respondents in eastern Ukraine. By weaponizing Russian history and using it to justify the invasion of Ukraine, Putin has convinced millions of previously sympathetic Ukrainians to view symbols of the Russian imperial past as part of the Kremlin’s ongoing attack on Ukrainian statehood.

Support for the Russian Orthodox Church in Ukraine has also plummeted, with recent polling indicating that only 4% of Ukrainians currently identify as adherents. This is hardly surprising, given the role of the Russian Orthodox Church as one of the principal cheerleaders of Putin’s invasion. Recent searches of Russian Orthodox Church premises in Ukraine have netted an array of Russian passports, imperial symbols, and literature denying the existence of Ukraine and Ukrainians.

Converging Ukrainian attitudes toward Russia are immediately apparent in relation to the peace process and foreign policy. A Kyiv International Institute of Sociology survey conducted in July 2022 found almost no difference of opinion between Ukrainians who identified as Ukrainian-speaking or Russian-speaking on the issue of a potential land-for-peace deal to end the war, with 85% of Russian speakers opposed compared to 90% of Ukrainian speakers. Likewise, there was no longer any evidence of a significant regional split, with 83% in eastern Ukraine and 85% in the south opposing any territorial compromises with the Kremlin.

The same shift toward greater national consensus is evident on foreign policy matters. Regional differences over the country’s future geopolitical direction were long seen as the most obvious indication of a divided Ukraine. However, since the onset of Russia’s full-scale invasion, successive surveys have found that clear majorities in all regions of Ukraine now support Ukrainian membership of NATO and the European Union. Meanwhile, enthusiasm for deeper integration with Russia or membership of the Moscow-led Eurasian Union has evaporated.

By invading Ukraine, Putin hoped to reverse the verdict of 1991 and bring Ukrainian independence to an end. Instead, Russia’s attack has backfired disastrously. The full-scale invasion which began on February 24 has served to accelerate Ukraine’s nation-building progress and unite the country in ways that would have been difficult to image just one year ago. The trauma and sacrifices of the past ten months mean that these changes are in all likelihood irreversible and will continue to shape Ukraine’s development for decades to come as the country strengthens its sovereignty and moves further away from Russia.

Taras Kuzio is a professor of political science at the National University of Kyiv Mohyla Academy and author of the forthcoming “Fascism and Genocide. Russia’s War Against Ukrainians.”

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post 2022 REVIEW: Russia’s invasion has united Ukraine appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
The partition of Ukraine would only encourage Putin’s imperial ambitions https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/the-partition-of-ukraine-would-only-encourage-putins-imperial-ambitions/ Tue, 20 Dec 2022 19:48:38 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=597131 Advocates of appeasement believe the best way to end the Russian invasion of Ukraine is by offering Ukrainian land in exchange for peace but this will only encourage Putin's imperial ambitions, writes Benton Coblentz.

The post The partition of Ukraine would only encourage Putin’s imperial ambitions appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
As the Russian invasion of Ukraine approaches the ten-month mark, various commentators in the West continue to push the idea that Ukraine should trade territory for peace. However, Russia’s long history of imperial expansion provides a sobering lesson for these advocates of appeasement. Far from guaranteeing peace, any compromise with the Kremlin that allowed Moscow to retain control over parts of Ukraine would position Russia for further acts of international aggression while strengthening Vladimir Putin’s faith in the fundamental weakness of the West.

Supporters of a land-for-peace deal tend to portray themselves as foreign policy realists but the policies they promote amount to an unsustainable partition of Ukraine that would almost certainly lead to more war. Such concessions would also risk empowering Putin’s vision of a return to the eighteenth and nineteenth century diplomacy of Great Power imperialism.

A brief look at the history of Russia’s imperial expansion in Ukraine and the surrounding neighborhood is enough to demonstrate that offering the Kremlin land in exchange for peace is unlikely to work. For hundreds of years, Russia has expanded its territory by waging wars to weaken without necessarily overwhelming or annexing its neighbors. Slowly but surely, these neighbors would be reduced to vassal status or incorporated entirely into the empire.

The eighteenth century Partition of Poland in particular should give pause to those currently advocating a twenty-first century partition of Ukraine. This gradual destruction of the Polish state was achieved in partnership with a number of leading European powers and allowed Russia to significantly expand its presence in Europe.

The Russian Empire’s conquest of Ukraine followed a similar pattern. The territories of modern-day Ukraine were gradually seized from Poland and the Ottoman Empire over a period of many decades. The bulk of Ukrainian lands were annexed between the 1650s and 1790s, but it was not until 1945 that all of today’s Ukraine was incorporated into the Soviet Union.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Russian President Vladimir Putin makes no secret of the fact that he sees the current invasion of Ukraine as a modern continuation of the wars of imperial expansion waged by Russian rulers Peter the Great and Catherine the Great hundreds of years ago. Indeed, he appears to relish such comparisons. The Kremlin has made this link explicit by resurrecting the Czarist-era name of “Novorossiya” (“New Russia”) for the territories of Ukraine it seeks to incorporate into the Russian Federation.

When he launched the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in early 2022, Putin’s ultimate objective was to return the whole of Ukraine to the Russian sphere of influence. However, that does not mean that anything less would be considered a defeat. Indeed, the kind of peace plans currently being proposed by those championing concessions to the Kremlin would be regarded as anything but defeat in Moscow. If Russia is allowed to legitimize its control over even a small part of Ukraine’s sovereign territory, this would be interpreted as a major victory and seen as a green light to push further.

A compromise peace that ceded land to Russia would vindicate Putin’s policies of imperial aggression in the eyes of the Russian public and among international audiences. It would place Russia in a strong position to plot its next invasion while condemning an entire generation of Ukrainians to live either under Russian occupation or in the shadow of war.

Nor would other countries be safe. If Putin is able to achieve his imperial goals in Ukraine, there is every reason to assume he would then proceed with new campaigns of conquest elsewhere against nations in Eastern Europe, the Southern Caucasus, and Central Asia that were formerly part of the Russian and Soviet empires. A peace deal that allows Putin to position himself as the heir to Peter the Great will certainly not discourage him from such ambitions.

Clearly, all efforts to end the war in Ukraine are welcome. However, talk of compromising with the Kremlin is dangerous because it risks validating Putin’s imperial delusions while encouraging Moscow to believe Western resolve may be faltering. At this critical stage in the war, Ukraine’s international partners must not pressure the country to accept peace on Russian terms. Instead, they should continue to make clear that the decision to enter into negotiations can only be made in Kyiv.

Rather than fueling speculation over possible concessions, Western commentators and policymakers should focus on making sure Ukraine is supplied with all the weapons it needs to defend its territory. A sufficiently armed Ukraine with the unwavering support of a formidable international coalition will be able to negotiate on its own terms from a position of strength. This is the only route to a settlement that will be truly sustainable. In order to secure peace in Europe, Putin must be decisively defeated. Without such a defeat, the centuries-long pattern of malign Russian imperial influence will continue and other European countries will face the fate of Ukraine.

Benton Coblentz is a program assistant at the Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post The partition of Ukraine would only encourage Putin’s imperial ambitions appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Memo to Macron: Russia doesn’t need security guarantees but Ukraine does https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/memo-to-macron-russia-doesnt-need-security-guarantees-but-ukraine-does/ Thu, 15 Dec 2022 21:50:26 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=596042 French President Emmanuel Macron has been widely criticized for calling on Europe to offer Russia security guarantees at a time when the Kremlin is using fake security concerns to justify the invasion of Ukraine.

The post Memo to Macron: Russia doesn’t need security guarantees but Ukraine does appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
French President Emmanuel Macron sparked controversy in early December by calling on European leaders to provide Russia with security guarantees. During an interview with French TV channel TF1, Macron said Europe needs to prepare the continent’s future security architecture and must consider “how to give guarantees to Russia.” Critics slammed the French leader’s comments as misguided and irresponsible, with some accusing him of legitimizing false narratives used by the Kremlin to justify the invasion of Ukraine.

In the run-up to the February 2022 invasion, Moscow sought to frame the coming offensive as a rational response to decades of NATO expansion into regions of Central and Eastern Europe formerly dominated by Russia. Kremlin officials declared that Russia felt threatened by NATO and demanded far-reaching security guarantees from the West. These protestations of innocence have continued since the invasion began, with Vladimir Putin and other Kremlin officials claiming that the growing NATO presence in their neighborhood left Russia with no choice but to respond militarily.

The NATO expansion narrative has been widely embraced by self-styled foreign policy realists and Western apologists for the Putin regime, who have used it to argue that the United States and other NATO members must accept their share of the blame for the carnage in Ukraine. They typically claim that Western encroachment into Russia’s traditional sphere of influence was unnecessarily provocative and inevitably led to a violent reaction.

This argument is superficially persuasive but does not stand up to serious scrutiny. Its most obvious flaw is the assumption that NATO poses any kind of security threat to Russia itself. Far from being a plot to encircle Russia, NATO’s post-Cold War enlargement was driven by defensive considerations on the part of new member states in Central and Eastern Europe, who scrambled voluntarily to join the military alliance in order to protect themselves from the imperial ambitions of a resurgent Russia. In other words, the key factor behind the expansion of NATO was fear of renewed Russian aggression among countries that had only recently gained independence from the Kremlin. Their membership bids required no prompting from Washington, London, or Berlin.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Opponents of NATO enlargement tend to assume the alliance seeks some kind of military confrontation with Russia. However, this is not supported by the facts, to put it mildly. Indeed, beyond the dark fantasies of the Kremlin propaganda bubble, the entire notion of a NATO attack on Russia is widely recognized as absurd.

Since 1991, NATO officials have sought to build trust with Moscow and have created numerous bodies to promote bilateral dialogue. In the early 2000s, Putin himself even expressed an interest in exploring possible Russian membership. Until this year’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the alliance had adopted a highly conservative approach toward the deployment of troops and armor in new member states located closer to Russia, and had made significant efforts to maintain transparency. These are not the actions of an army preparing to attack.

The ultimate proof that NATO poses no military threat to Russia can be found in Putin’s own actions. During summer 2022, Finland announced its decision to end decades of neutrality and join the military alliance. With a shared border of over 1000 kilometers, news of Finnish NATO membership should have sparked a major security crisis in Russia and led to a rapid military build-up to counter this emerging threat. Instead, Putin actually withdrew most Russian troops from the Finnish border zone and redeployed them to Ukraine. Clearly, he understands perfectly well that NATO has no intention whatsoever of invading Russia.

Russian protests over allegedly mounting NATO involvement in Ukraine are similarly unfounded. The alliance famously refused to grant Ukraine a Membership Action Plan in 2008, opting instead for deliberately vague promises of future membership. Since the onset of Russian aggression against Ukraine in 2014, NATO has made no effort to change its cautious stance on Ukrainian membership. On the eve of the current invasion, it was obvious to advocates and opponents alike that potential Ukrainian NATO membership was still decades away.

If NATO has no intention of invading Russia or offering Ukraine membership, what is all the fuss about? Russia’s displeasure over NATO expansion is genuine enough, but it is not based on any sense of insecurity. Instead, Moscow objects to the fact that it is no longer able to openly intimidate its NATO neighbors. With virtually no soft power tools at its disposal, Russia has traditionally used its military might to project influence throughout the wider region. NATO membership makes this impossible and is therefore bitterly resented.

Russian complaints over NATO enlargement are not only a reflection of Moscow’s frustration. Crucially, these complaints also serve as a highly effective smokescreen for imperial aggression. While Kremlin efforts to portray the attack on Ukraine as an anti-Nazi crusade or a war on Satanism have invited ridicule, attempts to blame NATO have proven far more effective. International audiences conditioned by decades of Western geopolitical dominance have been all too willing to believe that the West must also be somehow responsible for Russia’s decision to invade Ukraine.

While it is perhaps more convenient to point the finger at NATO and the West, the Russian invasion of Ukraine is in fact the most brazen act of unprovoked international aggression in Europe since the days of Hitler and Stalin. Putin himself has repeatedly denied Ukraine’s right to exist and has compared his war to the imperial conquests of eighteenth century Russian Czar Peter the Great. He has attempted to annex four Ukrainian provinces and has declared that Ukrainians are in fact Russians (“one people”).

This helps to explain why so many people were upset by President Macron’s talk of security guarantees for Russia. For years, the Kremlin has cynically exploited imaginary security threats as a means of justifying its own acts of international aggression. With his recent comments, the French President risked validating these fake concerns. In reality, of course, it is Ukraine and not Russia that is in desperate need of security guarantees. Echoing the Kremlin’s deliberate disinformation merely serves to embolden Russia and prolong the war.

Peter Dickinson is Editor of the Atlantic Council’s UkraineAlert Service.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Memo to Macron: Russia doesn’t need security guarantees but Ukraine does appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Vladimir Putin’s failing invasion is fueling the rise of Russia’s far right https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/vladimir-putins-failing-invasion-is-fueling-the-rise-of-russias-far-right/ Wed, 14 Dec 2022 17:57:11 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=595350 As Vladimir Putin's disastrous invasion continues to unravel, battlefield defeats in Ukraine are having a radicalizing effect on Russian domestic audiences and fueling the rise of the country's ultra-nationalist far right.

The post Vladimir Putin’s failing invasion is fueling the rise of Russia’s far right appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
A new and significant political force is emerging in the shadows of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. While Vladimir Putin has long cultivated an aggressive brand of Russian nationalism based on imperial identity, battlefield defeats in Ukraine are having a radicalizing effect on domestic audiences and placing the far right at the center of Russia’s shifting political landscape.

Like many dictators throughout history, Putin believed he could strengthen his position at home by waging a small, victorious war. However, he is now learning a painful lesson: if you stake your position as dictator on a quick victory but fail to deliver, you may suffer the fate of Khrushchev after the Cuban Missile Crisis or the Argentinian junta after their disastrous invasion of the Falklands. Losing a conflict that you are expected to win is so thoroughly demoralizing that it puts your entire reign at risk.

Many people now question why Putin embarked on such a reckless invasion at all. In fact, the Russian dictator has always been a betting man. His entire career has been marked by gambles that have paid off handsomely. However, with the full-scale invasion of Ukraine, his luck may finally have run out.

US President Joe Biden describes Putin as a rational actor who has miscalculated. This is probably true, but it is also important to recognize Putin’s miscalculation as a symptom of a flawed worldview that is disconnected from reality. In short, Putin fell into the same trap that eventually catches out many long-serving dictators; he drank his own Kool-Aid.

In a military context, believing in one’s own inflated prowess is catastrophically dangerous. Thanks to decades of propaganda, Russians take it for granted that their country is a military superpower. This myth has been shattered in Ukraine. Despite having less than one-third of Russia’s population, a far smaller economy, and being an emerging democracy rather than a militarized dictatorship, Ukraine has more than held its own for almost a year against the invading Russian army.

While the West has provided Ukraine with significant military aid, the extent of Western involvement in the war should not be overstated. So far, only about one percent of the relevant available Western weaponry has actually been sent to Ukraine. Key partners such as the US, UK, France, and Germany have resisted Ukrainian pleas for tanks, jets, and long-range missiles. Instead, they have provided anti-tank weapons, limited quantities of artillery, and shorter range missile systems. Nevertheless, this has proved sufficient to stop Russia’s offensive and liberate about half of the territory occupied by Putin’s troops during the initial stages of the invasion.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Faced with mounting setbacks in Ukraine, Putin has become increasingly delusional. Rather than acknowledge Russia’s embarrassing defeats and catastrophic losses, he insists everything is going according to plan. This is creating opportunities for Russia’s far right forces, which do not suffer from the same limitations. While Kremlin officials absurdly attempt to portray retreats as “goodwill gestures,” the far right wins over the Russian public by speaking frankly about the country’s military disasters in Ukraine.

Until the invasion began in February 2022, the only political opposition in Russia was represented by jailed anti-corruption activist Alexei Navalny, who had attempted to play broadly by Western democratic rules. When the war started, the remnants of Russian civil society were ruthlessly stamped out. Prominent opposition figures were jailed or forced into exile, while new laws criminalized all forms of public dissent. These trends have intensified over the intervening nine months, extinguishing any lingering hopes of a serious democratic opposition to the Putin regime.

Instead, the most serious challenge to Putinism may come from a newly emerging political movement that is even further to the right on the political spectrum than Putin himself. At present, this is a disorganized but vocal movement that has found its voice in the many unofficial Russian “war correspondents” and social media accounts reporting on the invasion while bypassing the Russia’s Kremlin-controlled mainstream information space. Most write from a Russian nationalist perspective while employing ethnic slurs for Ukrainians. They are unambiguously pro-war and often apparently pro-Putin. However, their content is frequently at odds with Russia’s official propaganda and highly critical of the military officials leading the invasion.

While there is currently no single nationalist leader, the most prominent figure among Russian ultra-nationalists is Yevgeny Prigozhin, the leader of the Wagner Group paramilitary force. Prigozhin once sought to distance himself from Wagner but has recently made his connection very public. He has released footage of his recruitment speeches and has opened a swanky head office in Saint Petersburg. This reflects the rising profile of Wagner itself. Formerly seen as a shadowy mercenary group used by the Kremlin in hybrid war hot spots such as Ukraine, Syria, and Africa to create a veneer of plausible deniability, Wagner has been one of the few Russian military units to perform credibly during the initial stages of the Ukraine invasion and has visibly grown in stature.

With his own public profile on the rise, Prigozhin has begun testing the boundaries by publicly deriding senior figures within the Russian military hierarchy. Meanwhile, his Wagner troops operate in Ukraine as an army-within-an-army, pursuing their own clearly defined battlefield objectives and openly positioning themselves as a military elite in contrast to the under-performing regular Russian army.

Wagner fighters have become the poster boys of the ultra-nationalists, who are themselves less prone to official delusions and more interested in the realities of hard power. Freedom from the constraints of the Kremlin propaganda machine is a major asset in their struggle for credibility among Russian audiences. This makes the far right a potentially formidable opponent in a future internal power struggle against the Putin regime.

It is hard to predict what the world could expect from a post-Putin Russia ruled by far right forces, but there is clearly little room for optimism. An ultra-nationalist successor regime would likely be even more inclined to wage war against Russia’s neighbors while ruthlessly targeting civilians. This extremism would be driven in part by the growing conviction within nationalist circles that Putin is failing in Ukraine precisely because he has not been ruthless enough in his leadership of the war.

Putin’s domestic position is not yet sufficiently weak to talk of an imminent fall from power, but it is already apparent that he is far weaker today than he was just one year ago. At the same time, the full-scale invasion of Ukraine has catapulted a wide range of formerly fringe nationalist figures into the Russian mainstream and transformed Yevgeny Prigozhin into a political heavyweight. This swing to the right has not yet been fully appreciated by many Western observers, but it offers alarming indications of where Russia may be heading politically and must be watched carefully in the months ahead.

Stanislav Shalunov is founder and CEO of NewNode and creator of FireChat.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Vladimir Putin’s failing invasion is fueling the rise of Russia’s far right appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Russian War Report: Pro-Kremlin Telegram channels promote news of TV Rain losing broadcasting license in Latvia https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/russian-war-report-pro-kremlin-telegram-channels-promote-news-of-tv-rain-losing-broadcasting-license-in-latvia/ Fri, 09 Dec 2022 19:02:37 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=594141 The Latvian National Electronic Media Council revoked the broadcasting license of TV Rain, an independent Russian television channel, citing threats to Latvian national security.

The post Russian War Report: Pro-Kremlin Telegram channels promote news of TV Rain losing broadcasting license in Latvia appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
As Russia continues its assault on Ukraine, the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab (DFRLab) is keeping a close eye on Russia’s movements across the military, cyber, and information domains. With more than seven years of experience monitoring the situation in Ukraine—as well as Russia’s use of propaganda and disinformation to undermine the United States, NATO, and the European Union—the DFRLab’s global team presents the latest installment of the Russian War Report. 

Security

Russia targets Ukraine infrastructure as explosions hit Russian bases

Serbian group denies Wagner Group partnership despite announcement

Tracking narratives

Pro-Kremlin Telegram channels promote news of TV Rain losing broadcasting license in Latvia

Russia targets Ukraine infrastructure as explosions hit Russian bases

On December 5, Russian forces conducted missile strikes targeting Ukrainian civilian and energy infrastructure in Kyiv, Odesa, Vinnytsia, and Zaporizhzhia. Russian strikes also damaged a power supply line in the Sumy region. On the same day, the Ukrainian armed forces reported that air defenses shot down sixty of the more than seventy missiles launched by Russia. However, new data suggests that Russia is not striking Ukraine with the same intensity as it did at the beginning of the invasion. The United Kingdom’s Defense Ministry reported on December 5 that the number of sorties conducted by Russian tactical combat aircraft over Ukraine had reduced significantly. “Russian aircraft now probably conducts tens of missions per day, compared to a high of up to 300 per day in March 2022,” it stated.

The Russian military continues to attack critical Ukrainian infrastructure, with reports of recent missile launches coming from the Caspian Sea. Moscow has previously used the Caspian Sea area to launch attacks on Ukraine. Russia will likely continue to use the Caspian region for future attacks as the possibility of Ukrainian attacks reaching critical Russian military infrastructure in occupied Crimea or Russia increases. 

Serhii Cherevatyi, a spokesperson for the Ukrainian Armed Forces Eastern Group, said that the frozen ground is enabling heavy vehicles to advance and that Ukrainian forces are preparing for winter operations. Last month, Ukrainian Deputy Defense Minister Volodymyr Havrylov said that Ukraine would continue its offensive during the winter months because slowing down would allow Russian forces to replenish and bring in reinforcements.

Earlier this week, several people were killed in explosions at two Russian military airfields. Russia accused Ukraine of using a drone to strike Russian targets hundreds of kilometers from the border – at Engels Airport in the Saratov region and Dyagilevo Airbase in Ryazan. The Russian Defense Ministry stated that drone attacks had killed three people, adding that the drones were “shot down as they flew in at low altitude,” and the resulting explosions led to some superficial aircraft damage. The Kremlin-owned RIA Novosti news agency also reported a fuel explosion at an airfield outside Ryazan. According to the report, three people were killed and six injured in the incident, with one aircraft damaged. Visegrad 24 reported that the blast occurred at the Dyagilevo Airbase, which is also a strategic bomber base. 

Elsewhere, surveillance footage showed a large explosion occurring at the Engels airbase at around 6am local time on December 5. The independent Russian Telegram channel Astra cited unidentified sources as saying a drone crashed into the airbase, damaging two long-range Tu-95 bombers and wounding two military personnel. Long-range Russian strategic bombers are believed to be based at this base in the Saratov region. Such bombers were previously used to launch attacks on Ukraine’s energy system. Saratov Governor Roman Busargin issued a statement calling for residents to remain calm amid the reports. While Ukraine says it has developed a drone that can fly more than 1,000 kilometers, we cannot confirm Ukraine’s involvement in the incident. 

Meanwhile, pro-Kremlin Telegram channels criticized Russian officials for failing to anticipate and prevent the drone strikes at the Engels and Dyagilevo airbases. Some Russian channels speculated that Ukraine launched the strike against Engels Airbase from inside Russian territory, asserting that Ukrainian sabotage groups are active inside Russia. One channel called on the Russian military to authorize retaliation strikes against Ukraine and intensify counterterrorism measures within Russia. 

Ruslan Trad, Resident Fellow for Security Research, Sofia, Bulgaria

Serbian group denies Wagner Group partnership despite announcement

On December 2, the Wagner Group said they are now present in Serbia, as they announced a collaboration with Orly, the “Russian-Serbian Cultural and Information Center of Friendship and Cooperation.” The announcement was widely reported by Serbian media on December 7. After receiving media attention, Orly published a statement the following day denying cooperation with Wagner. However, on December 6, Orly reshared the original announcement, published on the Wagner Telegram channel.

The Orly center’s leader is Aleksander Lisov, who is banned from entering Kosovo. According to Wagner’s statement, one of the goals of the partnership is to “deal with the information confrontation with Russian liberals” who have gone to Serbia and are trying to “carry out anti-Russian activities there with the aim of discrediting Russia.”

According to data from Serbia’s Interior Ministry, obtained by the Balkan Investigative Reporting Network (BIRN), nearly 45,000 Russian citizens have entered Serbia since February. The influx provoked both anti-Russian and anti-Ukrainian sentiments, however. Serbia also saw anti-war protests from Russians living in Belgrade, with some even burning their Russian passports. 

Russia is accelerating its presence in Serbia with the help of local groups, some of which are promoting their ties to Wagner. At the end of November, Damjan Knežević, leader of the right-wing People’s Patrol organization, boasted on Telegram about his visit to Wagner’s new center in Saint Petersburg. Knežević recently said that connections to Wagner could help if there is a “conflict in Kosovo.”

Wagner’s potential development in Serbia remains a matter of speculation, as its presence has been limited to public statements. However, links between local Serbian groups and Wagner are expected to expand in the context of Kosovo tensions and the broader issue of the war in Ukraine. Meanwhile, the Serbian government recently appointed a pro-Russian politician, Aleksandar Vulin, to be the director of BIA, Serbia’s intelligence agency.

Ruslan Trad, Resident Fellow for Security Research, Sofia, Bulgaria

Pro-Kremlin Telegram channels promote news of TV Rain losing broadcasting license in Latvia

On December 6, the Latvian National Electronic Media Council (NEPLP) revoked the broadcasting license of TV Rain (Dozhd), an independent Russian television channel, citing threats to Latvian national security. The decision was prompted by multiple instances of TV Rain not complying with Latvian law. Specifically, the channel did not provide Latvian translation; it broadcast a map of Russia that included Crimea on more than one occasion; and it referred to the Russian army as “our army.” Most recently, anchor Alexey Korostelev implied that the channel supported the Russian army. “We hope that we were able to help many of the servicemen, including with equipment and even the most basic of conveniences at the frontline,” he said. TV Rain denied any activity in support of the Russian army and fired Korostelev on December 2. The firing came after Edvins Snore, a Latvian politician, tweeted about Korostelev’s call for Russian army support. The license cancelation can be appealed in the legal system.

The decision to cancel TV Rain’s license provoked many reactions. Many Latvian politicians, like Ivars Ijabs, a member of the European Parliament, supported the NEPLP’s decision as it enforced Latvian law. However, the Latvian Journalists Association issued a statement calling the decision “disproportionate.” Other independent Russian media outlets like Meduza, also based in Latvia, created a petition supporting TV Rain.

On December 6, Maria Zakharova, the spokesperson for Russia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, published a compilation on Telegram of statements by Western politicians condemning Russia for preventing TV Rain’s operations. She then suggested readers substitute the word “Russia” with “Latvia.”

Screenshot of Google-translated text published by Maria Zakharova on Telegram. (Source: Maria Zakharova/archive)
Screenshot of Google-translated text published by Maria Zakharova on Telegram. (Source: Maria Zakharova/archive)

Zakharova’s statement garnered 613,536 views, 1,365 forwards, and 306 comments at the time of publishing, according to TGStat, a Telegram analysis tool. Out of 1,675 Telegram posts mentioning the keywords Дождь (TV Rain) and прекратит (“will stop”) between November 30 and December 7, Zakharova’s post received the highest number of views and forwards, according to TGStat.

Scatterplot graph shows engagement on Telegram channels, based on the average views and forwards, for posts about TV Rain’s license cancelation. (Source: @nikaaleksejeva/DFRLab via TGStat)
Scatterplot graph shows engagement on Telegram channels, based on the average views and forwards, for posts about TV Rain’s license cancelation. (Source: @nikaaleksejeva/DFRLab via TGStat)

Twenty-six pro-Kremlin Telegram channels amplified Zakharova’s post. Some channels had a high subscriber count, like @SolovievLive, the channel of Vladimir Solovyov, which has 1.3 million followers. But other channels had few subscribers, like @yat_2020, a channel with two subscribers that amplifies pro-Kremlin content. These forwards generated 437,935 views, which accounted for 71.38 percent of all post views.

Screenshot of the list of channels that amplified Maria Zakharova’s Telegram post. (Source:@nikaaleksejeva/DFRLab via TGStat)
Screenshot of the list of channels that amplified Maria Zakharova’s Telegram post. (Source:@nikaaleksejeva/DFRLab via TGStat)

TV Rain, the only opposition TV channel in Russia, was founded in 2010. In 2014, Russian authorities disconnected the channel from broadcasting. In 2017, Ukraine banned the channel. On March 3, 2022, TV Rain was forced to halt its operations. In June 2022, TV Rain resumed its operations in Riga.

Nika Aleksejeva, Lead Researcher, Riga, Latvia

The post Russian War Report: Pro-Kremlin Telegram channels promote news of TV Rain losing broadcasting license in Latvia appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Shakhtar’s young Ukrainians roar as foreign soccer stars flee Putin’s war https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/shakhtars-young-ukrainians-roar-as-foreign-soccer-stars-flee-putins-war/ Thu, 08 Dec 2022 10:23:56 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=593489 Ukrainian soccer giant Shakhtar Donetsk suffered an exodus of foreign stars following Russia's full-scale invasion but the club managed to mount an impressive Champions League campaign by relying on young Ukrainian talent.

The post Shakhtar’s young Ukrainians roar as foreign soccer stars flee Putin’s war appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Ukrainian soccer giant Shakhtar Donetsk surprised many pundits this season by recording the club’s strongest UEFA Champions League performance in recent years despite suffering from wartime exile and a mass exodus of star players. The secret to Shakhtar’s success was a reliance on young Ukrainian talent and an indomitable team spirit that drew inspiration from Ukraine’s wider defiance of Vladimir Putin’s criminal invasion.

Shakhtar Donetsk approached the current Champions League campaign in near complete disarray. The club had not played competitively for around half a year following the abandonment of the Ukrainian Premier League season in late February 2022 in response to Russia’s full-scale military invasion of the country.

With the largest conflict since World War II raging across Ukraine, most of Shakhtar’s expensively assembled foreign stars chose to leave the club. This left Croatian trainer Igor Jovicevic with a threadbare squad of local youngsters charged with filling the void created by the sudden departure of Shakhtar’s celebrated Brazilian imports.

Most observers expected this inexperienced side to be completely outclassed in what is Europe’s premier football competition. Instead, Shakhtar put together a highly credible Champions League group stage campaign that saw the club defeat Germany’s Leipzig in style before drawing against both Real Madrid and Celtic to secure a place in February’s Europa League playoffs. This six-point haul was a considerable improvement on the previous season’s effort, which had seen Shakhtar collect just two points and exit European competition before Christmas.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

The scale of Shakhtar’s achievement was most immediately evident in the club’s first group stage tie. Despite being considered rank outsiders, the Ukrainians scored a shock 4-1 victory away in Leipzig. Ten of Shakhtar’s starting eleven players in Germany were Ukrainian, while six were under the age of 23. Some had been signed recently from less fashionable Ukrainian clubs such as Desna Chernihiv and FC Mariupol and were enjoying their first taste of Champions League football.

Other highlights of the campaign included an impressive 1-1 draw with the mighty Real Madrid. Shakhtar actually came within seconds of what would have been an historic victory over Madrid, only for the Spanish giants to grab an injury time equalizer in the ninety-fifth minute.

The undoubted star of this season’s Shakhtar show has been turbo-charged winger Mykhailo Mudryk. The tattooed and coiffured 21-year-old Ukrainian player looks every inch the celebrity footballer and was already turning heads before this year’s campaign. Following a series of stunning Champions League performances, he is now regarded as one of the most sought-after players in world football.

Mudryk weighed in with a total of three Champions League goals and two assists. He was also recognized by UEFA as the fastest player in the Champions league group stages with a top speed of 36.6 kilometers per hour. This emerging superstar is now being widely tipped for a big money transfer to English Premier League club Arsenal and could soon break the record for the most expensive Ukrainian player.

Shakhtar’s success is all the more remarkable as the club has been forced to play its Champions league ties in exile. With the Russian invasion making it impossible to stage Champions League games anywhere inside Ukraine, Shakhtar has played home matches in Polish capital Warsaw.

This nomadic existence is not entirely new for the club. Shakhtar has been unable to stage matches in hometown Donetsk since the city was first occupied by Russia in spring 2014, and has spent the past eight seasons alternating between temporary bases in Lviv, Kharkiv, and Kyiv.

The scale of the war unleashed by Putin meant that this season’s Champions League campaign involved additional logistical issues for the club as players and staff traveled from their base in western Ukraine’s Lviv region. With no civilian flights currently possible in Ukrainian airspace, players were forced to endure ten-hour coach journeys across the border into Poland prior to and following European games.

Shakhtar players also suffer from the same wartime trauma and anxiety as millions of their compatriots. Most members of the overwhelmingly Ukrainian first team squad have friends and family living across the country who are experiencing the daily horrors of the Russian invasion including missile attacks and drastically limited access to light, heating, water, and other basic amenities.

Despite these uniquely difficult circumstances, morale within the club has remained remarkably high. There is a strong sense of camaraderie among the players and an awareness that their success on the football pitch can provide a welcome distraction from the war while also inspiring fellow Ukrainians to defy their doubters.

Overcoming overwhelming odds has become something of a Ukrainian national pastime in 2022. When Putin’s invasion began on February 24, the entire country was widely expected to fall within a matter of days. Instead, Ukraine’s courageous and brilliant resistance has humbling the once vaunted Russian military and won the admiration of the watching world.

Shakhtar’s heroics are of a far humbler nature, of course. Nevertheless, the club’s determination to overcome wartime adversity has captured the imagination of football fans across Europe and provided Ukrainians with one more symbol of their country’s refusal to accept defeat.

David Kirichenko is an editor at Euromaidan Press, an online English language media outlet in Ukraine. He tweets @DVKirichenko.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Shakhtar’s young Ukrainians roar as foreign soccer stars flee Putin’s war appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
As Putin retreats in Ukraine, he is also losing Kazakhstan https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/as-putin-retreats-in-ukraine-he-is-also-losing-kazakhstan/ Wed, 30 Nov 2022 21:16:20 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=590395 Putin's rapidly unraveling invasion of Ukraine is eroding Russian influence throughout the former Soviet Empire. This process of imperial retreat is nowhere more visible than in Kazakhstan, writes Kamila Auyezova.

The post As Putin retreats in Ukraine, he is also losing Kazakhstan appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Russia’s carefully choreographed political talk shows are notorious for their anti-Ukrainian invective, but in late November the target was Kazakhstan. “We must pay attention to the fact that Kazakhstan is the next problem, because the same Nazi processes can start there as in Ukraine,” commented one pundit on the prime time Evening with Vladimir Solovyov show. Russian officials subsequently criticized this thinly veiled threat, but many observers noted that in the tightly controlled world of Kremlin propaganda, such sensitive statements are unlikely to have been made without some form of prior approval.

The incident highlights rising concern in the Kremlin as the invasion of Ukraine continues to erode Russia’s position elsewhere in the former Soviet Empire. The most prominent shift since the onset of the invasion has been in relations with Kazakhstan, which has demonstrated its desire to distance itself from an increasingly isolated Moscow and pursue a more assertive multi-vector foreign policy with closer ties to China, Turkey, and the West.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Kazakhstan has traditionally been one of Russia’s closest allies. Due to a combination of factors such as common history, security cooperation, economic integration, and one of the world’s longest shared borders, there is little chance of a complete collapse in bilateral ties. Nevertheless, Kazakhstan has adopted a principled position in relation to the current war and has underlined that it does not approve of Russia’s attack on Ukraine.

Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev made his position particularly clear during the annual Saint Petersburg International Economic Forum in June. Seated on stage alongside Russian President Vladimir Putin, Tokayev declared that Kazakhstan had no intention of recognizing the independence of the so-called Luhansk and Donetsk People’s Republics in eastern Ukraine. The move was widely seen as a very deliberate and very public snub to Putin and the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Tokayev’s comments in Saint Petersburg came following a series of moves signaling Kazakhstan’s decision to step away from Russia. Since the invasion began in February, Kazakhstan has chosen to abstain rather than back Russia during a number of key UN votes on the war. The Kazakh government has also vowed to strengthen energy cooperation with Europe at a time when Putin was hoping to use his stranglehold on oil and gas supplies to pressure European leaders into abandoning their support for Ukraine.

In a highly symbolic move, Kazakhstan canceled the country’s annual Victory Day celebrations in May. This gesture angered many in Moscow, where official reverence for the Soviet role in World War II is regarded as an indication of continued political loyalty to Russia.

As the invasion of Ukraine has escalated, so has the critical rhetoric from Kazakh officials. When hundreds of thousands of Russians fled to Kazakhstan in September in order to avoid mobilization into the Russian army, Tokayev vowed to provide humanitarian assistance. In a stinging rebuke, he said most of the fleeing men had been forced to leave Russia due to the “hopeless situation” in the country, before condemning Putin’s attempts to annex four partially occupied Ukrainian provinces.

As Russian influence recedes, Kazakhstan is moving forward with a more assertive foreign policy of its own. In recent weeks, this has seen the Chinese and German leaders both visiting the Central Asian country. On November 11, Tokayev participated in the Summit of the Organization of Turkic States in neighboring Uzbekistan, where he again stressed the importance of strictly observing the UN Charter. In a further blow to Moscow, Kazakhstan has already begun to enhance the Trans-Caspian international transport route, which bypasses Russia and travels through China, Kazakhstan, the Caspian Sea, Azerbaijan, Georgia, and on to Europe via Turkey.

Russia is likely to fall further behind as other countries take advantage of Putin’s rapidly unraveling invasion of Ukraine to gain influence in Central Asia. Kazakhstan is now actively strengthening ties with two of Russia’s main Eurasian competitors, China and Turkey. During a May visit to Ankara, Tokayev signed an agreement on deepening security sector cooperation and joint development of military drones.

China is likely to emerge as the biggest winner from the shifting geopolitical balance of power in Central Asia, with Beijing understandably keen to emphasize its support for Kazakhstan. During a September visit to the Kazakh capital, Chinese President Xi Jinping spoke of China’s “strong support to Kazakhstan in protecting its independence, sovereignty, and territorial integrity.”

Looking ahead, Kazakhstan faces the challenging task of maneuvering between the Russian bear and the Chinese dragon. Russia looks set to remain an important power in Central Asia and a key partner for Kazakhstan, but Moscow will now longer be able to dominate the region as it once did. Putin’s invasion of Ukraine has already led to historic changes in Central Asia and sparked a push by Kazakhstan to pursue a more independent foreign policy.

For now, there is no question of Kazakhstan adopting an adversarial approach to Russia or choosing to side exclusively with Moscow’s rivals. Any such moves could have potentially disastrous consequences for the country’s security and independence. However, it is increasingly clear that as a result of Putin’s failing Ukraine invasion, Russian influence in Kazakhstan and the wider Central Asia region is in decline and has receded to levels not witnessed for over a century.

Kamila Auyezova is a research analyst who focuses on geopolitical and climate issues in Eurasia. You can find her on Twitter @KAuyezova.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post As Putin retreats in Ukraine, he is also losing Kazakhstan appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Former moderate Dmitry Medvedev becomes Putin’s pro-war cheerleader https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/former-moderate-dmitry-medvedev-becomes-putins-pro-war-cheerleader/ Tue, 29 Nov 2022 15:57:50 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=589946 Once seen in the West as a source of hope for better ties with Russia, former president Dmitry Medvedev has emerged since February 2022 as a pro-war cheerleader who regularly demonizes Ukraine on social media.

The post Former moderate Dmitry Medvedev becomes Putin’s pro-war cheerleader appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
During the first nine months of Russia’s Ukraine invasion, Russian President Vladimir Putin and former president Dmitry Medvedev have developed a shtick worthy of a Rodgers and Hammerstein musical. Once seen in the West as a moderate and a source of hope for better ties with Russia, Medvedev now plays the role of Putin’s bad cop, using the kind of overtly fascistic language that makes the Russian dictator’s own menacing speeches appear positively moderate by comparison.

Just recently, Medvedev compared Ukrainians to “cockroaches.” In early November, he opined that Moscow was fighting “crazy Nazi drug addicts” in Ukraine, whose Western supporters had “saliva running down their chins from degeneracy.” Russia’s task, he declared, was to defeat “the supreme ruler of Hell, whatever name he uses: Satan, Lucifer, or Iblis.” The identity of this supreme ruler of Hell is unclear, but presumably Medvedev had either octogenarian US President Joe Biden or mild-mannered Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in mind.

In contrast, Putin consciously avoids sounding overtly unhinged despite the often far-fetched nature of his public pronouncements. Examples of Putin’s baseless statements include his claim in February 2022 that Ukraine posed a mortal threat to Russia, and his lengthy article in mid-2021 insisting that Ukraine had no historic right to exist as an independent state. However, unlike Medvedev, Putin is careful to make sure his arguments are at least vaguely plausible. The Russian ruler also attempts to use recognizably statesmanlike language in order to portray the invasion of Ukraine as a difficult but justified foreign policy decision.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Putin’s speaking style is also worthy of note. In contrast to twentieth century dictators like Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler who were notorious for raving and gesticulating wildly, Putin’s often outrageous assertions are delivered in a soft-spoken and understated tone that creates the impression of a level-headed and entirely rational politician.

The annual Valdai Discussion Club held in Moscow this October was a case in point. Putin’s keynote address was a diatribe against the West, which he accused of attempting to eliminate the rich diversity of cultures around the world. Putin claimed he stood for traditional values, the dignity and sovereignty of all peoples, and the free exchange of science and cultural achievements. He assured listeners that he was against isolationism and any kind of racial, ethnic, or religious intolerance.

This was Putin the impeccable humanist on display. It would be difficult to imagine a figure further removed from Medvedev’s bloodcurdling proclamations. Judging by Putin’s demeanor at the Valdai event, few would believe this was the same man who had ordered the destruction of Grozny, Aleppo, and Mariupol, or who just months earlier had unleashed the largest European conflict since World War II.

While Medvedev uses the language of the gutter, Putin adopts the academic tone of the historian and disguises his imperial aggression by arguing at length that Russians and Ukrainians are actually “one nation.” He expresses exasperation at the alleged oppression of Ukraine’s Russian-speaking population, and positions his invasion as an unfortunate necessity. Whereas Medvedev is the voice of righteous fury, Putin is the voice of reason.

Unfortunately for the Kremlin, Putin and Medvedev’s good cop, bad cop routine is now failing in the West. The international media spotlight of the past nine months has done much to expose Russian lies and reveal the naked imperial ambition behind Moscow’s talk of phantom fascists and oppressed minorities. Few remain receptive to Putin’s convoluted explanations for the invasion of Ukraine other than ideological allies and those still willing to buy into the Kremlin’s conspiratorial narratives.

The contrasting rhetoric being offered up by Putin and Medvedev has proven more successful among domestic audiences and has helped convince millions of Russians that the Kremlin authorities know what they are doing in Ukraine. Raised in an authoritarian political culture, many Russians find Medvedev’s extremism emotionally appealing and are persuaded by Putin’s more measured approach.

The impact of this strategy is plain to see. While the Russian death toll for the invasion of Ukraine approaches 100,000 and the Russian economy continues its downward slide, there is no sign of any significant domestic opposition to the war. As more Russian sons and husbands return from Ukraine in coffins, the durability of the Kremlin duo will be further tested, but at present their double act appears highly effective.

Alexander Motyl is a professor of political science at Rutgers University, Newark. Dennis Soltys is a retired Canadian professor of comparative politics, living in Almaty.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Former moderate Dmitry Medvedev becomes Putin’s pro-war cheerleader appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Kherson euphoria highlights the folly of a premature peace with Putin https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/kherson-euphoria-highlights-the-folly-of-compromise-with-the-kremlin/ Thu, 17 Nov 2022 14:26:51 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=587012 Footage of the euphoric scenes in liberated Kherson should be compulsory viewing for anyone who still believes in the possibility of a negotiated settlement between Ukraine and Russia, argues Peter Dickinson.

The post Kherson euphoria highlights the folly of a premature peace with Putin appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Last week’s liberation of Kherson produced some of the most iconic scenes since the beginning of the Russian invasion. The arrival of Ukrainian troops in the city sparked wild celebrations from a civilian population brutalized by eight months of Russian occupation. “This is what liberation looks like. This is what liberation feels like,” commented CNN’s Nic Robertson in one of many memorable reports from the city. Sky News correspondent Alex Rossi described the atmosphere as “euphoric” as he was mobbed by joyous locals cheering Russia’s retreat.

Despite harsh conditions and a lack of basic amenities in Kherson, the party began almost as soon as news of the Russian military withdrawal was confirmed. Speaking to AFP, one Kherson resident summed up the mood in the liberated city. “We have no electricity, no water, no heating, no mobile or internet connection. But we have no Russians! I am extremely happy. We can survive anything but we are free.”

This footage should be compulsory viewing for anyone who still believes in the possibility of a negotiated settlement with Putin’s Russia. Despite overwhelming evidence of the Kremlin’s genocidal agenda in Ukraine, opinion pieces continue to appear with depressing regularity in the international media arguing that the time has come for Ukraine’s Western partners to pressure the country into peace talks.

The authors of such articles typically acknowledge Russia’s criminality before emphasizing the alleged inevitability of compromise. The wave of emotion that swept Kherson following the city’s liberation is a timely reminder for advocates of appeasement that compromising with the Kremlin actually means condemning millions of Ukrainians to the horrors of Russian occupation.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

At this point, it is no longer possible for any honest observer to deny knowledge of Russian war crimes in occupied Ukraine. In every single liberated region of the country, Ukrainian forces have encountered the same grim revelations of mass graves and torture chambers along with accounts of abductions, executions, sexual violence, and forced deportations involving millions of victims.

Meanwhile, the methodical Russian bombardment of cities such as Mariupol is believed to have killed tens of thousands of Ukrainian civilians. Attempts to document these atrocities are still at an early stage, but United Nations inspectors have already confirmed that Russia has committed war crimes against the Ukrainian civilian population.

Russian occupation forces have also made no secret of their desire to eradicate all traces of Ukrainian national identity. Wherever the Kremlin has established control, the Ukrainian language has been suppressed and the Ukrainian currency phased out. Access to Ukrainian media has been blocked. Teachers have been brought in from Russia to indoctrinate Ukrainian schoolchildren. At the same time, Kremlin officials and regime propagandists have explicitly declared their intention to extinguish Ukrainian statehood and proclaimed their genocidal denial of Ukraine’s right to exist. This is the ghoulish reality that so-called foreign policy realists believe Ukraine must be made to accept.

Russia currently occupies around 20% of Ukraine. Any peace agreement reached in the near future would inevitably involve ceding some or all of this territory to Moscow for an indefinite period. Millions of Ukrainians would then face a desperate future. Many would make the agonizing choice to flee their homes for free Ukraine, leaving behind their former lives and worldly possessions. Those who remained would be forced to adopt a Russian imperial identity or risk savage repression if they continued to resist.

Despite the risks involved, resistance would likely continue. The outpouring of emotion in liberated Kherson highlighted the strength of Ukrainian national feeling in occupied areas of the country and made a mockery of the idea that Moscow enjoys the support of the local population. Just weeks before Putin’s troops retreated from Kherson, the Kremlin claimed 87% of residents had voted in favor of joining Russia. The widespread public jubilation that greeted Russia’s withdrawal vividly illustrated the absurdity of that figure.

Nor is it clear exactly what everyone is so afraid of. Ukraine has already shattered the myth of Russia’s military invincibility and has successfully liberated more than half the territory occupied since the invasion began nearly nine months ago. Putin’s once vaunted army is demoralized and decimated, while the Russian dictator himself is an international pariah. His energy weapon has been partially disarmed and he has recently been forced to distance himself from earlier attempts at nuclear blackmail following rebukes from China and stern warnings from the United States. It makes no strategic sense whatsoever to offer Putin a face-saving peace deal at this point.

For now, there is little public indication that Western leaders are listening to calls for a return to negotiations. Instead, they remain insistent that any decision to resume diplomatic efforts can only be made by Ukraine. However, as the war drags on and the economic costs for Ukraine’s partners continue to mount, the voices currently pushing for Ukrainian concessions will grow louder.

As the war enters a potentially decisive period, it is vital to keep in mind that any compromise would come with crippling costs. For Ukraine, it would mean betraying and abandoning millions of citizens. For Western leaders, it would mean empowering Putin while sacrificing the foundational values of the democratic world. The problems posed by an aggressive and revisionist Russia would be unresolved, but the West’s position would be significantly weaker.

Nobody wants peace more than the Ukrainians themselves. Their country has been devastated by Russia’s invasion and their population left deeply traumatized. Thousands have been killed and millions have been forced to flee. Nevertheless, Ukrainians also understand that Putin must be defeated before peace can return to Europe. All they ask for is the continued support of their international partners. One way to demonstrate this support is by ending unhelpful appeals for a premature peace.

Peter Dickinson is Editor of the Atlantic Council’s UkraineAlert Service.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Kherson euphoria highlights the folly of a premature peace with Putin appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Russian War Report: Ukrainians celebrate in Kherson as Russia evacuates the city https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/russian-war-report-ukrainians-celebrate-in-kherson-as-russia-evacuates-the-city/ Fri, 11 Nov 2022 15:55:59 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=585225 As Russian forces retreat from Kherson, Ukrainians celebrate online and in-person. While the overall status of the withdrawal remains in flux, today’s footage shows Russia is no longer in control of the central parts of Kherson. 

The post Russian War Report: Ukrainians celebrate in Kherson as Russia evacuates the city appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
As Russia continues its assault on Ukraine, the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab (DFRLab) is keeping a close eye on Russia’s movements across the military, cyber, and information domains. With more than seven years of experience monitoring the situation in Ukraine—as well as Russia’s use of propaganda and disinformation to undermine the United States, NATO, and the European Union—the DFRLab’s global team presents the latest installment of the Russian War Report. 

Security

Ukrainians celebrate as Russia evacuates Kherson

Tracking narratives

Pro-Kremlin media amplify false story about NATO donating HIV-infected blood to Ukraine

Telegram post decries lack of communications between Russian soldiers and their families

International response

Ukraine claims more Iranian drone shipments as new reports of Syrian fighters surface

Ukrainians celebrate as Russia evacuates Kherson

Footage across social media confirmed for the first time that Russia had abandoned the city of Kherson and were withdrawing southeast across the Dnipro River. In photos and video shared on Telegram, Twitter, and elsewhere, Ukrainians could be seen in the center of the city waving Ukrainian flags and celebrating the Russian withdrawal. 

https://twitter.com/bayraktar_1love/status/1591027173133008898
https://twitter.com/Gerashchenko_en/status/1591043695528542209

Russia’s abandonment of the city began earlier this week when General Sergei Surovikin, appointed last month to take charge of Russia’s war efforts in Ukraine, proposed a pullout from Kherson, which would effectively give up a strategic city north of annexed Crimea and the only Ukrainian provincial capital Russia had captured since the February 24 invasion. Surovikin proposed to Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu that Russia adopt new defensive lines. On November 9, Shoigu ordered troops to withdraw. While the overall status of the withdrawal remains in flux, today’s footage shows Russia is no longer in control of the central parts of Kherson. 

Additionally, footage surfaced on November 9 showing the destruction of the Daryivskyi bridge in Kherson oblast, which would cut off Russian communications between Kherson and Nova Kakhovka. Subsequently, Telegram sources and Ukrainian media reported on the destruction of the Tyaginsky and Novovasilyevsky bridges, also in Kherson oblast. Ukrainian sources and Russian channels claimed the Russian army blew up the bridges in an attempt to slow down any Ukrainian offensive. The Daryivskyi bridge is behind Russian forces, so its destruction could be a signal for heavy entrenchment and preparation for defense.  In the meantime, the Ukrainian army took over Snihurivka in Mykolaiv oblast and Kalynivske in Kherson oblast.

https://twitter.com/erranta2_andrij/status/1590626432816119808

Russia is making serious efforts to prepare defenses behind the current front lines in southeastern and southern Ukraine to prevent any rapid Ukrainian advance in the event of a breakthrough. Most recently, the Russian army began installing defensive structures around the villages of Nikolske and Staryi Krym, near Mariupol. Work is also reportedly under way on fortifications in the occupied areas of Zaporizhzhia and Kherson oblasts.

Ruslan Trad, Resident Fellow for Security Research, Sofia, Bulgaria

Pro-Kremlin media amplify false story about NATO donating HIV-infected blood to Ukraine

On November 3, Mash, a popular pro-Kremlin Telegram channel, published a screenshot of a document allegedly retrieved from “the internal data system of the Ukrainian Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal’s office,” according to Kombatant Hack Group. The document was an alleged letter from Ukraine’s Ministry of Health to Ukraine’s prime minister that talked about Ukraine receiving 62,000 liters of blood from “NATO member states.” The letter alleged that the received blood was contaminated with HIV, as well as hepatitis C and B. This threatens the country with an epidemic of deadly diseases,” Mash asserted.

This, however, was false. Detektor Media, a Ukrainian fact-checking site, debunked the letter. “The letter does not meet the requirements for official documents in Ukraine,” it concluded, adding, “Ukraine has never turned to foreign partners for donor blood or its components, according to the Ministry of Health.” 

The DFRLab has previously come across cases of forged letters being published on one-off fringe social media accounts and then picked up and amplified by other accounts to spread controversies about Western interests and unity.

Mash’s post was amplified by prominent Kremlin-approved media outlets like Lenta.ru, RIA FAN, Komsomolskaya Pravda, Rambler, Argumenty I Fakty, Life.ru, News Front, and others. It was also amplified in English via a YouTube video that garnered just 232 views, and an anonymous Twitter account named @Constanze2022 that garnered 355 retweets, 103 quote tweets and 1,019 likes for a post containing the forged letter.

Nika Aleksejeva, Lead Researcher, Riga, Latvia

Telegram post decries lack of communications between Russian soldiers and their families

A popular Russian military blogger on Telegram reported that relatives of Russian soldiers are asking about their loved ones sent to the Ukrainian front in the area of Svatove, Kreminna, and Makiivka, as they have not heard from them for some time. In a post that garnered nearly 300,000 views, journalist Anastasia Kashevarova wrote: 

Hundreds of letters come with full names given by fighters from their relatives. The fighters, many of whom are mobilized, do not get in touch. Whether they are dead or simply without communication, it is necessary to check. They must be sought. 

Those who got in touch say that many were lost. Groups are abandoned without communication, without the necessary weapons, without medicines, naturally without artillery. No one knows who is on their right, who is on the left, who is in the rear. Enemy drones are constantly circling above them, you have to change positions very often. Constant artillery fire from the enemy, ours also begin to shoot and the men find themselves under crossfire.

A response to Kashevarova’s post on the WarGonzo Telegram channel speculated that the problem lies in the lack of prepared personnel due to recent changes in commanding officers in the Central Military District.

Ruslan Trad, Resident Fellow for Security Research, Sofia, Bulgaria

Ukraine claims more Iranian drone shipments as new reports of Syrian fighters surface

Ukrainian military intelligence reportedly found information that Iranian drones were delivered to Russia after February 24, which would refute a statement from the Iranian Foreign Ministry that Tehran only provided a small number of drones months before Russia’s invasion. These claims have not been confirmed. According to the report, the Iranian Mohajer drone is assembled from parts produced in different countries. On November 9, Russian Security Council Secretary Nikolai Patrushev visited Iran and met President Ebrahim Raisi, reportedly to discuss security cooperation.  

Iran is not the only Middle Eastern country helping Russian efforts in Ukraine. According to an investigation by Middle East Eye, Russia has deployed over 500 Syrian fighters to Ukraine in mostly non-combat roles. They have the main task of guarding facilities in the Luhansk and Donetsk regions. Middle East Eye cited regional intelligence sources in the Middle East, including a Syrian regime official. According to the report, Syrians might be serving under the Russian military contractor Shield, as well as Wagner’s far-right Rusich battalion. 

Ruslan Trad, Resident Fellow for Security Research, Sofia, Bulgaria

The post Russian War Report: Ukrainians celebrate in Kherson as Russia evacuates the city appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
NATO, Nazis, Satanists: Putin is running out of excuses for his imperial war https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/nato-nazis-satanists-putin-is-running-out-of-excuses-for-his-imperial-war/ Tue, 08 Nov 2022 16:11:26 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=583884 Vladimir Putin has blamed his invasion on everything from NATO expansion to Nazis and Satanists. In reality, he is waging an old-fashioned war of imperial expansion with the end goal of extinguishing Ukrainian statehood.

The post NATO, Nazis, Satanists: Putin is running out of excuses for his imperial war appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Why did Vladimir Putin invade Ukraine? The answer to this question really depends on when you’re asking. In the months leading up to the invasion, the Russian dictator focused his ire on NATO and sought to blame rising tensions around Ukraine on the military alliance’s post-Cold War expansion. As his troops crossed the border on February 24, Putin changed tack and declared a crusade against “Ukrainian Nazis.” More recently, he has sought to portray Ukraine as a “terrorist state” while insisting that Russia is in fact fighting against “Satanism.”

None of these arguments stands up to serious scrutiny. Instead, the various different narratives coming out of the Kremlin reflect Moscow’s increasingly desperate efforts to justify what is in reality an old-fashioned colonial war of imperial conquest.

Putin has long sought to use NATO expansion as an excuse for his own aggressive foreign policies. This plays well with the Russian public and also resonates among segments of the international community who believe the United States has become too dominant since the end of the Cold War. However, Putin’s attempts to position the invasion of Ukraine as a reasonable response to NATO encroachment have been comprehensively debunked by his own actions.

According to Reuters, Ukraine informed Russia during the first days of the invasion that it was ready to meet Moscow’s demands and rule out the possibility of future NATO membership, only for this offer to be rejected by Putin. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy went public in the following weeks with similar proposals to abandon Ukraine’s NATO ambitions, but Russia chose to continue its invasion.

The entire notion that Russia views NATO as a credible security threat was further undermined in summer 2022 when Moscow passively accepted neighboring Finland’s historic decision to join the military alliance. Putin has repeatedly cited Ukraine’s deepening NATO ties as justification for his invasion, but the prospect of imminent Finnish membership provoked no meaningful security response whatsoever from the Kremlin.

If Putin genuinely believed a NATO invasion of Russia was even a remote possibility, he would surely have reinforced the Finnish border. On the contrary, in the months following Helsinki’s decision to join the alliance, Russia dramatically reduced its military presence close to Finland and the nearby NATO member Baltic states in order to bolster the invasion of Ukraine. Whatever Putin may say in public, he clearly understands that NATO poses no threat to Russia.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Russian myth-making about “Ukrainian Nazis” is even older than complaints over NATO expansion and dates all the way back to Soviet World War II propaganda. For decades, Moscow has exaggerated wartime cooperation between Ukrainian nationalist groups and the Third Reich while conveniently ignoring the far more consequential Nazi-Soviet Pact. By conflating Ukraine’s centuries-old liberation movement with Nazism, generations of Kremlin leaders have sought to render Ukrainian national identity toxic in the eyes of domestic and international audiences alike.

Putin’s enthusiasm for the “Nazi Ukraine” trope is very much in line with his broader efforts to place the Soviet World War II experience at the heart of modern Russian identity. Over the past two decades, Putin has turned traditional Russian reverence for the generation who defeated Hitler into a quasi-religious victory cult complete with its own feast days, holy relics, and doctrinal dogmas. This has enabled him to whitewash the crimes of the Soviet era while attacking contemporary adversaries as the spiritual successors to the Nazis. In Putin’s Russia, accusations of Nazism are a routine feature of the public discourse and have been leveled against a dizzying array of individuals, organizations, and entire countries, but Ukraine remains by far the most popular target.

The effectiveness of these tactics has always depended heavily on outside ignorance of Ukraine and Russia-centric reporting by Moscow-based international correspondents. Unfortunately for Putin, his invasion has shone an unprecedented media spotlight on Ukraine that has done much to debunk the whole “Nazi Ukraine” narrative.

This was long overdue. Throughout the past 31 years of Ukrainian independence, the far-right has never come close to achieving power in Ukraine and remains significantly less influential than in many other European countries. While far-right candidate Marine Le Pen received 41.45% in France’s 2022 presidential election, the Ukrainian far-right typically struggles to secure low single digit support at the ballot box. During Ukraine’s last presidential election in 2019, the leading nationalist candidate garnered 1.6% of the vote. Months later in the country’s most recent parliamentary election, many of Ukraine’s far-right parties joined forces in a bid to improve their fortunes. This united nationalist platform failed miserably, winning a mere 2.15% of votes.

Nothing highlights the absurdity of Russia’s “Nazi Ukraine” allegations better than the rise of Volodymyr Zelenskyy. The Ukrainian President is both Jewish and a native Russian speaker. According to the Kremlin, this should make him deeply unappealing to Ukrainian voters. On the contrary, Zelenskyy was elected president by a record margin and subsequently secured a unique parliamentary majority for his newly formed political party. This success was all the more remarkable as it was achieved during wartime elections held amid an atmosphere of heightened patriotic fervor.

Since the start of the invasion, Russia’s failing efforts to portray Ukraine as a Nazi state have forced Moscow into ever more implausible mental gymnastics. Unable to produce any actual Ukrainian Nazis, regime officials and propaganda proxies have attempted to argue that the very idea of an independent Ukraine is in itself a Nazi concept, while also acknowledging that Putin’s stated war aim of “de-Nazification” in practice means the “de-Ukrainization” of Ukraine.

The Kremlin’s confusion was perhaps most immediately evident in the bizarre and disgraceful anti-Semitic comments made by Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov during a May appearance on Italian TV program Zona Bianca. When asked to address the obvious contradictions between Russia’s “Nazi Ukraine” claims and the fact that Ukraine has a Jewish president, Lavrov responded by declaring that Adolf Hitler also had “Jewish blood.” His statement sparked a wave of global condemnation, with Putin eventually forced to intervene and offer a personal apology to Israeli leaders.

This embarrassing incident illustrated the remarkable recent degradation of Russian diplomacy, which has now reached the point where it is often indistinguishable from internet conspiracy theories. Forced by Putin’s invasion to defend the indefensible, Russia’s top diplomats have retreated into an alternative reality world of blanket denials and dark fantasies. While Lavrov rants about “Jewish Hitler,” Russian Ambassador to the UN Vasily Nebenzya stuns his colleagues with fantastic tales of genetically engineered Ukrainian mosquitoes. No wonder exasperated British Ambassador Barbara Woodward recently felt moved to ask, “How much more of this nonsense do we have to endure?”

The awkward absence of Ukrainian Nazis and Russia’s non-response to Finland’s NATO membership bid have left Putin in desperate need of new narratives to explain his ongoing invasion. Disinformation researchers have recently noted a spike in Russian references to Ukraine as a “terrorist state” amid apparent efforts to position the war as a counter-terrorism operation. This has included a high-level campaign led by Putin himself and Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu, who have both groundlessly accused Ukraine of plotting an act of nuclear terrorism involving a dirty bomb.

While the idea of Ukraine nuking itself may seem far-fetched even by Russian standards, this is by no means the Kremlin’s most audacious excuse. Since late September, senior regime officials have gone even further and have been actively seeking to rebrand the invasion of Ukraine as a holy war against Satanism. Putin set the tone by calling his opponents “Satanic” during a landmark address marking the official annexation of four Ukrainian regions.

Others have enthusiastically followed Putin’s lead. In October, the deputy secretary of Russia’s influential National Security Council, Alexei Pavlov, declared that it was becoming “more and more urgent to carry out the de-Satanization of Ukraine.” This call was echoed by former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, who stated in a November 4 post marking Russia’s National Unity Day that the goal of the Ukraine invasion was “to stop the supreme ruler of Hell, whatever name he uses: Satan, Lucifer, or Iblis.” Key propagandists including Vladimir Solovyov have also endorsed the idea that Russia is at war with Satanism.

Behind Moscow’s increasingly outlandish attempts to justify the invasion stands a deeply unpalatable truth. Far from being a reaction to Western encroachment or Ukrainian extremism, Putin’s decision to invade Ukraine is the product of an unapologetically imperialistic mindset that he shares with millions of Russians who refuse to accept the verdict of 1991.

Putin’s entire reign has been shaped by his burning resentment at the perceived injustice of the Soviet collapse, which he regards as the “disintegration of historic Russia.” This has fueled his obsession with Ukraine, which for centuries occupied a key position at the very center of Russian imperial identity. Putin sees the existence of an independent Ukraine as a symbol of the unjust post-Soviet settlement and regards the country’s embrace of European democracy as an existential threat to Russia. He has repeatedly denied Ukraine’s right to statehood while arguing that modern Ukraine has been artificially separated from Russia. On the eve of the invasion, he called Ukraine “an inalienable part of our own history, culture, and spiritual space.”

The Russian dictator’s most revealing remarks came in summer 2022, when he directly compared his invasion of Ukraine to the eighteenth century imperial conquests of Russian Czar Peter the Great. Putin sought to qualify this claim by insisting he was merely “returning historically Russian lands,” but the actions of his invading army bear all the hallmarks of a brutal colonial conquest. Russian troops have reduced entire cities to rubble and killed tens of thousands of Ukrainian civilians. In areas of Ukraine under Kremlin control, the Russian military has engaged in mass executions and forced deportations. Meanwhile, all symbols of Ukrainian national identity have been ruthlessly erased.

This is the grim reality that all advocates of appeasement and proponents of a negotiated peace must address. Nobody wants to end the current war more than the Ukrainians themselves, but they also recognize that there is no room for compromise between genocide and survival. Russia has gone to great lengths to disguise the true nature of its imperial war in Ukraine, but Ukrainians are not fooled. They understand perfectly well that unless Russia is decisively defeated, Ukraine will cease to exist.

Instead of listening to Moscow’s fake grievances and fairytales about devil-worshiping phantom fascists, the international community must make clear to the Kremlin that Russian imperialism has no place in the modern world. The increasingly absurd nature of Putin’s excuses is an indication of his mounting desperation, but he has yet to abandon the colonial conquest of Ukraine. Unless he is forced to do so, Russia’s unreconstructed imperial ambitions will remain a threat to world peace.

Peter Dickinson is Editor of the Atlantic Council’s UkraineAlert Service.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post NATO, Nazis, Satanists: Putin is running out of excuses for his imperial war appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
The international community must prepare for a post-Putin Russia https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/the-international-community-must-prepare-for-a-post-putin-russia/ Mon, 07 Nov 2022 21:09:44 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=583611 With little hope of a meaningful settlement as long as Vladimir Putin remains in power, the international community should seek pathways to a lasting peace with a future post-Putin Russia, writes Francis O’Donnell.

The post The international community must prepare for a post-Putin Russia appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Nine months is enough time to bring a human being to birth, but it is apparently not long enough for Russian President Vladimir Putin to realize the folly of his war against Ukraine. Instead, it is becoming increasingly clear that no meaningful settlement will be possible as long as Putin remains in power. The international community must therefore seek pathways to a lasting peace with a future post-Putin Russia.

For many decades, the USSR and subsequently the Russian Federation played a major role in advancing humanity’s progress. In sharp contrast to his predecessors, Vladimir Putin is now leading Russia away from that legacy and is transforming the country into a pariah state. Russian acts of hostility are global in scale and include everything from waging war in Georgia to the subversion of domestic politics throughout the West. Since the unprovoked attack on Ukraine began in 2014, the Putin regime has embarked on a further diplomatic frenzy that has increasingly alienated Russia’s erstwhile closest friends and foreign partners.

Yet just four years ago, Russia was party to a UN Security Council resolution on the protection of civilians in armed conflict which recognized for the first time the intrinsic link between hunger and conflict. Russia now behaves in stark defiance of these principles. On four separate occasions this year, the UN General Assembly has resoundingly rebuked Russia for its invasion of Ukraine and unwarranted and egregious violations of UN norms. Russia has been suspended from the UN Human Rights Council and the Council of Europe, and has lost its seat on the Governing Council of the International Civil Aviation Organization.

In a March 2022 resolution, the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva agreed to establish a commission to investigate violations committed during Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. A subsequent resolution examined the deteriorating human rights situation in Ukraine stemming from the invasion. This led to a report by the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine addressing events during late February and March 2022 in the Kyiv, Chernihiv, Kharkiv, and Sumy regions of northern Ukraine.

Evidence continues to mount indicating tens of thousands of war crimes committed by Russian forces acting under command responsibility, as distinct from occasional rogue elements. This evidence includes official statements, actions, and systemic politically-driven campaigns with clear genocidal intent, including widespread ethnic cleansing, deportations, and repeated large-scale missile and artillery targeting of civilian populations and vital civilian infrastructure.

For a comparatively minor territorial gain, Putin has sacrificed Russia’s reputation and socio-economic well-being. Even worse, the ricochet effects have also surged around the world creating food and energy insecurity, escalating inflation, and widespread impoverishment. There would never have been a good time for such willful misadventure, but coming in the wake of the Covid pandemic, the timing could hardly be worse.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

The increasing mendacity of the Putin regime is now so severe that members of the elite cannot even trust each other, with key figures close to the Kremlin engaging in public attacks on the leadership of the Russian military. As battlefield failure and international isolation continue to erode Putin’s authority, his entire model of government is now under threat. Russia’s prospects today are the dimmest they have been since World War II, with a range of possible dangers now emerging including deepening internal divisions and the potential collapse of the country.

While it is important to rule out any interference in the internal governance of the Russian Federation, the West can and should call for full compliance with Russia’s international obligations to defend the human rights and legitimate aspirations of Russian citizens. At this stage, the inclusion of Russian local governments and municipalities in the global effort to tackle climate change and pandemic recovery could be an opener to the de-concentration or leveling of power. When President Trump pulled the US out of the Paris Accord on Climate Change, several US states and municipalities strengthened their commitment to it.

We may already be witnessing the early warning signs of a degradation in the Russian state as sanctions and military defeats take their toll and warlords like Wagner chief Yevgeny Prigozhin and Chechen leader Ramzan Kadyrov openly question Putin’s leadership of the war. Members of the Russian elite need to take stock of this decline and move beyond today’s misguided imperialism with a view to harnessing the energies of Russian society and thoroughly reforming the country’s institutions.

The real Russia is deeper and richer than today’s stolen billions in assets and the forfeited lives from Putin’s genocidal wars against the country’s neighbors. The real Russia, including its repressed civil society and talented Russian communities around the globe, can strive to optimize broad-based outcomes that uplift the people of Russia and enhance their lives whilst restoring international partnerships and global respect. This will only be possible through the openness, transparency, and accountability of elected leaders divorced from the power of money, media, and mania. Multiple networks of Russians abroad need to coalesce around a reform agenda that looks to a post-Putin Russia and ushers in a new era of benign leadership that puts the well-being of the Russian people before the narrow predatory interests of the country’s current kleptocratic leadership.

The international community should therefore focus their attention and resources not only on enabling Ukraine to win the war but also to encourage a process of reconciliation and convergence that unites all the various and often conflicting elements of the Russian opposition both internally and in the diaspora. This would not be unprecedented. It was the unifying of the Serbian opposition that led to the overthrow of Milosevic regime.

A recognition of the dilemmas and internal stresses that Russia is facing, as distinct from but in addition to the harm caused to Ukraine and the world at large, warrants attention at the forthcoming G20 summit. The stifling of civil society and dissent has deprived the people of Russia of their rightful freedom of expression. Despite various Russian opinion polls indicating majority support for the invasion of Ukraine, this cannot be credibly authenticated. By its behavior and utterances alone, the Kremlin has disqualified itself from international relations. It is time for world leaders to acknowledge that a change of tack in Moscow is essential.

In order to advance toward the goal of peace, the international community must act to help empower alternative Russian voices. The global networks, institutions, and methods that can enable capacity for mediation and negotiation in conflicts around the world, are a vital resource to foster engagement with Russian civil society, which is largely silenced internally but not abroad, and can also be approached virtually at the local level. Getting Russian civil society to converge on peaceful alternatives and a different narrative than the Kremlin’s is the key to de-concentrating political power in Russia and incubating real participatory reform. It may also be the best way to achieve a sustainable peace.

Ambassador Francis M. O’Donnell (Ret.) is the former UN Representative in Ukraine (2004-2009)

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post The international community must prepare for a post-Putin Russia appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Should Ukraine pursue closer ties with Taiwan? https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/should-ukraine-pursue-closer-ties-with-taiwan/ Tue, 01 Nov 2022 23:49:02 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=581631 In recent years China has emerged as Ukraine's leading trade partner but the war unleashed by Vladimir Putin has created a geopolitical climate where closer Taiwan-Ukraine ties may make sense, writes Michael Druckman.

The post Should Ukraine pursue closer ties with Taiwan? appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
The unintended consequences of Vladimir Putin’s disastrous war in Ukraine will be studied for years to come, with ongoing geopolitical repercussions already evident from North America to East Asia. Russia’s rapidly unraveling invasion has served as a warning to Putin’s ally, Chinese leader Xi Jinping, as he mulls a possible attempt to retake Taiwan.

Meanwhile, Taiwan is pursuing an ambitious global charm offensive to shore up its international relationships, including efforts to enhance bilateral ties with Ukraine. The Ukrainian government now has an opportunity to broaden and deepen the strategic relationship between these two embattled democracies.

Prior to Russia’s February 2022 offensive, Taiwan had almost zero visibility inside Ukraine. Its trade office presence in Kyiv was both intentionally minimized by Taipei and largely ignored by the Ukrainian authorities, who remained cautious about antagonizing China while welcoming strong Chinese trade links as a counterweight to Russia. Indeed, in the years prior to Putin’s full-scale invasion, China had emerged as Ukraine’s largest trade partner and a key market for Ukrainian exports.

The events of the past eight months have transformed the geopolitical climate, with Russia’s invasion also altering the dynamics of bilateral ties between Taipei and Kyiv. Given Xi Jinping’s open support for the Kremlin, the prospect of Ukraine resuming its earlier relationship with China is increasingly impractical, making the possibility of stronger economic and diplomatic ties with Taiwan potentially more attractive.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Taiwan is currently playing a quiet but steady role in Ukraine, including support for rebuilding civilian infrastructure in cities like Kharkiv. Ukraine’s parliament has responded to these overtures with steps of its own to enhance ties with Taiwan, including a newly-formed multi-party group within parliament to promote “closer friendship, trade, and cultural ties.” The Ukrainian government could soon look to extend cooperation into practical areas where both countries can trade best practices and complement each other’s experience of resisting authoritarian aggression.

Closer ties with Taiwan could potentially bolster Ukraine’s efforts to pursue a competitive and diverse market for its goods, a requirement of the country’s association agreement with the EU. The European Parliament has been vocal in its support for enhanced economic relations between Ukraine and Taiwan. Advancements in this area would not only offer Ukraine economic benefits, but could also smooth the path toward further EU integration.

The e-governance and information space offers obvious opportunities for closer cooperation. Ukraine’s ability to maintain the functions of government at all levels since the full-scale Russian invasion began on February 24 is an area worthy of greater international study, particularly in terms of how Ukraine’s decentralized approach to local government has empowered city officials to be proactive in communications, planning, and coordination with citizens. The country’s postal service, tax revenue collection, online banking payments, and e-government services on Ukraine’s Diya app have all functioned smoothly despite the enormous challenges posed by Russia’s invasion.

The Ukrainian government’s masterly use of social media and other communications channels to not only convey important information and build morale inside Ukraine but also effectively communicate to the international community is of enormous interest to Taiwan. Plans are already being developed by Ukraine’s Ministry of Digital Transformation to send a delegation of Ukrainian MPs to Taipei later this year. Similar initiatives would likely be welcomed and met with considerable interest.

Meetings between Ukrainian and Taiwanese representatives within the framework of larger EU gatherings to discuss the lessons already learned from Ukraine’s wartime experience would be beneficial for European and Taiwanese partners. Such gatherings would also provide an EU backdrop that could help Ukraine assess the challenges that European states and their municipalities currently face from Chinese influence.

Taiwan’s readiness to assist Ukrainian cities in addressing the damage wrought by Russia’s war and Taipei’s direct outreach to Ukrainian mayors during summer 2022 are strong arguments for a seat at the table in designing a post-war support package for Ukraine. Taiwanese involvement in reconstruction planning and the strategic rebuilding of Ukrainian cities could bring greater innovation and lead to expanded trade opportunities.

Ukraine could additionally benefit from Taiwan’s technological know-how, investment, innovation, and access to new markets in Asia. At the same time, strengthening public and diplomatic relations would potentially help both countries in their shared strategic goal of resisting authoritarian aggression.

As Ukraine moves closer to what would be an historic victory over Russia, the country will face a whole range of fresh challenges such as maintaining international interest in the post-war reconstruction process. There will also be new opportunities for Ukraine to assume an enhanced role among the world’s democracies. A fully-fledged partnership with Taiwan could deliver a range of important benefits to Ukraine as it begins this next chapter.

Michael Druckman is resident program director for Ukraine at the International Republican Institute.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Should Ukraine pursue closer ties with Taiwan? appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Putin’s failing Ukraine invasion proves Russia is no superpower https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/putins-failing-ukraine-invasion-proves-russia-is-no-superpower/ Tue, 01 Nov 2022 19:09:17 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=581247 Vladimir Putin's failing Ukraine invasion has dramatically undermined the credibility of modern Russia's Great Power pretensions and exposed the dysfunctional reality behind the Kremlin's claims to superpower status.

The post Putin’s failing Ukraine invasion proves Russia is no superpower appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
For centuries, Russia has seen itself as one of the world’s great powers. This superpower status was somewhat sullied by the humiliations of the 1991 Soviet collapse, but post-Soviet Russia has worked hard under Vladimir Putin to reclaim its position among the leading nations on the global stage. During the first two decades of his reign, Putin won plaudits for rebuilding Russia’s military and economic might, and was credited with returning the country to the top table of international affairs. However, his disastrous invasion of Ukraine has now done much to reverse this progress by exposing the deep dysfunction and hollow boasts that lie behind the facade of Russia’s superpower pretensions.

Russia’s weakness has not come as a total surprise. Ever since the fall of the USSR, Western commentators have noted the debilitating impact of corruption at every level of the modern Russian state. In recent decades, some have branded the Putin regime a “mafia state,” where the boundaries between the authorities and organized crime are blurred.

Corruption has flourished under Putin amid a climate of stagnation inherited from the late Soviet era. Unlike Ukraine, post-Soviet Russia has never undergone de-communization or acknowledged the need to reject the Soviet legacy. Instead, Putin has rehabilitated the Soviet era and placed the Red Army’s role in the defeat of Nazi Germany at the heart of his vision for a modern Russian national identity. Efforts to honor the memory of Stalin’s victims have been silenced and attempts to acknowledge the crimes of the USSR drowned out by a victory cult that has elevated the Soviet World War II experience to the level of religious cult and re-established Josef Stalin as a national hero. In 2020, Putin condemned Russians to a further sixteen years of stagnation when he staged a referendum on constitutional reforms that made it possible to extend his reign until 2036.

From politics to the economy, the consequences of widespread corruption and stagnation can be seen throughout Russian society. Crucially, this negative impact is also highly visible in the invasion of Ukraine. Whereas Ukrainian troops have repeatedly demonstrated the kind of initiative and leadership that one would expect from a society shaped by two post-Soviet pro-democracy revolutions, the Russian military remains hamstrung by a deeply hierarchical system and rigid chain of command.

On the eve of this year’s invasion, the Russian military was widely touted as the world’s number two army, but such claims have been brutally debunked by subsequent events in Ukraine. Putin’s army has been exposed in almost every department, from poor leadership and outdated tactics to equally out-of-date equipment. Chronic corruption within the Russian Ministry of Defense has hampered military logistics, with soldiers in many instances receiving kit dating from the 1970s or earlier. It has also become painfully obvious that many of the vehicles and weapons listed as part of the vast Russian arsenal exist on paper only. With the war now in its ninth month, chronic supply problems mean that Russia is now increasingly reliant on Iran for drones that it is unable to produce itself.

These shortcomings have highlighted the cosmetic nature of the much-vaunted military reforms carried out by Russia over the past two decades. In reality, the Russian army under Putin remains largely a Soviet relic with a distinctively Soviet political culture that allows Russian commanders to treat soldiers with contempt. This lack of consideration for troops has been particularly evident in the treatment of recently mobilized Russians, many of whom have been sent to the front in Ukraine with minimal training and inadequate equipment.

The human price of Russia’s military failures in Ukraine has been exceptionally high. An estimated 70,000 Russian soldiers have been killed during the first eight months of the invasion, according to the latest Ukrainian Ministry of Defense data. While this figure is disputed, even the most conservative independent analysis indicates tens of thousands of Russian casualties. This makes the invasion of Ukraine far deadlier than the nine-year Soviet campaign in Afghanistan, which resulted in the loss of 15,000 Soviet troops and has been widely cited as a contributing factor in the collapse of the USSR.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

The invasion of Ukraine has also revealed other areas where today’s Russia falls well short of superpower status. Unlike China and other rising powers, Russia has never diversified or modernized its economy. Instead, the country’s ruling elites have prioritized the accumulation of staggering personal fortunes. As a result, today’s Russia remains heavily dependent on commodities exports and has no technological equivalent of China’s Huawei or South Korea’s Samsung. With sanctions imposed in response to the invasion of Ukraine restricting access to a range of cutting-edge tech, Russia has struggled to produce sophisticated weapons and has in some instances reportedly resorted to cannibalizing elements of household appliances.

Russia’s excessive economic reliance on the export of energy and arms now looks to have been even more of a strategic blunder as international demand plummets due to the invasion of Ukraine. The EU has weaned itself off Russian gas earlier than expected and will enter 2023 with a high degree of independence from the Kremlin’s energy blackmail. With European customers turning away from Russian energy, Moscow will struggle to find sufficient alternative buyers for gas in the coming year as Russia has not invested in LNG.

Meanwhile, Russia’s defense industry also faces bleak prospects. The often abysmal performance of the Russian military in Ukraine has been a PR disaster for Russian arms exporters, who must now explain why their products are so technologically inferior. Numerous traditional clients have already cancelled weapons contracts. More are expected to follow suit.

Since the full-scale invasion of Ukraine began on February 24, Russia has become something of an international pariah. The entire Western world has condemned Moscow’s actions while even traditional allies such as China and India have offered muted criticism. Only a handful of fellow pariahs such as Syria, North Korea, and Nicaragua have been prepared to stand with Russia and back Moscow at the United Nations. In the former Soviet region, only Belarus has voted with Russia at the UN.

This international isolation has highlighted the fundamental weakness of Russia’s geopolitical position and the absence of any meaningful message behind Moscow’s anti-Western posturing. Putin’s attempts to position Russia as a champion of traditional values have failed to resonate. In reality, abortion, divorce, suicide, and alcoholism rates are all significantly higher in Russia than in most European countries. Russians have a far shorter life expectancy and are poorer on average than their European neighbors. This poverty is reflected in the mass plundering of household goods from Ukrainian homes, with Russian soldiers stealing everything from washing machines to used underwear.

The war has also revealed the limitations of Russian soft power, with Western audiences in particular overwhelmingly rejecting Russian attempts to justify the invasion. Even in regions with strong historic links to Russia such as the the South Caucasus and Central Asia, audiences have treated Kremlin narratives with deep distrust.

Despite massive investment in media operations, the invasion of Ukraine has highlighted the limitations of Kremlin disinformation. In the West, Moscow has largely been preaching to the converted and has failed to move beyond a minority audience driven primarily by anti-Americanism and conspiratorial thinking. The picture is similar in the political sphere. As the recent election of Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni has shown, Russian support for right-wing populists and nationalists has not led to any major breakthroughs in European politics.

The war in Ukraine has ruthlessly revealed Putin’s Russia as a Potemkin Great Power. Like the Potemkin villages erected along the banks of Ukraine’s Dnipro River in the late eighteenth century to impress visiting Russian Empress Katherine the Great, Russia’s much-hyped revival under Putin is in fact a masterly facade designed to disguise a far less impressive reality. This illusion has now been shattered by the harsh realities of Europe’s largest armed conflict since World War II.

Russia is heading toward an historic defeat in Ukraine that will have profound ramifications for the way Russians view their state and themselves. Defeat in Ukraine will undermine the imperial identity that defines Putin’s Russia. It will force the Russian public to belatedly confront decades of nationalistic myth-making by their own rapacious elites. It is still far too early to predict what kind of Russia will emerge from the wreckage of Putin’s Ukraine invasion, but it already looks unlikely that anyone will continue to view the country as one of the world’s superpowers.

Taras Kuzio is a professor of political science at the National University of Kyiv Mohyla Academy and author of the forthcoming book “Fascism and Genocide. Russia’s War Against Ukrainians.”

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Putin’s failing Ukraine invasion proves Russia is no superpower appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
The West needs a more united approach to sanctioning Putin’s elite https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/the-west-needs-a-more-united-approach-to-sanctioning-putins-elite/ Wed, 26 Oct 2022 17:01:31 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=579654 With Russia's invasion of Ukraine now in its ninth month, it is time for a coordinated approach to sanctioning Putin's elite that reflects the seriousness of the threat they pose to global security, writes David Clark.

The post The West needs a more united approach to sanctioning Putin’s elite appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Ukraine’s Western allies adopted a new round of sanctions earlier this month in response to Russia’s recent move to officially annex four partially occupied Ukrainian regions. These latest sanctions measures included expanding the list of individuals and entities subject to asset freezes, travel bans, and other restrictions.

The targeting of Russian officials and influential figures linked to the Putin regime has become a major plank of Western strategy. Yet even now, more than eight months after the start of Russia’s invasion, Western sanctions still contain significant anomalies and gaps in coverage according to a new report by the Ukrainian think tank, the International Centre for Policy Studies (ICPS). This is also reflected in the Atlantic Council’s Russia Sanctions Database.

The US, EU, UK, and Canada have each sanctioned more than a thousand individuals along with hundreds of entities, but have not done so according to a common list. For example, Russian steel magnate Vladimir Potanin has been sanctioned by the UK but not the EU or US, despite being named by the US Treasury in 2018 as a member of Putin’s inner circle. Roman Abramovich has been sanctioned in the UK and the EU but not the US. Viktor Vekselberg, another oligarch reputedly close to the Kremlin, has been sanctioned in the US since 2018 and more recently by the UK, but not the EU.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Special pleading and political considerations seem to have played a part in creating some of these discrepancies. The ICPS report sees a political motive behind the UK’s failure to sanction Alexander Lebedev, a former KGB officer who has owned media and other assets in the UK and Russia. Former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson is reportedly a personal friend of Lebedev’s son, Evgeny, and even nominated him for a seat in the House of Lords in 2020 despite concerns from the British security services, according to media reports. Sanctioning his father would have created obvious embarrassment.

None of this prevented the Canadian government from putting Lebedev on its sanctions list in May 2022. Lebedev was sanctioned for having “directly enabled Vladimir Putin’s senseless war in Ukraine,” according to the Canadian government. For now, at least, the US and EU have stuck with the UK position on Lebedev.

The ICPS report has found that of the 100 richest Russians listed by Forbes magazine, more than two-thirds have not been sanctioned at all (32 have been sanctioned by the UK, 26 by the EU, and only 16 by the US). Among the top 10, exactly half are currently sanctions-free.

The report also names Dmitry Rybolovlev, the Russian fertilizer magnate, now resident in Monaco, where he has reportedly cultivated considerable local influence. Rybolovlev has avoided sanctions despite being among 96 oligarchs listed by the US Treasury in 2018 for their “closeness to the Russian regime.”

These gaps need to be plugged, not least because a robust sanctions regime will almost certainly be necessary for the foreseeable future. Even though Russia currently appears to be losing its war in Ukraine, the Putin regime will remain an aggressive disrupter, hostile to Western interests and a threat to its neighbors, for as long as it survives. It will need to be contained and deterred.

The current ad hoc Western sanctions arrangements need to be replaced by a more coordinated approach to the task of targeting the Kremlin and its enablers. Greater coordination could involve joint analytical reports and sanctions recommendations to be adopted on a common basis.

If exceptions are to be made allowing for the removal of names from the list, these should be debated separately and transparently according to clear criteria. The conditions for removal should necessarily be tough: a complete break with the Putin regime, including all business and personal contact; unconditional public statements condemning the war and supporting Ukraine’s sovereignty, including over Crimea; and a willingness to support Ukraine’s post-war reconstruction financially.

The incremental approach that has guided Western sanctions policy since 2014 is not adequate to the task of confronting the threat posed by Putin’s Russia. The Western world is dealing with a system, not with an individual. With this in mind, the message should be that culpability for the Putin regime’s crimes is shared by everyone who has supported it, benefited from it, or acquiesced in it. It’s time for the severity of Western sanctions to match the seriousness of the challenge.

David Clark was Special Adviser on Europe at the UK Foreign Office 1997-2001 and now works as an independent analyst specializing in foreign policy and European affairs.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post The West needs a more united approach to sanctioning Putin’s elite appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Ukraine has a Russia problem not a Putin problem https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/ukraine-has-a-russia-problem-not-a-putin-problem/ Mon, 17 Oct 2022 20:44:34 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=576484 Ukraine appears poised to defeat Putin's invasion but Russia will continue to pose an existential threat to Ukrainian statehood until Russians learn to accept that Ukraine is a sovereign and independent nation.

The post Ukraine has a Russia problem not a Putin problem appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Vladimir Putin’s Ukraine invasion is rapidly unraveling, but most Ukrainians are well aware that Russia will continue to pose an existential threat to their nation for decades to come. With the current war already in its eighth month, fatigue is increasingly a factor. It is therefore vital for the international community to understand the long-term nature of the struggle ahead.

Most observers agree that Putin can no longer realistically achieve his initial war aim of extinguishing Ukrainian independence and establishing a puppet regime in Kyiv. With Putin’s invasion force suffering from mounting equipment shortages and demoralized by a combination of poor leadership and catastrophic losses, even the addition of 300,000 freshly mobilized Russian soldiers is unlikely to transform Moscow’s military fortunes. Instead, more and more analysts are now predicting either a prolonged stalemate or a Ukrainian victory.

It is not entirely clear what would constitute victory for Ukraine. As the war has progressed and Ukrainian battlefield successes have mounted, the country’s goals have become bolder. While concessions to the Kremlin might have been plausible in the early days of the war, Ukraine’s leaders now speak confidently of liberating the entire country. “Everything began with Crimea and will end with Crimea,” commented President Zelenskyy in August.

Opinion polls indicate that most Ukrainians share this sentiment and understand victory to mean the return of all occupied territories. In a June 2022 survey conducted by IRI, two-thirds of Ukrainians supported the liberation of eastern and southern Ukraine including Crimea. These poll results identified only minor regional differences ranging from 64% in the west and 67% in the south to 59% in the east. Meanwhile, just 5% of Ukrainians would be prepared to recognize Crimea as Russia and 2% would accept Moscow’s attempts to annex eastern Ukraine’s Donbas region.

Ukraine’s complete liberation remains an ambitious goal but it is no longer confined to the realms of fantasy. Following a string of stunning counteroffensive advances in September and October, many now believe Ukraine could push Russia back to the front lines of February 24 by the end of this year and return the rest of the country to Ukrainian control by the middle of 2023.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Vladimir Putin would be highly unlikely to survive the humiliation of a decisive Ukrainian victory. While it is impossible to predict exactly how his reign might end, it is equally hard to imagine the strongman Russian ruler surviving such a disastrous defeat. This is particularly true as the war is widely perceived within Russia as Putin’s personal project.

We can already say with some confidence that if Putin is ousted, his successor will not be a democrat. Modern Russia has no credible national democratic movement and lacks the pluralistic political traditions that made it possible for democracy to take root in post-Soviet Ukraine and the Baltic states. Given the political climate in Russia, any successor would almost certainly be a nationalist figure from within the ranks of the current elite. However, he (and yes, it would inevitably be a “he”) would probably be more pragmatic and therefore less prone to ranting about Ukraine.

In order to escape war guilt and bring sanctions to an end, he would seek to blame everything on Putin. This could help secure breathing space to repair Russia’s battered economy and armed forces. It would also give Ukraine some time to embark on a massive post-war reconstruction drive. At the same time, numerous major obstacles to a sustainable peace settlement would remain.

One of the most immediate challenges of the post-war period will be the quest for justice. In practice, this will mean attempting to charge the leaders of a nuclear power with war crimes. No successor regime will hand over Putin or any other senior Russian officials to an international tribunal, so it is reasonable to assume that war crimes prosecutions would have to take place in absentia. Nevertheless, it is vital for those guilty of war crimes to be held publicly accountable. Defendants should include a wide range of Russian politicians and military commanders along with the many regime propagandists who have provided the ideological foundations for Putin’s genocidal invasion.

Another urgent question will be how to make Russia pay for Ukraine’s post-war reconstruction. The obvious answer is to use the frozen Russian assets currently held by various Western nations. Work is already underway to create a legal framework for the reallocation of these frozen Russian assets, but this process could take years and will be fiercely contested by the Kremlin.

War crimes prosecutions and reparations can help undermine the sense of impunity within Russian society that helped make the current invasion possible. While most available evidence confirms overwhelming Russian public support for the war in Ukraine, Russia’s most respected independent pollster, the Levada Center, has found that a clear majority of Russians do not believe they are morally responsible for the deaths of Ukrainian civilians or the widespread destruction taking place in Ukraine.

Such attitudes are hardly surprising in an authoritarian society where nobody has ever been held accountable for the horrors of the Soviet era. Nevertheless, it is in everybody’s interests to end this cycle of impunity and encourage Russians to confront the crimes being committed in their name.

Whatever form Ukrainian victory takes, it will not mark the end of the historic confrontation between Russia and Ukraine. Today’s war is part of a grim saga stretching back centuries that is rooted in Russia’s refusal to recognize Ukraine’s right to exist.

Putin himself has frequently claimed that modern Ukrainians are really Russians (“one people”) and has accused Ukraine of being an artificial “anti-Russia” that poses an existential threat to Russian statehood and cannot therefore be tolerated. This genocidal logic is widely embraced in today’s Russia and will not disappear overnight. In reality, it may take decades before a majority of Russians are finally able to accept that Ukraine is a separate and fully independent nation.

Any leader of a post-Putin Russia would almost certainly continue to regard Ukraine as a threat. While they may not necessarily share Putin’s highly emotional obsession with the country, they would likely view Ukraine’s consolidation as a European democracy as a potential catalyst for democratic change inside Russia. In order to prevent this nightmare scenario, they would seek to undermine Ukraine’s economic recovery and derail the country’s Euro-Atlantic integration.

In public at least, Russia’s new leaders could be expected to declare their commitment to peaceful coexistence with Ukraine. However, such politically convenient rhetoric would not stop them from continuing to wage a hybrid war against the country. This could include everything from cyber warfare and terrorist attacks to political assassinations, disinformation operations, infrastructure sabotage, and the funding of pro-Russian networks throughout Ukraine. It would only be a matter of time before Ukraine faced a renewed Russian military threat.

In order to prevent another Russian invasion, Ukraine must transform itself and become a European Israel. Ukraine’s defense spending was already in the region of 4-5% of GDP prior to the onset of the current full-scale invasion. This must remain the norm for the foreseeable future. Likewise, the international security support that Ukraine has received since February must continue beyond the end of the current hostilities. It is vital that the Ukrainian military maintain its technological and organizational edge over the Soviet-style Russian army. Ultimately, this is the only security guarantee that matters.

Ukraine’s leaders appear increasingly confident of victory but they are also under no illusions regarding the future of relations with Russia, regardless of who sits in the Kremlin. “Knowing what I know first-hand about the Russians, our victory will not be final,” Ukrainian commander-in-chief Valeriy Zaluzhny told TIME magazine in September. “Our victory will be an opportunity to take a breath and prepare for the next war.”

The current war is merely the latest chapter in Europe’s longest independence struggle. This struggle will only end when Russia finally accepts that Ukraine is a sovereign country and Ukrainians are not Russians.

Taras Kuzio is a professor of political science at the National University of Kyiv Mohyla Academy and author of the forthcoming book “Fascism and Genocide. Russia’s War Against Ukrainians.”

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Ukraine has a Russia problem not a Putin problem appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Stifling the press is stifling progress. Here’s how policymakers can intervene. https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/stifling-the-press-is-stifling-progress-heres-how-policymakers-can-intervene/ Mon, 17 Oct 2022 10:00:00 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=574611 Today's decline in press freedom is nothing short of dangerous because of its concerning impact on other freedoms—and prosperity—in countries around the world.

The post Stifling the press is stifling progress. Here’s how policymakers can intervene. appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
The past few years have seen a dramatic shift in the way leaders treat their countries’ press. The result is that 85 percent of the world’s population has experienced a decline in press freedom in their country over the past five years, while trends in the suppression of independent press and media polarization are on the rise.

Authoritarian regimes have long used the press as a vehicle for propaganda, tightly regulating media outlets and silencing any voices of opposition. But now many democracies are exhibiting similar behavior: Governments of countries that once prided themselves on free and open media are exerting unprecedented levels of hostility, harassing journalists, engaging in censorship, and centralizing ownership of news outlets.

India, the world’s largest democracy, has devolved into one of the most dangerous countries for journalists, with an average of three to four journalists killed each year. The country’s ranking on the World Press Freedom Index has decreased dramatically in the last twenty years, falling from 80th in 2002 to 150th in 2022. Rather than addressing these concerns, India’s Ministry of Information and Broadcasting has resorted to denouncing the index as “questionable” and “non-transparent” while asserting that “media in India enjoy absolute freedom.”

Meanwhile, Brazil fell from 54th in 2002 to 110th in 2022 in part because of its aggressive rhetoric towards journalists and the presence of large media conglomerates. Even the United States has seen its share of eroding press freedom. The United States now ranks 42nd, a significant decline from 17th twenty years ago.

Freedom of the press is not simply relevant to journalists, and free media is a fundamental component of a country’s success. The data below demonstrates the relationship between freedom of the press, other freedoms, and prosperity, showing the need to take action in reversing the increasing hostility towards the press. Supporting a free and open media, however, will require a concerted effort from the world’s democratic leaders.

Where press freedom meets prosperity

Freedom of information is a human right; a free press is also a driver of other freedoms. It has a positive influence on good governance as well as on human and economic development. Countries with a free press are more likely to support entrepreneurship, attract foreign investments, and have strong connections in the global market. But beyond that, freedom of the press is a fundamental component of any democratic society since it requires governments to remain transparent and allows citizens to hold leaders accountable.

Mapping press and other freedoms

Source: 2021 data from the Reporters Sans Frontières Press Freedom Index and the Atlantic Council Freedom and Prosperity Index.

Countries that have “good” or “satisfactory” press freedom are economically and politically freer, have a stronger rule of law, and are generally more prosperous. Out of the sixty-nine countries that have at least satisfactory press freedom, only three remain mostly unfree according to the Atlantic Council’s Freedom Index: Niger, Côte d’Ivoire, and Togo. By contrast, Singapore stands out with its high level of freedoms despite an almost nonexistent freedom of the press. This reflects Singapore’s economic strategy: high levels of economic freedom while stifling political liberties.

Multilateral organizations are calling for more action. As part of measuring a country’s progress toward sustainable development goal number sixteen—peace, justice, and strong institutions—the United Nations (UN) added a specific indicator (16.10.1) that focuses on the number of cases of killing, kidnapping, enforced disappearance, arbitrary detention, and torture of journalists and associated media personnel in a given country. The indicator is still in Tier 2, meaning that despite being conceptually clear and recognized internationally, countries including the United States still haven’t regularly produced the data. It is urgent that countries, including ones with well-established press freedom, do more.

How to stand up for press freedom

Ignoring the freedom of the press is dangerous, and the international community needs to act, starting with the following steps:

First, leaders of free countries need to stand publicly for the freedom of the press. US Secretary of State Antony Blinken set a good example ahead of the UN General Assembly last month when he reiterated Washington’s commitment to freedom of the press and warned about increasing threats such as propaganda, surveillance, detention, and prosecution. World leaders need to follow in Blinken’s footsteps and publicly show their support for press freedom, condemning violations worldwide and offering assistance for any struggling or exiled journalists, such as those from Afghanistan. Similarly, leaders need to show a renewed commitment to protecting press freedom domestically, condemning the recent trends in polarization, concentration of ownership and monopolization, and censorship. Democratic nations must advocate for democracy and freedom worldwide, and this starts with becoming an example of success for correcting democratic backsliding at home.

Second, governments of democratic countries should lead the way in implementing practices outlined in the Windhoek +30 Declaration. Adopted by countries attending the 2021 World Press Freedom Day conference, thirty years after the 1991 Windhoek Declaration, the latest version offers recommendations to ensure a more diverse, independent media landscape as well as improved levels of media literacy and civic participation. Democratic leaders should begin to rebuild the landscape of free media. This includes:

  • Re-establishing local and community news outlets. This will decentralize media ownership, ensure a diversity of perspectives, and ensure more voices are amplified and represented in the media.
  • Requiring media literacy education in schools. Teaching children how to critically analyze media from a young age will enable them to distinguish between true media and disinformation and equip them with the skills to participate meaningfully in their communities.
  • Releasing information about media funding. With centralized ownership on the rise, releasing information about who is funding media outlets ensures transparency—and allows consumers to see exactly who and what may be informing the news. While state-controlled media is widely viewed as a red flag for freedom of expression, special interests and large conglomerates are just as damaging. Requiring transparency forces special interests to be straightforward about their intentions.

By publicly standing for press freedom and implementing the ideas of Windhoek +30, world leaders can show they are serious about their commitments to democracy and are willing to put ideas into action. And in working to improve freedom of the press, they will help make way for prosperity in their societies.


Joseph Lemoine is the deputy director of the Atlantic Council’s Freedom and Prosperity Center.

James Storen is a young global professional with the Atlantic Council’s Freedom and Prosperity Center.

The post Stifling the press is stifling progress. Here’s how policymakers can intervene. appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Meet the Ukrainian TV star fundraising millions for the country’s war effort https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/meet-the-ukrainian-tv-star-fundraising-millions-for-the-countrys-war-effort/ Thu, 13 Oct 2022 21:49:01 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=575566 TV host Serhiy Prytula is being tipped by many as a rising star of Ukrainian politics but for now he is fully occupied in his current role leading crowdfunding efforts for the Ukrainian Armed Forces.

The post Meet the Ukrainian TV star fundraising millions for the country’s war effort appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Editor’s Note: This article is part of the GENERATION UA series, which aims to introduce international audiences to the emerging generation of Ukrainian public figures and politicians.

It’s been a busy year for one of Ukraine’s most famous TV stars as he takes on a new wartime role. Serhiy Prytula’s crowdfunding efforts for the Ukrainian military have grown into a pillar of the country’s civil society and a symbol of Ukraine’s remarkable resistance to Vladimir Putin’s invasion.

Prytula first opened the eponymous Charity Foundation of Serhiy Prytula as an aid organization in 2020 in response to the Covid-19 pandemic. A longtime supporter of the Ukrainian military since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine first began in 2014 with the seizure of Crimea, Prytula mobilized his foundation to help coordinate the public response to Russia’s February 24 attack. The foundation has grown rapidly over the past eight months as it has provided military support to Ukrainian troops and humanitarian aid to civilians.

Public trust in the foundation was evident in early October when Prytula raised more than nine million dollars in just 24 hours to purchase kamikaze drones following a series of Russian airstrikes in Kyiv and other Ukrainian cities. Prytula had earlier demonstrated his fundraising potential during summer 2022 when he led the “People’s Bayraktar” project, a crowdfunding effort to buy three Bayraktar drones for the Ukrainian military.

When Turkish defense company Baykar offered to send the drones for free, Prytula decided to use the funds raised to buy a satellite instead. His foundation contracted one of the most advanced commercial satellite providers to help the Ukrainian military get high-resolution images of Russian formations more quickly in daylight, at night, and through cloud cover.

Prytula tells UkraineAlert that the satellite decision reflected Ukraine’s military needs. “Bayraktar is a well-known brand here in Ukraine. Many people understand how well these drones work so we thought that we could raise money for them,” he says. Indeed, Bayraktar drones have proved highly effective against Russian armor, with Ukrainians even singing wartime songs in their honor. But when Baykar said they would provide the drones free of charge, Prytula turned to Ukraine’s Defense Ministry. “We had a meeting with Minister of Defense Oleksii Reznikov, who asked us to check on the possibility of buying a satellite. So we did.”

Ukraine’s frontline military units rely on small reconnaissance drones and satellite imagery to find and target Russian positions. But most drones are prone to Russian electrical jamming, while satellite image-sharing from Western countries often arrives too slowly to be of immediate use. According to Prytula, his foundation’s satellite can cut the image-sharing transfer time from two days to three or four hours, making it much more useful. Most importantly, the Ukrainian military controls the satellite now and can decide for itself where to look.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

While Prytula has been civically engaged since his university days, the 41-year-old spent much of his career as a TV presenter and comedian. He made his name as a Ukrainian-speaking comic on the stand-up show Comedy Club Ukraine, before hitting the big time with Ukraine’s Noviy Kanal (New Channel). Prytula earned a reputation as one of Ukraine’s most versatile comic presenters, hosting the nation’s favorite morning TV show “Wake up” and a number of game shows.

He tried his hand at politics in the 2019 parliamentary elections as a candidate for the pro-European Holos party. The elections yielded 20 seats for Holos, but at 30th on the party list, Prytula did not enter parliament. Instead, he ran for mayor of Kyiv in 2020 and came in third with eight percent of the vote. In 2021, Prytula left Holos and later announced that he would form a new political party.

When asked if he still has plans to create a political party of his own, Prytula’s tone hardens. “We have no politicians in Ukraine these days. You cannot be a politician when your country is under fire. I have no other plans now except to stay alive and do everything that I can for our victory.”

There is a certain logic to this position. Since February 24, Ukrainian politicians have largely avoided the pitched partisan battles that have often poisoned the country’s politics. Even so, wartime public opinion polling regularly shows Prytula among the country’s most well-known public figures. Meanwhile, his foundation ranks among the most recognizable charities in Ukraine.

If he does go back into politics, Prytula has a good chance of rapidly establishing himself as one of Ukraine’s rising political forces. He has the name recognition to gain traction in the country’s personality-driven politics and also boasts humanitarian credentials that set him apart from many of Kyiv’s current elite.

The former showman is not convinced he will continue in his TV career. “I had a lot of different TV shows, but you can only be a good entertainer if you feel inside yourself that you have something to celebrate every day. But Russians have burned out this feeling inside of me,” he says. Instead, the last eight months have given Prytula a new calling. “I feel empowered now only to help the Ukrainian army, to unite people.”

Unity is central to the Prytula Foundation’s crowdfunding initiatives and to his vision for Ukraine’s future. The foundation has raised tens of millions of dollars since February 24 for military supplies alone, mostly in private donations. Funds have come in from Ukraine, Europe, and North America, often from Ukrainian diaspora communities.

The foundation is hoping to encourage more donations from Europeans by making a cost-saving argument. “Every dollar donated to the Armed Forces of Ukraine through the Serhiy Prytula Foundation saves ten dollars that would be spent on supporting Ukrainian refugees in Europe,” Prytula explains.

He believes this is a timely message and notes that donations have slowed in recent months. This could spell trouble for both Europe and Ukraine, warns Prytula. “The Ukrainian economy is in bad shape. Many people in Ukraine lost their jobs. That’s why we really need help with military aid and money, otherwise we could have millions more Ukrainian refugees.”

Prytula acknowledges that there will be huge issues to address at home once Russia’s invasion of Ukraine finally ends. Eventually he would like the millions of Ukrainians currently seeking safety abroad to return and help rebuild their country. Reconstruction itself will be a significant challenge, but Prytula has another task in mind for his compatriots. “I will be happy when our society develops new skills and learns to think more critically. I want Ukrainians to change the way they think, because we have paid a big price for our old way of thinking.”

Ukraine renewed many of its institutions and strengthened its sense of national identity in the years following the 2014 Revolution of Dignity. Many believe Russia’s 2022 invasion will serve as a catalyst for further societal development. Prytula hopes to be part of this process.

We ask Prytula if there’s anything else he thinks Western audiences should know about his work or about Ukraine. His press secretary chimes in off camera before he can answer. Prytula laughs, nods, and turns to us to translate. “Tell them that when we unite, we are invincible.”

Andrew D’Anieri is an assistant director at the Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center. He tweets @andrew_danieri. Oleksii Antoniuk is a third-year student at Yale University, born and raised in Ukraine. Find him on Twitter at @OleksiiAntoniuk.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Meet the Ukrainian TV star fundraising millions for the country’s war effort appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
No, Russia’s airstrike escalation is not retaliation for the Crimean Bridge https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/no-russias-airstrike-escalation-is-not-retaliation-for-the-crimean-bridge/ Thu, 13 Oct 2022 00:55:07 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=575080 International media coverage depicting Russia's recent airstrike escalation as retaliation for the alleged Ukrainian attack on the Crimean Bridge risks creating false equivalency over Vladimir Putin's war of aggression.

The post No, Russia’s airstrike escalation is not retaliation for the Crimean Bridge appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Russia fired more than 80 missiles and launched at least 24 kamikaze drones at civilian targets across Ukraine on October 10. The latest reports suggest that 19 Ukrainians were killed in the attacks with more than 100 injured. The strikes left large swathes of the country without electricity, water, and internet access. The following day, Russian airstrikes continued with around 30 missiles and 15 drones targeting civilian infrastructure.

This wave of attacks began just two days after an explosion on the Crimean Bridge, which links the occupied Ukrainian peninsula with the Russian Federation. In an address on October 10, Russian President Vladimir Putin claimed that Moscow’s dramatic air war escalation was a direct response to the suspected Ukrainian attack on the Crimean Bridge.

Many international media outlets appeared to take Putin at his word and framed their coverage of the Russian missile blitz as retaliation for the earlier bridge attack. These attempts to create a single news narrative from two separate events are factually incorrect, not to mention pernicious.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

The scale of Russia’s aerial attacks on October 10-11 indicates weeks if not months of planning and preparations. Dozens of targets in towns and cities across Ukraine had to be identified and confirmed; missiles, bombers, warships, and drones had to deployed and prepared for action. These are not tasks that could realistically be accomplished in the two-day window between the Crimean Bridge attack and the launch of Russia’s airstrike escalation.

In addition to these obvious practical issues, the retaliation narrative also risks creating false equivalency between Russian international aggression and Ukraine’s justifiable efforts to defend itself. The Crimean Bridge was constructed by Russia to strengthen Moscow’s illegal occupation of Ukraine’s Crimean peninsula. Furthermore, it has since been used as a key artery for the transportation of troops and military equipment from the Russian Federation to Crimea and Russian-occupied regions of southern Ukraine. In other words, the bridge plays a vital logistical role in the Russian invasion. As such, it clearly qualifies as a legitimate military target.

In contrast, Russia’s airstrikes deliberately targeted key civilian infrastructure such as power and heating stations that have no direct connection to the Ukrainian military or the ongoing war. Russia also launched missiles at a range of non-military targets in the heart of Kyiv that appeared to serve no purpose other than sowing panic and terror among the civilian population. These included a children’s playground, a pedestrian bridge, a university, and a busy downtown traffic intersection.

The destructive objectives of Russia’s blitz are entirely in line with the genocidal intent underpinning Putin’s invasion. Time and again, the Russian dictator and his Kremlin colleagues have expressed their desire to extinguish Ukrainian statehood and erase Ukrainian national identity. The war crimes currently being committed by the Russian military in Ukraine are entirely in line with the chilling logic of these words. By systematically destroying essential Ukrainian civilian infrastructure, Russia hopes to maximize human suffering among the noncombatant population and make the country unlivable.

This raises some uncomfortable questions for media outlets that have chosen to portray the recent escalation in Russia’s air war as a response to an alleged Ukrainian attack rather than as a new phase in Putin’s genocidal invasion. Would they also frame the mass rape and murder of civilians in Bucha, Irpin, Izyum, and countless other Ukrainian towns as Russian revenge? What was Moscow retaliating for when it reduced Mariupol to rubble and killed tens of thousands of the Ukrainian port city’s civilian population? No doubt the Kremlin could provide far-fetched excuses, but should the international media really allow such claims to pass unchallenged?

Framing Russia’s airstrike escalation as retaliation is misleading and irresponsible journalism. It encourages audiences to blame the victim and clouds perceptions of what is the most blatant act of international aggression in Europe since World War II. Media portrayals that imply Ukraine is at fault for defending itself risk fueling Russian disinformation and prolonging the war. As US Secretary of State Antony Blinken stated at the United Nations just weeks ago, “If Russia stops fighting, the war ends. If Ukraine stops fighting, Ukraine ends.”

Media coverage that fails to distinguish between Russian aggression and Ukraine’s defensive actions also serves to distort the debate over the need to provide Ukraine with more weapons. Critics argue that arming Ukraine merely provokes Russia and escalates the conflict. In reality, nothing could be more provocative to Putin than an isolated and defenseless Ukraine.

Almost eight months since the start of the Russian invasion, Moscow’s intentions should be crystal clear to all objective observers. Putin is aiming to destroy the Ukrainian state and is pursuing this goal in full public view. By suggesting that Russia’s actions are in some way retaliatory, international media outlets risk becoming inadvertent accessories in this crime.

Razom is a New York-based NGO.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post No, Russia’s airstrike escalation is not retaliation for the Crimean Bridge appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Memo to Elon Musk: Only Ukrainian victory can stop Vladimir Putin https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/memo-to-elon-musk-only-ukrainian-victory-can-stop-vladimir-putin/ Wed, 05 Oct 2022 20:16:04 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=573243 Elon Musk recently became the latest high-profile figure to argue that Ukraine should cede land to Russia in exchange for peace. These advocates of appeasement fail to grasp the genocidal nature of Vladimir Putin's war.

The post Memo to Elon Musk: Only Ukrainian victory can stop Vladimir Putin appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Ukraine should get real and agree to a ceasefire with Russia. An uncomfortable peace is better than continuing this horrific war, even if that means allowing Russia to keep the Ukrainian lands it currently occupies and perhaps has some right to.

This is the essence of the deeply flawed argument put forward by US tech billionaire Elon Musk on social media in recent days. Musk garnered headlines for his Kremlin-friendly peace proposals, but in reality he is merely one of many voices in the West calling on Ukraine to abandon millions of its citizens to perpetual Russian occupation in order to end Europe’s biggest armed conflict since World War II.

Ever since the early days of Vladimir Putin’s invasion, advocates of appeasement have pushed the idea that Ukrainian political and territorial concessions are the only way to end Russian aggression. These arguments ignore the genocidal reality of the war while denying agency to Ukrainians and relying on flawed assumptions of Russia’s behavior and capabilities.

Russia has not put forward a single sensible peace plan since the invasion began on February 24. Moreover, Moscow has rejected Ukraine’s proposals. During the initial stage of the war, Ukraine offered to abandon NATO membership and make further concessions to the Kremlin, but Putin preferred to proceed with his bid to seize Kyiv.

Despite multiple military setbacks, Moscow’s position has hardened over the intervening months, with Putin essentially demanding Ukraine’s capitulation and insisting that any settlement must include the surrender of entire Ukrainian regions to Russia. Such imperial posturing cannot serve as the basis for serious negotiations.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

The idea that Ukraine should be willing to trade some of its regions in exchange for peace might make sense in the abstract. This is especially true for those who believe Russia’s policymakers remain fundamentally rational actors who are merely seeking greater security for their own state. However, this logic ignores the crimes committed under Russian occupation and the genocidal agenda underpinning the entire invasion.

When the Russian army retreated from northern Ukraine in the second month of the war, advancing Ukrainian troops encountered widespread evidence of war crimes in the formerly occupied suburbs of Kyiv including mass executions and large-scale sexual violence against women, men, and children. Similar revelations in other liberated regions and testimonies of people who have fled occupied Ukraine indicate that these crimes are a deliberate feature of Russia’s so-called Special Military Operation.

In areas of Ukraine currently under their control, Russian forces are terrorizing the civilian population. Millions of Ukrainians have been subjected to forced deportation to the Russian Federation, with special laws adopted in Moscow to allow for the Russification of Ukrainian orphans. Children who remain in regions of Ukraine under Russian control are forced to undergo indoctrination in schools, with teachers imported from Russia to impart distorted histories. Meanwhile, the Ukrainian language is being eradicated from public life along with all symbols of Ukrainian statehood. Ukrainian media outlets are blocked and residents are pressurized to accept Russian citizenship.

More than seven months since the invasion began, it is now impossible to escape the conclusion that Russia aims not only to extinguish Ukrainian statehood but also to eradicate Ukrainian national identity wherever it is able to establish its authority. When proponents of a supposedly realistic peace agreement call on Ukraine to cede territory, they are actually asking Ukraine to accept genocide. Plainly, no Ukrainian leader could ever agree to a peace deal that consigned the civilian population to such a fate.

Nor do most Ukrainians share Elon Musk’s belief that they have no option but to compromise with the Kremlin. As a result of Russian aggression, Ukrainian national identity has never been stronger. Record numbers of Ukrainians back Euro-Atlantic integration, while recent military successes have further strengthened Ukrainian resolve to liberate all Russian-occupied regions of the country.

Elon Musk and other self-styled realists fail to grasp that Russia currently has far more reason than Ukraine to seek an off-ramp from the conflict, even if it may be hard to swallow for Russians. Russia is now clearly losing the war and has suffered a string of humiliating defeats on the eastern and southern fronts over the past month. Ukrainian forces are receiving some of the best weapons in the world along with the financial, intelligence, and military support of NATO and other global partners. Ukrainian morale is high, with soldiers fighting to free their homeland and their families from occupation.

Russia, on the other hand, is in increasingly dire straights. Putin has launched Russia’s first mobilization campaign since World War II in order to compensate for staggering battlefield losses. While the actual number of Russian soldiers killed in Ukraine remains a closely guarded secret, even the most conservative estimates put the figure in the tens of thousands. The Russian military has also lost huge amounts of equipment in Ukraine including more than 1000 tanks. Putin now finds himself forced to rely on nuclear intimidation in order to maintain the fearsome mystique of his once-vaunted army. Unsurprisingly, the remaining Russian forces in Ukraine are suffering from collapsing morale.

Meanwhile, the situation inside Russia is also deteriorating. Sanctions imposed in response to the invasion of Ukraine are hurting the economy, while travel restrictions are narrowing the horizons of ordinary Russians. An estimated 700,000 Russians have fled the country in the two weeks since mobilization was announced, inflicting further economic damage and fueling public discontent.

Ukraine is currently advancing simultaneously on multiple fronts against what is an increasingly poorly-armed and demoralized enemy. Furthermore, there is little reason to believe Russia can regain the battlefield initiative in the months ahead. With this in mind, it makes little sense to preach restraint or expect concessions from Kyiv.

Putin’s nuclear blackmail is the elephant in the room, of course. His threats must be taken seriously, but the West cannot allow nuclear saber-rattling to become a trump card that enables Russia to claim whatever territory it wants. Putin knows the specter of a nuclear strike frightens Western leaders and sparks whispers of ending support for Ukraine. If he succeeds, he will use the same tactic again and again. Others, too, will take note and draw the obvious conclusions.

The best response to these nuclear threats has come from the Ukrainians themselves. Officials in Kyiv have defiantly declared that while a nuclear strike would dramatically increase the costs of the war, it would not alter the eventual outcome. In other words, even if Putin crosses the nuclear threshold, he will not be able to prevent a Ukrainian victory. Western leaders should follow suit and make crystal clear that any nuclear escalation would have catastrophic consequences for Russia.

Ukrainians want peace, but not at any price. Crucially, they recognize that unless they are victorious, their homeland will cease to exist. Elon Musk and other proponents of land-for-peace proposals need to understand that the single best way to bring peace to Ukraine is by sending the weapons that will help secure a Ukrainian victory. There is no middle ground between Russia’s goal of destroying Ukraine and Ukraine’s own will to survive.

Ukraine is not standing in the way of peace. Nor is peace something that can be imposed on Ukraine by the country’s Western partners. Anyone who genuinely wants to bring the Russian invasion to an end should focus on pushing the international community to give Ukrainians the tools they need to defend themselves. Until Russia is decisively defeated, the war in Ukraine will go on and the suffering of Ukrainians will continue.

Doug Klain is a nonresident fellow at the Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center. Find him on Twitter @DougKlain.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Memo to Elon Musk: Only Ukrainian victory can stop Vladimir Putin appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Russian War Report: Putin illegally annexes Ukrainian territory https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/russian-war-report-putin-illegally-annexes-ukrainian-territory/ Fri, 30 Sep 2022 15:27:34 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=571816 On September 30, Russian President Putin officially annexed four Ukrainian oblasts, incorporating them into Russia. The announcement was met with swift global condemnation.

The post Russian War Report: Putin illegally annexes Ukrainian territory appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
As Russia continues its assault on Ukraine, the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab (DFRLab) is keeping a close eye on Russia’s movements across the military, cyber, and information domains. With more than seven years of experience monitoring the situation in Ukraine—as well as Russia’s use of propaganda and disinformation to undermine the United States, NATO, and the European Union—the DFRLab’s global team presents the latest installment of the Russian War Report. 

Security

Putin illegally annexes Ukrainian territory

Ukraine attempts to encircle Lyman; civilian convoy hit in Zaporizhzha

Documenting dissent

Russian men resist mobilization across the country

Tracking narratives

Russia-based Facebook operation targeting Europe with anti-Ukraine messaging revealed

Kremlin spins quotes from the Western leaders to blame the US in Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline explosions

Refugees and migration

Thousands of Russian citizens flee to neighboring Georgia, raising security concerns among Georgian civil society

Putin illegally annexes Ukrainian territory

On September 30, Russian President Vladimir Putin officially annexed four Ukrainian oblasts, including Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson, effectively incorporating all of southeastern Ukraine into Russia. “There are four new regions of Russia,” he told the assembled audience at the Kremlin, and insisted that annexing the regions was “the will of millions of people.” After a brief history lesson in which he lamented the collapse of the Soviet Union as a “catastrophe,” he called for Ukraine to accept a ceasefire. Putin was open to negotiating a settlement, he continued, but added that he would defend the newly annexed territories “by all means available.” In reference to the possible use of nuclear weapons, he said the US “created a precedent” for their use when it bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. 

Prior to the annexation ceremony, Reuters and the Guardian reported Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov discussing how Russia would “’de jure’ incorporate parts of Ukraine which are not under the control of Russian forces into Russia itself.” Russia would therefore consider Ukrainian attacks on annexed areas that Russia does not even control as an attack on Russia itself. 

Response to today’s developments have been swift. UK Defense Minister Ben Wallace declared on Twitter, “The UK will never recognise Russia’s illegal annexations in Ukraine. 

Estonian Prime Minister Kaja Kallas lambasted the move as a “land grab” and put the annexation into stark geographic terms: 

Let’s look at the magnitude of Russia’s illegal annexation. Russia will announce that around 20% of Ukraine’s territory is annexed to Russia. It is the size of 108 800 km2 – this is comparable to Austria and Belgium combined. Or Denmark, Belgium and the Netherlands combined. Or 30% of Germany. Or the size of the Republic of Korea. If you add Crimea to it, the territory is comparable to three Belgiums and the Netherlands combined. And around 40% of Germany. 

 

And let’s call things with the right names. Russia tries to rewrite the map of Europe. It’s a land grab. It’s theft. Putin hopes to add legitimacy to his invasion with this step. The international community will never recognize it.

Estonian Prime Minister Kaja Kallas

US President Joe Biden also condemned Putin’s annexation move. “Make no mistake: these actions have no legitimacy,” he said in a statement. “The United States will always honor Ukraine’s internationally recognized borders.”

Andy Carvin, Managing Editor, Washington DC 

Ukraine attempts to encircle Lyman; civilian convoy hit in Zaporizhzhia

Russian and Ukrainian analysts on Telegram are predicting that Lyman could fall into Ukrainian control, as Ukraine continues its efforts to encircle the Russian-controlled city. A Ukrainian armed forces spokesman told Ukrainian outlet Suspilne that the encirclement of Lyman is “nearing its completion.” There are unconfirmed reports that Russian forces are attempting a pullback from the city.  

https://twitter.com/IAPonomarenko/status/1575792380468658176

In recent days, Russian army shelling was most active in the front areas of the front near Bakhmut and Pokrovsk. In the Bakhmut area, Toretsk and Svitlodarsk came under fire. There is a Ukrainian breakthrough reported in Stavky, the liberation of Yampil which reportedly fell under Ukrainian control on this morning, and a blockade of Drobysheve, which is important for the Russian defense of the city. 

Outside of Zaporizhzhia, a missile struck a civilian convoy of residents attempting to relocate. Initial reports from the scene suggest a death toll of more than two dozen people, but at the time of writing had not been confirmed. 

The news from the front comes against the background of the Kremlin’s announcement to annex four more areas of Ukraine after self-styled referendums condemned by Ukraine and the West as a sham. It is worth noting that Russia does not fully control any of the four regions it has decided to annex. Although most of Luhansk remains under Russian control, Moscow only controls 60 percent of Donetsk. The capital of the southern region of Zaporizhzhia is under the control of Ukraine’s government while the frontlines in Kherson remain unstable.

Ruslan Trad, Resident Fellow for Security Research, Sofia, Bulgaria 

Andy Carvin, Managing Editor, Washington DC 

Russian men resist mobilization across the country

Against the backdrop of Ukrainian pressure on the front lines in the Donbas, signs of resistance in the Russian Federation against the announced mobilization continue to emerge. Authorities detained an individual after an arson incident took place at the military enlistment office in Uryupinsk. At least fifty-four arson incidents have been document documented in recent weeks, according to Russian independent media outlet Mediazona.  

On September 26, a Russian man lit himself on fire at a bus station in Ryazan while yelling he didn’t want to take part in the Ukraine war. In another incident that same day, a commander was killed at a military enlistment office in eastern Russia. A video emerged of a Russian man opening fire and killing the commander in the city of Ust-Ilimsk, who was also the head of the local draft committee. 

Meanwhile, the number of Russians attempting to leave the Russian Federation has increased since Putin declared a partial mobilization. The Finnish Border Guard, for instance, reported an increase of 37 percent on September 24 compared with the previous weekend at the immigration checkpoints Salla and Raja-Jooseppi in Lapland. Further south, where Finland has several cross-border roads to Karelia and the St. Petersburg region, traffic was reportedly higher. A total of 38,444 Russian citizens entered Finland at land border checkpoints last week, the Border Guards stated. Considering the mass exodus from Russia, Novaya Gazeta reported that 261,000 men had left the country since mobilization, according to the FSB; most had fled to Georgia, Kazakhstan, and Mongolia. Especially dire is the situation on the Georgian border, where the Russian army even established mobile barricades to stop those of military age from departing the country. Several outlets reported that Russian authorities could close the border for military-aged men as soon as this week. These reports also suggested that Putin will make the final decision on a departure ban and the possible introduction of martial law prior to addressing both chambers of parliament today.  

Some Russian officials are going even further to convince more recruits. Kirill Kabanov, a member of the Presidential Council for the Development of Civil Society and Human Rights, proposed to depriving residents from Central Asia of Russian citizenship if they refuse military service. This proposal would also affect people who had received citizenship within the last ten years, as well as their immediate family, thus raising the possibility that they would be stripped of their citizenship. 

Russian Muslims announced protests against the mobilization on September 30 after Friday prayers. They also planned to express solidarity with Dagestan, whose population was among the first to protest earlier this month. In recent days, over 100 people have been arrested during protests in the Dagestani capital of Makhachkala, and tensions between residents and security forces continue to rise. Arrests were also reported in the Republic of Tuva following local protests.

Ruslan Trad, Resident Fellow for Security Research, Sofia, Bulgaria 

Russia-based Facebook operation targeting Europe with anti-Ukraine messaging revealed

In August 2022, the DFRLab discovered a network consisting of six inauthentic Facebook pages purchasing ads to promote posts about Germany’s impending energy crisis and called for the lifting of sanctions on Russian gas imports. An independent review of these assets by Meta, along with others separately identified by German media, led to the discovery of a much larger network consisting of 1,633 accounts, 703 pages, twenty-nine Instagram profiles, and one Facebook group. These assets promoted Kremlin interests beyond Germany, also targeting France, the UK, Italy, Ukraine, and Latvia.  

It was “the largest [network] of its kind we’ve disrupted since the war in Ukraine began,” Meta said in its report. 

The network exhibited an overarching pattern of targeting Europe with anti-Ukraine narratives and expressions of support for Russian interests. It manifested multiple indicators of previous Russian influence operations, including the amplification of pro-Kremlin and anti-Ukraine or anti-Western narratives; the paid promotion of content; calls for action on petition sites and other forms of audience engagement; amplification across multiple languages reflecting inaccurate and non-native grammar; impersonating real people or institutions or creating fake ones; and generating names with detectable patterns. 

The timing and narratives of the posts coincided with policy decisions made by the targeted countries pages regarding the war in Ukraine. For example, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz went to Canada for talks about liquified natural gas supplies on August 21, 2022. On August 22 and 23, five pages in the network posted a cartoon portraying Europe as a character named “Dr. EuroReich,” who is seen cutting Russian gas to a patient representing Germany’s economy. Similarly, in June 2022, France completed its first delivery of Caesar self-propelled howitzers to Ukraine. At the end of that month, four pages posted an image of the howitzer and suggested that France was getting itself involved in war crimes allegedly committed by Ukraine. 

Meta concluded that the network originated in Russia and spread out across multiple platforms beyond Facebook and Instagram. It spent the equivalent of about $105,000 in advertising on Facebook and Instagram, primarily in US dollars and euros. 

Some of the Facebook pages within the network posted links to websites of Russian origin, as well as links spoofing the domains of legitimate media organizations, including Bild and Welt in Germany, 20minutes in France, ANSA in Italy, RBC in Ukraine, and the Guardian in the UK. EU DisinfoLab, together with the Swedish non-profit foundation Qurium Media Foundation, were able to identify fifty-six spoofed domains that were part of the network.  

Read the full report

Nika Aleksejeva, Lead Researcher, Riga, Latvia

Kremlin spins quotes from the Western leaders to blame the US in Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline explosions

Maria Zakharova, spokesperson for Russia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA), demanded on her Telegram channel that US President Joe Biden “answer whether the United States realized its threat on September 25 and 26, 2022, when an emergency occurred on the three lines of Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2, which is tentatively qualified as a pipeline rupture, suggesting that they were blown up.” Zakharova referred to a press conference on February 7, 2022, when Olaf Scholtz visited the White House. During the that meeting, President Biden said, “If Russia invades, that means tanks or troops crossing the — the border of Ukraine again, then there will be — there will be no longer a Nord Stream 2.” After a journalist asked to clarify on how exactly the US will stop Nord Stream 2, which is under German control, Biden said, “We will — I promise you — we will be able to do it.” 

Zakharova took out the video fragment of the press briefing and posted it on her Telegram. The post garnered more than 850,000 views, 85 shares to other Telegram channels and chats, 3,6000 forwards and 492 comments, according the TGStat.ru, a Telegram analysis tool.

Screenshot of Maria Zakharova’s Telegram post’s engagement data retrieved from TGStat.ru (Source: @nikaaleksejeva/DFRLab via TGStat) 
Screenshot of Maria Zakharova’s Telegram post’s engagement data retrieved from TGStat.ru (Source: @nikaaleksejeva/DFRLab via TGStat) 

Alternative für Deutschland (AfD), a German right-wing political party, used Facebook advertisements to promote the video fragment with Biden suggesting that the US might be behind the attack. 

Screenshot of Facebook ad paid by AfD and translated to English from German by Google translate. (Source: Meta Ad Library) 
Screenshot of Facebook ad paid by AfD and translated to English from German by Google translate. (Source: Meta Ad Library

Zakharova also used a tweet by Radek Sikorski, the former Polish Minister of Foreign Affairs, now Member of the European Parliament, in which he posted the bubbling surface of the Baltic Sea and wrote, “Thank you, USA.” Sikorski’s Tweet was amplified by the Russia’s MFA on Twitter to further suggest US involvement in the gas pipelines’ disruptions.

Screenshot of Russian MFA’s quote tweet of Radek Sikorski’s tweet. (Source: @mfa_russia/archive)
Screenshot of Russian MFA’s quote tweet of Radek Sikorski’s tweet. (Source: @mfa_russia/archive)

Sikorski later deleted this tweet but left another tweet celebrating the gas leak. Rafał Trzaskowski, the mayor of Warsaw, attempted to explain that what Sikorski might have meant was thanking the US for warning that such gas pipeline explosions might happen. Previously, on September 28, 2022, Spiegel, the German mainstream media outlet, wrote that the CIA warned Germany about possible attacks on the gas pipelines.  

Russian gas deliveries to Western Europe through Nord Stream 1 pipeline were among the Kremlin’s leverage over sanctions put on Russia after Russia invaded Ukraine. On September 5, 2022, Russian state-owned Gazprom company shut down Nord Stream 1 due to “necessary repairs.” Nord Stream 2 was never in use, as Germany decided to freeze the project amid Russia’s recognition on two breakaway regions in Eastern Ukraine. Putting both pipelines out of order does not change much for Western European countries in terms of gas supply, while the Kremlin has lost direct access to a large part of the European gas market.

Nika Aleksejeva, Lead Researcher, Riga, Latvia

Thousands of Russian citizens flee to neighboring Georgia, raising security concerns among Georgian civil society

Putin’s partial mobilization order on September 21 has led to a second wave of mass exodus from Russia. Tens of thousands of Russian citizens have left the country. According to statistics published by the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Georgia, up to 79,000 Russian citizens entered Georgia between September 17–26, out of which 53,000 Russian citizens entered Georgia since September 21, after the mobilization announcement in Russia. This is the second large wave of Russian influx in Georgia. The first wave followed shortly after Russia invaded Ukraine on February 24 and peaked in summer.  Between March and August, up to 800,000 Russian citizens entered Georgia. The visa-free regime was introduced by the previous Georgian administration. The Georgian Dream-led government has expanded the visa-free stay in the country from ninety days to one year.  

Footage emerged on social media platforms depicting thousands of Russian citizens trying to cross the border with Georgia at the Upper Lars border crossing. Maxar Technologies published satellite imagery from September 27 depicting a sixteen kilometer traffic jam near the Lars border checkpoint. The Insider also published drone footage of long lines near the border crossing. 

The latest influx of Russian citizens has raised concerns among civil society actors and democracy activists in Georgia. On September 28, activists held a protest rally near the Georgia-Russia border demanding closure of the checkpoint. Citizens also started to mobilize on Facebook. A Facebook group called “ჩავკეტოთ ლარსის გზა“ (“Let’s block the Lars road”) was created on September 27 and garnered 9,300 members in two days. The group has already organized two events on Facebook to demand the closure of the Lars checkpoint.  

The Georgian Dream-led government has not been responsive to the situation. Earlier in August, Georgian Dream party chairperson Irakli Kobakhidze accused opposition parties, media, and civil society actors of holding “xenophobic” and “chauvinistic” attitudes towards Russian citizens. On September 27, the Interior Minister Vakhtang Gomelauri stressed that about 60 percent of Russian entrants had already left the country. “Russians have always entered Georgia…why should this become a problem today?” – he added

On Telegram, the increase in mentions of “Ларс” (Lars) following Putin’s September 21 “partial” mobilization announcement peaked on September 27, with 4,502 mentions and up to 88 million views.

Screengrab from a TGStat query showing the increase of mentions (gray) and reach (blue) of “Ларс” (Larsi) following Putin’s announcement of “partial mobilization.” (Source: DFRLab via TGStat) 
Screengrab from a TGStat query showing the increase of mentions (gray) and reach (blue) of “Ларс” (Larsi) following Putin’s announcement of “partial mobilization.” (Source: DFRLab via TGStat

Various Russian Telegram channels and groups with “Lars” in their titles have been growing audience and garnering engagement. The groups include “ВЕРХНИЙ ЛАРС 🇬🇪 ЧАТ” (Upper Lars 🇬🇪 chat), ВЕРХНИЙ ЛАРС 🇬🇪 ЧАТ | ГРУЗИЯ (Upper Lars chat 🇬🇪 | Georgia), ВЕРХНИЙ ЛАРС 🇬🇪 (Upper Lars 🇬🇪), among others. The subscribers of the channels and groups have been sharing information about where to get products, water, and petroleum; advertising the private services of transportation from Russia to Georgia; posting images and videos of people crossing Georgian border; and giving various tips to each other. 

For instance, ВЕРХНИЙ ЛАРС 🇬🇪 ЧАТ | ГРУЗИЯ (Upper Lars chat 🇬🇪 | Georgia) had around 11,000 members at the end of August; by late September the number reached 36,000.

Screengrab from TGStat showing the participants number growth (top) and number of messages (bottom) in the Telegram group Upper Lars chat 🇬🇪. (Source: EtoBuziashvili/DFRLab via TGStat) 
Screengrab from TGStat showing the participants number growth (top) and number of messages (bottom) in the Telegram group Upper Lars chat 🇬🇪. (Source: EtoBuziashvili/DFRLab via TGStat

Sopo Gelava, Research Associate, Tbilisi, Georgia

Eto Buziashvili, Research Associate, Washington DC

The post Russian War Report: Putin illegally annexes Ukrainian territory appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Referendum coverage proves media is still vulnerable to Russian disinformation https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/referendum-coverage-proves-media-is-still-vulnerable-to-russian-disinformation/ Thu, 29 Sep 2022 14:16:41 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=571314 International coverage of Russia's sham referendums in occupied regions of Ukraine has served to highlight the continued influence of Kremlin disinformation at some of the world's leading media outlets, writes Peter Dickinson.

The post Referendum coverage proves media is still vulnerable to Russian disinformation appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
According to the Kremlin, millions of Ukrainian civilians who have been subjected to seven months of brutal Russian occupation just voted overwhelmingly to join their oppressors. This claim is self-evidently absurd and grotesque, but that did not prevent multiple international media outlets from reporting on Russia’s sham referendums in a matter-of-fact manner that risked lending a veneer of legitimacy to Vladimir Putin’s ongoing war of imperial aggression.

“Over 96% said to favour joining Russia in first vote results from occupied Ukraine regions,” declared Reuters in a tweet that uncritically cited Moscow’s highly improbable referendum results. Reuters also published an equally inaccurate news report titled, “Big majority said to favour joining Russia in first vote results of occupied Ukraine regions.” Meanwhile, the Financial Times led with the dangerously unhelpful headline, “Russian-held referendums in occupied Ukraine opt for annexation.”

There was also considerable confusion in the international press over exactly who was behind these bogus votes. The world’s oldest news agency, Agence France-Presse (AFP), referred to Russia’s occupation administrations in Ukraine as “Pro-Moscow authorities,” while Germany’s DW attributed the ballots to “separatists in Ukraine.” Such terminology implies a locally-driven conflict and absolves Russia of responsibility for what remains Europe’s most unambiguous act of international aggression since the days of Hitler and Stalin.

Unsurprisingly, this troubling coverage of Russia’s sham referendums sparked an online backlash. To their credit, some of the worst offenders deleted the posts in question and edited headlines in order to more accurately reflect the reality of the situation. However, the damage had already been done. Millions of people around the world had been exposed to deeply misleading reports from trusted news sources that reinforced Russian disinformation and endowed Putin’s fake ballots with a credibility they did not deserve.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This is not a new problem. From the very beginning of the Russian attack on Ukraine in spring 2014 until the full-scale invasion of February 2022, Moscow consistently sought to disguise its involvement by portraying the unfolding hostilities as a fight between the Ukrainian authorities and homegrown separatist movements. The international media often served as invaluable if unwitting accomplices in these efforts, with many of the world’s most prominent outlets choosing to prioritize impartiality over accuracy in their coverage of the conflict.

In practice, this typically meant giving equal weight to Russian denials despite overwhelming evidence that Moscow was simply lying. For example, nobody seriously questioned the fact that the “Little Green Men” who seized Crimea in early 2014 were in fact Russian soldiers, but most media coverage of the armed takeover stopped short of explicitly saying so. Likewise, while Russia’s subsequent military intervention in eastern Ukraine was widely recognized as the world’s worst-kept secret, international news reports frequently presented the ensuing conflict in ambiguous terms that suggested the extent of Russia’s participation was genuinely in doubt.

Securing Kremlin-friendly coverage from international correspondents has long been a key goal of Russia’s disinformation strategy. In an October 2021 interview, Russian MP Alexander Borodai spelled out Moscow’s efforts to manipulate the international media. Borodai is no ordinary Russian parliamentarian. Prior to entering the Duma via Russia’s September 2021 parliamentary elections as a representative of Vladimir Putin’s United Russia party, Borodai was best known for having served in summer 2014 as prime minister of the so-called Donetsk People’s Republic (DPR), the separatist republic created by the Kremlin in eastern Ukraine.

Asked why he left his post in Donetsk so abruptly in August 2014, Borodai explained that his exit was deemed necessary in order to hoodwink the international media regarding Russia’s role in the war. “At that time, the leadership of the Donetsk People’s Republic was a strange spectacle,” he recalled. “I am from Moscow. My first deputy was from Moscow. The power ministries were all controlled by Muscovites, and defense minister Igor Strelkov (Igor Girkin) was also from Moscow. It was a little too blatant from a propaganda perspective. There was no propaganda issue with domestic audiences in Russia, but the situation in the international information space was more difficult in this context. It was clear that it would be necessary to identify new leaders from among the local [Ukrainian] population.”

The world’s media has moved on considerably since 2014 and the early days of Russia’s attack on Ukraine. Indeed, the shock of this year’s full-scale invasion has brought much-needed clarity to coverage of the conflict and has led to a sharp decline in the number of outlets ready to unquestioningly quote the Kremlin as a credible source. It is also important to acknowledge that much of the reporting coming out of Ukraine since February has been truly world class, with courageous journalists bringing the unvarnished reality of the war to international audiences, often at great personal risk. Tragically, a number of correspondents have been killed in the line of duty.

While the bravery and professionalism of individual journalists reporting from Ukraine is not in question, the problematic portrayal of Russia’s recent fake referendums by much of the international media is a reminder that serious issues do remain. It is obviously farcical to employ the language of democracy when reporting on ballots conducted at gunpoint, much as it is obscene to imply that people under military occupation are able to express themselves freely. Errors of this magnitude reflect the continued success of Russian efforts to disguise the true nature of the war.

For more than eight years, disinformation has been at the heart of Russia’s attack on Ukraine. Putin lied about Russian soldiers in Crimea and eastern Ukraine; he lied about preparations for a full-scale invasion; and he lied about plans to annex Ukrainian territory. In reality, it is now painfully clear that Russia is waging an old-fashioned war of imperial expansion and intends to extinguish Ukrainian statehood altogether. International media outlets that allow Russian narratives to go unchallenged are putting themselves at risk of becoming inadvertent accomplices in this criminal agenda.

Peter Dickinson is Editor of the Atlantic Council’s UkraineAlert Service.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Referendum coverage proves media is still vulnerable to Russian disinformation appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
From the UN to The Late Show, Ukraine’s diplomats are winning https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/from-the-un-to-the-late-show-ukraines-diplomats-are-winning/ Mon, 26 Sep 2022 15:35:53 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=570192 Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba recently quipped at the UN that "Russian diplomats flee almost as aptly as Russian soldiers.” This one-liner was typical of the creative diplomacy that is bolstering Ukraine's war effort.

The post From the UN to The Late Show, Ukraine’s diplomats are winning appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba delivered one of the more memorable quotes of the war during his recent visit to New York. Commenting on Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov’s hasty departure from a United Nations Security Council session on Ukraine, Kuleba quipped, “I also noted today that Russian diplomats flee almost as aptly as Russian soldiers.”

Just hours after Kuleba’s instantly viral one-liner hit social media, he was starring on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert. Ukraine’s top diplomat received a rousing reception on the flagship US talk show, including a standing ovation from the studio audience in honor of the Ukrainian people and the country’s armed forces. Speaking with dignity, candor, and a dash of humor, Kuleba concisely expressed Ukraine’s view of the Russian invasion in a nine-minute interview that was hailed as a masterclass in public diplomacy.

The Ukrainian Foreign Minister’s strong showing in New York was a good example of the innovative approaches that are enabling Ukraine to gain the upper hand over Russia on the diplomatic front. In many ways, this confrontation is a generational clash between two very different diplomatic schools. While Russia is still represented by a Soviet-era generation of diplomats epitomized by 72-year-old Cold War veteran Sergei Lavrov, Ukrainian diplomats who came of age in the post-Soviet era are embracing new methods and achieving considerable success.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Ukraine’s wartime diplomacy has already delivered numerous significant results. These include securing the largest military support for any ally since World War II, along with unprecedented sanctions against Russia and other measures to increase Moscow’s international isolation. With the war now in its eighth month, the broad alliance of international partnerships created and nurtured by Ukrainian diplomats shows no signs of weakening.

What has Ukrainian diplomacy been doing differently in support of the country’s strategic interests? Based on personal interaction with and observation of Ukrainian diplomats at work, several aspects of Ukraine’s new diplomacy are noteworthy.

One key feature is empowerment. I first met Dmytro Kuleba when he was an advisor to the Ukrainian President a few years before his 2020 appointment as the country’s Foreign Minister. At the time, he gave the impression of a thoroughly modern person. It was also clear that Kuleba feels entirely at home as a manager of issues, relationships, and teams. In concert with Ukraine’s Defense Ministry, he appears to be providing explicit direction to Ukraine’s diplomats in the form of specific, country-based military support goals. This approach is combined with an expectation of proactivity on the part of individual ambassadors.

Thirty years after Ukraine’s independence, Kuleba is presiding over the final dismantling of the inherited Soviet diplomatic corps, which was notoriously clunky, bureaucratic, and sometimes truly under-skilled. Amid the pressure and pace of a full-blown war, a new organizational culture is emerging at the Ukrainian Ministry of Foreign Affairs that includes self-belief, positivity, and an emphasis on initiative.

Savvy communication is at the heart of Ukraine’s diplomatic progress. As part of their empowerment, Ukraine’s current generation of diplomats have strong license to communicate. Ministry officials in Kyiv and Ukrainian ambassadors around the world are now routinely using a wide array of contemporary channels including social media, traditional mass media, stakeholder relations, and cultural ties in order to build Ukraine’s image and articulate the country’s wartime needs. The innovative and often unorthodox use of social media by Ukrainian officials has won particular praise.

Ukraine’s clever communication is very sensitive to the cultural norms and expectations of individual audiences. Ukrainian Ambassador to Australia Vasyl Myroshnychenko noted recently that media skills are now central to successful diplomacy. “The impact of the full-scale Russian invasion on Ukraine’s diplomacy can be compared to the influence of COVID-19 on digital transformation,” he commented. “One of the key changes has been in the communications sphere. The ability of our ambassadors to provide compelling arguments for why a host nation should support Ukraine has played an important role in rallying military assistance. Being media savvy and fully proficient in the local language is no longer just an advantage. It is a must at times of war.”

Ukraine’s diplomatic engagement with partner governments and international audiences is particularly important in terms of the struggle against Russian disinformation. While Russian embassies often serve as hubs for anti-Ukrainian fakes and efforts to weaken Western unity, Ukraine’s diplomatic corps has framed its communication as accessible, reasonable, fact-based, and engagingly human. Today’s Ukrainian diplomats are not afraid to demonstrate a sense of humor or employ pop culture references in ways that would have shocked their stuffy Soviet predecessors.

This positive framing of Ukraine, Ukrainians, and their future is attractive and encourages international audiences to engage. Modern communications studies consistently show that how you communicate, especially in terms of tonality and timing, is as important as the actual message you are communicating. This is a lesson Ukrainian diplomats have clearly learned.

Ukraine’s wartime embrace of public diplomacy has been particularly striking. The country’s diplomats are now regularly in newspapers, on TV, at conferences, and in corporate boardrooms articulating their country’s needs and making the case for further support. This approach is designed to reach not only political partners, policy experts, and diplomatic representatives, but also the general public. Ukraine’s emphasis of public diplomacy reflects an awareness that public opinion in democracies is critical to maintaining policy support.

The success of Ukraine’s wartime diplomacy is rooted in the same progressive values that are helping the country to advance on the battlefield and as a young democracy. These values reflect a nation that feels increasingly at ease with itself and confident of its position as part of the wider democratic world. Ukrainian diplomats are winning because they have a winning story to tell and the skills to do so effectively. Their progress mirrors Ukraine’s historic coming of age over the past seven months and captures the spirit of a country that is finally finding its voice on the international stage.

Pete Shmigel is an Australian writer with a background in politics, mental health, and Ukrainian issues.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post From the UN to The Late Show, Ukraine’s diplomats are winning appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Will Ukraine invasion condemn Putin to place among Russia’s worst rulers? https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/will-ukraine-invasion-condemn-putin-to-place-among-russias-worst-rulers/ Thu, 22 Sep 2022 18:08:03 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=569135 Vladimir Putin has long dreamed of securing his place among the titans of Russian history but his disastrous Ukraine invasion now leaves him destined to be remembered as one of the country’s worst rulers.

The post Will Ukraine invasion condemn Putin to place among Russia’s worst rulers? appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Vladimir Putin refuses to admit defeat in Ukraine. On September 21, he announced plans for a partial mobilization while also vowing to annex large swathes of Ukraine and threatening to defend his gains with nuclear weapons. This latest show of strength cannot disguise the grim realities of Putin’s rapidly unraveling invasion. Seven months after Russian tanks first crossed the border, his depleted and deeply demoralized army has ground to a halt and the military initiative has passed decisively to the advancing Ukrainians.

While it remains unclear exactly how the war will end, it is already painfully apparent that the invasion of Ukraine has been a disaster for Russia in general and for Putin personally. It has undone the progress achieved during Putin’s first decade in power and has ruthlessly exposed the many failures of his 22-year reign. Putin has long dreamed of securing his place among the titans of Russian history. Instead, he now looks destined to be remembered as one of the country’s worst rulers.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

It is hard to overestimate the negative impact Putin has had on Russia and the wider international community. He has unleashed a series of unjustified wars and suppressed personal freedoms inside Russia itself; he has fostered a culture of xenophobia and cut Russians off from the developed world; he has stalled the Russian economy and ended the country’s modernization; and he has spread an information epidemic of fakes and falsehoods around the globe.

For Russians who dream of a return to imperial greatness, Putin’s biggest crime is his inept invasion of Ukraine. Russia is no stranger to humiliating military losses. In the past two centuries, four defeats stand out as particularly significant: the Crimean War (1853-56), the Russo-Japanese War (1904-05), World War I (1914-17), and the Afghanistan War (1979-88).

Encouragingly, all four defeats were followed by periods of liberalization. In the aftermath of the Crimean War, Czar Alexander II abolished serfdom throughout the Russian Empire. Defeat in the Russo-Japanese War led to the creation of the Duma, while Russia’s premature exit from World War I heralded the country’s first reasonably democratic elections. Meanwhile, the failure in Afghanistan was a significant factor in the collapse of the USSR. While pessimists predict that Putin will be followed by an even worse tyrant, the historical record suggests that military defeat is likely to lead to a relaxation of Russia’s authoritarian instincts.

It is difficult to see Putin surviving the war in Ukraine. The invasion he so recklessly ordered has devastated the Russian military and made his country a global pariah without achieving anything in return. The war has also led to a sharp deterioration on the domestic front. Echoing the worst excesses of Stalin and Hitler, Putin has normalized the genocide of Ukrainians and made it an everyday topic of discussion on Russian television. Meanwhile, as the excellent investigative journalists Andrei Soldatov and Irina Borogan have pointed out, his FSB security service has increasingly come to resemble the dreaded Soviet era NKVD.

Putin has had a highly negative impact on Russia’s international relations that goes far beyond the fallout from the invasion of Ukraine. His long record of broken promises and shameless dishonesty has made other world leaders increasingly wary of engaging. Some have persevered longer than others, but even the patient leaders of France and Germany appear to have now reached the conclusion that Putin’s words carry little weight.

The Russian ruler’s diminished status on the international stage was on display in Uzbekistan at the recent Shanghai Cooperation Organization summit. Putin was once notorious for keeping many of the world’s most prominent statesmen waiting. However, in Tashkent he was made to wait by the presidents of Azerbaijan and Kyrgyzstan. The only politicians who appear genuinely comfortable in his company are representatives of fellow pariah regimes such as Iran and North Korea.

Putin’s reign has also been bad for the Russian economy. During his first two presidential terms, lingering Gaidar-Yeltsin reforms and high energy prices created the false impression of sound economic management. This was an illusion. The Russian economy has stagnated since 2014 and is now sinking, with optimistic official forecasts predicting a six percent decline in 2022 and no recovery for a decade.

Russia’s unrivaled resource base is enough to make it the richest country on the planet. Instead, Putin has blocked modernization and left Russia completely dependent on the export of its natural resources. Even based on official figures, Russian real disposal income fell by ten percent between 2014 and 2020.

Rather than opening up the country and diversifying the economy, Putin has isolated Russia and scared away foreign businesses with his wars and his repressive domestic policies. This has led to a brain drain of Russia’s best minds, with official figures showing over 400,000 people leaving the country in the first half of 2022 alone. Many of those who vote with their feet are from the well-educated and entrepreneurial segments of society.

The only economic issue that seems to genuinely interest Putin is the wealth of his cronies and his family. He has made no effort to curb massive capital outflows from Russia, possibly because much of this outflow is linked to him or his allies. While salaries for ordinary Russians stagnate, members of Putin’s inner circle have acquired immense wealth. Although no official records exist, it has long been speculated that Putin himself is one of the world’s richest men.

The catastrophic consequences of Putin’s decision to invade Ukraine have helped cast an unforgiving light on the rest of his reign. He has caused enormous damage to the Russia while drastically undermining the country’s credibility in international affairs. Russia today is noticeably more isolated and less free than at the beginning of his rule over twenty years ago. It is a society trapped in a toxic vision of the past and openly hostile to much of the modern world. This is Putin’s legacy.

The one area where Putin has genuinely excelled is in the creation of a world-class propaganda machine. However, even this cannot disguise his shortcomings forever. If the war in Ukraine is indeed lost, it will only be a matter of time before the Russian public demands an end to the discredited Putin era.

Anders Åslund is the author of “Russia’s Crony Capitalism: The Path from Market Economy to Kleptocracy.”

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Will Ukraine invasion condemn Putin to place among Russia’s worst rulers? appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Russian War Report: Ukraine secures new territory as Prigozhin recruits Russian prisoners  https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/russian-war-report-ukraine-secures-new-territory-as-prigozhin-recruits-russian-prisoners/ Fri, 16 Sep 2022 17:39:38 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=567301 As Ukraine recaptures its territory, Russia attempts to recruit convicts. Elsewhere, the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan renews and hundreds of civilians are found dead in Izyum.

The post Russian War Report: Ukraine secures new territory as Prigozhin recruits Russian prisoners  appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
As Russia continues its assault on Ukraine, the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab (DFRLab) is keeping a close eye on Russia’s movements across the military, cyber, and information domains. With more than seven years of experience monitoring the situation in Ukraine—as well as Russia’s use of propaganda and disinformation to undermine the United States, NATO, and the European Union—the DFRLab’s global team presents the latest installment of the Russian War Report. 

Security

Ukraine secures new territory as Prigozhin recruits Russian prisoners

Renewed clashes between Armenia and Azerbaijan as Armenia calls for Russian military aid

War crimes and human rights abuses

Ukraine says hundreds of dead civilians unearthed in Izyum

Tracking narratives

Kremlin claims Russian troops are ‘regrouping’

Moscow police investigate journalist for ‘gay propaganda’

Fake RAND Corporation document promoting US conspiracy to weaken Germany spreads online

Russian War Report: Ukraine secures new territory as Prigozhin recruits Russian prisoners

Ukraine has successfully pushed back Russian forces over the last several weeks, launching counteroffensives in the regions of Kharkiv, Donetsk, and Kherson. With active fighting concentrated in the eastern and southern parts of the country, there has been an increase in civilians attempting to flee hard-hit areas. The Ukrainian army regained 600 square kilometers in the Kherson counteroffensive, according to Ukrainian media reports. In Kharkiv, Ukraine retook roughly 300 settlements across 3,000 square kilometers and liberated 150,000 people from Russian occupation. The frontline of the battle in the Kharkiv region is reaching closer to occupied areas of Luhansk and Donetsk oblasts. On September 13, reports claimed that Russian army units had abandoned Kreminna in Luhansk oblast; while partisans raised the Ukrainian flag over the town, as of September 14, Ukrainian forces had not entered the city. 

Separate attacks have also affected humanitarian assets in Donetsk oblast. On September 12 and 13, the Russian army shelled cities on the frontline of Sloviansk, killing at least one person and injuring another. An agricultural technical school and eight buildings were damaged in the shelling. Russian rockets also hit a hospital and a private residence in Kramatorsk. The town of Hostre, in area of Kurakhove, also came under fire. Meanwhile, Russia has shelled Avdiivka for several days in a row. Russian forces also launched an airstrike on Siversk on September 12. 

As the counteroffensive by Ukrainian forces continues, Russia is attempting to obstruct Ukraine’s progress in various parts of the country. Ukrainian sources reported that eight Russian missiles struck targets in Kryvyi Rih, in the Dnipropetrovsk region, resulting in flooding. The water level of the Inhulets River, which runs south of Kryvyi Rih, rose as result of the strike on the Kherson-Mykolaiv axis, flooding area homes. The target of the attack was likely the Karachun dam. 

Meanwhile, Russian oligarch Yevgeny Prigozhin was filmed making an appeal to convicts, promising amnesty if they sign up to fight in Ukraine. In the footage, Prigozhin revealed that prisoners have already been fighting on the frontlines with the Wagner Group. “In the first attack in Ukraine using forty prisoners, three died and seven were injured….Nobody goes back behind bars,” he said. “If you serve six months, you are free.” Russian law does not permit commuting prison sentences for military service, though it is unclear if exceptions can be made during wartime. Prigozhin is mobilizing combat power for the Russian army, which has suffered heavy losses in recent weeks. Prigozhin’s comments are not just about recruiting mercenaries; they are also an indication that Russia is seeking further mobilization, a practice that, even in Soviet times, relied on prisoners.

Prigozhin’s comments coincide with increasing domestic pressure on the Kremlin to mobilize more recruits and to officially declare the “special operation” in Ukraine a war. Chechen leader Ramzan Kadyrov called on regional governors in Russia to carry out self-mobilization and not wait for the Kremlin’s decision. Gennady Zyuganov, the leader of the Russian communist party, joined the calls for a nationwide mobilization.  

These recent developments indicate that paramilitary formations, like those in Syria who fought alongside the forces of President Bashar Assad’s regime, may be emerging in Russia. In Syria, amid the worst fighting in the civil conflict, the government allowed businessmen to gain influence in the state apparatus in exchange for sponsoring and creating local militias to support the army. The latest developments in Russia indicate that a similar process could be unfolding.  

According to the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense, officials in the occupation administration of Crimea and southern Ukraine have begun to secretly evacuate their families to Russia, indicating that the state of security in Russian-occupied territories is poor. These claims have not been independently confirmed. 

Meanwhile, the first visual confirmation of Iranian drones being used by Russia in Ukraine surfaced this week. A Shahed-136 (Герань-2) drone was most likely used in Ukaine’s Kupiansk region. This is a critical revelation that strongly suggests Tehran is sending Russia military aid, despite earlier denials. It also indicates that Russia may be experiencing a shortage of high-tech equipment and weapons. 

In addition, global sanctions may further hinder the Kremlin’s military efforts, as the group of seven nations is working to cap the price of Russian oil in an attempt to limit Moscow’s ability to fund its invasion of Ukraine. Currently, Russia relies on revenue from exporting energy resources to Asia. 

Lastly, Ukraine’s Cabinet of Ministers approved the draft budget for 2023, Minister of Finance Serhiy Marchenko announced on Facebook.  The 2023 state budget is the budget of a country that will become stronger, strengthen its defense capabilities, be able to rebuild after damage caused by Russian armed aggression, and also take care of those citizens who need it,” he said.

Ruslan Trad, Resident Fellow for Security Research, Sofia, Bulgaria 

Renewed clashes between Armenia and Azerbaijan as Armenia calls for Russian military aid

On September 13, the Armenian Ministry of Defense reported that Azerbaijani Armed Forces shelled Armenian military positions in Goris, Sotk, and Jermuk. Azerbaijan reportedly used large-caliber artillery, small arms, and drones in the attack. Azerbaijan reported fifty casualties, while Armenia said 105 Armenian servicemembers were killed in the strikes. Prior to the recent escalation, both parties had accused each other of planning and organizing a large-scale provocation. Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan said that Azerbaijan had gained ten square kilometers of Armenian territory this week. For comparison, in May 2021, Azerbaijan occupied forty square kilometers of Armenian territory. OC Media reported at least nineteen different Armenian locations along the border with Azerbaijan were hit by missiles this week. 

Amid renewed clashes, Armenian authorities asked the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), a Russian-led military block, to aid in restoring the territorial integrity of Armenia. Pashinyan stated that Armenia was invoking  Article 4 of the agreement, which stipulates that an attack on a member state is an act of aggression against other member states. In response to this request, CSTO held an emergency meeting and proposed the creation of a working group to assess the situation on the Armenia-Azerbaijan border. Armenia previously invoked Article 4 in May 2021, when Azerbaijan made advances in Armenia’s Gegharkunik and Syunik provinces; in response, CSTO advocated diplomatic negotiations. Armenia also asked Russia to provide military aid under the Russian-Armenian treaty on mutual defense that was signed in 1997. The Kyiv Independent reported that Russian President Vladimir Putin had declined to provide military assistance to Armenia, but did not cite a source.  

On September 13, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken urged Azerbaijan to stop the military operation along the border with Armenia. State Department Spokesperson Ned Price noted that the US has seen “significant evidence of Azerbaijani shelling inside Armenia and significant damage to Armenian infrastructure.” Freedom House also called for Azerbaijani armed forces to stop their attacks on Armenia.  

On September 13, Armenian media reported that mobile providers had blocked access to TikTok, but the app remained accessible via cable internet. The DFRLab used OONI Explorer to reviewed the connectivity of TikTok’s website in Armenia; we found that DNS tampering/spoofing began on September 13 at 4:03pm local time. OONI Explorer also showed that DNS spoofing of TikTok’s website took place in Azerbaijan on September 14. Azerbaijan’s State Security Service announced that it had temporarily suspended TikTok in Azerbaijan due to the fact that information published on the platform “casts a shadow on the successes of our army, contains military secrets, and aims to create a wrong opinion in the society.” Samvel Martirosyan, co-founder of Armenian CyberHUB, said that in order to prevent people from using virtual private networks (VPNs), state-aligned Azerbaijani bloggers were spreading rumors that major VPN services were controlled by Armenia.  

On September 14, Pashinyan announced that he was willing to recognize the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan, as long as Armenia’s Soviet-era border was recognized. He added that he was willing to sign an agreement with Azerbaijan. “Many people will criticize us, curse us, call us traitors, the people may even decide to remove us from power, and we will be grateful if as a result of this,” he said. “Armenia will get lasting peace and security with an area of 2,800 square kilometers.” Following the release of the statement, Armenian citizens gathered in front of the National Assembly building to protest the comments, with some demanding Pashinyan’s resignation. Pashinyan later clarified that no such document had been signed as of yet, and any claims to the contrary were rumors propagated by “external unfriendly forces.

Armenia and Azerbaijan negotiated a ceasefire that took effect at 8pm local time on September 15.

Givi Gigitashvili, Research Associate, Warsaw, Poland. 

Ukraine says hundreds of dead civilians unearthed in Izyum

Ukrainian officials said they had found 440 bodies in woodlands near the city of Izyum. They said most of the dead were civilians, and that the site proved war crimes had been committed by Russian occupiers. Video from Izyum showed a pine forest dotted with graves. Wooden crosses marked the locations. One handwritten sign read, “Ukraine armed forces, seventeen people, Izyum city, [taken] from the morgue.”  

If confirmed, this would be the largest mass grave identified in Europe since Tomašica, where the Bosnian authorities uncovered a mass grave in September 2013. It contained the remains of 435 people, mostly war victims, who were killed by the Bosnian Serb forces in various places around Prijedor from 1992 to 1995.  

Reports from Kupiansk also indicate potential Russian war crimes, including instances of torture. In jail cells at a local police station, Ukrainian forces found blood on the floor and stains on mattresses. Russian occupation forces hastily abandoned the police station after destroying records they had kept there.

Ruslan Trad, Resident Fellow for Security Research, Sofia, Bulgaria 

Kremlin claims Russian troops are ‘regrouping’

After a successful Ukrainian counteroffensive forced Russian troops to retreat from the vicinity of Kharkiv, Russian officials and pro-Kremlin sources rebranded the withdrawal as “regrouping.” 

As Ukraine regained territory, Igor Konashenkov, spokesperson for the Russian Ministry of Defense, said the MoD decided to “regroup” Russian forces in the areas of Balakliia and Izyum “to build up prospects at the Donetsk level.” The MoD continued, “During this operation, a number of distraction and demonstration activities were carried out with the designation of the real actions of the troops.”  

Meanwhile, Kremlin-owned and pro-Kremlin media outlets attempted to justify Russia’s retreat as a strategic decision. Outlets such as iz.ru, vz.ru, crimea.ria.ru, topcor.ru, and rk-news.com published interviews with pro-Kremlin pundits who offered varying justifications for the Russian withdrawal. In one interview, a “military expert” claimed that Russia’s MoD “carried out a whole range of measures to mislead the Armed Forces of Ukraine, creating the illusion that we had a weak defense.” Another interview reinforced the claim that Russia retreated to “mislead the enemy.” A third interview alleged that the “regrouping” took place because there was a “need to concentrate forces and strengthen positions in the Donbas.”  

Online mentions of the word “Перегруппировка” (“regrouping”) skyrocketed on September 10 and 11, according to a query conducted using the social media monitoring tool Meltwater Explore.

Online mentions of the word “перегруппировка” (“regrouping”) skyrocketed during Ukraine’s counteroffensive. (Source: DFRLab via Meltwater) 

In addition, Chechen leader Ramzan Kadyrov claimed, “The regrouping of troops in the Kharkiv region is a forced measure, which is explained by military strategy and the goal of saving human lives.”

Eto Buziashvili, Research Associate, Washington DC

Moscow police investigate journalist for disseminating ‘gay propaganda’

Moscow police are investigating TV personality Ksenia Sobchak for disseminating “gay propaganda,” Russian state-owned media outlet RIA reported on Monday. 

According to RIA, the investigation was initiated after a Russian citizen contacted police to “examine publications shared on the channel of journalist Ksenia Sobchak for LGBT propaganda among minors.” RIA reported that the case is being investigated under Article 6.21 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses, which pertains to the “promotion of non-traditional sexual relations among juveniles.” Article 6.21 carries a fine of up to 100,000 rubles ($1,676) for individuals and up to one million rubles for legal entities, in addition to a possible 90-day work suspension. 

Ksenia Sobchak is the daughter of the late Anatoly Sobchak, the former mayor of St. Petersburg and mentor to Vladimir Putin. In 2018, she ran as a presidential candidate against Putin, but some argued that Sobchak was a decoy candidate who only ran to create the illusion of a democratic election.  

On her Telegram channel, Krovavaya Barynya (“Кровавая барыня,” “Bloody Lady”), Sobchak suggested that police might be investigating her YouTube channel after she published an interview with Russian tennis player Daria Kasatkina, who recently came out as gay. “Now even just a conversation with LGBT people about their lives might be considered LGBT propaganda,” Sobchak added. The police have not confirmed which of Sobchak’s platforms is being examined. Sobchak’s YouTube channel has more than three million subscribers, and the interview with Kasatkina garnered more than 1.5 million views.   

Earlier this month, Russian internet regulator Roskomnadzor announced its support for a draft law “on administrative responsibility for propaganda of LGBT people and pedophilia.” The bill was introduced by Alexander Khinshtein, the head of the State Duma Committee on Information Policy.  

Last month, Russia revealed plans to construct an online surveillance system that could hunt down “homosexual propaganda,” among other “prohibited data.” In addition, Runiversalis – the Russian analog of the internet encyclopedia Wikipedia– announced that it will not cover “homosexual propaganda” on its platform.   

Eto Buziashvili, Research Associate, Washington DC

Fake RAND Corporation document promoting US conspiracy to weaken Germany spreads online

On September 11, the Russian television program Vesti Nedeli reported on what it claimed was a “confidential document” from the RAND Corporation, a US think tank. The document claimed the US had planned the war in Ukraine in advance and had deliberately provoked Russia. Reporter Mikhail Antonov argued that the document, said to be dated January 25, 2022, outlined a US strategy to force Germany into applying sanctions against Russia, in an attempt to weaken Germany’s economy. Antonov cited the German outlet Weltexpress as the source of the document.

A screencap from Vesti Nedeli showing the fake RAND report. (Source: Vesti Nedeli on smotrim.ru). 

RAND Corporation denied the allegation. “A supposedly leaked RAND report about a bizarre U.S. conspiracy to ‘weaken Germany’ is fake,” it said in a statement.   

Weltexpress, the first German language outlet to publish about the document, titled their article, “The economic crisis in Germany is the result of a deliberate provocation by the USA. The Americans collapsed the German economy to destroy a competitor.” Two days later, Weltexpress published in English what they claimed to be an excerpt from the alleged RAND report.

Sopo Gelava, Research Associate, Tbilisi, Georgia

The post Russian War Report: Ukraine secures new territory as Prigozhin recruits Russian prisoners  appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Ukrainian victory shatters Russia’s reputation as a military superpower https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/ukrainian-victory-shatters-russias-reputation-as-a-military-superpower/ Tue, 13 Sep 2022 19:37:52 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=565952 The stunning success of Ukraine’s counteroffensive in the Kharkiv region has exposed the rotten reality behind Russia’s military superpower reputation and convinced many that a decisive Ukrainian victory is now possible.

The post Ukrainian victory shatters Russia’s reputation as a military superpower appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
The stunning success of Ukraine’s recent counteroffensive has exposed the rotten reality behind Russia’s reputation as a military superpower. More than six months since the onset of Vladimir Putin’s Ukraine invasion, it is now obvious that his army is in fact a deeply flawed institution that bears almost no resemblance to the immaculate fighting force of Red Square parades and Kremlin propaganda. Instead, the Russian military suffers from endemic corruption, low morale, and poor leadership, with individual initiative in short supply and commanders deeply reluctant to accept personal responsibility. Last week’s disastrous defeat in northeastern Ukraine will only worsen the situation, with officers gripped by fear as Moscow seeks scapegoats for what is shaping up to be one of the most shameful military defeats in Russian history.

The scale of Ukraine’s recent victory has stunned the entire world, but perhaps nobody was as surprised as the Russians themselves. Naturally, the Kremlin sought to suppress news of the counteroffensive, but the speed of events and the sheer scale of the collapse meant that details of the unfolding disaster could not be completely censored despite the best efforts of the authorities. The resulting realization was a huge psychological blow for the Russian public, who learned for the first time that their soldiers in Ukraine were demoralized and beaten. The rout of Russian forces in Kharkiv Oblast was also a painful wake-up call for Ukrainian collaborators, who realized that Russia cannot be relied upon and will abandon them without thinking twice.

Beyond these immediate implications, Ukraine’s counteroffensive also says much about the broader state of the Russian military and provides valuable indications of what we can expect to see next. From now on, fear will shape every single decision made by Russian commanders in Ukraine. This will not be fear of losing precious lives or damaging Russia’s national interests; it will be a very personal fear of retribution from a vindictive hierarchy seeking culprits to blame for the rapidly declining fortunes of the Russian army.

This reaction speaks volumes about the dysfunctional leadership culture within the Russian military, where fear of failure has been the dominant instinct since Soviet times and can arguably be traced all the way back to the czarist era. With the hunt now underway for guilty parties, nobody will want to take responsibility for decisions that could lead to further defeats. Instead, officers at every level will seek to act as loyal cogs in the system while forcing those higher up the chain of command to issue orders.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

The inefficiency and lack of accountability at the heart of the Russian military help to explain its poor performance in Ukraine. While the Ukrainian military has undergone a radical transformation away from Soviet traditions in recent years and has embraced NATO-style reforms that hand the initiative to individual units and commanders in the field, the Russian army remains a rigid fighting machine hamstrung by top-down decision-making and totally unsuited to the rigors of modern warfare. Today’s Russian commanders continue to seek inspiration primarily from the military achievements of the Red Army during World War II. It is therefore no surprise that they find themselves being consistently outmaneuvered by a far more mobile and quick-witted enemy.

Recent events in Ukraine have revealed the underwhelming truth behind the many exaggerations that had previously led international experts to rank Russia as the world’s number two military. In a peacetime environment, such misconceptions were perhaps understandable. According to official figures, Russia had the world’s third-largest annual defense budget, at more than sixty billion dollars. Moscow was expert at staging impressive training exercises, while the Kremlin also invested heavily in prestige events that reinforced the impression of a mighty military.

It is now clear that Western observers made the mistake of confusing quantity for quality. While most analysis focused on the number of troops, tanks, missiles, and planes, these figures were misleading and offered no real indication of combat readiness. Nor was Russian data entirely accurate. Thousands of Russian tanks turned out to be partially stripped and incapacitated, while hundreds of missiles have fallen short of their targets since the start of the Ukraine invasion. Corrupt practices appear to have artificially inflated the size of the Russian military while drastically undermining its fighting potential.

The Russian military’s difficulties in Ukraine have also served to highlight the limitations of Vladimir Putin’s authoritarian rule. The invasion force assembled in early 2022 was woefully inadequate for the task at hand, but Putin’s personal obsession with the destruction of Ukraine meant that nobody dared to warn him of the dangers. Instead, Putin’s blind faith in the invincibility of the Russian army and his unhinged insistence on Ukraine’s illegitimacy were allowed to prevail over more sober military judgments. After all, how can a superpower lose to a country that does not exist? Like so many dictators before him, Putin fell victim to his own propaganda. His commanders were simply too scared to contradict him.

As Putin’s fantasy vision collided with reality, Russia plunged further and further into denial. The Russian withdrawal from northern Ukraine in April 2022 following defeat in the Battle for Kyiv and the subsequent retreat from Snake Island were both laughably portrayed as “goodwill gestures.” Likewise, when Ukraine sank the Russian Black Sea Fleet flagship, the Moskva, this was attributed to an accidental onboard fire. Unsurprisingly, Russian propagandists have attempted to spin the recent retreat from Kharkiv as a “planned regrouping.” These absurd excuses convince nobody and merely serve to underline Russia’s inability to admit defeat.

As the true state of the Russian military becomes impossible to deny, international faith in a Ukrainian victory is growing visibly. The Kharkiv offensive has proved beyond doubt that Ukraine is capable of staging large-scale offensive operations and reclaiming land that Russia has held for extended periods. While the war is far from over, most observers now recognize that the initiative has passed to Ukraine.

In the coming months, much will depend on the continued flow of weapons to Ukraine. The country’s leaders are requesting tanks and fighter jets as well as more artillery, ammunition, and armored transports in order to force Russia out of Ukraine entirely. This support cannot be taken for granted, but at present it looks likely that arms deliveries will continue to expand, both in terms of the types and quantities of weapons being delivered. With the myth of Russia’s military superpower status now shattered, the way is open for the democratic world to arm Ukraine for a decisive victory that will secure peace in Europe and bring Putin’s imperial ambitions to an end.

Andriy Zagorodnyuk is chairman of the Center for Defence Strategies and Ukraine’s former minister of defense (2019–2020).

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Ukrainian victory shatters Russia’s reputation as a military superpower appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Russian War Report: Ukraine intensifies offensive attacks in Kharkiv Oblast https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/russian-war-report-ukraine-intensifies-offensive-attacks-in-kharkiv-oblast/ Fri, 09 Sep 2022 15:01:48 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=564555 Over the last week, Ukraine has launched several counter offensives in occupied southern and eastern Ukraine, recapturing Balakliia.

The post Russian War Report: Ukraine intensifies offensive attacks in Kharkiv Oblast appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
As Russia continues its assault on Ukraine, the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab (DFRLab) is keeping a close eye on Russia’s movements across the military, cyber, and information domains. With more than seven years of experience monitoring the situation in Ukraine—as well as Russia’s use of propaganda and disinformation to undermine the United States, NATO, and the European Union—the DFRLab’s global team presents the latest installment of the Russian War Report. 

Security

Ukraine intensifies offensive attacks in Kharkiv Oblast, recapturing Balakliia

Tracking narratives

Kremlin-controlled media blame NATO for private jet crash

New Russian commercial threatens Europe with energy supply shutdown

Documenting Dissent

Pushback against compulsory ‘patriotism’ lessons in Russian schools

Ukraine intensifies offensive attacks in Kharkiv Oblast, recapturing Balakliia

The situation on the front line in Ukraine is rapidly changing as the attacks intensify and the fighting becomes increasingly fierce. On September 6, the Ukrainian army launched several counteroffensives against Russian positions in the occupied areas of southern and eastern Ukraine. Russian forces are preparing to defend their positions in Izyum, while the Ukrainian army is regaining control of settlements in the Kharkiv region. Newly released footage documented several prisoners of war who had been reportedly captured during Ukraine’s counterattacks. Meanwhile, there are signs that entire Russian units were wiped out during the fight for control of Balakliia in the Kharkiv region. On September 7, the Ukrainian army announced that it had recaptured Balakliia. The DFRLab expects that Russian reinforcements will not arrive as quickly as Moscow had initially planned, given the circumstances on the ground and the fact that Ukraine has destroyed many logistical hubs in recent weeks. In addition, explosions were reported in Berdyansk and Mariupol, with Ukrainian forces most likely using artillery and drones to attack critical Russian infrastructure. 

Ukrainian forces are also using drones to launch offensive attacks in their attempt to recapture Kherson; a video released on September 3 showed Bayraktar TB2 drones striking Russian equipment along the entire front. Also on September 3, images appeared online indicating that a bridge at the Kakhovka hydroelectric power station in Kherson Oblast had partially collapsed due to intense missile strikes from Ukrainian forces, further hindering Russian troops in their logistical efforts. In the meantime, Russian forces are building more pontoon bridges to help improve transport links across Kherson Oblast. 

https://twitter.com/WarMonitor3/status/1566151801275125760?s=20&t=jTvSdu0DkeM6J2xiGJxOyQ

Elsewhere, the city of Kupiansk in Kharkiv Oblast has become one of the epicenters of clashes between Russian and Ukrainian units, experiencing heavy shelling. It seems likely that Ukraine is attempting to add pressure from south of the Izyum axis, which has become a critical bastion for the Russian army since the invasion began. Kupiansk is crucial to both Russia and Ukraine as it is a major railway junction for the northeast frontline. The situation in Kharkiv Oblast remains fraught, but Russian forces are losing important equipment, such as the Strela-10 short-range SAM system that appears to have been captured by Ukraine.

Meanwhile, the Wagner Group confirmed that its fighters took part in the capture of the village of Kodema in Donetsk Oblast. Battles for the settlement have been ongoing since mid-summer. Taking control of Kodema would open the possibility of a Russian offensive launched from Zaitseve, in the south, to reach the city of Bakhmut, making it possible to storm the city from several directions. 

As the DFRLab has previously reported, the Wagner Group generally does not promote its involvement in the Ukraine war. However, our research suggests that Wagner Group members are most likely directly under the command of the Russian military hierarchy. In Ukraine, the unit’s direct ties to Spetsnaz special operations forces and Russian military intelligence are visible. For example, with the support of Wagner and Spetsnaz units, the Russian army managed to stop an attempted attack on the strategic village of Pisky, also in Donetsk Oblast. 

On September 8, Russian sources claimed military developments in the direction of Avdiivka, mentioning an “assault operation” in the Pisky area. The operation was carried out by the far-right Sparta and Somalia Battalions, the 11th Regiment, reservists, and units of the separatist Donetsk People’s Militia. This indicates that these irregular units, with links to Spetsnaz and composed of veterans and battle-hardened fighters who have been in the Donbas since 2014, are likely to play an extended role in the fighting in Donetsk as Russia experiences morale issues with its regular fighting forces. The Russian command will also likely continue to face problems such as the rising distrust among Luhansk separatist fighters who have not been paid regularly. 

On September 3, the head of the UN nuclear watchdog said that after sustained shelling in the area, the Russian-controlled Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant in Ukraine was disconnected from its last external power line, but was still able to run electricity through a reserve line. International Atomic Energy Agency Director General Rafael Grossi said in a statement that the agency’s experts, who remained in Zaporizhzhia after arriving for an inspection last Thursday, were told by senior Ukrainian staff that the fourth and final operational line was down. IAEA experts also learned that the reserve line linking the facility to a nearby thermal power plant was delivering the electricity generated by the plant to the external grid, according to a statement. It added that the same reserve line could provide backup power to the plant if needed. Russian-backed authorities earlier said the plant had been knocked offline. 

Russian forces continue to use the plant as a shield against possible Ukrainian attacks against Russian positions in Zaporizhzhia and Enerhodar. The Insider obtained video of multiple launch rocket systems (MLRS) shelling the area near the Zaporizhzhia plant on September 3. Preliminary geolocation indicates the shelling is coming from Russia-controlled territory near the power station. A few days later, Russia attempted to deny the IAEA report about Zaporizhzhia. Russian President Vladimir Putin claimed that there is no military equipment on the grounds of the plant, other than Rosgvardia elements. Rosgvardiya is the national guard of Russia and fulfills different roles in the context of Ukraine, serving as  both occupation forces and military reinforcements. 

Ruslan Trad, Resident Fellow for Security Research, Sofia, Bulgaria 

Kremlin-controlled media blame NATO for private jet crash

Pro-Kremlin media outlets accused NATO of taking down a Cessna 551 private jet near Latvia. The private jet was expected to fly from Spain to Germany on September 4 but lost contact with air traffic controllers shortly after takeoff. After the plane went dark, fighter jets from Germany, Denmark, and Sweden intercepted the jet to make visual contact with the plane, but were unsuccessful in locating the crew. The plane later crashed in the Baltic Sea near Latvia. The jet was owned by private jet chartering company Quick Air

Pro-Kremlin media were quick to suggest that NATO was behind the crash. Pravda.ru cited three possible reasons for the crash in a headline that read, “Cessna 551 crash: depressurization, NATO missile or crew poisoning.” Similarly, Tsargrad, the media outlet associated with Alexander Dugin, published an article with the headline, “Did NATO forces open fire? Plane crashed off the coast of Latvia.” 

Examples of pro-Kremlin media outlets suggesting NATO shot down the private jet. The pink lines highlight the parts of the headline that blame NATO. (Source: Pravda.ru/archive, left; Tsargrad/archive, right)

Other Kremlin-controlled media outlets, like Gazeta.ru, RBK, Rambler, and NTV, did not directly blame NATO for the plane crash but implied involvement by focusing on the fact that fighter jets belonging to NATO member states intercepted the plane. For example, Gazeta.ru wrote, “NATO fighters were lifted into the air. Following this, the aircraft began to lose speed and altitude. It was found off the coast of Latvia.” 

Outlets such as RBK, Rambler, and NTV referenced a Reuters report that cited a Lithuanian Air Force spokesperson who confirmed “that fighter aircraft from the NATO Baltic Air Police mission in Amari airfield in Estonia had taken off to follow the plane.” RBK also cited Reuters when reporting, “NATO fighters based in Estonia were raised to intercept it.” Similarly, Rambler reported that “a private plane Cessna 551 crashed northwest of the city of Ventspils in Latvia; NATO fighters were raised to intercept the aircraft.”

Nika Aleksejeva, Lead Researcher, Riga, Latvia

New Russian commercial threatens Europe with energy supply shutdown

In a newly released commercial, Russia appeared to threaten to cut Europe off from access to all Russian energy supplies this winter. The ad, which has gone viral on social media, includes a song with the lyrics, “Winter will be big, only twilight and snow.” 

In the commercial, a man wearing the uniform of Gazprom, the Russian national gas company, seemingly shuts off a gas supply, and a pressure gauge is seen falling to zero. The footage also includes scenes showing the Nord Stream 2 pipeline. The next scenes show EU flags and European capitals covered in snow. The video also includes footage of windmills and solar panels, which may be an attempt to communicate that Europe will not be able to heat their cities in the winter using green energy. 

Gazprom denied being involved in the creation of the commercial but commented that “the video is great.” 

The commercial has surfaced on YouTube, VK, pro-Russian outlets, and pro-Kremlin Telegram channels.

Eto Buziashvili, Research Associate, Washington DC

Pushback against compulsory ‘patriotism’ lessons in Russian schools

On September 5, Russia launched compulsory patriotism lessons referred to as Razgovory o Vazhnom (“Conversations about the Important”) in schools across the country. The Telegram channel Mozhem Obyasnity (“We Can Explain”) reported that some parents kept their children at home to boycott the lesson. On September 3, Telegram channel Utro Fevralya (“February Morning”) reported that a mother in Yekaterinburg wrote a letter to her son’s teacher stating that she is “categorically against” the new program. “I’ve seen the lesson plans,” she continued. “I think there is no place for propaganda in school.” The teacher responded that the school administration had ruled that the son did not need to attend the class. Similarly, on September 6, Utro Fevralya reported that a father in rural Novokievskii Uval who demanded that his child be excused from the lesson was told by the school administration, “If the child does not like it, he may not listen, but he is obliged to attend.” 

On August 30, the Russian Teachers’ Union and women’s rights organization Myagkaya Sila published an open letter condemning the new lesson and calling on parents to boycott the program by demanding their children not be taught propaganda. The letter cited a federal education law permitting students to choose their extracurricular courses; while the class is mandatory, it is technically extracurricular programming. 

On September 5, the Mozhem Obyasnity Telegram channel reported that all course materials had been removed from their official website. On September 7, the materials reappeared, but mentions of Russia’s “special military operation” had been removed. 

The “patriotic” extracurricular lessons are scheduled for Monday mornings for students in grades one to eleven. The official website for the program includes lesson plans through November 28, 2022.

Nika Aleksejeva, Lead Researcher, Riga, Latvia

The post Russian War Report: Ukraine intensifies offensive attacks in Kharkiv Oblast appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
There can be no compromise between Russian genocide and Ukrainian freedom https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/there-can-be-no-compromise-between-russian-genocide-and-ukrainian-freedom/ Thu, 08 Sep 2022 21:41:41 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=564455 Calls for a negotiated peace settlement in Ukraine fail to recognize that Russia's imperial ambitions and the Kremlin's genocidal objectives render any kind of compromise incompatible with Ukrainian statehood.

The post There can be no compromise between Russian genocide and Ukrainian freedom appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Ever since Vladimir Putin’s troops first crossed the Ukrainian border on February 24, there has been no shortage of Western commentators seeking to explain why Ukraine really has no choice but to offer Russia land in exchange for peace. Despite a series of Ukrainian military successes and mounting evidence that the Russian invasion has run out of steam, calls for a compromise peace continue.

The self-styled foreign policy realists behind these calls tend to overlook the fact that the land they are so eager to give away is actually home to millions of Ukrainians who would face a desperately bleak future under Russia’s genocidal occupation. Such arguments reflect a fundamental failure to grasp the unrepentant imperialism at the heart of modern Russian identity and the genocidal objectives underpinning the invasion of Ukraine.

Many in the realist camp remain convinced that the roots of the current conflict lie in NATO enlargement and Western encroachment into Russia’s traditional sphere of influence. They typically approach today’s war as a wholly rational geopolitical dispute and insist that Putin’s actions, however brutal, are a more or less inevitable response to the West’s own provocative policies in the decades following the Soviet collapse.

This Kremlin-friendly narrative has never really stood up to serious scrutiny. After all, even the most rabid of Russian propagandists recognizes that the entire notion of a NATO attack on Russia is pure fantasy. Even if NATO did genuinely harbor plans to invade Russia, why would they not simply use the Baltic states, which offer the same geographical proximity as Ukraine and have been members of the alliance for almost two decades?

The events of the past six months have further undermined the credibility of Moscow’s NATO mythology. Senior Kremlin officials now freely acknowledge that the current Russian invasion would continue even if Ukraine were to rule out NATO membership altogether and officially embrace neutrality, as Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has suggested.

Meanwhile, Russia has accepted neighboring Finland’s recent decision to join NATO with barely a murmur. This meek response to the fast-tracked Finnish membership bid has made a complete mockery of the Kremlin’s earlier protestations over the unacceptability of a growing NATO presence on Russia’s borders.

In reality, of course, Putin understands perfectly well that NATO poses no security threat to Russia. He has simply used the issue to his advantage. The Russian dictator has exploited lingering Western divisions over the wisdom of the alliance’s post-1991 enlargement as a convenient way of disguising and legitimizing his own historic mission to destroy independent Ukraine.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Putin is the latest in a long line of Russian rulers who have sought to eradicate Ukrainian identity and wipe Ukraine off the European map. This dark history provides essential context for anyone wishing to make sense of today’s war. Indeed, the current invasion is the latest link in an unbroken chain of imperial oppression stretching back for more than three hundred years.

For centuries, successive Russian regimes ruthlessly suppressed Ukraine’s independence aspirations while imposing wave upon wave of russification. Generations of Ukrainians were robbed of their past and banned from using their own language. The nadir was reached in the earlier 1930s when millions were starved to death in a genocidal famine engineered by Soviet dictator Josef Stalin to eradicate Ukrainian national identity in its rural heartlands.

While Ukraine officially achieved independence in 1991, Russia never came to terms with this separation. Instead, Moscow sought to keep independent Ukraine firmly within the Kremlin orbit and viewed Ukrainian efforts to embrace a democratic European future as an existential threat to authoritarian Russia that must be prevented at almost any cost.

Throughout his reign, the need to either control or crush Ukraine has dominated Vladimir Putin’s foreign policy thinking. His pivot from early cooperation with the West to Cold War-style confrontation came about as a direct response to Ukraine’s 2004 Orange Revolution. Ten years later when millions of Ukrainians took to the streets once again in defense of their European choice and fledgling democracy, Putin went one step further and ordered his military to intervene. The 2014 seizure of Crimea and occupation of eastern Ukraine set the stage for this year’s full-scale invasion and illustrated Putin’s readiness to make remarkable sacrifices in order to resolve the Ukrainian question.

While advocates of appeasement may well be genuinely unaware of Russia’s true intentions, Ukrainians are under no such illusions. They are painfully familiar with Russia’s deeply entrenched culture of denial regarding their country’s right to exist. They also noted how Russian rhetoric toward Ukraine grew increasingly radical in the months leading up to the invasion. Putin himself published an unhinged 5,000-word historical essay in July 2021 that many likened to a declaration of war on Ukrainian statehood.

As the outbreak of hostilities drew closer, Putin’s obsession with the destruction of Ukraine became increasingly obvious. He proclaimed Ukraine an inalienable part of Russia’s own history, culture, and spiritual space, while at the same time denouncing the present Ukrainian state as an illegitimate “anti-Russia” that could no longer be tolerated.

During the first six months of the invasion, Russia’s genocidal intentions have become even more explicit. Regime officials have routinely questioned Ukraine’s continued existence, while debates over the desirability of genocide in Ukraine has become an everyday feature of Kremlin-controlled Russian TV. Meanwhile, state media has helpfully clarified that Putin’s promised “de-Nazification” actually means the “de-Ukrainianization” of Ukraine.

These chilling words have been more than matched by deeds. The advancing Russian army has employed massive artillery bombardments to destroy entire Ukrainian towns and cities along with their civilian populations. Tens of thousands are believed to have been killed in Mariupol alone as Russian forces methodically destroyed the Ukrainian seaside city.

In regions under Russian occupation, Putin’s troops have systematically engaged in mass murder. Groups of victims have repeatedly been found in liberated areas with hands bound and showing signs of torture. Millions of Ukrainian civilians have been forcibly deported to Russia, including thousands of children. Those left behind are subject to terror tactics including abductions and hostage-taking. The Ukrainian language has been removed from every aspect of public life, while parents who refuse to subject their children to Russian indoctrination have been warned that they risk losing custody.

Given openness of Russia’s plans to extinguish the Ukrainian nation, it is hardly surprising that an overwhelming majority of Ukrainians firmly oppose any kind of land-for-peace deal with the Kremlin. They recognize that a negotiated settlement which cedes parts of Ukraine to Russian control would condemn the residents of those regions to genocide while paving the way for the next Russian invasion once Putin’s battered military regroups and rearms. Rather than accepting this dismal fate, there is a determination to continue fighting until a decisive victory can be secured. Faced with the destruction of their nation, most Ukrainians believe they have no other choice.

Media portrayals of the war in Ukraine often depict it as a struggle between Russia and the West but this geopolitical framing is misleading. What we are currently witnessing is actually the latest chapter in Europe’s longest independence struggle. As long ago as 1731, French thinker Voltaire was moved to write, “Ukraine has always aspired to be free.” This epic journey may now be entering its final stages.

Thanks to the remarkable courage and resilience demonstrated over the past six months, the Ukrainian nation is currently closer to securing true freedom than at any time in its long and troubled history. It is vital that the democratic world now remains united behind Ukraine as the war enters what is likely to be a decisive period. There should be no more talk of concessions or compromises. Partial genocide is not an option. Instead, the only way to achieve a lasting peace is by helping Ukraine to win the war.

Peter Dickinson is Editor of the Atlantic Council’s UkraineAlert Service.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post There can be no compromise between Russian genocide and Ukrainian freedom appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Russian War Report: Ukraine counterattacks in Kherson as Russia prepares new deployments https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/russian-war-report-ukraine-counterattacks-in-kherson-as-russia-prepares-new-deployments/ Fri, 02 Sep 2022 21:11:36 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=562547 Ukrainian forces targeted Russian military command-and-control elements in northwestern Kherson, while Russian forces attempted a limited ground assault in the same area.

The post Russian War Report: Ukraine counterattacks in Kherson as Russia prepares new deployments appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
As Russia continues its assault on Ukraine, the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab (DFRLab) is keeping a close eye on Russia’s movements across the military, cyber, and information domains. With more than seven years of experience monitoring the situation in Ukraine—as well as Russia’s use of propaganda and disinformation to undermine the United States, NATO, and the European Union—the DFRLab’s global team presents the latest installment of the Russian War Report. 

Security

Ukraine counterattacks in Kherson as Russia prepares new deployments

Media policy

Russia approves Yandex sale of media assets to VK

Tracking narratives

Austrian tabloid uses false images to claim Darya Dugina’s killer was stabbed to death

Additional reading

Pro-Kremlin Wikipedia alternative off to a rough start

Ukraine counterattacks in Kherson as Russia prepares new deployments 

On August 29, the anniversary of the 2014 massacre of 366 Ukrainian soldiers in Ilovaisk, the Ukrainian army launched a counter-offensive against Russian forces in Kherson. Kherson was the first major city to fall after Russia re-invaded Ukraine in February. Kyiv’s generals have hinted for months that they were preparing a counter-offensive. They launched the attack in the early hours of the 29th after laying the groundwork the previous night by striking key bridges and command points. 

Ukrainian forces targeted Russian military command-and-control elements in northwestern Kherson, while Russian forces attempted a limited ground assault in the same area. Ukraine’s Southern Command reported that damage to the Antonovsky and Darivka bridges made them impassable for heavy equipment. Ukrainian forces also attacked Nova Kakhovka. 

Media reports indicate that fierce fighting erupted on August 30 in the city of Kherson, and heavy gunfire could be heard near the city center. However, it is unclear whether Ukrainian troops had entered Kherson or whether the fighting in the city’s streets was between Russian forces and partisans loyal to Kyiv. On September 1, surveillance footage appeared online showing Russian forces waving white flags, reportedly in the Kherson region, according to Ukrainian channels. 

In addition, the military command in Moscow may soon encounter problems with the contingents stationed in Central Asia scheduled to be redeployed to Ukraine. According to Ukrainian intelligence reports, Russian military units in Kazakhstan (who were deployed there in January as protests erupted) refused to return and participate in the war against Ukraine. The official reason for the refusal was the lack of special air transport. There are roughly 1,000 troops in Kazakhstan with weapons and equipment, currently located near critical infrastructure sites such as airports, oil warehouses, and the Baikonur spaceport. Russia has already pulled almost all of its military contingents from Tajikistan and Armenia to participate in the war in Ukraine. 

Also on August 29, Maxar published satellite images of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant. The photos show Russian military equipment sheltered near one of the reactors. On September 1, a team of fourteen experts from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) finally visited the plant after a prolonged delay caused by the Russian authorities. IAEA Director Rafael Grossi said the visit was complete, but the IAEA “is here to stay and will maintain a continued presence at Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant.”

Newly released Maxar satellite images of the Zaporizhzhya nuclear power plant. (Source:  Maxar/archive) 

Meanwhile, volunteer battalions from Russia’s 3rd Army Corps are expected to be deployed to resume offensive operations in southern and eastern Ukraine. Images of the 3rd Army Corps training in Mulino, Nizhny Novgorod Oblast, indicate that troops are training with more advanced equipment, including BMP-3 infantry fighting vehicles, T-80BVM and T-90M battle tanks, and the latest variant of the AK-12 assault rifle. 

Previous Russian volunteer battalions that fought in Ukraine, including the North Ossetian Alania battalion, went into battle with older equipment. It appears that the Russian military intends to send the 3rd Army Corps units into offensive operations with the hope of regaining momentum on the front line. The T-80BVM and T-90M tanks from Mulino were seen on August 27 in Rostov Oblast, indicating that parts of the 3rd Army Corps are being deployed to locations close to the Ukraine border. 

Russian forces also carried out a limited ground attack near the western outskirts of Donetsk on August 27 and have advanced into the outskirts of Krasnohorivka. Russian troops are continuing efforts to flank Avdiivka from the north and firing upon Ukrainian positions along the Avdiivka-Donetsk frontline.

Ruslan Trad, Resident Fellow for Security Research, Sofia, Bulgaria 

Russia approves Yandex sale of media assets to VK

Russia’s Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS) approved a deal on August 30 allowing Yandex and VKontakte (VK) to exchange assets, in a move that will further restrict the flow of information in Russia. As part of the deal, Yandex will sell its search engine, news aggregator and Zen content platform to the state-controlled social media network VK. In exchange, Yandex will acquire Delivery Club, the largest food delivery company in Russia. 

As part of the deal, FAS will require both companies to comply with specific conditions “in order to maintain competition in their respective markets.” Yandex is prohibited from taking measures that would reduce the use of Delivery Club by restaurants or creating incentives for partners and couriers of Yandex.Food. VK, in turn, is obligated to request and obtain user consent for personal data processing on both Zen and News. 

Russian-owned news outlet TASS explained what the deal means for both companies. To understand VK’s strategic interest, they wrote, one “should take into account that it [VK] has recently turned into a quasi-state structure.” TASS noted that Gazprom, the Russian national gas company, is indirectly in control of the voting shares of VK. Companies dependent on the state, they added, “often perform social functions, at the same time acting as an instrument for implementing state policy.” TASS explained that VK has a “keen interest in Yandex’s media projects” because it would strengthen Russia’s “presence in new mass and popular segment of digital media, as well as expanding control over this area.” 

As for Yandex, TASS says the deal is an opportunity to “depoliticize” its business. TASS notes that international sanctions have heightened the risks for Yandex from a regulatory perspective. “Potentially risky assets will simply be exchanged for a promising politically ‘neutral’ Delivery Club project,” they added.

Eto Buziashvili, Research Associate, Washington DC

Austrian tabloid uses false images to claim Darya Dugina’s killer was stabbed to death

A right-wing Austrian tabloid published a story on August 28 claiming the woman accused of murdering Darya Dugina was stabbed to death. Exxpress, a tabloid associated with conservative and right-wing Austrian politicians, also reported that Natalya Vovk, the woman Kremlin media allege murdered Dugina, was found dead with “seventeen stab wounds and a piece of paper in her hand.” The article cited a “message that spread like wildfire on Telegram” as the source. 

Dugina was the daughter of Alexander Dugin, a Russian philosopher considered to be the founder of the Russkiy Mir ideology, which the Kremlin employs as justification for its war against Ukraine. 

The article’s lead image is a composite featuring a photo of Natalya Vovk, previously published in pro-Kremlin outlets, and a blurred photo of a woman lying on a bed. However, the blurred image is an old photo first published in July 22, 2020, according to a report by the Kremlin-controlled outlet REN TV.

Screenshots show Exxpress recycled an old photo to claim the woman accused of murdering Dugina had been killed. The pink boxes highlight the dates of publications. The green boxes highlight the blurred image of the woman. (Source: Exxpress/archive, left; REN TV/archive, right)
Screenshots show Exxpress recycled an old photo to claim the woman accused of murdering Dugina had been killed. The pink boxes highlight the dates of publications. The green boxes highlight the blurred image of the woman. (Source: Exxpress/archive, left; REN TV/archive, right)

Additionally, the Exxpress article shared an ID card which it claims was used by Vovk; however, the caption notes that the ID is fake. The photo on the ID actually shows Margarita Simonyan, editor-in-chief of the Kremlin-owned news outlet RT. 

Pro-Kremlin Telegram channels previously circulated an ID card they allege belongs to Vovk and proves she is a member of the Azov battalion. Twitter user @issandjumal conducted a photo forensic analysis on the ID card and concluded the image had been manipulated. 

In response to the fake Vovk ID, the Facebook account of the National Guard of Ukraine appeared to troll Russia by sharing several obviously photoshopped ID cards, replacing the photo with well-known Russian media figures, including Simonyan. 

Anton Gerashchenko, an advisor to the Ukrainian Interior Ministry, shared the fake Simonyan ID card with the caption, “We also know how to draw and make photo collages. Look at what character we have serving in the National Guard right now.”

Screenshots show Exxpress sharing the fake Margarita Simonyan ID, left, and Gerashchenko’s Facebook post, right.  (Source: Exxpress/archive, left; Anton Gerashchenko/archive, right)
Screenshots show Exxpress sharing the fake Margarita Simonyan ID, left, and Gerashchenko’s Facebook post, right.  (Source: Exxpress/archive, left; Anton Gerashchenko/archive, right)

Soon after the story was published, Kremlin-owned media outlets such as RIA Novosti in Crimea reported that Vovk had been killed, citing Exxpress as their source. The pro-Kremlin Russian actress Yana Poplavskaya amplified the false Exxpress story and suggested, “Those who order a murder do not leave the executers alive.” Several Russian media outlets, including RIA FAN, Ekonomika Segodnya, Slovo I Delo, and PolitEkspert, reported on Poplavskaya’s comment. Other well-known figures also amplified the story, including TV presenter Vladimir Sergienko and Ukrainian pro-Kremlin activists Olga Shariy and Anatoly Shariy

Eventually, pro-Kremlin outlets debunked the Exxpress article. RBC said it reached out to the Austrian Interior Ministry to inquire about Vovk’s death. “We can inform you that no such case is known in Austria,” the ministry told RBC. “Therefore, we cannot confirm the accuracy of this information.” Multiple Russian media outlets reported on the Austrian statement. 

Some pro-Kremlin media outlets, such as Tsargrad and REN TV, suggested in their debunks that Exxpress was fooled by an unnamed click-bait Telegram post that sought to garner subscribers. 

One day after Exxpress published the report on Vovk’s alleged murder, it published a follow-up story stating, “The first reports that the Ukrainian had been murdered were not confirmed by Moscow.” Despite this, Exxpress continued to use the fake image of the Simonyan ID card. 

Kremlin-controlled media outlets have previously suggested that Vovk fled from Moscow to Estonia and then to Austria, where she was allegedly spotted in a hotel. This may have given credence to the Austrian tabloid’s reporting on Vovk. 

The case of the Austrian tabloid demonstrates the diversity of actors capitalizing on the unsolved murder of Darya Dugina. 

Nika Aleksejeva, Lead Researcher, Riga, Latvia

Pro-Kremlin Wikipedia alternative off to a rough start

Runiversalis (руни.рф), a newly launched Russian analog of the internet encyclopedia Wikipedia, is an attempt to spread Russian propaganda and disinformation in the guise of a wiki. Beyond using the underlying software architecture employed by Wikipedia, it’s a wiki in name only. Read more about it in the latest analysis from the DFRLab’s Eto Buziashvili and Andy Carvin. 

Eto Buziashvili, Research Associate, Washington DC

Andy Carvin, Resident Senior Fellow and Managing Editor, Washington DC

The post Russian War Report: Ukraine counterattacks in Kherson as Russia prepares new deployments appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Russia’s self-defeating invasion: Why Vladimir Putin has lost Ukraine forever https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/russias-self-defeating-invasion-why-vladimir-putin-has-lost-ukraine-forever/ Fri, 02 Sep 2022 19:06:31 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=562310 The Russian invasion of Ukraine aimed to extinguish Ukrainian statehood and return the country to the Kremlin orbit. Instead, the war unleashed by Putin has sparked an unprecedented wave of de-Russification.

The post Russia’s self-defeating invasion: Why Vladimir Putin has lost Ukraine forever appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Russia’s genocidal invasion of Ukraine was meant to extinguish Ukrainian statehood and eradicate Ukrainian identity. Instead, it is turbocharging the de-Russification of the country. In the six months since the invasion began, Ukrainian support for de-Russification has become a truly nationwide phenomenon, reaching record highs far in excess of the significantly more modest public backing for de-Communization policies following the country’s 2014 Euromaidan Revolution. This wartime trend is rapidly reversing centuries of Russification and directly undermining Vladimir Putin’s dreams of a new Russian Empire.

Putin’s criminal war is having a truly historic impact on Ukrainian society and bringing Ukrainians together in a quite literal sense. The invasion has forced millions of Ukrainians to flee to the west of the country, where they have either sought refuge or traveled further into the EU. This has led to unprecedented intermingling between Ukrainians from different regions of the country, which is fueling feelings of solidarity and national integration. Recent opinion polls consistently indicate converging opinions on national identity, language, relations with Russia, and future geopolitical objectives among Ukrainians from all regions of the country. One of the national issues Ukrainians are now most united on is the need for de-Russification.

A further factor driving national integration is the mobilization of hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians to serve in the country’s military, with many deploying to frontline regions in the east and the south. Likewise, Ukraine’s large volunteer force is based throughout the country, bringing a wide variety of people from different professional and regional backgrounds into contact with each other for the first time.

The invasion is also speeding up Ukraine’s linguistic de-Russification, with the Russian language now increasingly associated with military aggression. The number of Ukrainians who support Ukrainian as the country’s official state language has risen to 86%. Just 2% of Ukrainians believe Moscow’s claims of a “genocide” against the country’s Russian speakers, but the deliberate weaponization of the Russian language by Vladimir Putin has led many Ukrainians to view the language less favorably.

At the same time, Russian remains widely used in everyday life throughout Ukraine. Language change is a slow process with Russian-speakers typically becoming bilingual before fully adopting Ukrainian. Recent data indicates that 85% use both Ukrainian and Russian at home while just 13% of the Ukrainian population uses only Russian.

Ethnic re-identification appears to be proceeding at a faster pace with 92% of Ukrainian citizens now declaring themselves ethnic Ukrainian in one recent survey. This figure would make Ukraine the third most homogeneous country in Europe after Portugal and Poland. Meanwhile, only 5% of today’s Ukrainian population identified as ethnic Russians in the same survey, representing a striking decline from 22% in the 1989 Soviet census and 17% in the 2001 Ukrainian census.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Ukraine’s relationship with the past is undergoing radical change in response to Russia’s invasion, leading to a widening of the memory divide separating the two neighboring countries. Only 11% of Ukrainians now express nostalgia for the USSR compared to approximately two-thirds of Russians. Likewise, 84% of Ukrainians hold a negative view of Stalin while most Russians have a positive attitude toward the Soviet dictator.

Meanwhile, Ukrainian attitudes toward the country’s twentieth century liberation movement have experienced a major shift. During the early decades of Ukrainian independence, public opinion was often deeply divided on the issue of Ukrainian nationalist groups. This began to change following the 2014 Euromaidan Revolution, when 41% expressed positive views of the OUN (Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists) and UPA (Ukrainian Insurgent Army). Since the February 2022 invasion, this figure has rocketed to 81%.

Ukrainians are now less inclined to differentiate between the Kremlin and ordinary Russians. Following the invasion of Crimea and eastern Ukraine in 2014, a majority of Ukrainians blamed Russia’s leadership. However, they now overwhelmingly hold both the Kremlin and the Russian people responsible for the current invasion. As a consequence, the number of Ukrainians who express positive views of Russians has plummeted from 47% in 2018 to just 3% today.

This collapse in positive attitudes toward ordinary Russians is not difficult to explain. Everything from polling data to anecdotal evidence demonstrates overwhelming Russian public support for the invasion of Ukraine. Millions of Ukrainians with relatives in Russia have personal experience of their family members either applauding the war or accusing them of lying about the horrors of the invasion.

It is also striking that the vast majority of civilian victims during the first six months of the invasion have been the same Russian-speaking Ukrainians in the south and east of the country who Putin claims to be protecting. Tens of thousands were murdered in Mariupol alone, while dozens of other towns and villages have been similarly reduced to ruins in regions of Ukraine that the Kremlin cynically trumpets as “historical Russian lands.”

Given the scale of the carnage, it is hardly surprising that 89% of Ukrainians believe the Kremlin is committing genocide in Ukraine. Almost nine in ten Ukrainians think Russia is seeking the destruction of the Ukrainian state and Ukrainian national identity, while half regard Russia as a fascist regime.

This sense that Ukraine is facing an existential challenge is fueling de-Russification and is also driving Ukrainians to reject any talk of a compromise peace. There is a strong sense throughout the country that without a decisive victory, Ukraine will never be secure. Around half of Ukrainians believe there can never be reconciliation with Russia and another third think it may only become possible in two to three decades. In other words, 78% of Ukrainians rule out any normalization of relations with Russia for at least a generation.

De-Russification at the official level has seen openly pro-Kremlin political parties banned and pro-Kremlin media shuttered. The Russian Orthodox Church (ROC) in Ukraine is on life support with only 4% of Ukrainians now professing membership. This is compared to 54% who identify as members of the Orthodox Church of Ukraine. With the Ukrainian government recently imposing sanctions on ROC head Patriarch Kirill and seven leading members of the ROC clergy for their role in the invasion, the ROC has an uncertain future in Ukraine.

Ukraine’s school curriculum is undergoing wartime de-Russification, with Ukrainian schoolchildren no longer studying Russian language and literature. The cultural de-Russification process also includes the removal of monuments to Russian literary figures such as Pushkin and Dostoyevsky, along with changes to thousands of street and place names across the country.

Monuments to Russian-Ukrainian friendship along with Russian and Soviet history are being rebranded or pulled down. In Kyiv, a prominent monument to Russian-Ukrainian friendship has been renamed while the city’s iconic motherland monument will have its Soviet crest replaced by a Ukrainian tryzub (trident). In Odesa, debate is raging about whether to remove the monument to Russian Empress Catherine the Great.

Irrespective of how long the war will last, it already seems clear that the end product will be a de-Russified and Europeanized Ukraine. This is exactly what Vladimir Putin hoped to prevent. The Russian dictator’s genocidal invasion is both a crime and a blunder on a scale unparalleled in modern European history.

Taras Kuzio is a Professor of Political Science at the National University of Kyiv Mohyla Academy.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Russia’s self-defeating invasion: Why Vladimir Putin has lost Ukraine forever appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Death of Mikhail Gorbachev highlights Europe’s lingering memory divide https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/death-of-mikhail-gorbachev-highlights-europes-lingering-memory-divide/ Thu, 01 Sep 2022 19:15:03 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=561984 The death of Mikhail Gorbachev has highlighted the memory divide between Western Europe and the countries of the former Eastern Bloc that also shapes contemporary attitudes toward Putin's imperial agenda.

The post Death of Mikhail Gorbachev highlights Europe’s lingering memory divide appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Few would argue that former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, who passed away this week aged 91, was a figure of huge historical significance. However, reactions to his death varied greatly across Europe, reflecting a memory divide that is also evident in contemporary European attitudes toward Vladimir Putin’s imperial agenda. While Western European commentators celebrated Gorbachev for his role in ending the Cold War, those who grew up behind the Iron Curtain were far more inclined to view him as a Kremlin tyrant wholly undeserving of praise for the collapse of a totalitarian empire he fought to preserve.

Many of the most generous tributes to Gorbachev came from European leaders. EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen set the tone by tweeting, “Mikhail Gorbachev was a trusted and respected leader. He played a crucial role to end the Cold War and bring down the Iron Curtain. It opened the way for a free Europe. This legacy is one we will not forget.”

Such sentiments were widely echoed in Brussels and other Western European capitals, where Gorbachev has always enjoyed a remarkably benign reputation. NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg lauded the former Kremlin ruler for “historic reforms that led to the dissolution of the Soviet Union, helped end the Cold War, and opened the possibility of a partnership between Russia and NATO. His vision of a better world remains an example.”

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Reactions in Russia itself ranged from muted to hostile. While Russian President Vladimir Putin offered his condolences and acknowledged Gorbachev as “a politician and statesman who had a huge impact on the course of world history,” he also delivered a very public snub by confirming that he would not be attending the former Soviet leader’s funeral.

Others were more direct in their condemnation. Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov took a swipe at the alleged naivety of Gorbachev’s efforts to reduce tensions with the Western world. “This romanticism did not materialize,” he noted. “There was no romantic period or honeymoon. The bloodthirstiness of our opponents has shown itself.”

The chilliness of this Russian response was entirely predictable. While Western audiences associate Gorbachev with the end of the Cold War, Russians blame him for the humiliations of the Soviet collapse and the bitter hardships of the 1990s. Since coming to power at the turn of the millennium, Putin has made it his mission to reverse the mistakes of the perestroika era and Gorbachev himself has become a symbol of national weakness.

Some of the most powerful responses to Gorbachev’s death came from the countries of the former Eastern Bloc, with many declaring that they did not share the positive sentiments expressed in Western obituaries. There was tangible anger on social media as people voiced their dismay at sanitized portrayals of Gorbachev that whitewashed his role in bloody Soviet attempts to suppress independence movements throughout the USSR in the late 1980s. “Lithuanians will not glorify Gorbachev,” posted Lithuanian Foreign Minister Gabrielius Landsbergis. “We will never forget the simple fact that his army murdered civilians to prolong his regime’s occupation of our country. His soldiers fired on our unarmed protesters and crushed them under his tanks. That is how we will remember him.”

Some commentators from Central and Eastern Europe branded the overly enthusiastic appraisals of Gorbachev coming out of Western Europe as an example of “Westplaining,” meaning the tendency to lecture locals on regional issues in a condescending, overconfident, and often inaccurate manner. Former Estonian President Toomas Hendrik Ilves spoke for many when he tweeted, “The hagiographic panegyrics to Gorbachev in Western Europe today are the perfect accompaniment to their position on visas: You people in the East of the EU don’t matter, your worries don’t matter, your issues don’t matter.”

The mood was similarly strident in Ukraine. While most government officials kept their counsel, many Ukrainians noted Gorbachev’s failed efforts to save the Soviet Empire and his personal responsibility for ordering hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians to take part in traditional May Day parades in the immediate aftermath of the 1986 Chornobyl nuclear disaster. They also pointed out that Gorbachev had repeatedly voiced his support for Russia’s 2014 invasion of Crimea and questioned why so many in the West continue to view him as a man of peace.

For many in Central and Eastern Europe, this week’s veneration of Gorbachev was one more example of Western Europeans failing to understand the true nature of Russian imperialism. While Gorbachev may appear comparatively benevolent when viewed alongside Josef Stalin or Vladimir Putin, he was nevertheless a totalitarian ruler with blood on his hands who owes his place in world history largely to the simple fact that he failed. As Anne Applebaum noted in a brilliant essay reflecting on Gorbachev’s legacy, “He presided over the end of a cruel and bloody empire, but without intending to do so. Almost nobody in history has ever had such a profound impact on his era, while at the same time understanding so little about it.”

Peter Dickinson is Editor of the Atlantic Council’s UkraineAlert Service.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Death of Mikhail Gorbachev highlights Europe’s lingering memory divide appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Russia must be held accountable for committing genocide in Ukraine https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/russia-must-be-held-accountable-for-committing-genocide-in-ukraine/ Wed, 31 Aug 2022 16:42:53 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=561372 Efforts to hold Russia accountable for genocide in Ukraine will involve war crimes trials but must also focus on the broader challenge of addressing Russia's historical sense of impunity, writes Danielle Johnson

The post Russia must be held accountable for committing genocide in Ukraine appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Many observers believe the current war in Ukraine could have been avoided if Russia had earlier confronted its troubling past. There is no way to know for sure if this is true, but it remains a fact that nobody has ever been held accountable for the Soviet regime’s countless atrocities. It is equally true that Ukrainians were among the chief victims. Millions of Ukrainians perished in the genocidal man-made famine known as the Holodomor, which was engineered by the Kremlin in the 1930s.

Putin came to power in this culture of impunity and has used it to his advantage. Over the past two decades, he has rehabilitated the Soviet past and revived the glorification of Russia’s imperial identity, making it possible to challenge Ukraine’s very right to exist. For this reason, it is imperative that Putin and other key members of his regime now face a long overdue reckoning. But is such an outcome even possible?

The most obvious route to a reckoning is via international justice. Given the massive scale of the crimes being committed by Russian forces in Ukraine, it is unclear what would be the best forum for prosecutions. Investigators from the International Criminal Court (ICC) are already investigating war crimes in Ukraine, while the UN Human Rights Council has established an Independent Commission of Inquiry. Meanwhile, the Ukrainians themselves have begun putting individual Russian soldiers on trial. These efforts will probably result in war crimes prosecutions but it may be many years before key verdicts are delivered. It is also extremely unlikely that Putin himself will ever end up in the dock.

With these uncertainties in mind, we need to ask what true accountability would look like. Holding criminals accountable is meant to deter them and others from future crimes, foster reconciliation between perpetrators and victims, and promote sustainable peace. As Putin’s crimes are rooted in an historic failure to impose accountability, any legal punishments for the invasion of Ukraine would only go so far in accomplishing these goals. Prosecuting war criminals must go hand in hand with efforts to challenge the historical narrative that drove the invasion in the first place. This means confronting Russia’s imperial identity and addressing the toxic notion that Ukrainians have no right to exist as an independent nation.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

If Russia is to be held accountable, the international community must do everything possible to ensure a Ukrainian military victory and the liberation of all occupied Ukrainian land. Following Russia’s defeat on the battlefield, Ukraine will need to receive credible security guarantees offering protection equivalent to NATO membership. Likewise, Western leaders should commit to making Russia pay reparations. Above all, the war must end on Ukraine’s terms. Any attempts to push Ukraine into accepting a compromise peace would be an affront to the country’s immense sacrifices and would also fly in the face of the need for accountability. It is vital that Russia publicly recognize its guilt and acknowledge the sanctity of Ukrainian sovereignty.

One way to achieve greater accountability is by empowering Ukrainians. The international community must work to support Ukrainian society in its efforts to hold Russia accountable. This support should include everything from technical assistance to helping local civil society systematically gather evidence and document atrocities. Ukraine has a functioning legal system but it does not have nearly enough capacity to cope with the volume of war crimes committed by Russian forces over the past six months. International assistance can make a big difference.

Ukraine’s international partners should also assist in the long quest to identify all the victims of Russia’s genocide. For the average Ukrainian, anger at Putin may be something of an abstraction. Indeed, while he is the individual most directly responsible for the invasion, he is neither the soldier who pulled the trigger nor the one who launched the bombs that destroyed civilian homes, hospitals, and schools. Like genocidaires throughout history, Putin’s intent is to destroy Ukrainian culture, language, and national identity, but he does not act alone. Recognizing each and every victim is an important step towards meaningful accountability for the crimes committed against the Ukrainian nation.

We need to consider how to target Putin’s false historical narratives at their very roots. One way to do this is to recognize, as Yale historian Timothy Snyder has said, that we need more history and less memory. While it is an open question to what extent Russians themselves bear collective responsibility for Putin’s invasion, polls indicate that a clear majority of Russians do support the war. While exact figures remain elusive, many Russians have evidently bought into Putin’s views of history. With Russia becoming an increasingly closed and authoritarian country, where does that leave those of us who want to see accountability from the inside out?

Here, we need to think beyond the immediate term. “Canceling” Russian culture is not necessarily the answer, but amplifying Ukrainians and their culture absolutely is. Getting their stories to Russians is critical, whether through technologies like VPNs or by supporting the Russian investigative journalists who have fled the country but are continuing their courageous work while based outside Russia.

Here in the West, we can work to advance public awareness, both of today’s Russian genocide and of historic Soviet crimes. This means making sure we document them in history books, teach them in schools, memorialize the victims in public places, and even recognize our own complicity in ignoring past events like the Soviet-era Holodomor famine in Ukraine.

Putin and his regime must face legal punishment for the genocidal invasion of Ukraine. But in order to achieve meaningful accountability, we must also address the unrepentant imperialism that makes it possible for Russians to dehumanize Ukrainians and destroy entire Ukrainian cities. This will require a long-term approach to historical justice that goes beyond the courtroom and seeks to strengthen every aspect of Ukrainian statehood while fundamentally challenging the way Russians view their own past.

Danielle Johnson holds a PhD in Politics from Oxford University and specializes in Russian and Ukrainian affairs.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Russia must be held accountable for committing genocide in Ukraine appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Decolonizing Crimean history https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/decolonizing-crimean-history/ Tue, 30 Aug 2022 17:16:39 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=561001 A new online educational initiative is aiming to decolonize Crimean history and challenge the problematic international tendency to view the lands of the former Soviet Union through a Russian prism.

The post Decolonizing Crimean history appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Russia’s war against Ukraine did not begin with the invasion of February 24. Instead, the conflict started almost exactly eight years earlier in February 2014 with the seizure of Ukraine’s Crimean peninsula. The Russian occupation of Crimea was a watershed moment in modern European history. It was the first time since WWII that one European country had invaded and attempted to annex the territory of another.

Russian President Vladimir Putin’s bid to redraw Europe’s borders by force was accompanied by one of the most sophisticated information offensives ever launched. As the Ukrainian Armed Forces fight to end the occupation of Crimea, it is also vitally important to debunk the disinformation promoted by the Kremlin to justify the 2014 takeover of the Ukrainian peninsula.

A recently launched English-language online course aims to educate international audiences about Crimean history. Developed by the Ukrainian Institute and EdEra online education studio with the support of the International Renaissance Foundation, the “Crimea: History and People” initiative explores the history and culture of the Crimean Tatars while telling the story of Crimea from the perspective of the peninsula’s indigenous people. This approach aims to decolonize the history of Crimea and counter the many imperial Russian narratives that continue to dominate international perceptions.

This initiative is arguably long overdue. Ever since the Russian invasion in early 2014, Moscow’s false claim that Crimea is “historically Russian land” has remained largely unchallenged in the international arena. In reality, Russia did not appear until relatively late in Crimea’s more than two thousand years of recorded history, with the Russian Empire annexing the peninsula in the final years of eighteenth century. Prior to this, Crimea had been home to the Crimean Khanate for over three hundred years, a far longer span than the subsequent period spent under Russian rule. This is largely overlooked in Russian histories and is rarely referenced in international coverage of Crimea. Instead, the peninsula is misleadingly portrayed as part of Russia’s ancient heritage. This helps legitimize Moscow’s wholly illegitimate claims to Crimea.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Since Ukraine became independent in 1991, the process of decolonizing the country’s past has been slowly gathering pace. A more nuanced study of the entire post-Soviet region that goes beyond traditional Russia-centric approaches is essential for anyone seeking to make sense of contemporary Ukraine or looking to understand the origins of the invasion launched by the Kremlin in February 2022. This is perhaps nowhere truer than on the issue of Crimea.

For decades following the Soviet collapse, many international observers spoke favorably of the “civilized” divorce between Russia and Ukraine. They often identified Crimea in particular as a success story, noting the absence of violent conflict and praising the compromises that made it possible to manage the return of the Crimean Tatars from Soviet exile along with the division of the Black Sea Fleet.

The true picture of Crimea in the 1990s is not quite so rosy. While open conflict was indeed avoided, the volatile political debates that raged over the future of the peninsula highlighted the continued strength of imperial sentiment in the supposedly democratic and pro-Western Russia of the Boris Yeltsin era. Russian politicians agitated against Ukraine over the issue of Crimea throughout the 1990s and were often accused of fueling separatist movements on the peninsula. As Paul D’Anieri noted in his 2019 book Ukraine and Russia: From Civilized Divorce to Uncivil War, “Even many Russian liberals who accepted Ukraine’s independence believed that Crimea, Sevastopol, and the Black Sea Fleet were Russian.”

Simmering imperial anger in Russia over the loss of Crimea was a warning sign of potential conflict that went unheeded and ultimately led to today’s war. It is now painfully apparent that Russian society as a whole has never fully accepted the loss of Ukraine and still clings to obsolete notions of the country’s place within Russian imperial identity. Failure to move beyond the imperial past in the 1990s has turned modern Russia into a backward-looking country that is driven by a revisionist desire to reassert its authority over former colonies rather than building pragmatic neighborly relations.

The Western world must share some of the blame for this tragic reality. During the 1990s, many Western politicians and academics continued to view the post-Soviet world through a Russian prism while embracing Kremlin-friendly historical narratives shaped by centuries of Czarist imperialism. This helped to justify Russia’s continued regional dominance while reducing the newly independent peoples of the former USSR to the status of footnotes in their own national stories. It is now time to challenge such outdated thinking and decolonize perceptions of the entire post-Soviet region.

For far too long, academic courses at Western universities focusing on Eastern European studies have placed disproportionate emphasis on understanding Russia. In the years to come, this needs to change. Instead, Western academics must dedicate far more time to understanding Ukraine. Learning about the complex history of Crimea from a non-Russian perspective is an important step in the right direction.

Dr. Oleksandra Gaidai is Head of Academic Programmes at the Ukrainian Institute.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Decolonizing Crimean history appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Information warfare in the air littoral: Talking with the world https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/content-series/airpower-after-ukraine/information-warfare-in-the-air-littoral-talking-with-the-world/ Tue, 30 Aug 2022 13:00:00 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=555913 Information operations play a crucial role in generating mass in the air littoral, the airspace between ground forces.

The post Information warfare in the air littoral: Talking with the world appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
In the early days of the ongoing war in Ukraine, Kyiv put out calls over Facebook for civilians to donate their drones or sign up to join drone units. Informal donation pages were set up, too, along with online efforts to bring civilian drones into the country. Russian volunteers caught on and tried to emulate the practice, although their attempts were less successful than the Ukrainians’ efforts. Nevertheless, the donation of drones supports both actors in generating and sustaining concentrated military power (or mass in military parlance)—a significant factor in the contest over the air littoral, the airspace between ground forces and high-altitude fighters and bombers.

The importance of mass in the air littoral

The systems that are employed to contest the air littoral—drones, loitering munitions, and low-flying missiles—are often cheap and disposable. Swarming attacks of numerous drones, loitering munitions, and missiles can overwhelm target defenses, but with high attrition rates. If stocks run out and cannot be replenished, the air littoral cannot be used for guiding artillery strikes or gathering and sharing propaganda. Global public-facing information warfare operations can encourage the building of mass, hinder adversary attempts to build mass, and reduce strategic effects of air littoral competition.

The role of information operations in generating mass

Information operations may encourage (or hinder) support from allies in generating mass. The United States provided Ukraine with hundreds of Switchblade loitering munitions. Though American national interest was certainly an influential factor, Ukraine’s success in garnering international sympathy for its unexpected combat prowess and capacity to fight the Russian army also played a big role. The Ukrainians have used memes of “Saint Javelin” and farmers towing away Russian tanks to crowdsource military and humanitarian donations. Lithuania provides the clearest example: the nation crowdfunded five million euros to buy Ukraine a new Bayraktar TB2 drone. Then Turkey gave the TB2 to Ukraine for free, suggesting the funds be used for humanitarian support. Ukraine also generated mass through an unconventional source: civilians. Although not an information operation itself, civilian engagement may support a larger narrative about how all of Ukrainian society is deeply committed to the war effort.

Of course, since early 2014, Russia has also launched its own information operations, often centered on weapons and defenses for contesting the air littoral. Russia continues to push disinformation regarding a fake Ukrainian chemical and biological weapons program to justify the invasion and discourage sympathy and support for Ukraine. The Russian Ministry of Defense has even accused Ukraine of conducting a “drone chemical attack” against Russian forces. In addition, Russia has conducted information operations seemingly designed to degrade Ukraine’s ability to generate mass in the air littoral. For example, Russia claims to have fielded a new anti-drone laser, but the United States has pushed back on the report, with a Department of Defense official saying that he had not seen “anything to corroborate reports of lasers being used” in Ukraine. Although it is possible that the United States might have just not found the evidence, disinformation about fielding a fancy new countermeasure could be intended to discourage Western drone resupply and induce greater caution on Ukrainian drone deployments.

In addition, cyber warfare—another important aspect of information warfare more broadly—can help generate mass while attempting to disrupt the other side’s ability to do the same. For example, the hacking collective Anonymous, furious with Russian actions in Ukraine, claims to have hacked drone manufacturers, capturing various documents on planning and tactics (exactly how useful these documents are remains unclear). Such information could be used to design better countermeasures or improve Ukrainian systems. Alternatively, cyber espionage and attacks could be used to identify potential vulnerabilities—cyber, physical, or electronic—to sabotage supply chains, targeting critical part manufacturers when Russia has few (or no) alternative producers. More broadly, this example illustrates the importance adversaries place on the use of information operations to generate and sustain mass in the air littoral, and the growing importance of physical, electronic, and cyberattacks to interdict air-littoral weapon systems.

Information environment in the air littoral

An open question is how to best counter such efforts. The Russia-Ukraine conflict has seen significant use of Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) attacks, which could be leveled against websites hosting drone recruitment messages, or local Internet providers. Alternatively, an adversary could, say, hack into the Facebook account hosting the message, or set up a fake effort to divert some of the drones. Taking down an entire channel would be difficult and would most likely produce only limited effects—the longest Facebook outage in history lasted 14 hours. Nevertheless, the open-source nature of social media websites could allow an adversary to collect useful intelligence. If an adversary knows the manufacturer and model of the drones being provided, they can also know operating parameters, potential vulnerabilities, and which countermeasures are most effective. They could also target supply chains, perhaps through information attacks.

A civilian’s drone-captured footage of Russian troop movements has little impact if the civilian cannot share the footage with those individuals capable of attacking the troops, emplacing obstacles to inhibit movement, avoiding the troops, or otherwise reacting to troop movements. Likewise, the civilian almost certainly will not know which unit to call. That means the military would require the capacity to find the video on the Internet, provide an alternative means for the civilian to upload the video, and relay the video to the appropriate units.

Of course, delays in information sharing can still have meaningful effects. A Ukrainian drone captured footage of a Russian soldier appearing to shoot a civilian who surrendered. If the operator had to wait weeks or months to share the video, the opportunity for it to have an impact could have been lost: states might have already decided whether to provide or withhold support. The video might go viral, stuck on the front page of world newspapers, but the conflict may be too far along for it to make a difference. Even more modest delays—days or just hours—might prevent action on particularly time-sensitive information. Direct attacks on popular information-sharing channels (Telegram, Twitter, Facebook) might have limited effects if a prolonged outage forces a sharing group to migrate to a new channel. However, because global companies with major information-technology capabilities operate those channels, extended outages are unlikely.

Preparing to wage information warfare in the air littoral

The information environment is compressing the tactical, operational, and strategic levels of warfare, especially in the air littoral. Tactical victories and errors can go viral, spreading from Wellington to Timbuktu. Winning the information warfare contest can mean that the victor receives more missiles, intelligence information, and humanitarian support. Losing can result in cyberattacks from anarchic nonstate actors, and adversaries empowered with outside support. The United States and allied forces need to be prepared: they should hold wargames and exercises to explore how information operations interact with the air littoral; explore ways to use civilian engagement to support air-littoral stocks; ensure that information awareness is baked deeply into military organizations; and strengthen mechanisms for interagency collaboration on information operations. Today, an act of violence can echo throughout the world.

***

Zachary Kallenborn is a Policy Fellow at the Schar School of Policy and Government, a Research Affiliate with the Unconventional Weapons and Technology Division of the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START), an officially proclaimed US Army “Mad Scientist,” and national security consultant.

Read more essays in the series

Airpower after Ukraine: The future of air warfare

Airpower experts and practitioners examine interim lessons from the war in Ukraine and consider applications for twenty-first century air and space forces.

Forward Defense

Forward Defense, housed within the Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security, generates ideas and connects stakeholders in the defense ecosystem to promote an enduring military advantage for the United States, its allies, and partners. Our work identifies the defense strategies, capabilities, and resources the United States needs to deter and, if necessary, prevail in future conflict.

The post Information warfare in the air littoral: Talking with the world appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Amnesty announces review as Ukraine report backlash continues https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/amnesty-announces-review-as-ukraine-report-backlash-continues/ Thu, 25 Aug 2022 18:23:21 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=559968 Amnesty International has announced an independent review of a controversial report that accused the Ukrainian military of endangering civilians and was subsequently used by the Kremlin to justify war crimes.

The post Amnesty announces review as Ukraine report backlash continues appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Amnesty International provoked outrage earlier this month with a controversial and misguided press release that accused the Ukrainian armed forces of endangering civilians. The fallout is ongoing. The head of Amnesty’s Ukraine branch, Oksana Pokalchuk, has resigned. Several colleagues have followed suit, including the co-founder of Amnesty Sweden and as many as eighty members of Amnesty Norway.

The report, which according to Amnesty was written in an effort to protect civilians, has unwittingly endangered them by fueling Russian propaganda narratives. The unintended yet predictable consequences of the report have prompted Amnesty International to announce a much-needed internal review. 

Amnesty accused the Ukrainian armed forces of “launching strikes from within populated residential areas as well as basing themselves in civilian buildings.” The report implies some sort of blanket prohibition on operating in civilian areas or using civilian infrastructure, when in fact the military’s responsibility under international law is to avoid locating military objectives near populated areas and to protect civilians from the dangers resulting from military operations to the maximum extent possible. Amnesty’s misinterpretation has muddied the waters with potentially disastrous consequences.

In a recent episode that illustrated the problematic nature of the report, Russia’s ambassador to the United Nations Vasily Nebenzya referenced Amnesty’s findings as justification for Russia’s occupation and militarization of the Zaporizhia nuclear power plant in southern Ukraine. The Russian armed forces stand accused of using the plant, which by Nebenzya’s own admission is civilian infrastructure, to house the artillery and rocket systems it uses to attack Ukrainian forces on the other side of the Dnipro River. When the Ukrainians fire back, they are accused of targeting civilian infrastructure.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

How did Amnesty get it so dangerously wrong? The organization itself wants to know and will undertake a review conducted by external reviewers to examine the decisions and working practices within Amnesty that led to the publication of the release. “We want to understand what exactly went wrong and why, in order to learn lessons and improve our work in the field of human rights,” Amnesty International said

As Amnesty begins its assessment of what went wrong, Oksana Pokalchuk has offered her own diagnosis. In an op-ed published in the Washington Post on August 13, Pokalchuk identified some of Amnesty’s missteps, including its failure to adequately cooperate with the Ukrainian government and its wild misinterpretation of international law. 

Amnesty’s argument that the Ukrainian military should somehow protect populated areas from afar is completely out of touch with the military realities of Russia’s ongoing invasion, Pokalchuk noted. Instead, she explained, assessments of how well a military protects civilians must be made on a case-by-case basis.

Shame is an important tool for compelling governments and militaries to adhere to international norms. But so is cooperation. Pokalchuk highlighted that the Ukrainian government has a solid track record of responding to Amnesty’s concerns and was not given adequate time to respond in this instance. 

The founder of the UA Recover Initiative, Donald Bowser, has called attention to Ukraine’s successes in compliance with international humanitarian law (IHL). In what he identified as one of the great reforms in the Ukrainian military over the last eight years, thousands of Ukrainian officers were trained on IHL in joint programs with international organizations. IHL has been integrated into the curriculum of both military universities and army training programs. Given Ukraine’s record on compliance, it seems Amnesty had other avenues to voice their concerns that could have enabled them to advocate for Ukrainian civilians without empowering their Russian attackers. 

Pokalchuk also recounted how Amnesty’s Ukrainian branch was silenced in favor of a team of international researchers who were unfamiliar with the local language and context. Pokalchuk described the attitude of the main branch as “condescending and unfair” and highlighted the “total disregard for the principle of international solidarity proclaimed in Amnesty’s statute.” 

But while Amnesty’s main branch stands accused of colonial attitudes, the organization’s Canadian branch has tried to demonstrate solidarity with Ukraine. In its own statement, Amnesty Canada expressed regret that the press release was published without sufficient context and did not pay due attention to the numerous war crimes committed by the Russian military in Ukraine. It also condemned the instrumentalization of the report by Russian propagandists. 

“Several years ago, Amnesty International purposefully decentralized to better listen, respond to, and be led by the voices of human rights defenders on the frontlines. Unfortunately, this press release defaulted to outdated ways of working that centralize knowledge and decision-making while placing local expertise and understanding at the margins. We have done this at considerable risk to our colleagues and rights holders in Ukraine,” Amnesty Canada wrote.

As Pokalchuk emphasized in her editorial, Amnesty has a dedicated staff of human rights advocates and researchers, all of whom share a commitment to humanitarian values including amplifying diverse voices and international solidarity. As it conducts its postmortem, returning to those values is step number one. Amnesty’s leadership has a responsibility to uphold its stated mission and to place its trust in its staff, especially when they raise red flags. Failure to do so in Ukraine has proved disastrous but can hopefully serve as a much-needed wake-up call.

Lillian Posner is a Research Associate at the Council on Foreign Relations. She earned her master’s degree in Eurasian, Russian, and East European Studies from Georgetown University.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Amnesty announces review as Ukraine report backlash continues appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Chinese discourse power: Ambitions and reality in the digital domain https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/in-depth-research-reports/report/chinese-discourse-power-ambitions-and-reality-in-the-digital-domain/ Wed, 24 Aug 2022 04:00:00 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=555866 The CCP has embarked on a concerted strategy to gain control over the global digital and information environment. Its goal: create an alternative global order with China at its heart.

The post Chinese discourse power: Ambitions and reality in the digital domain appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>

Executive Summary

As China’s military and economic power has grown, so has its ambition to shape global norms to suit its priorities. China believes that the United States currently dominates the international system, and sees growing Western opposition to China as evidence that the current order is now a threat to the continued security of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). As such, China’s leadership has come to see its ability to reshape the international order—or, at least, to decenter US power within it—as essential to the party’s future.

China’s leaders have clearly articulated that they believe that Western countries, and especially the United States, have been able to exert global dominance because they possess what China terms “discourse power” (话语权): a type of narrative agenda-setting ability focused on reshaping global governance, values, and norms to legitimize and facilitate the expression of state power.

For the CCP, gaining discourse power translates into an ability to increase China’s geopolitical power by creating consensus around an alternative, China-led international order—one that privileges state sovereignty over civil liberties, and that subordinates human rights to state security. China has identified both the digital realm and the geographic regions of the Global South as arenas of opportunity in advancing its goals and gaining a discourse-power advantage over the United States.

China’s leadership has been transparent in outlining its goals for both gaining discourse power and implementing a strategy for doing so. Chinese government scholars believe that discourse power comprises two, mutually reinforcing components: the “power to speak,” or to articulate a coherent vision for the world order, and the “power to be heard,” or to have audiences have exposure to, and then to buy into, this message. This involves embedding cultural values within a system so that it comes to structure the relations between states—in both subjective terms (such as norms) and objective terms (such as rules and standards). To operationalize its strategies for gaining discourse power, China has embarked on a major restructuring of the party-state to ensure that the CCP Central Committee—the seat of CCP leadership, of which Xi Jinping is the head—retains direct oversight over the bodies responsible for carrying out China’s discourse-power goals.

Chinese official and academic writings also show that the CCP has come to see the digital arena as crucial in its discourse-power strategy, seeing the opportunities brought about by the Fourth Industrial Revolution as offering a chance to disrupt the hegemony of the West. As one Chinese government official wrote in July 2020, “technological changes in different periods throughout history not only bring about economic changes, but also affect changes in the global power structure […] The digital economy is prompting a reshuffle, and China has the opportunity to gain a first-mover advantage.” Beijing has made clear its intentions to command the digital world, announcing its aims to dominate advanced-technology manufacturing by 2025, to lead in international standards setting by 2035, and to become a “cyber superpower” by 2050.

As such, China has embarked on a concerted strategy to gain discourse power via the digital domain. It has done so through several mechanisms: by shaping local information ecosystems via social and digital media platforms, by promoting CCP-approved norms for digital governance and Chinese-developed international technical standards, and by offering the physical digital and Internet infrastructure on which these information ecosystems rely at an affordable cost, and with no conditions for how it is used.

China also sees the Global South as potentially more receptive to its norms and governance principles, and as an attractive market for Chinese digital-infrastructure offerings. China’s external propaganda narratives couch Beijing’s activities in the digital sphere as ultimately aimed at granting countries more power over the development and direction of their digital economies.

China has promoted the norm of “cyber sovereignty” (网络主权)—in China’s definition, the right of each country to exert total control over the Internet within its borders—in various international organizations, technical standards-setting bodies, and its commercial relations with countries interested in Chinese products and services. In its external propaganda messaging, China often targets audiences with narratives that erode the legitimacy of the liberal democratic framework and that resonate with local experience; for example, in the Global South, Chinese messaging on digital cooperation emphasizes a shared distrust of Western governments or a shared experience as “developing” (to use China’s term) countries.

In actuality, however, China’s strategy is less about a true attempt to make the digital world more inclusive, and more about supporting the Chinese government’s leadership goals. While boosting its economic growth and protecting its ability to exert political control domestically are two major goals of China’s promotion of cyber sovereignty, Beijing sees laying the necessary groundwork for gaining a discourse-power advantage over the West as another key objective. As Adam Segal puts it, “cyber sovereignty represents a pushback against the attempted universalization of [Western] norms [regarding privacy, free speech, access to information, and the role of regulation] that has become the default of the current operating system, as well as a reassertion of the priority of governments over non-state actors.”

China sees engaging in targeted messaging, and gaining support for its normative framework across various audiences, as better positioning it to gain the discourse power it sees as essential for reshaping the international environment in a way that better facilitates the expression of Chinese power. Additionally, China’s leaders fundamentally do not believe that the Chinese perspective can be “heard” unless they can make the soil fertile globally for their message to seed.

As such, China’s strategy around discourse power should not be understood as an attempt to turn the world into an authoritarian stage. China is clear in emphasizing its agnosticism with regard to the domestic political characteristics of the governments with which it engages. To this end, it is less important to China whether countries support “cyber sovereignty” because it offers them more freedom in determining their digital futures, or whether governments see support for this approach as an opportunity to clamp down on Internet freedoms. In either case, China gains discourse power by increasing buy-in for its vision of the global digital order, bringing it closer to achieving its aims of gaining a comparative advantage over the West.

Lastly, while China has advanced presence and strategy in standard-setting bodies, normative spaces, the digital information ecosystem, and the provision of physical infrastructure, the Western world’s approach has been more piecemeal and reactive. Notably, China is advancing much of this strategy through the very mechanisms the United States and its allies created to govern and shape a “free, open, secure, and interoperable” digital world. Chinese leaders have taken a bet on the West’s overconfidence in its systems and have built a relatively successful strategy of quietly shaping, repurposing, and encircling them to advance China’s discourse power. Any effort to counter this reshaping, therefore, relies on the democratic world reinvigorating its engagement in these spaces, more clearly defining mutually reinforcing industrial, commercial, and geopolitical strategies, and doubling down on creating a more geographically inclusive, multistakeholder, collaborative system.

The post Chinese discourse power: Ambitions and reality in the digital domain appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
A strong Ukraine is the best solution to Europe’s Russia problem https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/a-strong-ukraine-is-the-best-solution-to-europes-russia-problem/ Tue, 23 Aug 2022 11:32:38 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=558904 Ukraine's courageous response to Putin's invasion has inspired the world but some Western leaders remain in denial over the threat posed by a hostile Russia, writes Ukrainian Defense Minister Oleksii Reznikov.

The post A strong Ukraine is the best solution to Europe’s Russia problem appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
August 24 is Ukrainian Independence Day. For the first time in three decades since Ukraine regained its independence, there was a real danger this year that the holiday would not take place at all. Exactly six months earlier on February 24, Russia launched a full-scale invasion of the country with the aim of crushing Ukrainian statehood and extinguishing the Ukrainian nation. The genocidal war unleashed by Vladimir Putin in early 2022 is unparalleled in modern European history. It is also a wake-up call for the many Europeans still in denial over the threat facing the continent from a hostile Russia.   

So far, the Kremlin’s criminal plans have been thwarted by Ukrainian strength and courage. An invasion that was supposed to end victoriously in just three days is now entering its seventh month with no end in sight. Putin dreamed of parading his soldiers through a conquered Kyiv. Instead, on the eve of Independence Day, Ukraine unveiled a “parade” of destroyed Russian tanks in the heart of the capital.

While Ukraine’s successes are encouraging, there is no doubt that Russia has not abandoned its plans to destroy Ukraine. On the contrary, Moscow appears more determined than ever to proceed with its genocidal agenda, whatever the cost. The recent public call from a senior Russian ambassador to show “no mercy to the Ukrainian population” was the latest in a long line of official statements underlining Russia’s intention to annihilate Ukraine.

This is well understood by Ukrainians, who appreciate that they are fighting not only for their country’s independence but for their survival as a nation. However, there are still indications that many in Europe refuse to acknowledge the scale of the Russia problem facing the international community.

The current war is not just about Ukraine. It is a struggle to determine who gets to set the rules the whole world will live by. The confrontation actually began eight years ago with the Russian occupation of Crimea. This year’s full-scale invasion marked a major escalation in Russia’s ongoing campaign to wipe Ukraine off the political map of Europe and undermine the foundations of the existing world order.

Ever since Vladimir Putin’s shameless denials during the Russian seizure of Crimea in spring 2014, the Kremlin has placed barefaced lies at the heart of its diplomacy. Moscow has routinely violated international law while protesting its innocence. The existing international institutional architecture has proved powerless when confronted by this Russian cynicism. The United Nations, the OSCE, the ICRC and others have all failed to prevent Russia from waging war and have been unable to impose meaningful consequences on the Kremlin.

Unsurprisingly, this has only served to encourage further Russian aggression. We have now reached the stage where Russia is openly waging a genocidal war while at the same time engaging in nuclear blackmail. Kremlin officials and regime proxies regularly threaten Europe with the prospect of nuclear attack, while the Russian military is currently using the seized Ukrainian atomic energy plant in Zaporizhia to hold the wider international community hostage.

It is increasingly obvious that dramatic changes are needed in order to avoid a further deterioration in the global security climate. International institutions that were founded to serve as pillars of a more civilized world have evidently lost their way and need to go back to basics.

The most recent example of this malaise was the deeply flawed report published by Amnesty International in early August, which completely failed to acknowledge the circumstances of Ukraine’s fight for survival and denied Ukrainians the right to defend themselves. The fact that Amnesty International’s report was enthusiastically embraced by the Kremlin and deployed to justify ongoing Russian war crimes in Ukraine spoke volumes about the moral morass which much of the international community now finds itself in.

The Russian invasion has also exposed the extreme reluctance among many of the world’s wealthiest and most developed nations to leave their comfort zone and defend the core principles of Western civilization. This is perhaps due to long decades of peace and rising prosperity, which have created the illusion of a world where the horrors of military aggression are consigned to the barbaric past.

Such delusions place today’s tyrants at a distinct advantage. They are able to seize the initiative and in many instances advance their agenda undetected until the damage has already been done. One good example of this trend is the international expansion of Russia’s propaganda media empire, which has grown rapidly over the past decade while many have turned a blind eye or dismissed the phenomenon as “just a dissenting opinion.” In reality, Russia has been able to establish a powerful Kremlin-controlled information apparatus dedicated to undermining Western societies from within. Countries cannot effectively defend themselves if they refuse to acknowledge they are under attack.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

The prevailing mood of denial in Europe has allowed Russian society to wholeheartedly embrace an anti-Western fascist ideology while at the same time enjoying the benefits of Western civilization. Moscow actively attacks Western values and routinely depicts the United States, NATO, and the European Union as implacable adversaries. At the same time, the Kremlin elite and Russia’s middle classes send their wives and children to live in the hated West and take advantage of Europe’s superior education and healthcare opportunities. They buy up Western real estate, invest in Western businesses, settle their disputes in Western courts, and keep their savings in the same Western currencies they preach against.  

Russians have grown used to the idea that they can use violent rhetoric, violate international norms, and even invade their neighbors with impunity. They are supremely confident that Western leaders will nevertheless seek to maintain dialogue with Moscow.

This has fostered a culture of contempt. Not unreasonably, Russians believe the West has no stomach for confrontation and is utterly unable to defend the values it so readily betrays. After years of engaging with the perceived hypocrisy of the West, Russians see nothing wrong in professing their hatred for democracy while enjoying its fruits. Likewise, they are entirely comfortable calling Ukrainians “brothers” and in the same breath proclaiming that Ukraine itself cannot be allowed to exist.

Until this absurd situation is addressed, there is little hope of ending Russian aggression. Instead of viewing the country as a difficult partner or a competitor, the West must acknowledge that today’s Russia is an unambiguously hostile power that is waging war against the entire democratic world.

One key measure would be to declare Russia a state sponsor of terrorism. A small number of countries have already taken this step, but others including the United States remain reluctant. Skeptics argue that such a move would lead to unwelcome consequences that should be avoided. This is a slippery slope. Experience since 2014 demonstrates that failing to respond forcefully to Russian aggression only leads to bigger problems and higher costs further down the line. Rather than seeking compromises with a hostile power, Western leaders should designate Russia a state sponsor of terror without delay.

Europe must also deploy its considerable soft power tools to demonstrate that the days of double-dealing are over. You cannot expect to drive luxury German cars while scrawling “to Berlin” slogans on Russian tanks and parading them on state TV as symbols of national identity. You cannot expect to drink French wine or Viennese coffee while simultaneously threatening to nuke Europe.

Sanctions should be tightened and loopholes closed. Russian citizens should face a Schengen Zone tourist visa ban, with only humanitarian cases permitted to enter the EU. A wealth of evidence indicates that the vast majority of Russians support the war in Ukraine. They need to understand that they will face negative consequences for the war crimes being committed in their name.

Until the Russian middle classes begin to lose access to the trappings of Western civilization, they will continue to dismiss Western criticism of Russia as hypocritical and insincere. Once they are denied access to the privileges they previously took for granted, serious change in Russia may finally become possible. This will not happen overnight, of course. But until the current double standards are addressed, there is no chance whatsoever of Putin facing genuine domestic pressure.

Ukraine is celebrating Independence Day for the thirty-first time this week precisely because Ukrainians are prepared to fight for their country and defend their choices. Many of our Western partners were initially guilty of underestimating the strength of Ukrainian society, much as they underestimated the transformations taking place within Ukraine’s state apparatus and the Ukrainian military.

Thankfully, this is no longer the case. Ukraine has impressed the watching world during the first six months of the Russian invasion and has received colossal support from our partners. This has included large quantities of everything from artillery and MLRS systems to armored vehicles and ammunition.

Thanks to the leadership of the United States and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin III personally, the Ukraine Defence Contact Group has been established bringing together more than 50 nations in the Ramstein Format. Under the leadership of UK Secretary of State for Defence Ben Wallace, a series of donor conferences have been held to support Ukraine. This initiative was expanded thanks to the active stance of Denmark and Defense Minister Morten Bødskov. As a result, we now enjoy particularly strong support from a number of North European states.

From the very first days of the invasion, Ukraine has received unprecedented support from the Polish government and nation. Our trusted friends from Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia have stood by us during what have been some of the toughest moments in our modern history. We deeply appreciate the support of our Turkish partners together with Canada, Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium, France, Australia, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Germany and many other states. I am happy to report that the list of Ukraine’s partners is extensive and continues to grow.

Half a year after the launch of Russia’s invasion, it is evident that Ukraine is no longer a post-Soviet state. Instead, Ukraine has returned to its historic position within the family of European nations. This return was formalized in summer 2022 when the European Union granted Ukraine official EU candidate nation status. I only wish this success had not come at such a staggering price.

Ukraine’s further integration will benefit Europe as a whole. The events of the past six months have illustrated that Europe will become significantly more secure if it recognizes that Ukraine can serve as a shield in the east. Europe has a Russia problem and a strong Ukraine is the obvious solution. 

Ukraine has already provided ample evidence that Russia will back down whenever it encounters serious resistance. On multiple occasions, Russian troops have responded to battlefield setbacks with retreats disguised as “goodwill gestures.” The lesson for advocates of appeasement could not be clearer: failure to confront Russia will lead to escalating aggression, whereas a firm response will force Russia to back down and withdraw.

Military support for Ukraine is already bringing security benefits for the whole of Europe. Since the invasion began, Ukraine has succeeded in seriously weakening the Russian military. Around 45,000 Russian soldiers have been killed including approximately one-third of the Kremlin’s elite troops. More than 1000 Russian tanks have been captured or destroyed, along with hundreds of fighter jets and helicopters. Key successes have included the sinking of the Russian Black Sea Fleet flagship, The Moskva, victory in the Battle for Kyiv, and the liberation of Snake Island.    

This has shifted the military balance of power on Europe’s northeastern flank, with the threat to Scandinavia and the Baltic states now noticeably reduced. Additional military backing for Ukraine will lead to further reductions in Russia’s ability to menace its neighbors and the wider European community.

The Kremlin is counting on Western weakness and believes European leaders will ultimately cave in when confronted by a combination of rising economic costs and escalating terror tactics. If this expectation proves correct, the consequences for European security will be disastrous. Instead, it is in Europe’s best interests to provide Ukraine with the tools it needs to finish the job of defeating Putin.

Oleksii Reznikov is Ukraine’s Minister of Defense.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post A strong Ukraine is the best solution to Europe’s Russia problem appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Russia’s war in Ukraine: Six surprises six months in https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/russias-war-in-ukraine-six-surprises-six-months-in/ Mon, 22 Aug 2022 00:29:23 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=558360 The Russian invasion of Ukraine has shocked the world and transformed the geopolitical climate. Melinda Haring looks back at the first six months of the invasion and reflects on the six most surprising developments.

The post Russia’s war in Ukraine: Six surprises six months in appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Six months ago, Russia launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Since then, Russia has occupied 13% more of the country, killed thousands of Ukrainians, leveled major cities along with countless towns and villages, strangulated Ukraine’s economy, taken Europe’s largest nuclear plant hostage, and caused hundreds of billions of dollars in damage. Russian soldiers have committed unspeakable war crimes and thousands of Ukrainian children have been forcibly relocated to Russia. One-third of Ukrainians have left their homes, sparking the largest refugee crisis since World War II.

Back in February, I was one of the few analysts who fully expected Moscow to invade. Most remained skeptical in spite of Washington’s full-throated insistence and intelligence that an invasion was looming. The first six months of the war have continued to challenge assumptions. These are the six biggest surprises to me.  

1. The utter failure of the international system to restrain Russia

Diplomacy failed, US threats flopped (US President Joe Biden even sent Russian President Vladimir Putin a letter outlining the US response to an invasion), and a beefed-up NATO presence in Eastern Europe before the invasion did nothing. The international system is now failing Ukraine in seeking justice for war crimes and restitution for billions in damage. Even after six months of war, the West has nothing real to offer Ukraine in terms of permanent security guarantees.  

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

2. The sheer brutality of the Russian army toward “brotherly” Ukrainians

The Russian army has a long history of brutal violence, but it seemed unthinkable that soldiers would engage in the mass rape, torture and killing of civilians whom the Russian regime officially considers their Slavic brothers. And yet this is exactly what they did in towns and villages on the outskirts of Kyiv. Russia’s deliberate bombing of a theater in Mariupol that was known to be sheltering women and children defies belief.

As Andrii Osadchuk, a Ukrainian MP with the Holos party recently reminded me, it previously seemed unthinkable that the Russian army would eliminate Russian-speaking village after village in southeastern Ukraine, thereby destroying its own political stronghold in the country. Russia’s actions in southeast Ukraine alone expose the myth of Slavic brotherhood.

3. The US administration’s failure to communicate what the war is really about

President Biden didn’t ask the American public to do anything beyond pay higher prices at the pump. He has done a ton for Ukraine, and he and his team deserve huge credit for many things, but messaging to the public isn’t one of them.

Dashing off an op-ed for elites in the New York Times explaining what the US will and will not do in Ukraine isn’t enough. It’s not quite as bad as when President George W. Bush told the American public to go shopping after 9/11, but Biden’s inattention to messaging to the American public doesn’t get high marks.

Russia’s war in Ukraine will be long and drawn out. The outcome of the war depends on how long the West will sustain the effort with weapons and financial support. It all hinges on public opinion in the end. The lack of public messaging during the first six months of the war is a shame because Biden has an extraordinary gift for connecting with average people and fervently believes in the cause of freedom. 

4. Zelenskyy’s growth from showman to statesman  

Less than a year ago, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy came to Washington for a visit. I couldn’t figure out why he bothered with no real achievements to show. He was trying to boost investment in Ukraine without engaging in the real work of reform. In his first two years in office (2019-2021), he showed little interest in the often boring and complicated details of policy, opting instead for quick fixes. Rather than overhaul the courts, he flirted with the idea of investment nannies who would help Western businesses if they encountered any problems with Ukraine’s notorious law enforcement and legal systems.

Fast forward to today and Zelenskyy has become the Churchill of our times. He began the war by rejecting overtures to leave Kyiv and govern from western Ukraine or Poland. He has since inspired the world with his personal heroism and courage while brow beating Western governments to do more and explaining to the world the price of freedom.

As a war leader, Zelenskyy has a reputation for respecting his generals and leaving the big strategic decisions up to them. He has also become a staunch defender of Ukraine. During his 2019 presidential election campaign, many people questioned Zelenskyy’s patriotism and commitment to Ukraine. Up until February 24, he showed willingness to compromise and negotiate to end the war. No longer.

5. How little Moscow understands modern Ukraine

The Kremlin never understood how much Ukraine fundamentally changed since the country’s 2014 Euromaidan Revolution. Moscow failed to grasp that the reforms put in place over the past eight years were genuine, however haltingly they were implemented. This was especially true in terms of military reforms.

As Daniel Szeligowski at the Polish Institute of International Affairs points out, Russians completely misinterpreted polling data from Ukraine showing that Ukrainians disliked their political authorities but trusted the country’s military. This led to the disastrous conclusion in Moscow that if Russia could wipe out the Ukrainian military, Ukrainians would be glad to accept new leaders. How wrong they were.

6. Ukraine’s weak state institutions survived

Ukraine is not a failed state. Six months after the start of the Russian invasion, Ukraine’s banking system continues to work. Ukraine pays public sector workers on time. Hospitals and schools still function. The state railway moved millions of Ukrainians out of harm’s way. Central election data was closed and moved abroad to protect it from Russian hackers. Government ministries partnered with volunteers to deliver humanitarian goods and medicine across the country. Ukraine’s weak state institutions have proved surprisingly durable during war.

What surprised you the most? We would love to know.

Melinda Haring is the deputy director of the Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center. She tweets @melindaharing.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Russia’s war in Ukraine: Six surprises six months in appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Generation UA: Young Ukrainians are driving the resistance to Russia’s war https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/generation-ua-young-ukrainians-are-driving-the-resistance-to-russias-war/ Thu, 11 Aug 2022 16:49:27 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=555682 Generation UA: From politics and the military to civil society and journalism, the post-independence generation of young Ukrainians is driving the country's remarkable fight back against Russia's invasion.

The post Generation UA: Young Ukrainians are driving the resistance to Russia’s war appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
When Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine on February 24, analysts around the globe predicted the country would fall in a matter of days. Almost six months later, the people of Ukraine remain united in their resistance to Putin’s war, with Ukrainian youth very much at the forefront.

The remarkable resilience of the Ukrainian nation has shocked and impressed many observers around the world. But those of us who live and work in Ukraine are not nearly so surprised. As the conflict approaches the six-month mark, it is important to understand that a war designed to crush Ukrainian independence has in fact resulted in a stronger, unifying Ukrainian identity centered on the principles of freedom and democracy. This is best exemplified by the mood among young Ukrainians.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Russia’s war is not the first time Ukraine’s emerging post-Soviet generation has risen to the challenge of resisting a return to authoritarianism. In 2004, when widespread voter fraud in the country’s presidential election seemed poised to undo independent Ukraine’s hard-fought freedoms and fledgling democratic values, young Ukrainians were among the leading organizers of the Orange Revolution.

Ten years later, Ukrainian youth once again rose to the occasion, but this time as leaders of the Euromaidan Revolution following the Ukrainian government’s Kremlin-backed decision to reject an Association Agreement with the European Union. As the Russian Federation now seeks to rob Ukraine of its sovereignty, we are once again witnessing Ukrainian youth at the center of the fight for the future of their country.

This younger generation of Ukrainians born following the collapse of the USSR is leading positive change on multiple fronts including the military and civil society. Many thousands are currently serving in the Ukrainian Armed Forces. As the war rages around them, young Ukrainians are also volunteering in large numbers to distribute humanitarian aid through digital platforms like SpivDiia that match people’s needs with resources from businesses and private individuals. 

Young Ukrainians in government are designing cutting-edge solutions to meet emergency wartime needs. Young journalists are risking their lives to provide accurate information and document Russian war crimes. Many of these journalists have recently been recognized for their professional accomplishments, including Ukrainska Pravda Chief Editor Sevgil Hayretdın Qızı Musaieva, who was named this year by Time Magazine as one of the world’s top 100 most influential people.

Another example is Mykhailo Fedorov. The 31-year-old Minister of Digital Transformation and Ukraine’s youngest cabinet member has rallied the Ukrainian IT community and lobbied international tech companies to support Ukraine in the digital hybrid war against Russia. He is also behind the wartime adaptation of a government app that is providing social benefits to millions of internally displaced people who lost their jobs as a result of the war. Deputy Minister of Health Mariia Karchevych is another high-profile government official under 35 who is coordinating the flow of humanitarian aid throughout the country.

In addition to supporting the country’s wartime needs, young Ukrainians are also on the frontlines of the fight against Russian propaganda. From the very first days of the invasion, numerous professional and grassroots initiatives have emerged to expose the Kremlin’s disinformation campaigns.

In the months and years to come, youth will remain on the Ukrainian frontlines, both literally and figuratively. They will need to play an integral part in Ukraine’s post-war reconstruction, helping to shape important initiatives such as youth-friendly mental health services and educational efforts to address wartime interruptions in learning.

As the world marks International Youth Day on August 12, it is important that we recognize the contributions of young Ukrainians in government and civil society as well as in the military. And as national and international stakeholders look to rebuild Ukraine, it is also crucial that we continue supporting, listening to, and engaging this younger generation to make sure they remain at the heart of the post-war recovery process.

Ukraine’s resilient response to Russian aggression highlights the country’s commitment to democratic values and active citizen participation. It reflects a remarkable readiness to take personal responsibility for the future of the country. Amid the horrific destruction of the Russian invasion, young Ukrainians are playing a crucial role in consolidating an even stronger sense of national identity. This victory is as strategically important as any military success for the future of Ukraine’s statehood.

Mehri Druckman is IREX’s Country Director for Ukraine and Chief of Party for the USAID funded Ukraine National Identity Through Youth (UNITY) program. SpivDiia is an IREX grantee.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Generation UA: Young Ukrainians are driving the resistance to Russia’s war appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Putin is running out of excuses as Ukraine expands the war to Crimea https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/putin-is-running-out-of-excuses-as-ukraine-expands-the-war-to-crimea/ Thu, 11 Aug 2022 01:37:43 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=555533 Russian officials have denied that Ukraine was behind an audacious August 9 attack on an airbase in occupied Crimea but Moscow's excuses are beginning to wear thin as Vladimir Putin's invasion continues to unravel.

The post Putin is running out of excuses as Ukraine expands the war to Crimea appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Ukraine appears to have struck deep inside Russian-occupied Crimea for the first time on August 9 with an audacious attack on a heavily defended military base. The explosions at western Crimea’s Saki airbase rattled nerves in Moscow and sparked panic throughout the Russian-occupied Ukrainian peninsula, with traffic jams reported on routes leading to the Crimean Bridge as Russian holidaymakers scrambled to cut short their vacations.

The exact nature of the suspected Ukrainian attack is still unclear. The Washington Post cited unnamed Ukrainian officials calling it a Special Forces operation. Other international media reports confirmed Ukrainian responsibility without providing specific details. In the hours following the blasts, much of the debate among military analysts centered on whether the damage was caused by missiles, airstrikes, or combat drones. Satellite images have since revealed large-scale destruction at the site.

Speaking on Tuesday evening, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy stopped short of confirming the involvement of the Ukrainian military. However, in an apparent nod to the airbase attack, he did note that Russia’s war against Ukraine had begun with the occupation of Crimea and would end with its liberation.

In Moscow, the response to the airbase attack was one of characteristic denial. Rather than accusing Ukraine, Russian officials attempted to downplay the incident and insisted instead that the multiple explosions were caused by an accidental detonation of aviation ammunition. This dubious claim is entirely in line with a number of equally implausible excuses presented by Russia over the past six months as the Kremlin has sought to explain away a series of similarly embarrassing setbacks in the country’s faltering invasion of Ukraine.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Moscow’s record of absurd excuses began in late March, when Kremlin officials attempted to rebrand the Russian retreat from northern Ukraine as a “goodwill gesture” despite the fact that it came in the immediate wake of the country’s defeat in the Battle of Kyiv.

Russia employed the same “goodwill gesture” terminology once again at the end of June to describe the equally ignominious Russian retreat from Snake Island. Unsurprisingly, the entire concept of Russian “goodwill gestures” has now become fodder for social media memes as Ukrainians poke fun at the often farcical alternative reality created by Kremlin propaganda.

When Ukraine sank the flagship of Russia’s Black Sea Fleet during the early months of the war, the Kremlin was predictably quick to offer up face-saving excuses. The Mosvka sank in the Black Sea on April 14 after reportedly being struck by two Ukrainian anti-ship missiles. However, according to the version of events promoted by Russia, Putin’s prized flagship actually sank while being towed in stormy seas following an accidental fire onboard. This unconvincing explanation raised eyebrows, not least as weather reports gave little indication of choppy seas at the time of the sinking.

Moscow’s excuse-making has sometimes verged on the surreal. In an apparent bid to explain why the much-vaunted Russian military has so far failed to overcome Ukrainian resistance, members of a Russian parliamentary commission declared in mid-July that Ukraine was using mutant soldiers who had been transformed into superhuman killing machines by American scientists. Commission co-chairs and serving Russian MPs Konstantin Kosachev and Irina Yarovaya were quoted in Russian newspaper Kommersant claiming to have uncovered evidence that Ukrainian servicemen were being transformed into “deadly monsters” in laboratories under US supervision.

Russia’s reluctance to publicly recognize Ukrainian battlefield successes is hardly unprecedented, of course. Deception has always played a key role in armed conflict and Moscow has long been known as an information warfare innovator. Russia also has a number of very good military reasons to downplay its setbacks in Ukraine. Any public acknowledgement of the Ukrainian military’s ability to strike high-value targets deep inside Kremlin-controlled territory would confirm the ineffectiveness of Russia’s air defense systems and would further undermine fighting spirit within the ranks of an invasion force that is already suffering from demoralization due to high losses.

At the same time, there is something obsessive about Vladimir Putin’s apparent readiness to embrace even the most damaging of disinformation rather than admit Ukrainian victories. The Russian dictator has repeatedly preferred to portray his own troops as incompetent and has invited ridicule over nonsense tales of voluntary withdrawals rather than acknowledge the humiliating truth of defeat at the hands of a country he insists does not exist.

As his invasion approaches the half-year mark, Putin is now fast running out of excuses. Initial expectations of a quick and victorious war have long since given way to the reality of a brutal conflict against a determined and capable foe backed by the might of the democratic world. Despite deploying a large part of the Russian military’s available manpower, his armies have been fought to a virtual standstill while paying a terrible price in both men and machines. This poor performance has proved devastating for Moscow’s superpower pretensions. Indeed, it is safe to say that anyone still referring to Russia as the world’s number two army is almost certainly being sarcastic.

The impact of this collapse in military prestige is already becoming apparent in Moscow’s old imperial backyard. Kazakhstan is now in open confrontation with the Kremlin and Azerbaijan no longer feels constrained by the presence of Russian peacekeepers in the South Caucasus. Tiny Lithuania recently defied Russia for weeks over the transit of goods to Kaliningrad, while even loyal Belarus has so far resisted intense Kremlin pressure to join the invasion of Ukraine.  

Unless Russia is able to transform its military fortunes in Ukraine, these negative trends will only intensify. More countries will lose their fear of the toothless Russian bear, while potential allies will begin to question the value of such a geopolitically and militarily compromised partner. Already resigned to an extended period of isolation from the Western world, Russia may find itself increasingly excluded from the top table of world affairs and reduced to a junior role in its unequal partnership with China.

Putin’s perilous predicament means we could now be facing one of the most dangerous periods in modern European history as the Russo-Ukrainian War enters a potentially decisive phase. In the coming months, we should expect everything from desperate offensives and escalating terror tactics to energy cut-offs and nuclear blackmail. Nevertheless, as long as Ukraine’s Western allies can remain united in their support for the country, there is good reason to believe these efforts will ultimately fail. Putin’s criminal invasion has exposed the diminished reality behind the myth of Russian military might. Farcical talk of “goodwill gestures” and “accidental fires” merely serves to underline the point.

Peter Dickinson is Editor of the Atlantic Council’s UkraineAlert Service.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Putin is running out of excuses as Ukraine expands the war to Crimea appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Flawed Amnesty report risks enabling more Russian war crimes in Ukraine https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/flawed-amnesty-report-risks-enabling-more-russian-war-crimes-in-ukraine/ Tue, 09 Aug 2022 19:05:09 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=554869 Amnesty International's recent report accusing Ukraine of endangering civilian lives has sparked a wave of international criticism and is being actively used by the Kremlin to justify Russian bombing of civilian targets.

The post Flawed Amnesty report risks enabling more Russian war crimes in Ukraine appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Oksana Pokalchuk, who has spent seven years documenting and investigating human rights abuses as Director of Amnesty International Ukraine, tendered her resignation on Friday as the backlash continued over a controversial Amnesty International report titled, “Ukrainian fighting tactics endanger civilians.”

The Amnesty report, which accuses the Ukrainian military of basing its troops too close to civilian infrastructure, has been widely condemned by Ukrainian officials and many others in the international community including war crimes experts. Meanwhile, the Kremlin has warmly welcomed Amnesty’s claims, with Russian officials actively promoting the report to justify Moscow’s ongoing bombing campaign in Ukraine.  

Pokalchuk took to Facebook on August 4 to disavow the report, explaining that Amnesty’s global branch had effectively sidelined the Amnesty Ukraine team and proceeded with publication without their input or consent. She resigned the following day, writing, “Although unwillingly, the organization created material that sounds like support for Russian narratives. Seeking to protect civilians, the study has instead become a tool of Russian propaganda.” 

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Under international humanitarian law, armies have a responsibility not to use civilian infrastructure such as operational schools and hospitals or densely populated areas for military operations that could draw enemy fire. Ukraine is no exception. However, the Amnesty report makes some glaring omissions. Although it notes that Ukraine’s tactics in no way justify Russian attacks, it doesn’t address Russia’s demonstrated strategy of targeting civilian objects of no military value. Moreover, it ignores evidence that Ukraine has made a concerted effort to evacuate civilians from areas of intense fighting. 

Although such practices are explicitly prohibited under international law, Russia has repeatedly attacked civilian infrastructure with impunity, frequently shelling residential areas at night and pedestrian spaces during the day. Even clearly marked buildings such as an International Red Cross warehouse and the Mariupol Drama Theater, which sheltered around 1,000 civilians and was identified with the word “children,” were reduced to rubble by Russian strikes.

Attacks on Ukrainian healthcare have been so frequent and targeted that they appear part of a deliberate campaign rather than an unfortunate pattern. Since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine began in February, the World Health Organization has documented 433 attacks on Ukrainian healthcare facilities. Despite all this, Amnesty International has chosen to focus its attention on 19 towns in which Ukrainian soldiers allegedly based their operations too close to civilian infrastructure. 

Some of the expectations expressed in the Amnesty report, such as the notion that Ukrainian troops should defend civilians from Russian attack without stationing themselves nearby, are nothing short of absurd. But despite resounding criticism, Amnesty International has defended its claims. Its Secretary-General, Agnès Callamard, dismissed all objections to the report, tweeting, “Ukrainian and Russian social media mobs and trolls: they are all at it today attacking Amnesty investigations. This is called war propaganda, disinformation, misinformation. This won’t dent our impartiality and won’t change the facts.” 

Callamard’s comment mischaracterizes the nature of the criticism her organization has received. Among the “mob” of critics are such prominent figures as Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, who rejected the idea that blame for civilian deaths lies with the victim rather than the aggressor. “There cannot even hypothetically be any condition under which a Russian strike against Ukraine becomes justified,” he said in a speech shared on Telegram. 

Numerous international officials have joined Zelenskyy in his criticism of the Amnesty report. “After 163 days of an unprovoked war the Kremlin started, it should be absolutely clear that Ukrainians are in danger due to Russia’s aggression, the brutality of its forces, and their relentless barrage on cities across the country,” tweeted US Ambassador to Ukraine Bridget Brink. The Estonian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Latvian Minister of Foreign Affairs were also among those to voice their criticism. Meanwhile, British newspaper The Times branded Amnesty International “Putin’s propagandists.”

As for Russian trolls, Callamard should probably check again. Far from opposing the report, they are delighted. Russian propaganda has repeatedly tried to blame the Ukrainian armed forces for attacks on civilians perpetrated by Russians, and has often attempted to justify attacks on civilian infrastructure by falsely claiming that civilian targets were military objectives. For example, after Russia purposely bombed a functioning maternity hospital in Mariupol in March, Russian propagandists attempted to justify the attack by saying the hospital was controlled by the Ukrainian military. 

The Amnesty report has not only played into these dangerous narratives. Crucially, it has given the Kremlin carte blanche to continue its strategy of targeting Ukraine’s healthcare and civilian infrastructure.

Russian diplomats have already tweeted a post that uses the Amnesty report to legitimize the bombing of Ukrainian hospitals, schools and other civilian targets. “When a civilian building is used for military purposes, it turns into a legitimate target for a precision strike,” the post reads. “Ukraine continues to do it, but now even Amnesty can’t handle it. Whenever MSM shows you photos of a destroyed Ukrainian school or hospital, always ask: Who was inside?” 

This Russian Embassy tweet is not the only evidence that Moscow is exploiting the Amnesty report for propaganda purposes. Amnesty International’s Moscow office was forcibly closed by the Russian authorities in April 2022. Its website is blocked in Russia and Russians are not typically able to access Amnesty content. However, Meduza reported that the recent Amnesty report had become a trending news story on the Yandex News aggregator, which does not index independent media, suggesting that the Russian authorities are deliberately spreading the story to discredit Ukraine and justify violence towards the civilian population. 

It appears that Pokalchuk’s worst fears have come true. Amnesty’s report, however well-intentioned, has likely empowered Russia to continue its attacks on Ukrainian civilians. This tragic outcome could have been avoided if Amnesty International had shown faith in its Ukrainian colleagues and entrusted such reports to those with knowledge of the region.

Lillian Posner is a Research Associate at the Council on Foreign Relations. She earned her master’s degree in Eurasian, Russian, and East European Studies from Georgetown University.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Flawed Amnesty report risks enabling more Russian war crimes in Ukraine appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Putin has forced Ukrainians to view Russian culture as a weapon of war https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/putin-has-forced-ukrainians-to-view-russian-culture-as-a-weapon-of-war/ Mon, 08 Aug 2022 16:15:27 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=554548 Efforts to reduce Russia's cultural footprint in Ukraine have sparked criticism but in reality it is Putin who has weaponized Russian culture and forced Ukrainians to view the likes of Pushkin and Dostoevsky as tools of empire.

The post Putin has forced Ukrainians to view Russian culture as a weapon of war appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
The Russian invasion of Ukraine has amplified the ongoing debate over Russia’s cultural presence in Ukrainian society and accelerated efforts to remove vestiges of the imperial past. Some Russian intellectuals have voiced concern over the targeting of Russian culture in Ukraine, with author Mikhail Shishkin going as far as to ask in a recent piece for The Atlantic whether a Ukrainian author would “speak up for Pushkin.”

This raises challenging questions regarding the separation of culture from politics and the role played by culture in Russian imperialism. With Russian troops occupying vast swathes of Ukraine and Russian President Vladimir Putin proudly declaring the return of “historic Russian lands,” is now the right time for Russian intellectuals to rally in defense of Pushkin?

Figures like Shishkin certainly have the right to speak out over perceived attacks on Russian culture in wartime Ukraine. Yet others also have the right to challenge the intent behind such statements. As Russia’s genocidal campaign enters its sixth month with no apparent end in sight, what message do famous Russian intellectuals wish to convey when they use their name recognition to focus on the preservation of Russian culture in Ukraine? Are they really tone-deaf to the centuries of imperial politics underpinning the formerly dominant position of Russian culture in Ukraine? Do they not see how Putin has weaponized Russian culture in his quest to rebuild the Russian Empire?

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Russia is committing genocide against the Ukrainian people and making no secret of the fact. On the contrary, the overwhelming physical evidence of war crimes in Ukraine itself is supported by an endless array of proofs from Russian officials and propagandists in Moscow that demonstrate clear and unambiguous genocidal intent.

Since the invasion began on February 24, testimonies of survivors who fled Russian occupation have made clear that Putin’s ultimate objective is to wipe Ukraine off the map. Russian troops are trying to achieve this criminal goal through a combination of mass murder, terror tactics, deportation and depopulation. Mass graves have been uncovered wherever Russian troops have been forced to retreat. The Ukrainian authorities have been overwhelmed with accounts of torture and sexual violence. Thousands of Ukrainian children have been forcibly relocated to Russia. Air raid sirens sound in nearly every region of Ukraine on a weekly or sometimes daily basis. Civilian buildings are frequently the target of missile strikes. Millions of Ukrainians have fled their homes. No part of the country is safe.

Meanwhile, Kremlin TV pundits routinely question the legitimacy of Ukrainian statehood and call for the forced “re-education” of Ukrainians to rob them of their Ukrainian identity. Officials declare that Ukraine “no longer exists,” while editorials in Russian state media confirm the invasion’s stated military goal of “de-Nazification” actually means “de-Ukrainianization.” Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, who the West once naively hailed as a liberal change-maker, now regularly posts deranged anti-Ukrainian messages on his Telegram channel alongside maps of Ukraine divided up among Russia and other neighboring countries.

Throughout occupied Ukraine, the campaign to erase Ukrainian identity frequently employs Russian cultural icons. For example, billboards featuring giant portraits of Pushkin have been erected in the occupied city of Kherson in southern Ukraine as part of efforts to promote Russia’s imperial claims. In such circumstances, it is only natural that Ukrainians would begin to view Russian culture as an extension of Russian military aggression and cling more fiercely to their national identity instead.

Several noted Ukrainian authors who wrote mostly in Russian until the invasion have underlined how the conflict has made it impossible to separate culture from politics.

One such example is Volodymyr Rafeyenko, who wrote Mondegreen, his first novel in Ukrainian, after fleeing his native Donetsk in 2014. As he explained in a recent piece for Literary Hub, he was fully prepared to be a bilingual author but everything changed following the start of the full-scale invasion in February. “Genocide, the murders of children and adults, rapes, torture, the destruction of churches and museums, kindergartens and schools. Beastly, ungodly cruelty. All of this will be closely connected with the Russian language. And nothing can be done about it. The Russian language in its entirety has become obscene, speech outside the bounds of decent human discourse. And these days, if I have to use it in some private communication, I always feel something like disgust mixed with shame, guilt and physical pain.” After February 24, Rafeyenko found himself displaced yet again due to Russian aggression when he and his wife were trapped in the occupied suburbs of Kyiv. Thanks to the help of friends, they were able to evacuate to the west of the country.

The daily brutality of Russia’s invasion has compelled many Ukrainian artists to call on the world to suspend any and all cooperation with the Russian cultural sphere for as long as the war continues. Critics like Mikhail Shishkin have argued that it is Putin and not Pushkin who is directly responsible for the crimes taking place in Ukraine. Many Russian liberals appear to find it incomprehensible that poetry and other forms of high art could be spoken of in the same vein as mass torture, kidnapping, rape, and murder. Such posturing is either conveniently shortsighted or intellectually dishonest. 

For centuries, Russian literature has played an important role in the shaping of negative imperialistic stereotypes about Ukraine. The country has routinely been depicted as a backward and inferior region of Russia that is incapable of self-rule and undeserving of statehood. One particularly notorious example is the infamous poem by celebrated Soviet dissident Joseph Brodsky entitled “On the Independence of Ukraine,” which was written during the breakup of the Soviet Union. In this vicious and vulgar poem, he uses a Russian ethnic slur to refer to Ukrainians and contemptuously declares that on their deathbeds, Ukrainians will forsake nineteenth-century Ukrainian national poet Taras Shevchenko in favor of Pushkin.

Brodsky’s poem sheds light on a painful truth that many in the West are still struggling to grasp. While Russian literary figures have traditionally been lionized by Western audiences as symbols of a freer Russia, their readiness to take a stand against the autocracy of the Russian state does not necessarily make them natural allies of the Ukrainian national project. Indeed, Ukrainians have long noted that Russian liberalism ends at the Ukrainian border.

None of this means that the tonedeaf words of Russian writers such as Mikhail Shishkin are tantamount to war crimes committed by the Russian army. However, understanding the nuances of Russian-Ukrainian relations should compel us to reexamine how the public sphere engages the topic of Ukraine. This is especially true in the context of ongoing Russian aggression and against an historic backdrop of Russian imperialism. Ideally, the current war should spark a fundamental shift in international perceptions of Ukraine and expose the folly of attempting to view the country through a Russian prism.

Russian artists, like Ukrainian artists, have been victims of the Russian state in its many ugly forms. Yet political oppression should not be confused with genocide. While Russian authors like Mikhail Shishkin sit in exile and mourn the loss of Pushkin statues in Ukraine, their Ukrainian contemporaries such as Oleh Sentsov, Artem Chapeye, Artem Chekh, Oleksandr Mykhed, Illarion Pavliuk, Stanislav Aseyev, Pavlo Stekh, Yaryna Chornohuz and many more have taken up arms to save their country from destruction. In the final analysis, it is their nation-building experience and not the fate of Pushkin that is the true story of this war. This is a story the world desperately needs to hear. 

Kate Tsurkan is a Ukraine-based American writer and Chief Editor of Apofenie Magazine.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Putin has forced Ukrainians to view Russian culture as a weapon of war appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Russian army faces morale problems as Putin’s Ukraine invasion drags on https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/russian-army-faces-morale-problems-as-putins-ukraine-invasion-drags-on/ Thu, 04 Aug 2022 21:47:57 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=553701 A new opinion poll indicates that the Russian public continues to strongly support their country's invasion of Ukraine but there are growing signs that Vladimir Putin's invading army is suffering from low morale.

The post Russian army faces morale problems as Putin’s Ukraine invasion drags on appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
New polling data from Moscow indicates that Russian public support for the country’s invasion of Ukraine is growing. However, with the war now in its sixth month, there is little sign of similar enthusiasm within the ranks of Vladimir Putin’s invading army. Instead, much of the available evidence points to mounting demoralization among the Russian troops currently fighting in Ukraine.

The latest monthly opinion overview from Russia’s only internationally respected independent pollster, the Levada Center, has identified a slight rise in the number of Russians who back their country’s war against Ukraine. Published on August 1 and based on research conducted in late July, the poll found that 76% of Russians currently support the war effort in Ukraine. This represents a one percent increase compared to the figure for June 2022.

While a single percentage point obviously does not represent a major shift in public opinion, the consistently high levels of support registered over the past five months coupled with the slight upward trend in this latest poll do suggest that Russian backing for the war remains both solid and strong.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

The results of this new Levada Center survey will come as a wake-up call for all those who hoped Vladimir Putin would face a domestic backlash as the costs of the Ukraine invasion became increasingly apparent to the Russian public. On the contrary, it appears that the vast majority of Russians have acclimatized to the new wartime reality despite the worsening economic climate in their own country and mounting revelations of war crimes being committed in their name across the border in Ukraine.  

There has been much debate over the true level of pro-war sentiment in Russia since the invasion began on February 24, with critics arguing that opinion polls cannot be regarded as trustworthy measures of the public mood in authoritarian societies such as Putin’s Russia. It is also important to note that the Kremlin introduced draconian measures at the start of the war that effectively banned any public criticism of the invasion and imposed long prison sentences for displays of opposition.

At the same time, it must also be said that this tough stance has rarely been tested. There has been virtually no sign of an anti-war movement emerging inside Russia since a brief wave of small-scale anti-war protests which fizzled out in the early weeks of the conflict. Despite widespread initial reports of horror and alarm within the Russian establishment over Putin’s decision to invade Ukraine, the country’s political, business and cultural elites have since largely mobilized in support of the Kremlin. There have been very few resignations, with the relatively few who have preferred to leave the country generally choosing to remain silent.

If Russian society as a whole seems to have accepted the war, the same cannot be said for the country’s military. Reports of demoralization among Putin’s invasion force have become a common feature of the invasion over the past five months as Russian casualties have continued to mount at an alarming rate.

While the exact number of Russians killed or wounded in Ukraine remains a closely guarded secret, US officials believe the figure is already above 75,000 and rising. Other calculations are slightly lower, but all serious sources outside of Russia itself acknowledge that Russian losses now number in the tens of thousands.

Meanwhile, Moscow’s increasingly desperate recruitment efforts hint at the scale of the manpower crisis facing the Kremlin. Across Russia, potential army recruits are being enticed with mouth-watering salaries five or six times higher than the national average along with the promise of short-term contracts. In May, the Kremlin scrapped age limits on newly enlisted men in an apparent bid to fill gaps created by heavy losses in Ukraine. More recently, recruiters have begun scouring Russian prisons and offering convicts the chance to sign up in exchange for an amnesty.

Russia’s current troop shortages are in large part due to Vladimir Putin’s reluctance to officially declare war on Ukraine. Instead, he has branded the invasion a “Special Military Operation.” As a consequence, Russian contract soldiers are not legally obliged to fight in Ukraine and can theoretically resign from the army at any moment. Thousands are believed to have already done so, leading to increasingly desperate measures as the Russian authorities seek to prevent more soldiers from quitting.  

Reports this week claimed that hundreds of Russian soldiers have been illegally imprisoned by their own commanders in the east Ukrainian conflict zone after refusing to take any further part in the war. In one written testimony republished by the UK’s Guardian newspaper, a Russian soldier claimed he was jailed after deciding to stop fighting “as a result of what I believe were the tactical and strategic mistakes of my commanders and their total disregard for human life.”

Low morale among Russian troops represents a serious challenge for the Kremlin as both Russia and Ukraine prepare for what many now fear will be a long war. Ukraine has also suffered heavy casualties during the first five months of hostilities but Ukrainian troops are supremely motivated by the knowledge that they are fighting for their homeland against a foreign aggressor. Unlike their Russian enemies, they have nowhere else to go.

Motivation is likely to become a key factor in the months ahead. This is one category where the Ukrainian military enjoys an unquestionable and overwhelming advantage. While ordinary Russians cheer the invasion from their sofas, demoralization within the ranks of Putin’s army could become a major problem for the Kremlin as the brutal war unleashed by the Russian dictator drags on with no end in sight.  

Peter Dickinson is Editor of the Atlantic Council’s UkraineAlert Service.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Russian army faces morale problems as Putin’s Ukraine invasion drags on appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Vogue diplomacy: First Lady Olena Zelenska is Ukraine’s secret weapon https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/vogue-diplomacy-first-lady-olena-zelenska-is-ukraines-secret-weapon/ Thu, 28 Jul 2022 20:32:08 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=551783 Ukraine's First Lady Olena Zelenska has recently sparked debate by posing for a Vogue photo shoot with celebrity photographer Annie Leibovitz that some slammed as frivolous but others praised as a soft power masterstroke.

The post Vogue diplomacy: First Lady Olena Zelenska is Ukraine’s secret weapon appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Ukraine’s First Lady Olena Zelenska spent the early months of the Russian invasion far away from the limelight. She is now making up for lost time and has recently embarked on a high-profile US visit before hosting an international summit in Kyiv. While these initiatives have generated considerable publicity, Zelenska’s most eye-catching appearance has been in a photo shoot for Vogue magazine.

Zelenska’s Vogue portraits were taken by legendary photographer Annie Leibovitz, with the First Lady captured alone and together with her husband, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Leibovitz’s photos of Ukraine’s presidential couple are instantly iconic and have proved a viral sensation on social media. Zelenska’s appearance in Vogue has also sparked controversy, with some critics branding the decision tone-deaf at a time when the entire Ukrainian nation is fighting for survival.

Predictably, much of this criticism has come from Russia itself and from pro-Kremlin voices in the West, with numerous commentators pointing to Zelenska’s Vogue appearance as evidence that the scale of the war in Ukraine has been somehow exaggerated. Nor has the backlash been limited to Ukraine’s geopolitical adversaries. Many Ukrainians have also voiced their unease over the images, with some accusing their country’s First Lady of engaging in inappropriate PR.

These negative responses to Zelenska’s Vogue interview are understandable but short-sighted. Crucially, they fail to recognize the importance of keeping Ukraine in the international headlines and misunderstand the nature of Olena Zelenska’s role as the First Lady of a country that finds itself at war with a superpower. An attention-grabbing photo shoot with a global media brand is a smart move by Zelenska that plays to Ukraine’s strengths and enhances the country’s ability to punch well above its weight in the information war against Russia. At a time when scenes of death and destruction in Ukraine have lost the power to shock, she offers a compelling personal perspective that brings home the reality of the war to outside observers.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

The battle for global opinion is one of the most important fronts in the Russo-Ukrainian War. Ukraine’s ability to defend itself depends heavily on the continued flow of Western arms and money, which in turn can only be assured as long as public opinion throughout the democratic world remains firmly on Ukraine’s side. This cannot be taken for granted.

With Russia’s invasion now in its sixth month, a degree of Ukraine fatigue has already begun to set in and international media coverage of the war has noticeably declined. As attention turns elsewhere, Western leaders will find it more and more challenging to prioritize support for Ukraine or enforce sanctions measures that call for sacrifices from their own electorates.

Russia is well aware of this and is actively working on the information front to undermine Western resolve. Moscow’s clumsy initial efforts to portray the invasion as an anti-Nazi crusade have now been largely abandoned in favor of a subtler narrative that highlights the supposed futility of arming Ukraine while stressing the need to end the fighting. The Kremlin hopes this seemingly sensible message will resonate with jaded Western audiences and lead to mounting pressure on Kyiv to accept a compromise peace.

The consequences for Ukraine could be calamitous. Ukrainians are well aware that any ceasefire at this point would allow the Kremlin to consolidate its grip over regions in the south and east of the country that have been occupied since February 2022, while also potentially paving the way for the next stage of Russia’s campaign to extinguish Ukrainian statehood. This is why it is so important to keep the invasion in the news and underline the maximalist nature of Russia’s war aims. Zelenska’s Vogue appearance succeeded on both counts.

Even the most vocal of critics would have to concede that the Ukrainian First Lady’s Vogue portraits have attracted a lot of attention. This was achieved without resorting to sensationalism. On the contrary, Annie Leibovitz’s images are stunning yet authentic, capturing the emotional bond between Zelenska and her husband in a manner that also reflects the gravity of the circumstances and the life-changing experiences of the past five months.

Perhaps the most striking image of all features Zelenska seated alone on some steps inside an anonymous government building against a backdrop of sandbags that serves as a jarring reminder of the war. With elbows resting on knees, She stares straight ahead into the camera with an unaffected intensity that suggests both strength and exhaustion. It is a superb portrait that goes beyond traditional war reporting in its ability to communicate Ukraine’s deep trauma and the country’s remarkable resilience.

Zelenska is undeniably photogenic but her recent public appearances have allowed her to demonstrate that she is much more than just a pretty face. The Ukrainian First Lady clearly has much to say and uses her Vogue interview effectively to put the horrors of the Russian invasion into a relatable human context. “The first weeks after the war broke out we were just shocked,” she recounts at one point. “After Bucha we understood it was a war intended to exterminate us all. A war of extermination.”

As a wife and mother who has never courted publicity and famously preferred to remain backstage during her husband’s showbiz career, Zelenska enjoys a degree of authenticity that few politicians can match. This makes it possible for her to reach audiences that would be unlikely to engage with more traditional political messaging. She is now taking full advantage of this credibility to share Ukraine’s story with the outside world.  

Ukraine is hopelessly outgunned on the information front and cannot hope to match Russia’s resources. But while the Kremlin can count on multi-billion dollar budgets along with extensive networks of contacts and sympathizers throughout the ranks of the Western establishment, Ukraine has the priceless advantage of truth on its side. The key task now facing Kyiv is to keep Ukraine in the global spotlight and continue communicating with as wide an audience as possible.

If Ukraine can maintain current levels of public engagement and support, the country has a good chance of achieving an historic victory over Russia. In the potentially decisive battle to shape international opinion, First Lady Olena Zelenska may well be Ukraine’s secret weapon.

Peter Dickinson is Editor of the Atlantic Council’s UkraineAlert Service.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Vogue diplomacy: First Lady Olena Zelenska is Ukraine’s secret weapon appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Putin believed his own propaganda and fatally underestimated Ukraine https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/putin-believed-his-own-propaganda-and-fatally-underestimated-ukraine/ Thu, 28 Jul 2022 15:06:00 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=551338 Vladimir Putin likes to pose as an expert on all things Ukrainian but in reality his understanding of Ukraine is hopelessly distorted by propaganda that has led him to fatally underestimate Ukrainian resilience.

The post Putin believed his own propaganda and fatally underestimated Ukraine appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Russian President Vladimir Putin likes to pose as an unrivalled expert on Ukrainian history and identity politics. However, it is now apparent that his understanding of Ukraine has been hopelessly distorted by the wishful thinking of his own propaganda. When the Russian dictator gave the order to invade Ukraine five months ago, he seems to have genuinely believed his army would be met with cakes and flowers by a grateful population. Instead, he has plunged Russia into a disastrous war and turned his country’s closest neighbour into an implacable enemy.

Putin’s biggest blunder is his apparently sincere belief that Ukrainians are actually Russians who by accident of history now find themselves temporarily beyond the borders of the modern Russian state. This historically illiterate insistence that Russians and Ukrainians are “one people” lies at the heart of the current war. Indeed, it features prominently on propaganda posters erected throughout Russian-occupied regions of southern Ukraine.

As Putin himself must now realise, these claims of Slavic indivisibility are both factually incorrect and dangerously misleading. In reality, Ukrainian society has always embraced a range of values that diverge dramatically from the imperial instincts shaping Russia’s own sense of self. These differences can be traced back hundreds of years and have become significantly more pronounced since the collapse of the USSR, leading to the development of two very different post-Soviet states.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Modern Russia remains an authoritarian society where many aspects of everyday life are rigidly structured in a hierarchical manner. Individual Russians typically have little sense of their own agency or inclination to hold their leaders accountable. The same vertical power structures are found everywhere from government and business to academia and the military.

In contrast, independent Ukraine has emerged over the past three decades as a highly democratic if frequently chaotic society with a population that takes its own agency for granted and demands accountability from elected representatives. The contrast between the different political cultures in post-Soviet Russia and Ukraine could hardly be more striking and makes a mockery of attempts to portray the two nations as “one people.”   

During the two decades of Putin’s reign, Russian society has broadly accepted the country’s gradual retreat from the fledgling democracy of the 1990s. Putin has managed to suppress modest levels of domestic opposition and has succeeded in re-establishing the one-party dictatorship of the Soviet era.

Meanwhile, Ukraine has moved in the opposite direction and has experienced two popular uprisings in defense of the country’s democracy. Millions of Ukrainians took part in both the 2004 Orange Revolution and 2014 Euromaidan Revolution, with people across the country risking their lives and livelihoods to defy the government and prevent a return to the authoritarian past. These protest movements confirmed modern Ukraine’s democratic credentials while sparking unprecedented outrage and alarm in the Kremlin.

Moscow’s concern is easy to understand. Putin and the present generation of Russian leaders came of age politically during the Soviet collapse and remain haunted by the entire notion of popular uprisings. They view any demonstrations of people power with deep disquiet and regard the consolidation of Ukrainian democracy as a possible catalyst for further Russian imperial retreat. 

The role of Ukrainian civil society in the country’s war effort has done little to allay these fears. The spirit of volunteerism that drove Ukraine’s two post-Soviet revolutions was clearly evident in the military miracle of spring 2014, when thousands of Ukrainians formed volunteer battalions to derail Russia’s invasion of the country. This civic mobilization has once again been central to Ukraine’s fight back following the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion in February 2022.

The growing gulf between modern Russia and Ukraine is also evident in the contrasting attitudes of the two neighboring societies toward historical memory. The Putin era has witnessed the rehabilitation of Josef Stalin in Russia and the elevation of the Soviet victory over Nazi Germany into something approaching a religious cult. In contract, Ukrainians have belatedly come to terms with many of the darkest chapters of the Soviet past such as the genocidal forced famine of the 1930s that killed an estimated four million people.

De-communization has taken place gradually in post-Soviet Ukraine, with the initial steps of the early 1990s followed by a new wave beginning in 2014. While the process has been far slower than in Central Europe and the Baltic States, Ukraine’s de-communization has nevertheless placed the country on a completely different ideological trajectory to modern Russia.  

Putin and other Russian leaders are either unwilling or unable to acknowledge the agency of Ukrainians and stubbornly refuse to recognize the significance of the country’s vibrant civil society. Instead, they cling to conspiracy theories portraying the Ukrainian revolutions of 2004 and 2014 as Western plots orchestrated by meddling foreigners. Comforting myths of this nature have a long history in Russian imperial propaganda and echo similar claims made regarding the Ukrainian national liberation movement during the Czarist and Soviet eras.

Moscow’s attempts to blame everything on corrupting foreign influence reflect a deep reluctance to concede that Ukrainian society is truly distinct from Russia or that Ukrainians would voluntarily reject Russia. In reality, of course, Ukrainians do not require any prompting from Western agents in order to mobilize. They have been profoundly shaped by their experience as a post-imperial society and need no outside encouragement to fight for their rights. This terrifies Russia’s leaders, who see Ukraine’s democratic transformation as an existential challenge to their own authoritarian model. 

The war is now serving to highlight just how far apart Russia and Ukraine have become. While Russians embrace the openly imperialistic rhetoric of the Kremlin and in many cases applaud the invasion, Ukrainian civil society works to document Russian war crimes and Ukrainian volunteers crowd source drones and body armor for their country’s military. The next generation of Ukrainians appear to have instinctively picked up on this mood of volunteerism. There have been numerous examples in recent months of Ukrainian children who have acted independently to raise money for the army without any prodding from their parents.

The folly of continuing to insist that Russians and Ukrainians are “one people” is now all too evident. Unlike their Russian counterparts, today’s Ukrainians are confident in their own agency and comfortable defending their rights against domestic tyrants and foreign despots alike. Putin’s decision to invade Ukraine was rooted in his refusal to recognize this resilience. It has proven a costly mistake.  

The Russian ruler’s entire invasion strategy was based on the flawed assumption that any opposition could be overcome by decapitating Ukraine’s government and replacing it with a Kremlin-friendly alternative. In essence, Putin fell into the trap of believing his own propaganda. He assumed Ukrainians would demonstrate the same kind of passivity he has come to expect from Russians. Instead, he now finds himself an international pariah at war with a nation of forty million.

Taras Kuzio is a professor of political science at the National University of Kyiv Mohyla Academy and is the author of “Russian Nationalism and the Russian-Ukrainian War.”

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Putin believed his own propaganda and fatally underestimated Ukraine appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
More Russians must face personal sanctions over Ukraine invasion https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/more-russians-must-face-personal-sanctions-over-ukraine-invasion/ Tue, 26 Jul 2022 15:49:03 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=550666 As the world seeks ways to end the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Oleksandr Novikov of Ukraine’s National Agency on Corruption Prevention says dramatically expanded personal sanctions are the most effective available tool.

The post More Russians must face personal sanctions over Ukraine invasion appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Sectoral sanctions imposed over the invasion of Ukraine are clearly hurting the Russian economy. However, it is equally apparent that such measures are long-term in nature and cannot be expected to end the invasion overnight. In order to have a more immediate impact, it is time to consider dramatically broadening the application of personal sanctions to encompass the many thousands of Russians who make the genocidal war in Ukraine possible.  

Individual sanctions targeting government officials and other significant participants in the Russian war effort can serve to undermine the cohesion of the entire Putin regime. This would require expanding the sanctions net to include around a hundred thousand members of the Russian establishment as outlined in proposals drawn up by the Yermak-McFaul International Working Group

Focusing on personal sanctions is an attractive option for countries engaged in international efforts to contain the Kremlin. Individual sanctions enable Western countries to be specific in targeting the army of government officials, politicians, business executives, and propagandists whose contributions are critical for the continuation of Russia’s invasion.  

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Personal measures such as travel bans and asset freezes can have a massive impact on those who are targeted. In practical terms, any Russians included on individual sanctions lists will find themselves no longer able to access the benefits of the democratic world.

The poetic justice of such sanctions is hard to ignore. For years, belonging to the Putin regime has meant guaranteed access to the many material advantages of Western civilization. Almost without exception, members of the modern Russian elite have invested their wealth in Western businesses and real estate. They have become leading consumers of every imaginable Western luxury and have secured privileged access to the very best of Western education and healthcare.

Members of Putin’s elite have done all this while shamelessly advancing a doctrine of anti-Western hatred to domestic audiences inside Russia itself. Will they be as enthusiastic in their support for Putin’s imperial agenda and his war in Ukraine if they find themselves excluded from the West and restricted to Russia? It seems highly unlikely. 

While expanding personal sanctions could help undermine the pro-war consensus within the Russian establishment, the question remains of exactly who should be targeted. The Yermak-McFaul International Working Group on Sanctions against Russia has begun addressing this issue and has developed a road map for individual sanctions.

In order to prevent lobbying and avoid accusations of a selective approach, it is vital to apply clear rules when identifying targets for individual sanctions. This would require participating countries to agree on a range of categories covering the Russian government, economy, and the media.

Obvious targets would include oligarchs, senior government officials, executives at banks and companies linked to the war effort, and those involved in managing the Kremlin’s massive propaganda apparatus. As well as identifying key individuals in each given sector, it would also be important to extend any restrictions to proxies and family members.

The final list of those subject to personal restrictions could easily include over 100,000 people, making it the largest targeted sanctions initiative ever undertaken. This figure may sound excessive, but it actually represents less than 0.1% of the Russian population.

The effectiveness of an expanded personal sanctions policy would depend on the number of countries that agree to participate. Ukraine’s National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) has published a preliminary list of individuals who would meet sanctions criteria and has shared this with potential participating countries.

Russians who find themselves on the list would be able to secure sanctions relief by resigning from their positions or otherwise publicly distancing themselves from the regime. It would be crucial to establish close consultation between the Ukrainian authorities and partner countries when imposing or lifting sanctions. It is worth noting that NACP officials in Kyiv have already been contacted by a number of Russians seeking to be excluded from sanctions lists. 

A wave of resignations from senior figures in Russian state structures and Kremlin-linked industries would significantly hamper the country’s war effort while also exposing divisions within the ranks of the Russian establishment. This would reveal the fragile reality behind Putin’s posturing as the all-powerful dictator of Russia. With the future of his entire regime in question, he may then decide that he has no choice but to rethink the invasion of Ukraine. 

Oleksandr Novikov is Head of Ukraine’s National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP).

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post More Russians must face personal sanctions over Ukraine invasion appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Ukrainian footballers prepare to defy Putin with wartime premier league https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/ukrainian-footballers-prepare-to-defy-putin-with-wartime-premier-league/ Mon, 25 Jul 2022 23:16:56 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=550599 The Ukrainian Premier League is preparing to begin the 2022-23 season in August despite Russia's ongoing invasion of the country as Ukrainians turn to football to demonstrate their determination to defy the Kremlin.

The post Ukrainian footballers prepare to defy Putin with wartime premier league appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Ukraine’s professional football league has unveiled plans to begin a new season on August 23 despite the ongoing war with Russia. The return of the Ukrainian Premier League, which was announced recently by Ukraine’s Minister of Sport Vadym Gutzeit, reflects the country’s determination to defy the Kremlin. 

The Ukrainian Premier League’s 2021-22 season was abruptly abandoned at the midway stage in late February as everyday life ground to a halt amid the shock of Russia’s full-scale invasion. By resuming top flight matches, the authorities hope to send a message of strength while also providing the Ukrainian public with some welcome entertainment.

Needless to say, security will be the top priority once the new season gets underway. Talks continue between the Ukrainian football authorities, government officials, the military, and local law enforcement. According to Gutzeit, matches will take place behind closed doors in stadiums located in western Ukraine and the Kyiv region. Host stadiums must be able to offer ample air raid shelter facilities, with match officials instructed to pause games during any security alerts.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

With the Ukrainian economy in crisis and funding issues mounting alongside security challenges, not all Ukrainian Premier League clubs are expected to participate in the coming season. FC Mariupol and Desna Chernihiv have already confirmed that they will not be able to take part. 

Other Ukrainian teams are preparing for both domestic and European campaigns. A total of five Ukrainian clubs have qualified for UEFA competitions this season. Reigning Ukrainian Premier League champion Shakhtar Donetsk is guaranteed a berth in the group stages of the prestigious Champions League, while Dynamo Kyiv and three other Ukrainian teams will enter UEFA competitions at the qualifying stages.

All European ties featuring Ukrainian clubs will be played outside Ukraine in line with UEFA regulations. Shakhtar will play Champions League home ties in Warsaw. They will use the Polish capital as a base throughout the season, commuting across the border to Lviv for Ukrainian Premier League games. Arch rival Dynamo Kyiv will play Champions League qualifying round ties in Lodz, with Zorya Luhansk in Lublin and Dnipro-1 in Slovakia. 

The war has had a significant impact on the number of foreign players plying their trade in the Ukrainian Premier League. Due to a combination of security concerns and uncertainty about future prospects, the overwhelming majority of non-Ukrainian players have received permission from world football’s governing body FIFA to suspend their current contracts and find new clubs elsewhere.

This exodus has been particularly bad news for Shakhtar Donetsk, which has traditionally maintained a cosmopolitan squad featuring a large Brazilian contingent. The club is now seeking up to EUR 50 million in compensation from FIFA over lost transfer fees. Shakhtar coaches are also preparing to begin the season with an overwhelmingly Ukrainian squad for the first time in two decades.

In spite of the challenges ahead, Gutzeit remains convinced that launching a new Ukrainian Premier League season is the right step. “Restoring elite football in Ukraine is very important. Despite everything, Ukrainian sports and the will to win on all fronts cannot be stopped,” he wrote recently. In order to share this positive sentiment with as many Ukrainians as possible, matches will be streamed online and broadcast live on Ukrainian TV.

Ukraine’s national football team has already demonstrated the power of sport to unite the nation during wartime. In June 2022, Ukraine played a series of World Cup qualification ties that captivated Ukrainian fans and captured the imagination of the watching world. Star players such as Oleksandr Zinchenko and Andriy Yarmolenko used the games to act as sporting ambassadors and remind global audiences of the horrors taking place in their home country as a result of Russia’s invasion. 

Ukraine’s extended footballing community has also enthusiastically embraced the war effort. Household names such as Andriy Shevchenko have attended rallies and contributed to fundraising efforts, while some players and coaches have placed their sporting careers on hold in order to join the ranks of the country’s defenders.

It is still not certain exactly what the coming Ukrainian Premier League season will look like, with much set to depend on the security situation as the big kick-off draws closer. However, it is already apparent that the Ukrainian authorities, the football federation, and individual clubs all share a commitment to restarting the Ukrainian Premier League in some form or other.   

Ukraine’s current fight for national survival puts the often exaggerated drama of professional sports into context. Nevertheless, the very act of playing top flight football matches on Ukrainian soil will serve as a powerful symbol of Ukraine’s indomitable spirit and the country’s resilience. Through his own words and the criminal actions of his invading army, Putin has made it clear that he intends to destroy Ukrainian statehood and extinguish Ukrainian identity. Defiant Ukrainians are now determined to show the Russian dictator that he cannot even prevent them from playing football.

Andrew Todos is an AIPS accredited journalist who runs Zorya Londonsk, an English-language online platform dedicated to Ukrainian football.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Ukrainian footballers prepare to defy Putin with wartime premier league appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Russian War Report: Russia accuses Ukraine of creating ‘monster’ troops in biolabs https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/russian-war-report-russia-accuses-ukraine-of-creating-monster-troops-in-biolabs/ Fri, 22 Jul 2022 21:29:41 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=549990 Plus, a right-wing Polish political party presented a legislative proposal to stop the "Ukrainization" of Poland.

The post Russian War Report: Russia accuses Ukraine of creating ‘monster’ troops in biolabs appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
As Russia continues its assault on Ukraine, the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab (DFRLab) is keeping a close eye on Russia’s movements across the military, cyber, and information domains. With more than seven years of experience monitoring the situation in Ukraine—as well as Russia’s use of propaganda and disinformation to undermine the United States, NATO, and the European Union—the DFRLab’s global team presents the latest installment of the Russian War Report. 

Tracking narratives

Russia accuses Ukraine of creating “monster” troops in biolabs

Rising trend: “Decolonizing” Russia

Polish right-wing party proposes anti-immigration bill to “stop Ukrainization of Poland”

Security

Ukrainian HIMARS attack key supply bridge in Russian-controlled Kherson

Documenting dissent

Russian football fans protest introduction of Fan-ID tracking system

Russia accuses Ukraine of creating “monster” troops in biolabs

Russian officials are spreading the newest iteration of the conspiracy that suggests the United States is running secret biolabs in Ukraine, this time suggesting that Ukraine has created experimental “monster” troops. This appears to be an attempt to justify Russian failures in Ukraine.

Russian state media outlet Kommersant reported that on July 18, Russia’s Federation Council held a regular meeting of the parliamentary investigative committee on US biological laboratories operating in Ukraine. Committee cochairs Konstantin Kosachev and Irina Yarovaya, who also are vice speakers of the Federation Council and the State Duma, revealed the latest “findings from the investigation.” According to the cochairs, a blood test of Ukrainian soldiers showed that they were subject to “secret experiments,” which turned them into “the cruelest monsters.”

Kosachev explained, “For a number of diseases, including those atypical for the territory of Ukraine, the content of the relevant substances is many times higher than the permissible norms.” This suggested that Ukraine is experimenting with “extremely dangerous diseases” which could be distributed for “military purposes.”

Yarovaya also accused the United States of running a system that produces “killing machines.” This, she suggested, explained why Ukrainian soldiers commit “cruelty and atrocities,” including crimes against civilians and prisoners of war. Yarovaya added that the experiments “neutralize the last traces of human consciousness and turn them into the most cruel and deadly monsters.”

Some Kremlin-aligned and fringe news outlets published stories about the conspiracy. They all cited Kommersant as the source.

The Kremlin has employed a variety of biochemical disinformation narratives to justify Russia’s war in Ukraine.

Eto Buziashvili, research associate, Washington DC

Rising trend: “Decolonizing” Russia

A Telegram channel for a troop of Russian nationals who are against the invasion of Ukraine has alleged that Russian President Vladimir Putin is oppressing minorities in ethnically non-Russian republics.

The Freedom of Russia Legion, fighting under the Ukrainian Army, describes itself as wanting to “fight for Russia against the Putin regime in Ukrainian military uniforms with symbols of our new Russia.” It has posted about Putin’s regime oppressing ethnic Maris, Tatars, Kalmyks, Avars, and Buryats. In its posts, the channel claims that people of non-Russian ethnicities are being discriminated against, and it argues for an anti-imperialist future. 

The idea of “de-imperializing” Russia is expected to be a key topic at the Forum of Free Nations in Russia, which is being held from July 22 to 24 in Prague. The forum plans to ratify its Declaration on Decolonization of Russia, which demands independence for ethnically non-Russian nations and republics from the Kremlin.

Last month, the United States Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) held a public panel discussion titled “Decolonizing Russia.” Three weeks later, on July 17, the topic was addressed by Dmitry Kiselev, a presenter on the Kremlin propaganda channel Rossiya 1 and the head of Kremlin-owned Rossiya Segodnya media group. During his weekly news show, Kiselev cited Russian journalists and political commentators who support the idea of Russia being divided into different parts. He referred to CSCE’s discussion as a “project,” implying that the United States already had plans to divide Russia. Kiselev’s show also played a Putin speech in which the Russian president said the goal of the West is to “split Russia” and make it “weak and dependent.”

Some Russian soldiers who have died in Ukraine have come from non-ethnically Russian regions, such as Dagestan and Buryatia, Important Stories reported. On July 17, Mediazona, an independent Russian media outlet, wrote about the pressure that Buryat soldiers faced when trying to terminate contracts with the Russian Army. The following day, the Moscow Times wrote about three hundred Dagestani soldiers who wanted to terminate their contracts due to the insufficient provision of uniforms, supplies, and “weapons that turned out to be faulty.” Some of the soldiers managed to terminate the contracts, while others were brought back to war zones.

Nika Aleksejeva, lead researcher, Riga, Latvia

Polish right-wing party proposes anti-immigration bill to “stop Ukrainization of Poland”

On July 14, the right-wing Polish political party Confederation of the Polish Crown, which holds eleven seats in parliament, presented a legislative proposal to the Sejm titled “Stop Ukrainization of Poland.” According to party leader Grzegorz Braun, the document proposes legislative initiatives to “protect” Poland from “ethnic, political, and perhaps territorial disintegration” amid the massive influx of Ukrainian refugees.

The document makes several unsubstantiated anti-Ukraine and anti-immigration statements, claiming that the influx of Ukrainians poses a threat to Polish sovereignty and creates ethnic and cultural divisions in the country. The bill proposes that Ukraine, Russia, and Belarus be removed from the list of official minorities in the census of national minorities, making it more difficult for them to obtain Polish citizenship. The bill claims that the large presence of Ukrainians in Poland may trigger a struggle between the different nationalities, as it claims it would be very difficult for Poles to live peacefully in a country where Ukrainians are the largest minority group. The authors of the bill also requested that parliament adopt an antidiscrimination law to protect Poles from minorities.

The proposal also recycles bigoted accusations that Ukrainians are inherently violent by asserting that the number of homicides in Ukraine is eight to ten times higher than in Poland and that the potential arrival of violent Ukrainian men with fresh combat experience would significantly increase the crime rate in Poland. Against this backdrop, the bill recommends Poland close the Poland-Ukraine border when Ukraine lifts its ban on men of conscription age leaving the country. It warned that Ukrainians could displace Polish people from the labor and housing market, and that the arrival of Ukrainians increases the risk of epidemiological threats in Poland such as HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis.

The DFRLab used CrowdTangle to analyze mentions of “Stop Ukrainizacji Polski” (“Stop Ukrainization of Poland”) in public Facebook groups and pages and found sixty-three posts mentioning the phrase. The posts garnered over 3,800 interactions from July 14 to 20.

Chart shows mentions of “Stop Ukrainizacji Polski” in public Facebook groups and pages from July 14 to 20. (Source: CrowdTangle)

The bill was presented during a meeting of the Parliamentary Group for International Relations and the Interests of Poland and the Polish Diaspora, established by Confederation of the Polish Crown party members in 2020. During the presentation, party member Wojciech Siński claimed that Russia is not hostile to Poland because the two countries have no territorial disputes and Poland lacks a significant Russian minority population. He also asserted that it is in Poland’s interests to prevent the war from spreading to other countries. Notably, the document does not once mention Russia by name.

Givi Gigitashvili, research associate, Warsaw, Poland

Ukrainian HIMARS attack targets key supply bridge in Russian-controlled Kherson

On July 19, Anton Gerashchenko, an adviser to Ukraine’s Interior Ministry, reported that Ukrainian forces had struck a key bridge in Russian-controlled Kherson. Gerashchenko claimed the attack was carried out with US-supplied high mobility artillery rocket system missiles (HIMARS). The attack targeted the Antonovskiy bridge, south of Kherson. It is one of the main supply bridges used by Russian forces to cross the Dnipro River.

On July 20, reports of a second attack on Antonovskiy bridge surfaced. Kremlin media outlet TASS reported that ten to twelve HIMARS missiles had struck the bridge. In the article, Kirill Stremousov, deputy head of the Russian-backed administration currently running the Kherson region, claimed that the bridge “is repairable, but will require time. We will probably have to block traffic… There are no casualties.” Russian media asserted that Russian air defense systems managed to take down ten HIMARS missiles, though they failed to present any evidence to back up this claim.

These attacks can also be verified using satellite imagery from Planet.com. A comparison of Planet satellite imagery from July 18 and July 20 shows two clear areas of impact (darker territory) on the bridge, and this correlates with eyewitness videos surfacing on social media.

Comparison of Planet.com satellite imagery from July 18 (left) and July 20 (right). The green lines mark the areas of impact, visible only on July 20. (Source: Planet.com, location on Google Maps)

The areas of impact visible in the satellite imagery correspond with a video posted on July 19 that shows an impact near the end of the bridge.

A July 19 video showing damage on the Antonovskiy bridge. (Source: @PelmeniPusha)

Videos taken from the bridge also confirm that the attack was successful as several large craters are visible on the bridge.

A July 19 video showing the damage inflicted on the bridge. (Source: @KremlinTrolls/Archive)

Whether the tactical goal of the attack was reached is debatable, as Ukrainian forces were unable to destroy the bridge despite two days of successfully hitting it with missiles.

https://twitter.com/MihajlovicMike/status/1549886792232583168
Tweet questioning the success of the attack on the Antonovskiy bridge. (Source: @MihaljovicMike/Archive)

This attack suggests that HIMARS can be used to target high-value targets with a high amount of precision. To date, the Ukrainian military has primarily used HIMARS to attack Russian frontline ammunition dumps.

Lukas Andriukaitis, associate director, Brussels, Belgium

Russian football fans protest introduction of Fan-ID tracking system

Russian football fans are boycotting football matches of the Russian Premier League (RPL) amid the introduction of a mandatory Fan-ID personal verification system required for entry into sports stadiums. On July 19, pro-Kremlin media outlet RBC reported that the number of fans attending the first tour of the RPL season was one-third of attendance during the 2019–2020 season. Fans of fifteen out of the sixteen football clubs announced that they intended to boycott onsite games until the requirement to obtain the Fan-ID was lifted.

The law requiring documentation to enter sporting events passed on December 30, 2021, and went into force on June 1 of this year. The stated goal of Fan-IDs is “ensuring the security of the state, public safety, and order.”

Fan-ID was first introduced during the Sochi Winter Olympics in 2014, then used again during the 2017 domestic Confederations Cup and the 2018 World Cup. Previously, football fans reported their Fan-IDs would decline their entrance for no specific reason. Some fans speculated without evidence that this was because the ID holders had attended an anti-Kremlin protest or worked as a journalist or lawyer.

The DFRLab did not identify any coordinated attempts by Kremlin media to convince football fans of the merits of Fan-ID. The only noteworthy publication, by Kremlin-approved media outlet Vedomosti, compared how similar technologies had been introduced in countries such as Italy, Turkey, and Mexico.

Nika Aleksejeva, lead researcher, Riga, Latvia

The post Russian War Report: Russia accuses Ukraine of creating ‘monster’ troops in biolabs appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Russian War Report: Russian missiles strike Vinnytsia https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/russian-war-report-russian-missiles-strike-vinnytsia/ Fri, 15 Jul 2022 17:51:52 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=547008 Russian forces launched a missile attack on the Ukrainian town on Vinnytsia, Russia's public death toll grows, and Iran's coverage of the war.

The post Russian War Report: Russian missiles strike Vinnytsia appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
As Russia continues its assault on Ukraine, the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab (DFRLab) is keeping a close eye on Russia’s movements across the military, cyber, and information domains. With more than seven years of experience monitoring the situation in Ukraine—as well as Russia’s use of propaganda and disinformation to undermine the United States, NATO, and the European Union—the DFRLab’s global team presents the latest installment of the Russian War Report. 

Security

Russian missiles strike Vinnytsia

Russian independent media outlets document Russian death toll by searching public sources

Tracking Narratives

Russia accuses Poland of launching a propaganda campaign to cover up its expansion into Ukraine

International Relations

Analyzing Iranian media coverage of the war in Ukraine

Russian missiles strike Vinnytsia

On Thursday, July 14, Russia launched an attack in the Ukrainian city of Vinnytsia. The head of Regional Military Administration in Vinnytsia, Serhii Borzov, announced the alert on Telegram, urging the civilians to stay indoors and that four missiles were already taken down by Ukrainian military.  

Ihor Klymenko, Chief of the National Police of Ukraine, announced on Facebook that three rockets hit an office building and damaged surrounding residential buildings in the city southwest of Kyiv. Various photos and videos of the damaged caused by the attack started appearing on the same day on social media. The Ukrainian Security Service also shared a video of destroyed civilian buildings in the city. 

A July 14 video showing the destruction caused by the Russian missile strike on Vinnytsia. (Source: @mhmck/Archive) 

The DFRLab geolocated one of the areas in the city center hit by the missile attack, close to the House of Officers and a monument honoring the Ukrainian Air Forces of Ukraine.

Geolocation of one of the areas hit in central Vinnytsia. Green color marks the Monument in honor of the Air Forces of Ukraine, blue color marks a high-rise building and pink color marks the House of Officers. (Source: @mhmck/Archive, bottom; GoogleMaps, top left; GoogleMaps, top right)
Geolocation of one of the areas hit in central Vinnytsia. Green color marks the Monument in honor of the Air Forces of Ukraine, blue color marks a high-rise building and pink color marks the House of Officers. (Source: @mhmck/Archive, bottom; GoogleMaps, top left; GoogleMaps, top right)

A high-rise building damaged in the attack contained a medical center that was recently opened, which was also destroyed.

Photos of before and after of a destroyed medical center in Vinnytsia (Location). (Source: @elriness/Archive)

According to media sources, the attack killed 20 people, including three children. At the time of reporting, another 90 civilians had been injured. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy called the Russian attack an act of terrorism on the Ukrainian people. The city of Vinnytsia is roughly 400 kilometers away from the nearest frontlines (Kherson) and does not pose a threat to Russian forces.

Lukas Andriukaitis, Associate Director, Brussels, Belgium 

Russian independent media outlets document Russian death toll by searching public sources

Vazhnye Istorii and Media Zona, together with BBC in Russian, independently documented the names of approximately 4,500 Russian soldiers killed in Ukraine through mentions in public sources. This number was then corroborated by novayagazeta.eu, which calculated the total sum of money received by relatives of the deceased. Novayagazeta.eu is the new edition of the Pulitzer prize-winning media outlet Novaya Gazeta, which was forced to cease operations in Russia.  

Media Zona and BBC Russia worked with a group of volunteers to document 4,515 deaths of Russian soldiers and officers as of July 8, 2022. Vazhnye Istorii, meanwhile, used a similar method to calculate 4,421 deaths as of July 12. Novayagazeta.eu assessed that “four to seven thousand people” had been officially recognized as dead to qualify for compensation payments to relatives.  

As not all deaths of soldiers are publicly announced, the actual death toll is believed to be much higher. Authorities have also attempted to quash documentation of death tolls. On June 6, for example, a court in Kaliningrad region ruled that data about casualties at war or military operation is “state secret” and demanded that regional outlet 60.ru delete its list of deceased soldiers garnered from open sources. At least seven other regional outlets deleted similar lists from their pages to avoid prosecution, according to Roskomsvaboda, an anti-censorship website in Russia.  

The most recent death toll officially announced by the Russian Ministry of Defense was 1,351 soldiers as of March 25, 2022. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy told CNN on April 16 that 2,500 – 3,000 Ukrainian soldiers had died during the war by that time. Neither side regularly reports about its own losses during the war, and are widely believed to be undercounts.

Nika Aleksejeva, Lead Researcher, Riga, Latvia

Russia accuses Poland of launching a propaganda campaign to cover up its expansion into Ukraine

On July 13, Sergei  Naryshkin, director of Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service, alleged that Polish political leaders launched a propaganda campaign to cover up the country’s “expansion” into Western Ukraine. Naryshkin asserted that Poland hoped to seize Ukrainian territory without attracting much attention from Washington or Moscow, and would force all involved parties to accept “Polish expansion as a fait accompli” during eventual peace negotiations. According to Naryshkin, after NATO and the EU found out about Warsaw’s plans, the latter launched a media campaign to disguise its actions and gave instructions to state-controlled think tanks and media outlets to disperse “inappropriate rumors” about Poland’s expansion in Ukraine.  

This is not the first time that Naryshkin has made similar claims without providing evidence. In April, 2021, he accused Poland of plotting to reinstate Polish control on Western Ukraine with the help of the United States. Polish ministerial spokesman Stanislaw Zaryn wrote on Twitter that such statements from the Kremlin were an attempt to sow tensions between Poles and Ukrainians.  

On July 9, pro-Kremlin media outlet Eurasia Daily pushed a related narrative in which Ukraine is allowing Poland to issue passports for citizens of Ukraine, despite the fact that Poland does not issue passports to Ukrainian citizens. The Ukrainian government recently launched a new project to issue identity documents for Ukrainian citizens outside of Ukraine. The project is being piloted in Poland, but the Polish government itself is not issuing passports to Ukrainians. According to Ukrainian law, only Ukrainian state institutions are entitled to do this.

Givi Gigitashvili, Research Associate, Warsaw, Poland

Analyzing Iranian media coverage of the war in Ukraine

To better understand recent Iranian coverage of the war in Ukraine, the DFRLab analyzed headlines of articles published by Iranian media outlets from July 8 to July 14 using the content analysis tool Event Registry. The AI-powered tool collects articles from approximately 150,000 news sources globally and clusters them into media narratives, or “events.” Most of the Iranian media events associated with the keyword “Ukraine” in Farsi were determined to be neutral. Those articles that were not neutral criticized the US, NATO, Europe, and the West, or covered statements by Kremlin or pro-Kremlin officials. These included: 

  • Kremlin spokesperson: America puts the world on the brink of nuclear war (12 articles, first published in Iran by ILNA citing Sputnik) 
  • US and Europe secretly consult about Ukraine (11 articles, first published by Mehr News citing Die Welt) 
  • Russia warned Europe over transit restrictions to Kaliningrad (11 articles, first published by ISNA citing RT) 
  • Is the West running out of ammunition? (8 articles, first published by IRNA citing Financial Times)  
  • Lukashenka says that the West and NATO are preparing an attack on Russia through Belarus (8 articles first published by ILNA citing RT) 
  • American intelligence sends satellite images to Kyiv (5 articles, first published by ISNA citing Sputnik) 
  • The West cannot support Ukraine for a long time (4 articles, first published by Mehr News citing the New York Times) 
  • NATO threatens world peace by making China an enemy (2 articles, first published by ISNA citing Middle East Eye) 

IRNA is the official news agency of Iran. Mehr News Agency is affiliated with Iran’s Ministry of Culture. ILNA is the Iranian Labor News Agency, while ISNA is the Iranian Students News Agency. Both ILNA and ISNA used to be more critical of the Iranian government, but have taken a more conformist approach to political coverage in recent years.  

Russian President Vladimir Putin is visiting Iran on the week of July 18. The visit was announced one day after US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan said that US intelligence “indicates that the Iranian government is preparing to provide Russia with up to several hundred UAVs [drones], including weapons-capable UAVs, on an expedited timeline.” Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian would not confirm the sale of drones to Russia. “We have various forms of cooperation with Russia, including in the sphere of defense, but we are not helping either side involved in the [Ukrainian] conflict because we are certain that it should be concluded,” he said. TASS.com, the English version of the Kremlin-controlled outlet, wrote that Amir-Abdollahian “denies selling drones to Russia,” while the Washington Post qualified Amir-Abdollahian’s answer as “vague.” 

Nika Aleksejeva, Lead Researcher, Riga, Latvia

The post Russian War Report: Russian missiles strike Vinnytsia appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
With all eyes on Ukraine, Vladimir Putin targets domestic dissidents https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/with-all-eyes-on-ukraine-vladimir-putin-targets-domestic-dissidents/ Fri, 01 Jul 2022 12:55:40 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=543311 While international attention focuses on Vladimir Putin’s genocidal war in Ukraine, the Russian government is accelerating its brutal crackdown on any remaining expressions of anti-regime dissent on the domestic front.

The post With all eyes on Ukraine, Vladimir Putin targets domestic dissidents appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Imprisoned Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny recently went missing for a few hours.

Poisoned and jailed on trumped-up charges, Navalny has spent the last 18 months in prison, occasionally passing messages through his lawyers to publish in op-eds or on social media. But when his lawyers arrived at Russia’s Pokrov penal colony for a June 14 meeting with Navalny, they were simply told, “There is no such convict here.”

Navalny seemingly vanished off the face of the earth overnight, says his spokesperson Kira Yarmysh. His team received word a few hours later that he had been transferred to a different maximum-security prison. The opposition leader, turned gaunt by difficult prison conditions and a hunger strike, was slated for a transfer last month after being sentenced to another 15 years on bogus charges. But according to Yarmysh, neither his family nor his lawyers were informed in advance of the transfer, much less when and to where.

While the fear that he may be “disappeared” and killed seems to have dissipated, Navalny’s prospects remain grim. Transferred to the high-security IK-6 penal colony at Melekhovo, the anti-corruption crusader and former Russian presidential challenger now faces life in a prison infamous for ghastly conditions, brutal torture, and murders.

In a penal system known for turning fellow prisoners into collaborators, Navalny remains at the mercy of a regime that stands accused of attempting to kill him on two separate occasions. His predicament reflects the deteriorating climate across Russia for what remains of the country’s anti-Putin opposition as the Kremlin exploits wartime conditions to crush dissent.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Russia still bears the unhealed scars of the Soviet Gulag, a vast system of camps where millions were killed through forced labor, torture, executions and starvation. In the final years of the Soviet era, political prisoners were released from the gulags and human rights organization Memorial was founded to document the horrors of the camps. When Memorial was liquidated and banned by the Russian government in December 2021, it was widely seen as a green light for future abuse.

Many of the voices that would normally draw attention to the Kremlin’s crimes are currently being silenced. While attention focuses on Russia’s genocidal war in Ukraine, the Russian government is accelerating its brutal crackdown on any shred of dissent at home.

Navalny’s anti-corruption network, Russia’s independent news media, and many of the country’s remaining independent human rights NGOs were silenced in the lead up and immediate aftermath of the February 24 invasion. Other top opposition leaders like Vladimir Kara-Murza and Ilya Yashin have since been arrested and jailed on dubious charges.

Kara-Murza and Yashin are just two of more than 15,000 Russians detained since the full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Some were arrested for joining mass anti-war demonstrations, others for the seditious crime of holding a blank piece of paper in public.

This latest wave of repression comes as Putin and regime loyalists are drawing battle lines inside their own country and giving their most rabid supporters internal enemies to go after. Since the start of the invasion, hundreds of thousands of Russians have fled the increasingly repressive domestic environment. Some of those who stay and speak up find their homes vandalized with pro-war symbols and violent threats.

Navalny may be the bellwether for what comes next for the Kremlin’s domestic political enemies. The remnants of his anti-corruption network say one of the only things keeping him alive is the significant global attention his case attracts and the pressure it generates from rights organizations, Western governments, and the public.

It was feared Navalny would die early in his sentence in 2021 when he went on hunger strike to protest over a lack of medical attention. On that occasion, massive pressure from around the world eventually helped get Navalny transferred to a prison hospital.

The Kremlin is now relying upon a distracted international community as Russia descends into full-blown totalitarianism. While support for Ukraine remains at the top of the international agenda, a faltering global economy and security concerns arising from the Russian invasion threaten to draw attention away from Putin’s violent excesses inside Russia itself.

Through his war of annihilation in Ukraine and increasingly ruthless suppression of all independent voices inside Russia itself, Putin is turning his country into what may be the twenty-first century’s most dangerous totalitarian state. Standing up to this darkness means standing by Ukrainians as they fend off Moscow’s invading forces and also standing up for the people being swallowed alive by the Russian state.

Doug Klain is an assistant director at the Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center in Washington, DC. Find him on Twitter at @DougKlain.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post With all eyes on Ukraine, Vladimir Putin targets domestic dissidents appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Goodwill gestures and de-Nazification: Decoding Putin’s Ukraine War lexicon https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/goodwill-gestures-and-de-nazification-decoding-putins-ukraine-war-lexicon/ Thu, 30 Jun 2022 18:20:24 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=542998 From “goodwill gestures” to “de-Nazification” and “reclaiming Russian lands,” the Atlantic Council's Peter Dickinson decodes some of the key phrases from the lexicon of Putin’s Ukraine War into plain English.

The post Goodwill gestures and de-Nazification: Decoding Putin’s Ukraine War lexicon appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Ever since Russian troops first crossed the Ukrainian border on February 24, the Kremlin has employed characteristically euphemistic language in order to downplay the criminal nature of the unfolding invasion. This has led to the creation of an entire alternative reality where Russian troops are noble liberators waging a chivalrous campaign against dastardly Ukrainian Nazis who bomb themselves and stage fake atrocities by massacring their own civilian population.

While the official Russian version of events is self-evidently absurd, an understanding of the true meaning behind Moscow’s preferred terminology is essential for international audiences looking to make sense of the often bizarre statements coming out of the Kremlin. From “goodwill gestures” to “de-Nazification” and “reclaiming Russian lands,” here are some of the key phrases from the lexicon of Putin’s Ukraine War decoded into plain English.

Special Military Operation: When is a war not a war? When it is a Special Military Operation. This would appear to have been Putin’s logic when he announced his “Special Military Operation” against Ukraine in the early hours of February 24. Despite waging the largest and most widely reported European war since the days of Hitler and Stalin, the Russian dictator remains so paranoid over the negative connotations of the “w” word that he has banned its use entirely in the Russian media.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

De-Nazification: Putin has stated that the main goal of his “Special Military Operation” in Ukraine is the “de-Nazification” of the country. This attempt to justify the invasion by portraying it as a crusade against far-right extremism mirrors historic Kremlin efforts to discredit the Ukrainian independence movement by equating it with fascism. Putin’s “de-Nazification” claims are emotionally appealing to Russian audiences haunted by the horrors of WWII but they are also deeply misleading. Today’s Ukraine is actually an emerging democracy with a Jewish president and a far-right fringe that struggled to secure 2% of the vote in the country’s last national election.

In reality, the often savage actions of Russian troops in Ukraine have confirmed that the Kremlin views anything identifiably Ukrainian as “Nazi” and makes no distinction between the two. Putin’s proclaimed “de-Nazification” actually means “de-Ukrainianization,” as this prominent wartime article from Russian state news agency RIA Novosti makes abundantly clear. As far as most Ukrainians are concerned, the only Nazis in the country are the Russian soldiers waging a genocidal war on behalf of an unhinged dictator.  

Military Objects: Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has been accompanied by a massive aerial campaign of bombings and missile strikes across the country. Meanwhile, Putin’s slowly advancing troops are heavily reliant on indiscriminate and overwhelming artillery attacks that have left thousands dead and reduced dozens of Ukrainian towns and cities to rubble.

While the whole world can see that much of Ukraine now lies in ruins, the Kremlin remains extremely sensitive to accusations of war crimes and continues to insist that Russian forces only ever target military objects. Based on the experience of the past four months, Russia’s understanding of “military objects” apparently includes Mariupol Drama Theater, Kramatorsk Railway Station and Kremenchuk Shopping Mall along with hundreds of schools, hospitals and residential buildings throughout Ukraine. With international war crimes investigations already underway, Russia’s claims regarding “military objects” will likely be tested in court.

Goodwill Gesture: Russia expected a quick and victorious war in Ukraine, but things have not gone according to the Kremlin plan. Rather than capturing Kyiv within a few days as anticipated, Russian forces have encountered robust resistance and suffered a series of painful battlefield losses. In a desperate attempt to disguise these defeats and protect Russian dignity, the Kremlin has taken to officially describing its retreats as “goodwill gestures.”

The first “goodwill gesture” came in late March when Russia retreated entirely from northern Ukraine after suffering defeat in the Battle for Kyiv. Following Russia’s most recent retreat from strategically vital Black Sea outpost Snake Island on June 30, the Kremlin similarly declared that it was withdrawing as a “goodwill gesture” to Ukraine. Ukrainians will be hoping for many more such “goodwill gestures” in the weeks ahead as they seek to dislodge Russian forces from the south and east of their country.

Reclaiming Russian Lands: In the months leading up to the Russian invasion, Putin pretended to be primarily concerned with NATO expansion into the former USSR. He has since abandoned this pretense and declared himself the heir to Peter the Great. Speaking in early June, Putin compared the current war to the eighteenth century conquests of the celebrated czar and stated that like Peter, he was now also engaged in the historic endeavor of “reclaiming Russian lands.”  

Putin has never made any secret of the fact that he views the territory of modern Ukraine as historically Russian land. For years, he has denied Ukraine’s right to exist while claiming that all Ukrainians are in fact Russians (“one people”). The real question is which other sovereign nations might also fit Putin’s definition. He recently set off alarm bells by commenting that the entire former Soviet Union was historically Russian territory.

Nor is it clear if Putin’s appetite for reclaiming Russian lands is limited to the 14 non-Russian post-Soviet states. Imperial Russia once also ruled Finland and Poland, while the Soviet Empire after WWII stretched deep into Central Europe and included East Germany. One thing is clear: unless he is stopped in Ukraine, Putin’s imperial ambitions are certain to expand.

Peter Dickinson is Editor of the Atlantic Council’s UkraineAlert Service.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Goodwill gestures and de-Nazification: Decoding Putin’s Ukraine War lexicon appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Why fear of provoking Putin is the most provocative policy of all https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/why-fear-of-provoking-putin-is-the-most-provocative-policy-of-all/ Fri, 17 Jun 2022 10:45:26 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=538590 It is now abundantly clear that cautious policies toward Russia driven by a misguided fear of provoking Putin have in fact provoked Europe’s biggest war since the days of Hitler and Stalin, argues Alyona Getmanchuk.

The post Why fear of provoking Putin is the most provocative policy of all appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
When EU leaders meet on June 23-24, Ukraine will be at the very top of the agenda. The forthcoming European Council Summit is expected to adopt a decision on granting Ukraine EU candidate country status, a key step on the long road toward eventual membership of the 27-nation bloc.

There is a growing sense of optimism in Kyiv that a breakthrough may finally be imminent. The European Commission announced on June 17 that it recommends candidate status for Ukraine. During a visit to the Ukrainian capital one day earlier, the leaders of France, Germany, Italy and Romania all voiced their support for Ukraine’s bid.

Although the political momentum now appears to favor candidate status for Ukraine, there are still signs of skepticism over the suitability of the step. Some critics question whether Ukraine has done enough in its fight against corruption to warrant the move, while others note the European Union’s more pressing internal priorities or point to the existing queue of candidate nations waiting for progress in their own EU membership bids.

For many in the skeptic camp, one of the most powerful arguments against granting Ukraine candidate status is the suggestion that it would be seen as provocative by Russian President Vladimir Putin. They claim it could further complicate efforts to end the war sparked by Russia’s February 24 invasion of Ukraine. This fear of provoking Putin represents a dangerous misreading of the geopolitical situation that plays directly into Russian hands.

In reality, there is nothing more likely to encourage further Russian aggression than decisions driven by a desire to avoid provoking Putin. Today’s uncertainty about Ukraine’s future is a key factor allowing Putin to dream about reoccupying the country. It emboldens the Russian dictator and encourages him to continue the war while believing he can end Ukrainian hopes of European integration and force the country back into the Russian orbit.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Ukraine has learned from bitter experience that efforts to avoid provoking Putin have a tendency to backfire disastrously. When Volodymyr Zelenskyy won the Ukrainian presidency in spring 2019, he initially went out of his way to avoid anything that might have been construed as provocative as he sought to end the simmering conflict in eastern Ukraine.

During his first eighteen months as president, Zelenskyy studiously avoided direct references to Russian aggression or occupation. He also made a number of practical concessions to the Kremlin including unilateral troop withdrawals. Far from responding in kind, Moscow began the mass distribution of Russian passports in occupied eastern Ukraine while strengthening its military grip over the region.

More recently, the Ukrainian delegation attending peace talks with Russia in Istanbul in late March 2022 announced its readiness to abandon Ukraine’s strategic objective of NATO membership. Russia responded to this key concession by launching a major new offensive in eastern Ukraine and declaring its intention to incorporate entire occupied regions of southern Ukraine into the Russian Federation. Once again, Putin made clear that he views any efforts to be unprovocative as signs of weakness.

Europe’s own experience should be sufficient to dispel any myths over the alleged benefits of appeasing Putin. In 2008, European leaders were instrumental in denying Ukraine and Georgia NATO Membership Action Plans for fear of angering Putin. Within months, Russia invaded Georgia. Fourteen years later, around 20% of the country remains under Russian occupation.

When Russia invaded Crimea and eastern Ukraine in spring 2014, Europe once against hesitated. Rather than imposing tough sanctions that might have forced Moscow to rethink its position, European leaders favored policies of compromise while warning about the possibility of further escalations. This directly paved the way for the full-scale invasion of February 2022 and the largest European conflict since WWII.

There is no excuse for continuing to repeat these mistakes. It is time to recognize that only clear and resolute support for Ukraine’s European integration can deter Russia from pursuing a revisionist and expansionist foreign policy.

Giving Ukraine candidate status would send a powerful signal to Moscow that Ukraine is not alone. It would demonstrate that the desire of the Ukrainian people for a European future is matched by the members of the European Union itself. The European public is particularly supportive of this step. According to recent polling data, there is strong backing in France, Germany, and the Netherlands for candidate status “as soon as possible”. Among those who have made up their mind, the idea enjoys support from more that 60% in all three states.

Conversely, rejecting Ukraine’s bid would be an historic mistake that would only increase Russia’s appetite for further military aggression. Any EU compromise would be a powerful propaganda victory for the Kremlin. It would be used to demoralize the Ukrainian population and strengthen Putin’s claims that Ukraine’s natural place is within the Russian sphere of influence. This would also weaken the European Union as a whole by creating the impression that Moscow enjoys an unofficial veto over important EU decisions.

It is now clear that policies driven by a misguided fear of provoking Putin have in fact provoked Europe’s biggest war since the days of Hitler and Stalin. Continuing along the path of appeasement and compromise will only make the problem worse. Instead, Europe must demonstrate the kind of strength that Russia understands and respects. Granting Ukraine EU candidate status without any preconditions would be a major step in the right direction.

Alyona Getmanchuk is director of New Europe Center think tank and a nonresident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Why fear of provoking Putin is the most provocative policy of all appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
White in CyberScoop on Russia and information operations https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/insight-impact/in-the-news/white-in-cyberscoop-on-russia-and-information-operations/ Thu, 16 Jun 2022 20:37:00 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=540749 "TJ" White was quoted in CyberScoop saying that the Russian focus on information operations has been unyielding. White, however, argued that Russian information war objectives have been thwarted to a large degree by Starlink satellite internet and by the fact that many Ukrainians have virtual private networks.

The post White in CyberScoop on Russia and information operations appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>

On June 16, Forward Defense nonresident senior fellow Timothy J. “TJ” White was quoted in CyberScoop saying that the Russian focus on information operations has been unyielding. White, however, argued that Russian information war objectives have been thwarted to a large degree by Starlink satellite internet and by the fact that many Ukrainians have virtual private networks. White remarked that, despite the centrality of information operations to the present conflict, the US defense community still lacks coherent definitions in this area.

“[W]e haven’t decided yet what is or isn’t information operations, information warfare, cyberspace operations, operations in cyberspace that enable information operations”

TJ White
Forward Defense

Forward Defense, housed within the Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security, generates ideas and connects stakeholders in the defense ecosystem to promote an enduring military advantage for the United States, its allies, and partners. Our work identifies the defense strategies, capabilities, and resources the United States needs to deter and, if necessary, prevail in future conflict.

The Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security works to develop sustainable, nonpartisan strategies to address the most important security challenges facing the United States and the world.

The post White in CyberScoop on Russia and information operations appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Vladimir Putin’s dark journey from economic reformer to war criminal https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/vladimir-putins-dark-journey-from-economic-reformer-to-war-criminal/ Mon, 13 Jun 2022 17:53:02 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=536243 Vladimir Putin's recent boasts of waging war in Ukraine to "reclaim" historic Russian land mark a new low in his journey from would-be economic reformer to unapologetic authoritarian and enthusiastic imperialist.

The post Vladimir Putin’s dark journey from economic reformer to war criminal appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Vladimir Putin’s 22-year reign has been marked by a steady decline in the goals he has set for himself and his country. He initially embraced progressive notions of domestic reform and international integration, but has since led Russia deeper and deeper into authoritarian isolation. His recent comments comparing himself to Peter the Great and boasting of plans to seize Ukrainian lands represent a new low in this depressing journey from would-be reformer to war criminal.  

It is tempting to assume that Putin was always an unapologetic authoritarian and an enthusiastic imperialist but during the early years of his reign, he often championed sensible reforms while promoting initiatives to modernize and diversify the Russian economy.

Soon after he was first appointed president in 2000, Putin published an essay claiming that he wanted Russia to reach Portugal’s level of GDP per capita by the end of his two terms in office. This was a realistic and pragmatic economic target, as Portugal was then the poorest EU member state. However, two decades later in 2021, Portugal’s GDP per capita in current USD was twice as high as Russia’s.

Despite the damage suffered by Portugal during the 2010 euro crisis, Russia has actually fallen further behind the Portuguese economy. This should come as no surprise. The Russian economy has stagnated since 2014 when the West imposed its first round of sanctions following the invasion of Crimea and eastern Ukraine. After almost a decade in the doldrums, Putin now appears to have given up entirely on Russia’s economic development. He is not even planning for any growth until 2030.

Until the end of his first presidential term in 2004, Putin spoke extensively about the need for the rule of law and other systemic reforms. In 2002, Russia adopted far-reaching judicial reforms along with a new civil code and a liberal tax code, while also allowing private ownership of agricultural land. In effect, Putin completed the progressive economic reforms begun by the Yeltsin administration during the 1990s.

These policies paid dividends. Russia enjoyed a period of uniquely strong economic expansion during the early years of the Putin era, with annual growth rates of around seven percent from 1999 to 2008. In truth, Putin had arrived at a laid table with prepared reforms, while his economic success also owed much to a sustained commodity boom. Nevertheless, it was still possible to argue that Putin was steering Russia toward a future governed by the rule of law.

During this early period, Putin also called for far-reaching international integration, making Russia’s membership of the World Trade Organization a key goal. However, he gradually lost interest in this initiative. Despite strong Western support, Russia did not join the WTO until 2012. By that point, Putin had already begun embracing isolationist policies protectionism and import substitution.

When did the turning point come? Some say it was Ukraine’s 2004 Orange Revolution, which poisoned Putin against the West. Others argue that Putin’s early flirtation with a more reformist agenda was merely political pragmatism as he consolidated his position at home and abroad. With the benefit of hindsight, it now appears obvious that Putin’s background as a KGB officer and his alleged ties to organized crime were decisive in shaping his reign. During the second half of the 2000s, this toxic baggage increasingly took over.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

In truth, the warning signs of a return to authoritarianism were there from the very beginning. The first indication was Putin’s suppression of independent Russian television in 2000, which saw the Kremlin take over Vladimir Gusinsky’s NTV and Boris Berezovsky’s ORT. In May 2001, he established direct control of Gazprom, Russia’s wealthiest state company.

With the arrest of leading Russian oligarch Mikhail Khodorkovsky in October 2003, Putin initiated the renationalization of Russia’s most successful private companies. This revival of state dominance was mirrored throughout the Russian economy, with the security services and Putin’s personal favorites often the beneficiaries.   

Despite the changing political climate in Russia, for many years Putin continued to publicly advocate for academic openness and innovation. This is no longer the case. Instead, the Kremlin now promotes ideas of isolation and orthodoxy. Meanwhile, the language of scientific and technological development has become increasingly reminiscent of the Brezhnev era Soviet Union. Unsurprisingly, many of Russia’s leading scientists and entrepreneurs have chosen to leave the country and pursue their careers in freer environments.

With any sense of optimism about the future gradually fading from view, Putin has become dependent on the propaganda power of an idealized past. He has rehabilitated the Soviet era and transformed the Red Army role in the defeat of Hitler into a victory cult that now serves as an unofficial state religion. Most of all, he has sought to justify his increasingly dictatorial rule by identifying enemies and waging wars of aggression.

Putin has used various excuses to justify his aggressive foreign policies. On different occasions, he has claimed to be protecting Russian citizens in Georgia, preventing NATO expansion, defending Russian-speaking Ukrainians, and liberating Ukraine from Nazis. While these narratives may have worked inside Russia, they have had limited success in convincing outside audiences.

The current invasion in Ukraine has exposed the limitations of Putin’s expensively assembled disinformation apparatus. With Moscow now struggling to shape international perceptions of Putin’s wars, he appears to have switched to open intimidation. Since the invasion began in February 2022, Kremlin officials and regime propagandists have frequently issued thinly-veiled threats of nuclear war.

Meanwhile, Putin himself has abandoned his earlier denials and embraced the archaic rhetoric of imperial expansion. Speaking at a recent Moscow event to mark the three hundred and fiftieth birthday of Russian Czar Peter the Great, Putin eulogized Peter’s conquests in the Great Northern War and praised him for “returning” historically Russian lands. “It seems that it has fallen to us, too, to return (Russian lands),” Putin commented in a clear reference to the current war in Ukraine.

Putin’s reliance on nuclear blackmail and his absurd search for legitimacy in the imperial past reflect his failure to build an attractive modern state. After more than two decades in power, he is unable to deliver a coherent vision of a brighter future. Instead, Putin’s earlier talk of reform and innovation has been completely eclipsed by the repressive logic of his authoritarian kleptocracy. All that remains is imperialism.

Many Western leaders fear what might come after Putin. They worry about the possible break-up of the Russian state or the rise of an even less predictable dictator in his place. However, few scenarios are more alarming than a continuation of Russia’s current descent into full-scale fascism under an increasingly isolated and unhinged Putin. He is already the greatest single threat to global security and will likely remain so until he loses power. The West should not be afraid of pursuing this objective.  

Anders Åslund is a senior fellow at the Stockholm Free World Forum and author of “Russia’s Crony Capitalism: The Path from Market Economy to Kleptocracy.”

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Vladimir Putin’s dark journey from economic reformer to war criminal appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Putin admits Ukraine invasion is an imperial war to “return” Russian land https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/putin-admits-ukraine-invasion-is-an-imperial-war-to-return-russian-land/ Fri, 10 Jun 2022 12:45:20 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=535411 By abandoning all pretense and comparing himself to Peter the Great, Russian dictator Vladimir Putin has confirmed that he is waging an old-fashioned imperial war of conquest with the goal of annexing Ukrainian land.

The post Putin admits Ukraine invasion is an imperial war to “return” Russian land appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Throughout the past few months, Vladimir Putin has offered up all manner of outlandish excuses for his invasion of Ukraine. At various different times he has blamed the war on everything from NATO expansion to imaginary Nazis, while also making completely unsubstantiated claims about Western plots to invade Russia and Ukrainian schemes to acquire nuclear weapons.

The reality, it now transpires, is considerably less elaborate and infinitely more chilling. Putin has launched the largest European conflict since WWII for the simple reason that he wants to conquer Ukraine. Inspired by the czars of old, Putin aims to crush his neighbor and incorporate it into a new Russian Empire.

Putin elaborated on his imperial vision during a June 9 event in Moscow to mark the 350th birthday of Russian Czar Peter the Great. He spoke admiringly of Czar Peter’s achievements during the Great Northern War and drew direct parallels to his own contemporary expansionist policies. The lands taken from Sweden during the Great Northern War were historically Russian and Peter was merely returning them to their rightful owners, Putin stated. “Apparently, it is now also our responsibility to return (Russian) land,” he said in a clear reference to the ongoing invasion of Ukraine.

Putin’s latest comments underline his imperial objectives in Ukraine and expand on years of similar statements lamenting the fall of the Russian Empire. For more than a decade, he has questioned the historical legitimacy of Ukrainian statehood and publicly insisted that Ukrainians are really Russians (“one people”). Putin has also repeatedly accused Ukraine of occupying ancestral Russian lands and has blamed the early Bolsheviks for bungling the border between the Russian and Ukrainian Soviet republics.

His unapologetically imperialistic attitude toward Russian-Ukrainian relations was laid bare in July 2021 in the form of a 7,000-word essay authored by Putin himself which set out to explain the alleged “historical unity” binding the two nations together. “I am confident that true sovereignty of Ukraine is possible only in partnership with Russia. For we are one people,” Putin the amateur historian concluded. This bizarre treatise was widely interpreted as a declaration of war against the entire notion of an independent Ukraine and has since been made required reading for all Russian military personnel.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

The Russian dictator’s obsession with Ukraine reflects his burning resentment over the collapse of the USSR and his lingering bitterness at post-Soviet Russia’s dramatic loss of international status.

This nostalgia is not rooted in a fondness for the ideology of Marxist-Leninism. Instead, Putin regards the disintegration of the Soviet Empire as the demise of “historical Russia” and has spoken of how the 1991 break-up left “tens of millions of our compatriots” living beyond the borders of the Russian Federation. As the former Soviet republic with the deepest ties to Russia and the largest ethnic Russian population, independent Ukraine has come to embody this sense of historical injustice.

Putin’s efforts to “return” Ukrainian land to Russia did not begin with the invasion of February 24. The current campaign of imperial conquest actually started eight years earlier with the Russian takeover of Ukraine’s Crimean peninsula, which Putin seized in a lightning military operation that took advantage of political paralysis in Kyiv in the immediate aftermath of the 2014 Euromaidan Revolution.

Following his success in Crimea, Putin then attempted to partition mainland Ukraine by instigating pro-Kremlin uprisings throughout the south and east of the country. This initiative fell flat after Kremlin agents ran into stronger than expected local opposition from Russian-speaking Ukrainian patriots, leaving Putin’s proxies in possession of a relatively small foothold in eastern Ukraine’s Donbas region.

Control over Crimea and the Donbas allowed Putin to keep Ukraine destabilized, but his true objective has always been the reestablishment of complete Russian control over the whole country. After eight years of geopolitical pressure and hybrid warfare failed to achieve the desired outcome, and sensing that Ukraine was now in danger of moving irreparably out of the Russian orbit, Putin made the fateful decision in early 2022 to launch a full-scale invasion.

By abandoning all pretense and comparing himself to Peter the Great, Putin has now confirmed that he is waging an old-fashioned imperial war of conquest with the goal of annexing Ukrainian territory. Recent statements from Kremlin officials have also made these imperial intentions explicit. During a visit to southern Ukraine’s Russian-occupied Kherson region in early May, Russian Senator Andrei Turchak declared that the current Russian presence in the region would be permanent. “Russia is here forever,” he stated. “There should be no doubt about this. There will be no return to the past.”

This openly imperialistic agenda represents an unprecedented challenge to international law and poses a grave threat to the entire post-WWII global security system. It also exposes the absurdity of appeals to appease Moscow or accept some kind of negotiated settlement that would avoid “humiliating” Russia. There can be no compromise with the Kremlin as long as Putin continues to deny Ukraine’s right to exist and declares his intention to annex entire regions of the country.

If Putin is not decisively defeated in Ukraine, he will surely go further in his mission to “return” lost Russian lands. The list of former Russian imperial possessions that could potentially become targets is extensive and includes Finland, the Baltic States, Poland, Belarus, Moldova, Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and the nations of Central Asia. Nor can future Russian attacks on the former Warsaw Pact countries of Central Europe be entirely ruled out. If this sounds far-fetched, it is important to remember that almost nobody in Ukraine believed a Russian invasion was even remotely possible until it actually happened.

Today’s brutal colonial war in Ukraine is a reminder that unlike the other great European empires of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, Russia never underwent a period of de-imperialization. Despite collapsing spectacularly in both 1917 and 1991, Russia’s imperial identity is still very much intact and has become a central pillar of the Putin regime. Until Russia enters the modern era and becomes a post-imperial power, peace in Europe will remain elusive. The best way to speed up this process is to ensure Ukraine wins the war.

Peter Dickinson is Editor of the Atlantic Council’s UkraineAlert Service.

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Putin admits Ukraine invasion is an imperial war to “return” Russian land appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
More than three-quarters of Russians still support Putin’s Ukraine War https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/more-than-three-quarters-of-russians-still-support-putins-ukraine-war/ Mon, 06 Jun 2022 17:43:47 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=533404 The latest polling data from Russia indicates that public support for the invasion of Ukraine remains strong despite higher than expected Russian casualties and widespread accusations of war crimes.

The post More than three-quarters of Russians still support Putin’s Ukraine War appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
The latest polling data from Russia indicates that public support for the invasion of Ukraine remains strong despite higher than expected casualties and widespread accusations of war crimes.

A survey conducted in late May by Russia’s only remaining independent pollster, the Levada Center, found that 77% of Russians currently back the war. This represented a slight increase on the corresponding figure for April, when 74% of respondents voiced support for the ongoing invasion.

There has been considerable speculation over scale of Russian backing for the war in Ukraine, with critics questioning the credibility of numerous government-linked surveys showing strong levels of support. While any attempt to accurately gauge opinion in a dictatorship is notoriously difficult, the Levada Center’s recent data is likely to be the most legitimate available indication of public feeling toward the war.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

While younger Russians were less likely to back the invasion, the survey identified comfortable majorities in favor of the war among every single age group. Sixty percent of 18-24 year old respondents voiced their support, rising to eighty three percent of those aged over 55. Nor is there much expectation of a quick victory, with almost half respondents (44%) predicting that the war would last for at least a further six months.

These figures are bad news for anyone hoping to see a domestic backlash within Russia as the war in Ukraine drags on and the costs become increasingly apparent to ordinary Russians. On the contrary, the slight rise in support since April suggests that a majority of Russians have accepted today’s wartime conditions as the new normal and are largely supportive of the Kremlin’s official narrative.

Since the outbreak of hostilities, the Putin regime has worked hard to control domestic perceptions of the conflict, which it euphemistically calls a “special military operation.” Draconian new legislation was adopted in the first days of the war introducing tough penalties for any media coverage that deviated from the official Kremlin narrative, while any attempts to stage anti-war protests have been ruthlessly stamped out.

So far, the Kremlin’s precautions have proven highly effective. During the first three months of hostilities in Ukraine, no major anti-war rallies have taken place anywhere in Russia. Instead, those who opposed the invasion have largely chosen to keep quiet or have left the country.

Despite multiple reports of concern behind the scenes, the regime has also remained solidly supportive of the war with no prominent figures seeking to protect their reputations by stepping down or speaking out against the invasion. This absence of high-level resignations was inadvertently underlined in early May when mid-ranking Russian diplomat Boris Bondarev made global headlines by announcing his decision to resign over the war.  

The one area where opposition to the war is increasingly evident is within the ranks of Russian military itself. Since the outbreak of hostilities in late February, significant numbers of Russian troops have refused to fight in Ukraine or have abandoned their units and deserted.

While the exact number of Russians refusing to follow orders remains a closely guarded secret, one widely reported incident saw 115 members of Russia’s National Guard dismissed after they refused to fight in Ukraine. Meanwhile, a lawyer representing Russians who do not want to participate in the invasion has claimed that he’s been contacted by more than a thousand soldiers.

Collapsing morale within Putin’s military may now represent the greatest single threat to Russia’s war effort. While the Kremlin-controlled Russian media can disguise the true nature of the war indefinitely, those on the frontlines know the reality of Russia’s losses and are well aware of the atrocities being committed against the Ukrainian civilian population. As more and more soldiers seek to escape the Ukrainian meat grinder, Putin faces challenges finding enough troops to maintain the invasion without taking the politically risky move of ordering a general mobilization.  

There are signs that the Kremlin is already beginning to face manpower issues. Recent legislation removed age limits for Russian soldiers in an apparent bid to fill out depleted ranks by recruiting men over the age of forty. The regime has also been relying on ethnic minority soldiers from many of Russia’s poorest regions along with conscripts from Russian-occupied eastern Ukraine. If mounting losses and desertions force the Kremlin to enlist thousands of young Russians from Moscow and St. Petersburg, the current pro-war consensus may not survive.

Peter Dickinson is Editor of the Atlantic Council’s UkraineAlert Service.   

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post More than three-quarters of Russians still support Putin’s Ukraine War appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Russia has not abandoned its goal of crushing Ukrainian statehood https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/russia-has-not-abandoned-its-goal-of-crushing-ukrainian-statehood/ Mon, 06 Jun 2022 11:55:10 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=533176 Ukraine has achieved a number of striking successes during the first phase of the Russian invasion but there is no room for complacency as Vladimir Putin's goal of crushing Ukrainian statehood remains unchanged.

The post Russia has not abandoned its goal of crushing Ukrainian statehood appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Just over 100 days ago, Russian President Vladimir Putin bet the house on war in Ukraine. Before February 24, Moscow occupied seven percent of the country; now it controls 20 percent. As a result of the aging autocrat’s decision to go in again, one-third of Ukrainians have fled their homes. Russian soldiers have committed unspeakable war crimes and crimes against humanity. Moscow has blocked all of Ukraine’s ports, choking Ukraine’s economy and putting millions of people across the globe at risk of starvation if the ban isn’t soon lifted.

Ukraine won the first phase of the war, but the next phase won’t be a cakewalk. Moscow wanted to take Kyiv in a matter of days and install a new leader. But Ukrainians pushed them out and Moscow has since refocused its invasion on the Donbas, where the fighting rages on.

There’s every reason to worry as public interest in the war flags, enthusiasm for taking in refuges may be waning in Central Europe, and more and more reports are issued daily saying that the Ukrainians are outmanned and outgunned in the Donbas. One newspaper estimates that Russian forces outnumber Ukrainian troops by a factor of 7:1, while one source in Dnipro puts the figure closer to 3:1. There are also reports that the Ukrainian side doesn’t have enough ammunition. President Zelenskyy estimates that 60-100 Ukrainian soldiers are dying every day, which is an astonishingly high rate.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Yet at the annual Globsec 2022 conference in Bratislava, Slovakia, one of the “gung-ho countries” to use Edward Luce’s memorable term, one could be forgiven for almost forgetting that the outcome of Ukraine’s war is not settled. Many of the panels and private discussions revolved around intricate discussions about Ukraine’s reconstruction, a colossal task, but by no means an assured one.

While photos of the war damage adorned the hotel hallways, many of the attendees wore yellow and blue ribbons and Ukrainian flag lapel pins, and Ukrainian musicians sang movingly each night, the overall atmosphere of the conference and the mood among Central European elites could be described as near Pollyannish. Not one panel focused on an actual military assessment or the grim reality in the Donbas. 

One man brought us back to reality. Ukrainian Defense Minister Oleksii Reznikov spoke via Zoom and offered a sobering account of the state of play. He warned that Kyiv is outgunned in the Donbas and Moscow has an “unlimited supply” of ammunition.

Reznikov urged leaders to send heavy weapons in large quantities quickly and asked for multiple launch rocket systems, tanks, artillery, drones, anti-ship complexes, anti-aircraft and anti-missile defense systems. In straightforward but patient language, he urged European bureaucrats to speed up deliveries of weapons and warned that every delay means more dead Ukrainian soldiers. “The character of the war has changed, and we have different needs now,” he said. 

Beyond arms, there are political worries. The European Union will decide on June 23 whether to offer Ukraine EU candidate status. Speaking to Globsec from Kyiv, President Zelenskyy urged the EU to confirm candidate status without delay. For her part, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen agreed with Zelenskyy. “I think it’s not only our strategic interests, but it is our moral duty to make it possible that they [Ukraine] join our European Union,” von der Leyen said on June 2.  

Some experts on the sidelines at Globsec told me that Kyiv will be granted EU candidate status but advised not get too excited because the status is more symbolic than substantive. Others worry that France, Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, and Hungary will block Ukraine.

Another big war worry is Ukraine’s demographics. The country was losing people before the war and the situation has only gotten worse. Six million Ukrainians have left as a result of the war and mostly resettled elsewhere in Europe. Ivan Krastev, chair of the Centre for Liberal Strategies, said that if Ukrainians stay for more than a year, the likelihood that they will return drops sharply as children learn local languages and enroll in local schools. 

The conference did shine by bringing Ukrainian voices into the discussion, although regrettably few heard some of the most compelling voices. Prime Minister Denis Shmyhal, Melitopol Mayor Ivan Fedorov, Mykolaiv Governor Vitalii Kim, and Kharkiv Mayor Ihor Terekhov all spoke movingly about the impact of the war on their cities and Ukraine’s reconstruction in private sessions and appealed to European governments to help. The task ahead is daunting. In Kharkiv alone, 150,000 people have lost their homes.

But before the West begins to construct elaborate reconstruction plans, which it should do, let’s keep the heavy weapons coming so Kyiv can win the war.     

Reznikov put it best, stressing that Moscow “hasn’t abandoned its goal of capturing Kyiv and crushing Ukrainian statehood.” We should not be lulled into a false sense of euphoria after Kyiv’s initial victory. Much depends on how quickly we respond.  

Melinda Haring is the deputy director of the Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center. She tweets @melindaharing.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Russia has not abandoned its goal of crushing Ukrainian statehood appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Imperial myths and genocidal realities: 100 days of Putin’s Ukraine War https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/imperial-myths-and-genocidal-realities-100-days-of-putins-ukraine-war/ Fri, 03 Jun 2022 18:14:59 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=532747 Putin’s Ukraine war relies on a series of propaganda myths that reflect modern Russia’s failure to break with its imperialistic past. If Europe wants to achieve a lasting peace, it must work toward a post-imperial Russia.

The post Imperial myths and genocidal realities: 100 days of Putin’s Ukraine War appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
The Russian invasion of Ukraine has been made possible by one of the most comprehensive disinformation campaigns in world history. For years, Vladimir Putin has exploited longstanding anti-Ukrainian prejudices within Russian society and widespread international ignorance of Ukraine to set the stage for today’s conflict. He has succeeded in convincing millions of Russians and a surprising number of outside observers that Moscow’s unprovoked attack on Ukraine is both historically legitimate and geopolitically justified.

In reality, Putin’s war is the most unapologetically imperialistic undertaking of the twenty-first century. The Russian dictator seeks to annex entire regions of Ukraine while eradicating all traces of Ukrainian identity and statehood. In order to disguise this genocidal agenda, he employs a range of propaganda myths that have deep roots in the Russian imperial consciousness and reflect modern Russia’s refusal to recognize the reality of an independent Ukraine.

Putin’s favorite myth is the notion that Ukrainians are actually Russians and form part of an indivisible whole (“one people”). In July 2021, he published an entire essay in support of this argument entitled “On the Historical Unity of Russians and Ukrainians.” This remarkable document brought together many of Putin’s most shameless distortions including the claim that Ukrainians traditionally saw themselves as Russians and the assertion that modern Ukraine was established on historically Russian lands. “I am confident that true sovereignty of Ukraine is possible only in partnership with Russia,” he wrote. “For we are one people.”

In normal circumstances, it would be tempting to dismiss Putin’s pseudo-scientific imperial narrative as the harmless rant of a delusional dictator. However, his historically illiterate essay was no laughing matter. It was subsequently made required reading for all Russian military personnel and is now widely regarded as an unofficial declaration of war against the continued existence of an independent Ukraine.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Putin is not the first Russian ruler to insist Ukrainians are in fact Russians. Similar arguments were common during Czarist rule when much of today’s Ukraine was incorporated into the Russian Empire. This continued in modified form throughout the Soviet era with Ukraine and Russia typically portrayed as “brotherly nations.”

Over the past two decades, Putin has taken this propaganda trope to new extremes. He has weaponized the “one people” narrative to demonize any Ukrainians who insist on a separate identity, while at the same time portraying today’s Ukraine as an “anti-Russia” that can no longer be tolerated.

Unsurprisingly, the “one people” concept was always far more popular among Russians than Ukrainians. In the aftermath of Putin’s essay, polls found that an overwhelming majority of Ukrainians rejected his claims of historical unity between the two nations. Following the full-scale invasion of their country, the percentage of Ukrainians who now view Russians as a “brotherly nation” has become vanishingly small. With tens of thousands of Ukrainians killed and entire cities reduced to rubble, the myth of “one people” is officially dead.

Putin’s promotion of fraternal narratives has always been a way of expressing his territorial claims to Ukraine. Legitimizing these claims means whitewashing centuries of imperial oppression. While the close geographical proximity of the two countries means that they inevitably share many features of a common past, the story of Russia’s relations with Ukraine has always been defined by Russia’s aggressive expansion and Ukraine’s struggle for independence.

For hundreds of years, Russian rulers suppressed Ukrainian statehood aspirations while ruthlessly russifying the country. The reigns of Peter the Great and Catherine the Great were marked by particularly gruesome atrocities, but there was no single period when Ukrainians were not subjugated in their own land. Indeed, as long ago as 1731, French writer Voltaire was moved to observe, “Ukraine has always aspired to be free.”

Efforts to eradicate Ukrainian identity accelerated during the Soviet era. The early Bolsheviks brutally crushed the fledgling Ukrainian state established in 1918 amid unprecedented bloodshed in Kyiv and other Ukrainian cities. Stalin’s reign then saw the mass murder of Ukraine’s intellectual leadership. The darkest period of all came in the early 1930s when the Soviet authorities engineered a genocidal famine to wipe out the agrarian communities that had for centuries served as the traditional repositories of Ukrainian national culture. An estimated four million Ukrainians starved to death. 

Putin makes no effort to address or excuse these staggering crimes. On the contrary, he simply ignores them while portraying periods of enforced cohabitation as evidence of eternal brotherhood.

Sadly, international audiences still sometimes struggle to grasp the scale of Putin’s cynicism and continue to repeat the Kremlin’s “one people” propaganda. In April 2022, French President Emmanuel Macron stated that he still considers Russians and Ukrainians “brotherly peoples.” Others have echoed Russia’s fraudulent historical claims to advocate for appeasement or undermine international support for Ukraine.

This needs to change. There should be no more talk of a compromise peace or attempts to placate Putin while Moscow is engaged in the genocide of the Ukrainian nation. Instead, the international community must be unambiguous in its rejection of Russian falsehoods and historical distortions.    

Putin’s invasion of Ukraine relies heavily on a series of myths that reflect modern Russia’s failure to break with its imperialistic past. While the rest of Europe underwent decades of turbulent decolonization following WWII, Russia still clings to an anachronistic imperial identity that prevents its own development while exposing its neighbors to the horrors of colonial conquest. The current war in Ukraine is a throwback to an altogether darker era and a painful reminder that if Europe wants lasting peace, it must work toward a post-imperial Russia.

Nestor Barchuk is international relations manager at the DEJURE Foundation.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Imperial myths and genocidal realities: 100 days of Putin’s Ukraine War appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Memo to Henry Kissinger: Appeasing Putin means enabling genocide https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/appeasing-putin-means-enabling-genocide/ Tue, 31 May 2022 12:35:48 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=530518 Appeasing Russia will not end the war in Ukraine or secure peace in our time. On the contrary, it will embolden Putin, prolong Ukraine’s pain, weaken the West, and destabilize the entire world, writes Stephen Blank.

The post Memo to Henry Kissinger: Appeasing Putin means enabling genocide appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
As the Russo-Ukrainian War enters its fourth month, calls are mounting for Ukraine to trade land for peace and accept a compromise settlement that would allow Vladimir Putin to retain control over at least some of the regions currently under Russian occupation.

The most high-profile advocate of appeasement so far has been former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, who garnered global headlines when he argued at the recent World Economic Forum that Ukraine should be prepared to cede territory to Russia in order to end the war. Likewise, French President Emmanuel Macron has called for a compromise solution and warned against “humiliating” Putin, while his German and Italian counterparts have indicated support for similar positions.

Arguments in favor of appeasement have also become increasingly common in the international media. A May 19 New York Times editorial that spoke of the need for Ukraine’s leaders to make “painful territorial decisions” was one of numerous recent high-profile articles calling on Kyiv to accept the Russian annexation of Ukrainian lands in exchange for peace.

These outpourings of solicitude for Putin are an indication of continued international reluctance to accept the reality of an escalating confrontation with the Kremlin. They also reflect widespread ignorance of modern Russia and a failure to grasp the true nature of the current war.  

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

The war unleashed by Vladimir Putin on February 24 is a classic example of unprovoked international aggression. Crucially, the main objective of the war is to destroy the Ukrainian state and nation. This goal has been repeatedly stated by Russian officials including Putin. It is also regularly reinforced by the Kremlin-controlled Russian media, where talk of genocide in Ukraine has become normalized since the beginning of the invasion.

Russian war aims include the elimination of the territorial, political, economic and cultural basis of Ukrainian statehood. Putin himself has often declared that Ukrainians are really Russians (“one people”) and has argued at length that Ukraine has no right to exist as an independent and sovereign state. In other words, this is a genocidal war in line with the terms of the 1948 Genocide Convention. It is being waged with the explicit intention to “completely or partially destroy a group based on its nationality, ethnicity, race, or religion.”

Confirmation of Russia’s genocidal objectives in Ukraine goes far beyond the unhinged public statements of Putin and his propagandists. During the first three months of the war, evidence has emerged of mass murders, widespread torture and sexual violence designed to hinder future childbirth, forced deportations (especially of children), the destruction of Ukrainian cultural heritage, and systematic policies of Russification. In areas occupied by the Kremlin, potential opponents of the Russian takeover have been subjected to Soviet-style round-ups and in many cases remain unaccounted for.

These war crimes are not aberrations but rather a revival of traditional Russian imperial policies toward Ukraine. From the 1708 sack of Ukrainian Cossack capital city Baturyn during the reign of Russian Czar Peter the Great, to the genocidal famine engineered by Stalin in early the 1930s, Russian leaders have a long history of ruthlessly eradicating any manifestations of Ukrainian statehood. Today’s war fits seamlessly into this long and bloody history of Russian imperial aggression.

As any student of WWII will tell you, attempting to appease genocidal tyrants with territorial concessions is not only morally repugnant but also strategically nonsensical. The only response such figures understand is overwhelming force. The only meaningful objective is their total defeat.

Supporters of appeasement must also recognize that a genocidal war of aggression cannot be accommodated within the existing framework of the international order. Indeed, war crimes on this scale are antithetical to any kind of order whatsoever. Failure to defeat those responsible for such crimes merely accelerates the descent of world politics into the jungle and sets a dreadful geopolitical precedent for the decades to come.

As many commentators have written, it makes no sense to pursue a negotiated settlement over Ukraine’s head analogous to the infamous Munich Pact of 1938.  President Zelenskyy has already forcefully made this point. Nevertheless, we must constantly remind people that in launching this war, Putin broke at least seven solemn international treaties and accords to which Russia is a full signatory. On what basis can we assume that he and his government would observe any new settlement?

Nor is there any indication that Russia is currently seeking to save face or ready to accept a negotiated settlement. Putin has so far refused every “off-ramp” or offer of negotiation because he thinks he can ratchet up the pressure on what he considers to be a decadent West until it gives him everything he wants. Like a mob boss, Putin uses the threat of violence to intimidate his Western opponents. He knows they fundamentally fear a military confrontation and sees each successive appeal for appeasement as proof that his bully-boy tactics are working.   

Those clamoring to dismember Ukraine in order to continue doing business with Moscow need to explain why we should be so afraid of Russia when it is Russia that faces an infinitely stronger alliance. Instead of seeking to negotiate at Ukraine’s expense, the West should focus its energies on making sure Ukraine wins and Russia loses. This is obviously the correct approach for Ukraine itself and for the democratic world in general. It would also ultimately be in Russia’s interest if the country is to finally emerge from its authoritarian prison and follow the path of postwar Germany. 

Appeasing Russia will not end the war or secure peace in our time. On the contrary, it will embolden Putin, prolong Ukraine’s pain, weaken the West, and destabilize the wider world. The entire notion that the current war can be resolved via compromise is a dangerous illusion. Until Russia is decisively defeated, any pause in the fighting will be temporary. Territorial concessions will only whet Putin’s appetite for further conquests while exposing millions more Ukrainians to the Kremlin’s genocidal agenda.

Stephen Blank is a senior fellow at the Foreign Policy Research Institute.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Memo to Henry Kissinger: Appeasing Putin means enabling genocide appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
South Ukraine holds the key to Putin’s dreams of a new Russian Empire https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/south-ukraine-holds-the-key-to-putins-dreams-of-a-new-russian-empire/ Fri, 27 May 2022 15:32:26 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=530287 The biggest European battles since WWII are currently raging in eastern Ukraine's Donbas region but the ultimate outcome of the Russo-Ukrainian War is likely to be decided hundreds of miles to the south.

The post South Ukraine holds the key to Putin’s dreams of a new Russian Empire appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
The biggest European battles since WWII are currently raging in eastern Ukraine. However, while international attention is firmly focused on the monumental Battle of the Donbas, the ultimate outcome of the Russo-Ukrainian War is likely to be decided hundreds of miles to the south.

When the war first began on February 24, few envisioned such a long or large-scale campaign. On the contrary, the Kremlin anticipated a rapid and comprehensive victory that would bring Ukraine’s Euro-Atlantic integration to a shuddering halt and drag the country back into Russia’s orbit.

Instead, Russia decisively lost the Battle for Kyiv and was forced to retreat entirely from northern Ukraine. Putin responded to defeat in the north by regrouping and concentrating his forces in eastern Ukraine, where Russia continues to advance slowly but steadily while paying a high price in both casualties and military equipment.

Beaten in the north and struggling in the east, Russia’s most significant progress of the campaign so far has come in the south. Large swathes of southern Ukraine were captured during the first days of the invasion and remain in Russian hands. This has enabled Moscow to establish a land bridge connecting the occupied Crimean peninsula with the Russian proxy entities created by the Kremlin in eastern Ukraine eight years ago. Ukrainian troops have succeeded in preventing further Russian offensives towards the key southern port city of Odesa, but Kyiv currently lacks the military forces and heavy military equipment to liberate the regions that have fallen under Russian control.

With Russia seeking to consolidate its hold over occupied areas and Ukrainian forces preparing for a coming counter-offensive, the struggle for southern Ukraine is far from over. The outcome of this confrontation will likely determine whether Vladimir Putin is able to achieve his goal of extinguishing Ukrainian statehood and incorporating large parts of the country into a new Russian Empire.  

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

It is vital for Ukraine’s international partners to appreciate that the de-occupation of Ukraine’s southern seaboard is a race against time, with the Kremlin currently taking active steps to incorporate these territories into the Russian Federation. Ukrainian state symbols are being removed from public spaces, the Russian curriculum is being introduced in local schools, and the Ukrainian hryvnia currency is being replaced by the Russian rouble. Ukrainian media, internet services and mobile phone operators have been cut off.

The few local collaborators that have been found are being installed as Russian puppets. Meanwhile, local elected officials, journalists, community leaders and military veterans are being targeted in round-ups and abducted amid growing reports of torture and executions. Tens of thousands from the civilian population have been subjected to forced deportation. In recent days, Putin has unveiled plans to offer Russian passports to residents of southern Ukraine’s Kherson and Zaporizhzhya regions. Meanwhile, senior Kremlin officials have declared that Russia has come “forever.”

The Battle for Southern Ukraine will likely hinge on control of Kherson region, which lies directly north of Crimea. It is no exaggeration to state that Ukraine’s future as a viable independent state may depend on regaining control over this region. For Moscow, the stakes are similarly high. The occupation of Kherson allows Russia to supply fresh water to occupied Crimea and is essential for Putin’s land bridge connecting the peninsula to the Russian border through Berdyansk and Mariupol in south eastern Ukraine.

Kherson region is also a springboard for further anticipated Russian advances along the Black Sea coast toward Odesa. This would enable the Kremlin to cut Ukraine off from the sea and thwart plans to break the current Russian naval blockade of Ukraine’s Black Sea ports. Russian dominance over Ukraine’s south eastern coastline stretching from Crimea to the Russian border has already allowed Moscow to transform the Azov Sea into a Russian lake. Blocking Ukraine’s access to the Black Sea entirely would deal a lethal blow to the export-heavy Ukrainian economy and leave the country with little choice but to accept peace on Moscow’s terms.   

In addition to its strategic importance, southern Ukraine also has great symbolic value for Russia. Since the seizure of Crimea and the outbreak of hostilities with Ukraine in spring 2014, Kremlin officials and Russian nationalists have resurrected the half-forgotten Tsarist term “Novorossiya” (“New Russia”) to describe the regions of eastern and southern Ukraine which they seek to annex. Putin has repeatedly accused the early Bolshevik leaders of erroneously granting Soviet Ukraine these southern regions while claiming that the entire area is in fact “ancient Russian land.”

The upcoming battles in southern Ukraine are likely to be the biggest and bloodiest of the war. Ukraine will face Russian troops occupying well-prepared defensive positions who also benefit from the logistical advantages of air support and resupply from nearby Russian-occupied Crimea.

In order to succeed, the Ukrainian military will need to achieve some kind of breathing space in eastern Ukraine that will allow it to concentrate in the south. Another crucial factor will be the timely delivery of heavy weapons from Ukraine’s international partners including long range artillery, attack drones and multiple launch rocket systems (MLRS). Western intelligence will also be vital as Ukraine seeks to repeat the successes it achieved during the first month of the war. Behind the front lines, Ukrainian partisans and Special Forces units will have a significant role to play disrupting Russia’s military movements, destroying vital infrastructure and removing collaborators.

Time is of the essence. While it would be foolish to rush into an offensive as critical to the wider war effort as the liberation of southern Ukraine, it would also be dangerous to wait too long. Russia is clearly in a hurry to annex the region. Many observers expect Moscow to push for annexation in the coming months, possible together with parallel efforts in eastern Ukraine’s Donbas region. This will likely be accompanied by further human rights abuses as the Kremlin looks to secure its position and silence any local opposition.

Unless Russia is forced to retreat from southern Ukraine, all efforts to broker a negotiated peace will prove futile and merely lead to a pause before the next round of hostilities. The region is simply too important and cannot be left under Kremlin control. It holds the key to Putin’s dreams of a new Russian Empire and is at the same time essential for Ukraine’s continued existence as an independent state.

If Ukrainian forces succeed in ending the Russian occupation of the south, they will save their own country while dealing a potentially fatal blow to Moscow’s expansionist agenda. This would be long overdue. More than three decades after the collapse of the USSR, Putin’s Russia remains an unapologetically imperialistic power. The time has come to cast these imperial ambitions on the ash heap of history.  

Taras Kuzio is a research fellow at the Henry Jackson Society and Professor of Political Science at the National University of Kyiv Mohyla Academy. He is the author of the recently published book “Russian Nationalism and the Russian-Ukrainian War.”

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post South Ukraine holds the key to Putin’s dreams of a new Russian Empire appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
The Putin puzzle: Why is the Russian dictator so obsessed with Ukraine? https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/the-putin-puzzle-why-is-the-russian-dictator-so-obsessed-with-ukraine/ Tue, 24 May 2022 22:22:08 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=528054 Vladimir Putin has sought to justify his invasion of Ukraine by claiming the country has no right to exist but in reality modern Ukraine enjoys a level of democratic legitimacy that far exceeds his own authoritarian regime.

The post The Putin puzzle: Why is the Russian dictator so obsessed with Ukraine? appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Why did Vladimir Putin invade Ukraine? In the three months since the invasion began, the Russian dictator has put forward a wide range of different rationalizations blaming the war on everything from NATO enlargement to imaginary Ukrainian Nazis. But throughout it all, his one consistent message has been the alleged illegitimacy of the Ukrainian state.

Such rhetoric is nothing new. For years, Putin has denied Ukraine’s right to exist while insisting that Ukrainians are really Russians (“one people”). He has repeatedly accused modern Ukraine of occupying historically Russian lands and has dismissed the entire notion of a separate Ukrainian national identity as an artificial invention created by outside forces seeking to weaken Russia from within.

The full extent of Putin’s Ukraine obsession was laid bare in a 5,000-word essay on the supposed “historical unity” of Russians and Ukrainians that was published in July 2021, just seven months before the Russian invasion. Posing as both amateur historian and amateur philosopher, Putin conveniently ignored centuries of imperial oppression before expressing his confidence that “true sovereignty of Ukraine is possible only in partnership with Russia.”

Insofar as “sovereignty” means freedom from external control, Putin’s statement is Orwellian-level nonsense. This chilling document was correctly interpreted by many as a declaration of war on Ukrainian statehood. It was subsequently made required reading for all members of the Russian military.

Events on the battlefield have since exposed the absurdity of Putin’s core arguments. If he has any lingering doubts regarding the reality of the Ukrainian nation, he need only consult the Russian soldiers who lost the Battle for Kyiv and were forced to retreat entirely from northern Ukraine after suffering catastrophic losses. Indeed, it is hard to think of a more comprehensive debunking of the whole “one people” myth.  

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Putin’s attempts to deny Ukrainian identity are easily dismissed but his insistence on the purported illegitimacy of modern Ukraine is worth exploring in further detail as it raises some interesting questions regarding the true causes of today’s war.

The foundational principle around which the Founding Fathers created the United States was the notion that those who govern can derive their legitimacy from only one source, namely the people they seek to govern. This idea of government “of the people, by the people, for the people,” as expressed by President Lincoln at Gettysburg in 1863, has come to be recognized as the basic principle underpinning all modern democratic systems.

The ideas of democratic rule and free elections have become so popular around the world that even totalitarian states often include the label “Democratic” in their respective country’s names, as is the case with the North Korean “Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.” Similarly, dictatorships such as Putin’s Russia still feel the need to stage faux elections in order to maintain the pretense of democratic legitimacy.

Much to Putin’s chagrin, modern Ukraine does not share his own regime’s lack of legitimacy. Far from it, in fact. In December 1991, Ukrainians took part in a nationwide referendum on independence from the Soviet Union that saw over 90% of voters back the creation of an independent Ukraine. Crucially, clear majorities supported independence in every single Ukrainian region including Crimea (54%) and the two regions that make up the Russian-occupied Donbas, Luhansk (83%) and Donetsk (76%). The vote was widely acknowledged as free and fair, setting a democratic standard that would gradually become the norm in Ukraine during the coming decades of independence.

Ukraine’s most recent election cycle in 2019 reflected the continuing consolidation of the country’s democracy. Despite running as a complete outsider with no political experience whatsoever, Volodymyr Zelenskyy was able to secure a landslide election victory over incumbent Petro Poroshenko in April 2019 and become Ukraine’s sixth president. Three months later, his newly established political party made history once again with a record win in Ukraine’s parliamentary election. Zelenskyy’s success reflected the highly competitive nature of Ukraine’s political system while underscoring the genuine legitimacy that the country’s democratic culture helps to bestow upon this state.

In the past few months, the courage and commitment demonstrated by millions of Ukrainians in the face of foreign invasion have vividly reaffirmed the legitimacy of Ukrainian statehood. The country has responded to Russia’s invasion with an unprecedented wave of national mobilization that has seen huge numbers volunteer for the armed forces and many more make breathtaking sacrifices in support of their nation’s defense. This remarkable show of unity and resilience has inspired the watching world while making a mockery of Putin’s ramblings.

By comparison, Russia’s post-Soviet development could hardly be more different. When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, nobody was offered the opportunity to vote in a referendum on whether they wished to be part of the Russian Federation. When Chechnya attempted to break away from Russia in the early 1990s, Moscow waged two bloody wars to crush that independence movement.  

Since coming to power at the turn of the millennium, Putin has had his political opponents murdered, jailed or exiled. He has steadily reversed the limited democratic gains of the 1990s and now completely controls the entire political system along with the media. All forms of dissent are outlawed. The crackdown on alternative voices in Putin’s Russia has become so surrealistic that people are now routinely arrested for holding up blank placards in public spaces.

Despite the country’s slide into authoritarianism, Russia still officially goes through the motions of regular election cycles in order to renew Putin’s mandate to rule. However, the increasing absurdity of these choreographed campaigns merely serves to underscore the illegitimacy rather than the legitimacy of the entire regime. 

This places Putin’s efforts to portray Ukraine as illegitimate in an entirely different light. By almost any measure, President Zelenskyy enjoys far more personal legitimacy than Putin, while democratic Ukraine is an infinitely more legitimate state than autocratic Russia.

Putin is well aware of this fact. He also understands that if a democratic Ukraine is allowed to gain strength and prosper, it will likely inspire Russians to seek similar changes in their own country. In other words, he regards the existence of a free and democratic Ukraine as an existential threat to the future of his own autocratic regime.

This helps to explain why Putin has chosen to gamble everything on the destruction of the Ukrainian state. From the Russian ruler’s perspective, independent Ukraine is an intolerable reminder that democratic legitimacy is entirely possible in the Slavic heartlands of the former USSR. Unless Ukraine is destroyed, Putin fears Russia itself may enter a new era of collapse that will continue the process begun in 1991.

Bohdan Vitvitsky is a former Resident Legal Advisor at the US Embassy in Ukraine and Special Advisor to Ukraine’s Prosecutor General.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post The Putin puzzle: Why is the Russian dictator so obsessed with Ukraine? appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Appeasement is the worst possible policy for both Ukraine and Russia https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/appeasement-is-the-worst-possible-policy-for-both-ukraine-and-russia/ Sat, 21 May 2022 12:23:06 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=526946 Western advocates of appeasement in Ukraine such as French President Emmanuel Macron fail to appreciate the deep-rooted imperial ambitions underpinning Vladimir Putin's campign to extinguish Ukrainian independence.

The post Appeasement is the worst possible policy for both Ukraine and Russia appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
As Vladimir Putin’s Ukraine War reaches the three-month mark, it is clear that things are not going according to the Kremlin plan. Ukrainian troops have forced Russia to retreat entirely from the north of the country and are now advancing in the east around Kharkiv. With the first wave of Western heavy weapons deliveries beginning to arrive on the battlefield, Kyiv has voiced its intention to liberate the whole of Ukraine including Crimea and the eastern regions occupied since 2014.

Ukraine’s military success has won global admiration but has also sparked alarm among some Western leaders and commentators. French President Emmanuel Macron is the most prominent of the many voices now warning against driving Putin into a corner. Instead, Macron advises leaving the Russian leader an off-ramp.

The off-ramp envisioned by Macron would likely involve a ceasefire enabling Russia to retain at least some of the territorial gains it has made since the invasion began on February 24. Aside from the dubious morality of having their lands traded for peace, Ukrainian officials believe that any such deal would only postpone another round of aggression until Russia rebuilds its forces.

The French leader is far from alone in advocating appeasement. Indeed, Macron’s German and Italian counterparts have also indicated support for similar positions in recent weeks, while a May 19 op-ed by the New York Times editorial board was the latest in a series of high-profile articles in the international media calling for Ukraine to cede territory in exchange for an end to the fighting. These arguments in favor of appeasement are typically framed as foreign policy realism, but in fact they have little in common with Putin’s version of reality and underline the failure of many in the West to understand the true nature of modern Russia.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Advocates of appeasement often echo the belief that Russian foreign policy is a defensive response to the post-1991 expansion of the NATO alliance into Moscow’s traditional sphere of influence. They appear unaware of the far deeper historical context underpinning the Russian invasion and ignore the fact that imperial Russia had been oppressing Ukraine and other neighbors for centuries before NATO existed. These imperial instincts remained intact throughout the Soviet period and have thrived once more in Putin’s Russia. In other words, the Kremlin’s current aggression fits a culturally well-embedded script that has little to do with the actions of the West.

A related and equally important misunderstanding is the failure to realize that imperialism is necessarily based on racist premises. Russians traditionally categorize Ukrainians either as “Little Russian” loyalists, sly but amusing bumpkins, or irredeemable fascists. Each category is racist in its own right, reflecting the traditional Russian desire to deny Ukrainians agency and identity while also dehumanizing those who are viewed as hostile to Russian rule.

Most Russians simply refuse to recognize that modern Ukrainian society has little in common with the Kremlin’s crude stereotypes and is instead characterized by political secularism and European values. This was the great miscalculation of the Kremlin’s invasion and a key reason for Russia’s military setbacks. Putin appears to have sincerely believed his soldiers would be welcomed with flowers by large portions of a divided Ukraine. Instead, Ukrainians united against him. While Russia’s racism is based on false premises, it cannot be dismissed as it shapes the regime’s behavior.

Arguments in favor of compromise ignore the considerable capacity of Russia’s state bureaucracy for mobilizing hatred. This was put on display in Ukraine by the widespread and militarily superfluous atrocities committed by the Russian army in its areas of occupation and by the persistent terror bombing of residential areas in eastern Ukrainian cities which, incidentally, have large ethnic Russian populations. 

Such conduct is the most persuasive argument in favor of Ukraine’s NATO membership aspirations and against appeasement. Countries such as Poland, the Czech Republic and the Baltic states, which are all infinitely more acquainted with traditional Kremlin practices than Macron and other members of the appeasement camp, were not taken over against their will by an expansionist NATO. On the contrary, they themselves did everything possible to secure membership.

Talk of appeasing Putin has two unintended but harmful effects on Russia. First, such appeals are enthusiastically echoed by the Kremlin propaganda apparatus to legitimize its victimization narrative, which helps Russians to avoid a self-examination of their dysfunctional notions.

It also forecloses a productive relationship with Russia’s neighbors. In this context it is worth noting the lesson provided by Poland, which historically held parts of Ukraine in situations that produced periodic violence by both sides. Modern Polish politicians and academics are intellectually mature enough to avoid demonizing Ukrainians and to admit that Poles were responsible for their share of the violence. Poles and Ukrainians engage in an honest dialogue and have agreed on the formula “to forgive and ask for forgiveness.” As a consequence, the two countries are now good friends and close allies. In contrast, most Russians would angrily reject the entire proposition of asking Ukrainians for forgiveness.

In the meantime, Russia and neighboring countries needlessly forego the economic benefits that could have come from better relations. The Kremlin could have achieved mutually advantageous trade that would have allowed Russia to continue using Ukrainian gas pipelines to Europe, and Russia’s citizens could have been spared the high cost of bypass pipelines to Europe and the unprofitable Power of Siberia to China. Instead, Russians remain mired in the repressive governance and economic stagnation that are the trademarks of the Putin regime.

Regardless of how the war plays out in Ukraine, Russia is likely to emerge as the biggest loser. Its institutions have been exposed as corrupt and its army is now widely regarded as inept.

The Chinese will be the first to notice this weakness and will call in the financial and political debts that Russia has accumulated. Chinese firms will obtain equity in sanctions-weakened Russian companies. This will accelerate Russia’s transformation into a de-industrialized resource appendage locked to authoritarian China with poor prospects for future democratization.

If Russia retains control over Ukrainian territories, the Kremlin will have to maintain a strong repressive apparatus not only in Occupied Ukraine but also in Russia itself in order to ensure resistance does not spread. Liberalization will be indefinitely foreclosed, to the detriment of ordinary Russians.

At a fundamental level, the Russian public needs to be cured of nostalgia for former imperial possessions like Ukraine before there can be any hope of a lasting peace in the region. However, Western entertainment of the Kremlin’s victimization narrative merely postpones this process.

Through their complicity in Putin’s political course, Macron and other appeasers misjudge the underlying reasons for this course and play a secondary but significant role in Russia’s continued decline. Appeasement is obviously bad for Ukraine but it is also disastrous for Russia itself.  

Dennis Soltys is a retired Canadian professor currently living in Kazakhstan.

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Appeasement is the worst possible policy for both Ukraine and Russia appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Vladimir Putin is running out of options to avoid defeat in Ukraine https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/vladimir-putin-is-running-out-of-options-to-avoid-defeat-in-ukraine/ Tue, 17 May 2022 12:29:02 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=524867 Vladimir Putin expected a quick victory in Ukraine but now finds himself facing a catastrophic defeat that will shatter Russia's pretensions to military superpower status while threatening Putin's own authoritarian regime.

The post Vladimir Putin is running out of options to avoid defeat in Ukraine appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
When Vladimir Putin launched the invasion of Ukraine on February 24, he envisaged a lightning campaign that would be over in a matter of days with Ukraine’s pro-Western government deposed and the country firmly back in the Russian orbit. However, things have not gone according to plan. The Russian military has suffered catastrophic losses and failed to achieve its key objectives, while Ukraine has fought tenaciously and secured the support of the entire democratic world. As the war approaches the three-month mark, Putin is now rapidly running out of options to avoid a disastrous defeat that will shatter Russia’s pretensions to military superpower status and threaten the future of his entire regime.

According to British estimates, Russia has already lost approximately one-third of the 190,000-strong invasion force assembled in February 2022. Putin chose to invade with this obviously inadequate force due to a combination of faulty intelligence and his own faith in Russian nationalist dogma, which convinced him that the Ukrainian public would greet advancing Russian soldiers as liberators and shower them with flowers.

Instead, his troops received an overwhelmingly hostile reception and were soon reporting severe battlefield losses. Amid mounting setbacks, Russia lost the Battle for Kyiv and was forced to retreat entirely from northern Ukraine. More recently, Russian forces have been pushed away from Ukraine’s second city, Kharkiv, while the much anticipated Donbas Offensive in eastern Ukraine has made painfully slow progress.

Putin’s most obvious option at this point would be to escalate the conflict by moving from today’s so-called “Special Military Operation” to an official declaration of war against Ukraine and full mobilization. This might help to fill growing gaps within the ranks of the Russian military, but public opposition to mobilization could also destabilize the domestic situation within Russia at a time when the Kremlin is already paranoid over possible signs of revolt. Perhaps this fear of opposition helps explain why a significant number of oligarchs and their families have died in suspicious circumstances in recent months.  

Nor would mobilization necessarily produce the kind of fighting force Putin currently needs. An army full of conscripts and reservists with limited military training would be no match for Ukraine’s battle hardened and highly motivated troops armed with superior Western weapons.

Putin’s predicament is likely to worsen in the coming months, making his invasion of Ukraine even more untenable. Western sanctions will begin to have a greater impact from the end of the summer season onward as Russia’s inability to replace Western imports becomes impossible to disguise and as the savings of ordinary Russians begin to run out. Unemployment figures will likely reach record highs and economic forecasts will deteriorate as the costs of international isolation continue to mount.  

Growing public awareness of the grim military situation in Ukraine will add to the gloomy mood. Based on the current rate of attrition, the Russian army will suffer 50,000 combat deaths by September. Such losses are completely unprecedented for a major power in modern warfare and cannot be entirely explained away or otherwise disguised by the Kremlin propaganda machine.  

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

The Kremlin currently faces a series of parallel challenges as it seeks to prevent the faltering invasion of Ukraine from unravelling completely.

There are no more pressing issues than the rising number of Russian soldiers refusing to fight in Ukraine. Reports of resistance to deployment have been emerging since the early days of the war and continue to mount. Growing numbers of Russian contract soldiers have resigned from the army or simply refused to fight in Ukraine, while members of Russia’s National Guard have allegedly argued that they are legally only obliged to serve within the borders of the Russian Federation.

Other forms of protest have been more informal. Large numbers of Russian troops have simply abandoned their tanks and armored vehicles in Ukraine and fled or surrendered. This has enabled the Ukrainian military to acquire over 230 Russian tanks and earned Russia the unwelcome status of Ukraine’s number one arms supplier.

Morale among Putin’s invasion force now appears close to breaking point. Anger at incompetent officers has led to at least one incident of soldiers running over their commander. Meanwhile, the Ukrainian Security Service has intercepted numerous telephone conversations of Russian troops calling home and describing the hell they face in Ukraine and the often staggering scale of the casualties within their individual military units.  

The Kremlin is particularly eager to prevent the Russian public from learning the criminal realities of the war. While some intercepted mobile telephone calls indicate Russian support for atrocities against Ukrainian civilians, it is likely that widespread awareness of war crimes committed in Ukraine would spark a highly negative response. Russian propaganda has been largely successful in demonizing Ukrainians, but the Kremlin lacks convincing excuses for the mass murder of civilians in Russian-speaking Ukrainian cities such as Mariupol and Kharkiv.

Likewise, Russian officials are having difficulty explaining how the supposedly “second most powerful army in the world” is unable to defeat a nation that Putin insists does not exist. Longstanding negative stereotypes of Ukraine as an unruly peasant province of Russia have left today’s Russian public ill-prepared for the shock of modern Ukraine’s impressive military prowess and strong national identity. After years of propaganda insisting that only a tiny minority of Ukrainian nationalists actually opposed Russia, the Kremlin finds itself forced to acknowledge that the entire Ukrainian nation, including millions of Russian-speaking Ukrainian patriots, now regards Russia as its sworn enemy.

Despite wall-to-wall pro-war propaganda, Russians are already becoming increasingly aware that the “Special Military Operation” is running into serious difficulties. A series of unexplained fires and explosions across Russia have fuelled unconfirmed rumors of Ukrainian sabotage and Special Forces operations on the home front, while military disasters such as the sinking of Russia’s Black Sea Fleet flagship The Moskva and the recent Russian defeat on the Donets River have been too big to cover up completely.

The grim realities of the war in Ukraine will be further brought home to Russian audiences as Ukraine puts more Russian soldiers on trial for committing war crimes against Ukrainian civilians. While the Kremlin will continue to deny that these crimes took place, it will be impossible to entirely block accounts of Stalinist-style mass executions and the documented rape of over 400 Ukrainian women from reaching the Russian public.  

Russia’s crippling military losses and the practical limitations of a possible mobilization mean that Putin’s Ukraine war is fast becoming unwinnable against an opponent which enjoys high morale and unprecedented international support. As Ukrainian forces receive further weapons from the West and continue to launch successful counterattacks, we can expect to see the slow but steady degradation of Russian forces. Eventually, this may lead to a 1917-style collapse as morale within the Russian army continues to plummet.

The failure of his Ukrainian adventure will have disastrous domestic consequences for Putin personally. It will shatter the myth of the all-powerful dictator and lead to calls for dramatic political change within Russia. The exact nature of the ensuing crisis is impossible to predict, but it already looks highly unlikely that Putin will remain president for life.  

Taras Kuzio is a Research Fellow at the Henry Jackson Society and Professor of Political Science at the National University of Kyiv Mohyla Academy. He is the author of the recently published book “Russian Nationalism and the Russian-Ukrainian War.”

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Vladimir Putin is running out of options to avoid defeat in Ukraine appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
Western advocates of appeasement need a crash course in Putinology https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/western-advocates-of-appeasement-need-a-crash-course-in-putinology/ Sun, 15 May 2022 12:50:17 +0000 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/?p=524144 The war in Ukraine has exposed the fundamental failure of international audiences to appreciate the true nature of modern Russia. Western advocates of appeasement clearly need a crash course in Putinology.

The post Western advocates of appeasement need a crash course in Putinology appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>
The war in Ukraine has exposed the fundamental failure of Western audiences to appreciate the true nature of modern Russia. Many international observers still assume Russia is a rational actor and believe policies of appeasement can bring the conflict in Ukraine to an end. Nothing could be further from the truth.

In reality, neither bleeding heart liberals nor diehard realists truly understand Vladimir Putin. They fail to recognize that he is an authoritarian kleptocrat who does not care about Russia’s national interest and is focused instead on his power and wealth. He hides this self-interest behind a façade of revisionist Russian nationalism that helps secure popular support for his criminal rule.

As I have argued in my book, “Russia’s Crony Capitalism: The Path from Market Economy to Kleptocracy,” Putin’s personal politics combine authoritarianism and kleptocracy. He needs war not to make Russia great again but to increase his popularity and justify his repressive domestic policies. Putin also fears the rise of a democratic Ukraine and views the country’s Euro-Atlantic integration as an existential threat to his own authoritarian regime.

Subscribe to UkraineAlert

As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Understanding Putin is the key to forming effective Western policies toward Russia and Ukraine. Ukrainians tend to understand Putin very well but surprisingly few Westerners do. A number of common misconceptions need to be addressed and debunked if the West wishes to get Russia right.

One key problem when dealing with Putin is the Western fear of escalation. The Russian dictator is well aware of this and always escalates until he has won or been defeated. The West must therefore not seek to avoid escalation, but should demonstrate a readiness to escalate more and faster. This is the only way to ensure that Putin fails and Ukraine wins.

Western fears of “provoking Putin” are particularly unhelpful. For this reason, US President Barack Obama refused to deliver lethal weapons to Ukraine. Members of the current US administration appear to embrace the same flawed idea. Meanwhile, similar arguments dominate the debate in Europe and fuel a mood of excessive caution that only serves to embolden Putin.

It is difficult to see any logic in these concerns. Putin has started an unprovoked and unjustified war, but it is the West that must not provoke him? Such thinking is essentially a call to allow a Russian victory and accept Ukrainian defeat. Instead, the word “provocation” should be retired from the Western discussion about Putin.

A similarly gentlemanly idea is the notion that the West must allow Putin to save face. Really? Putin is no gentleman. He wages wars of aggression and ruthlessly orders the destruction of entire cities. The West cannot compromise over crimes against humanity on this scale. On the contrary, Putin must be defeated. The only language he understands is the language of overwhelming strength. 

Many misguided Western politicians and commentators continue to call on Ukraine to negotiate with Putin. The problem with this position is that Putin himself has consistently refused to meet, negotiate, or even speak on the phone with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. 

Putin has also demonstrated conclusively that his word has no value and he feels under no obligation to keep any of his promises. For decades, Putin has routinely violated international agreement after agreement while publicly defending his conduct with bare-faced lies and obviously implausible denials. Why bother to conclude another worthless agreement with this lawless character?

Western calls for Ukrainian neutrality are similarly futile. Ukraine has been neutral throughout its thirty years of independence and has never had any serious prospects of joining NATO. Far from fearing Ukraine’s NATO integration, Putin invaded the country precisely because it was not a NATO member and had not received sufficient military support from the alliance.

NATO membership remains the only credible security guarantee for Ukraine. Finland and Sweden have drawn the obvious conclusion from Russia’s invasion and have now abandoned decades of neutrality. Ruling out closer ties between NATO and Ukraine will only encourage further Russian aggression in Ukraine and elsewhere.

When advocates of appeasement run out of other arguments, they tend to call for an immediate ceasefire. While seemingly sensible, these appeals ignore Russia’s long record of treating ceasefire agreements as opportunities to regroup and prepare for new attacks.

This trend was particularly prominent during the seven years of simmering conflict in eastern Ukraine following the signing of the second Minsk Accords in February 2015. Russia refused to adhere to the ceasefire terms agreed in Minsk and regularly launched localized escalations to suit Moscow’s interests. 

Peaceniks often declare that the West must avoid painting Putin into a corner. Similarly, they warn against destabilizing Russia, but it is entirely irrational to position Putin as a source of stability when he is clearly the main destabilizing factor in both Europe and Russia itself. Where would Europe be today if this twisted logic had been applied to Adolf Hitler?

Russia’s war against Ukraine is the biggest geopolitical crisis for a generation. It is entirely understandable that many international observers are desperate to end the slaughter and believe a negotiated peace is the best way to secure peace. However, such hopes are shortsighted and fail to appreciate the character of the Putin regime.  

The only way to end the war conclusively is via a decisive Ukrainian victory that forces Russia to acknowledge its defeat and sees Ukraine regain all the land it has lost since 2014. If a compromise peace allows Putin to hold on to his latest territorial gains in Ukraine, he will use any pause in hostilities to prepare for the next stage in his campaign to subjugate the rest of the country. If he wins the war, Russian aggression will inevitably expand beyond the borders of Ukraine.

Years of Western wishful thinking and concessions to the Kremlin have failed to prevent Putin’s emergence as the greatest threat to world peace. It is now time to recognize the reality of modern Russia and belatedly abandon the path of appeasement.  

Anders Åslund is the author of “Russia’s Crony Capitalism: The Path from Market Economy to Kleptocracy.”

Further reading

The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.

The Eurasia Center’s mission is to enhance transatlantic cooperation in promoting stability, democratic values and prosperity in Eurasia, from Eastern Europe and Turkey in the West to the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia in the East.

Follow us on social media
and support our work

The post Western advocates of appeasement need a crash course in Putinology appeared first on Atlantic Council.

]]>