Written by Anton Khimiak, UCMC/HWAG analyst
The unexpected offensive by the Ukrainian Armed Forces has once again shattered the myth of Moscow’s military might. The Ukrainian advance exposed the Kremlin’s inability to defend its internationally recognized borders. The sudden attack from Ukrainian troops in Russia’s Kursk region caught the Russian propaganda machine off guard, struggling to maintain its narrative.
However, the Kremlin’s propaganda is slowly regaining its footing. The primary objective now is to downplay the magnitude of the military defeat and reassure the Russian public that the enemy has been contained. This article delves into the contrasting narratives spread by Russian propagandists and examines the conclusions that can be drawn from their statements.
A Successful Offensive
As of August 21, Ukrainian forces had gained control of the district center of Sudzha and dozens of villages in the Kursk region, securing over 1,200 square kilometers. In just a week, the Ukrainian Armed Forces seized nearly as much Russian territory as Moscow had captured in Ukraine over the past seven months.
“Ukrainian soldier and local resident. Sudzha, Russia. August 2024”
Despite limited official information, it can be inferred that the extension of hostilities into enemy territory is intended to divert Russian reserves from the most threatened areas of the frontline. This operation also seeks to strengthen Ukraine’s negotiating position, particularly regarding prisoners-of-war exchanges.
Military analysts suggest that the Russian command has already begun relocating troops to Kursk from areas where Moscow’s offensives have stalled. By holding even a small portion of Russian territory, Ukraine is forcing Moscow to respond, highlighting vulnerabilities and the potential for further breakthroughs.
Simultaneously, the Ukrainian operation in Kursk aims to disrupt the logistics of Russian forces operating in Kharkiv Oblast. However, Russian troops continue their slow and costly advance in Donbas, particularly towards Pokrovsk.
An important outcome of Ukraine’s successful incursion was the capture (more specifically the surrender) of hundreds of Russian prisoners of war, mostly conscripts. This development is particularly troubling for the Russian authorities, as it evokes memories of the First Chechen War when reports of casualties among 18-year-old conscripts fueled public unrest and led to the formation of the Soldiers’ Mothers’ Movement. Despite the Kremlin’s tightening grip, there is a fear of renewed discontent among the Russian populace, potentially sparking an anti-war movement. Consequently, Russian officials are reluctant to acknowledge the capture of conscripts, and the topic is largely suppressed in state-controlled media.
Russia’s Systemic Failures
The initial confusion within Russian media and its response led to chaos in how information was interpreted and presented to the domestic audience, evident in the constant contradictions of events.
A notable example is the issue of control over the city of Sudzha. Telegram channels aligned with prominent propagandist Vladimir Solovyov echoed Akhmat unit commander Apti Alaudinov’s claim that “the Ukrainian Armed Forces do not control Sudzha.” However, Z-bloggers, who, despite supporting the war, occasionally criticize the Russian Ministry of Defence, accused Alaudinov of lying.
“The occupation of a district center by Ukrainian forces is indeed offensive, painful, and sad. But lying about it is even more clownish,” remarked the Zergulio Telegram channel.
It was these “independent” Z-bloggers and military commentators, unaffiliated with the Russian Ministry of Defence’s PR network, who spearheaded criticism of the Russian military command. Yuriy Podolyaka wrote, “The situation is worsening… we’re dealing with a diversionary operation, which is already starting to concern me.” Another anonymous Telegram channel, Two Majors, emphasized the need for an honest assessment of the situation: “The invasion of the Kursk region by Ukrainian forces has been a shocking wake-up call for many. We must objectively assess the situation, avoid deceiving the authorities, and not mislead the public.” These statements appear to be aimed at specific figures within the Russian Ministry of Defence and General Staff, reflecting attempts to shift responsibility within the Kremlin.
Despite measured criticism on Telegram, Russian propaganda remains unified in its call to mobilize the population to continue the war “until victory.”
The Information War in the Kursk Region
The breach of Russia’s border shattered the Kremlin’s assurance to its people that the fighting would never reach “old” Russian territory. The evacuation of over 132,000 people from the Kursk and Belgorod regions underscores the gravity of the situation.
“The head of state noted that Ukraine will receive a ‘worthy response’ to its provocation,” reported Gazeta RU.
Putin dismissed Ukraine’s incursion as a “provocation” and an “attempt to destabilize” the border regions. State-controlled media followed suit, downplaying Ukraine’s significant advances in Kursk and asserting that Ukraine would “pay dearly for the treacherous attack.”
To maintain public support, Russian media were instructed to avoid framing the invasion as a “new front” in the war or mentioning its proximity to the Kursk nuclear power plant. Instead, they focused on humanitarian aspects, such as payments to affected civilians, stories of displaced persons, and blood donation campaigns.
As the initial crisis subsided, Russian propagandists returned to their usual narratives. For example, the Russian Telegram channel Digital Army of Russia, which coordinates bot farm activities, urged its members to spread the message that Ukraine’s operation in Kursk had failed. This narrative was to be paired with images depicting Russian advances in the Pokrovsk sector. Similar demoralizing messages were prevalent across Russian platforms targeting Ukrainian audiences. “Our source informs us that relatives of Ukrainian soldiers sent to the Kursk region are dissatisfied with the fact that their husbands and sons were left to die without any chance of survival,” claimed the anonymous Telegram channel “Legitimate.”
To disseminate such narratives, Russia often manipulates statements by Western experts to undermine international support for Ukraine. For instance, Russian propagandist Yulia Vityazeva and other pro-Russian outlets shared an excerpt from an interview with German analyst Karl Masala, emphasizing the scenario where Ukraine might surrender, while conveniently omitting that the expert considers the fall of the Putin regime a “positive scenario.”
Russian narratives also included familiar claims of attacks on civilians and religious sites. “The attack by Ukrainian forces on the Kursk region has once again shown that the Kyiv regime has no regard for anything sacred. And I’m not just talking about shooting at civilians, but even at ambulances,” said Tina Kandelaki, a senior Gazprom Media official. Deputy Foreign Minister Grigory Karasin added, “The audacious invasion of the Kursk region by Ukrainian forces has exposed the bloodthirsty nature of the Kyiv regime. It’s clear what Zelenskyy is trying to achieve with this provocation. Now, it’s extremely important for him to demonstrate his capability to his Western masters.” The notion of Ukraine’s lack of autonomy on the international stage is a recurring theme in Russian propaganda.
Pro-Kremlin journalists, such as Armen Gasparyan, have also actively spread the falsehood that Suzhansky district was annexed to Sumy region. Ukrainian media monitoring organizations quickly exposed this document as fake. It seems the Russian media aimed to mirror their own crimes against Ukraine, such as incorporating temporarily occupied territories into the Russian Federation after rigged referendums.
Ukraine’s operation in the Kursk region has undermined the Kremlin’s narrative that everything is proceeding according to plan and that Putin can protect Russian citizens from external threats. This shift in public perception has led to a change in sentiment. Although Putin’s approval rating initially surged after the invasion of Ukraine, recent polls indicate a growing desire for negotiations among ordinary Russians. A July poll revealed that 58% of Russians now favor negotiations with Ukraine, compared to 34% who support continuing the war. This shift reflects the increasing war fatigue among the Russian population.
Russian propaganda continues to downplay the significance of Ukraine’s Kursk offensive, framing it as a minor provocation and emphasizing the resilience of Russian defense forces. This narrative aims to maintain public support while concealing the vulnerabilities exposed by intelligence.
