Russian state television pundits and officials have for months portrayed Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine as a well-oiled “military special operation” methodically achieving its goals of “demilitarizing” and “denazifying” the Kiev “regime.”
But the awkward flight of Russian forces from north-eastern Ukraine in recent days stirred up a normally harmonious chorus of pro-Kremlin TV shows and newspapers struggling to explain to audiences that they had assured victory, which is why Ukraine had retaken more land than Russia took since April.
The result was the broadcast of unusually tense scenes to millions of Russian homes, with some uncharacteristically blunt concessions.
“We have come to a point where we need to understand one simple thing: it is impossible to defeat Ukraine with the means that Russia is now trying to fight with, with this method of ‘colonial war’, with contract soldiers, mercenaries and without general mobilization,” lamented Boris Nadezhdin, a former Russian lawmaker, in a powerful public critique of the Kremlin strategy on a weekend show on NTV.
“Either we call for mobilization and all-out war, or we pull out,” he added, saying the only other option for Moscow, and the one he favors, is to try to negotiate a peace deal.
“Not comrade Nadezhdin, I urge you to watch your language,” warned another guest, Alexander Kazakov, co-chair of the Just Russia party, which is led by ardent pro-war supporters.
Russian President Vladimir Putin has resisted declaring a general mobilization and putting the whole country on a war drive because forced conscription would be widely unpopular, particularly in Moscow and St. Petersburg. Instead, Putin opted for a massive recruitment campaign, recruiting contract soldiers and mercenaries who were promised salaries that dwarfed the national average.
Amid Ukraine’s amazing achievements, liberated villages describe Russian troops dropping guns and fleeing
The heated exchanges between the two political commentators on NTV and other emotional debates that unfolded during the weekend broadcasts were a departure from the typically staged theatricality of Russian television.
One of Russia’s top propagandists, Dmitry Kiselev, struck a rarely seen note of pessimism, opening his flagship Sunday show by saying it was “the toughest week on the special operations frontline,” but also describing the escape as a “regrouping.” consistent with the language recognized by the military.
Others saw the setback as an opportunity to bolster calls for an even more aggressive Kremlin attack and called for unity in their ardent pro-war patriotism.
“I hate tantrums,” Margarita Simonyan, the head of the pro-Kremlin RT network, wrote on Telegram on Saturday, trying to calm the outrage of popular pro-Russian military bloggers and correspondents calling for the withdrawal. a catastrophe,” and called for the officials responsible for the Kharkiv collapse to be punished.
“Calm, calm, help where you can, pray, quench your indignation… do all you can for our inevitable, by God’s grace, victory,” she wrote.
However, many media chose to simply ignore the withdrawal from the occupied territories.
Russia’s official acknowledgment of the backlash did not go beyond a Saturday announcement by Russia’s defense ministry that the armed forces had “regrouped” and abandoned Izyum and Balakliya.
Rossiyskaya Gazeta, Russia’s official government newspaper, duly reported on the Defense Ministry’s recent claims – which are unsupported – that the Ukrainian army suffered 4,000 casualties during last week’s counter-offensive.
Another report on the newspaper’s website praised the crew of a Russian Mi-35 attack helicopter for preventing Ukrainians from crossing the Oskil River just off the eastern edge of the Kharkiv region, but made no mention of Ukraine’s progress – although the Location of troops admitted that the Russians were in retreat.
“By placing the action in Senkove on the Oskil River…it admits how deep the Ukrainians have already penetrated,” tweeted Mark Galeotti, head of the Mayak intelligence group.
Galeotti added that the Defense Ministry and Rossiyskaya Gazeta rely on audiences to “take the triumphant tone and not go into detail.”
“The Kremlin seems stunned and hasn’t come up with a plan yet on how to try to turn this around, so the media largely ignores the bad news until they get a directive,” Galeotti said, adding “is more of a sign.” for the state to lose control of the narrative.”
Car bomb killings unnerve the cheerleaders of Putin’s war
Ahead of Ukraine’s breakthrough, state media anchors and reporters downplayed the threat, suggesting that Ukraine’s counteroffensive was just a “facade” to launder “billions of dollars” in aid to Kyiv. or a cunning Russian plan to uncover enemy positions to the east.
Last Wednesday, Rossiya 1 host Vladimir Solovyov, known for his anti-Western war rants, rejoiced, saying the counteroffensive “is not going as airily as Ukrainians had hoped.”
“If you remove the hysteria, there are no results,” he said. “Ukraine has not been able to return a single significant settlement by military means.”
However, that narrative changed dramatically on his flagship Sunday show, in which he explained Russia’s strategic losses by claiming that the country was fighting not just Ukraine, but the overwhelming might of the entire NATO alliance.
“Is there no more civilian infrastructure in the rest of Ukraine, in the non-liberated parts? Are there no power lines, nuclear power plants, turnstiles, etc.? [if destroyed] could easily incapacitate the enemy state,” Simonyan said on the show.
“I have called [infrastructure strikes] For a long time; This is part of the NATO strategy, which includes destroying infrastructure, including civilian ones,” Solovyov agreed.
While the show was airing, Russian forces attacked Ukraine’s power grid, causing power outages in more than 30 settlements in north-eastern Ukraine.
The strikes sparked a fire at a train station near Kharkiv, killing at least one person. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy condemned the “deliberate and cynical rocket attacks” on civilian targets as an act of terrorism.
Scenes of flames engulfing the Kharkiv power plant and reports of thousands of Ukrainians being left without electricity or water were hailed in Russia by pro-war advocates, who saw the attack as the aggressive retaliation they demanded amid this attack from the Kremlin had long hoped for.
“It’s a pleasure to hear all those screams from the other side,” Solovyev said.
“I’m happy [there were] Strikes against the energy infrastructure of the Kiev regime because they are important for victory,” pro-Kremlin war correspondent Evgeny Poddubny wrote on his Telegram blog.
Simonyan echoed the mood by publishing a short Russian poem that ended with a line: “What happened to your electricity, neighbors?”
Russian troops in major retreat as Ukraine’s Kharkiv offensive advances
By Monday, Russian state television’s narrative had mostly reverted to the usual triumphant proclamations as the Defense Ministry insisted on conducting heavy airstrikes.
“We strike the enemy not only from the ground, but also from the air; You can even see the missiles from the Caspian Sea,” said Olga Skabeeva, the host of the 60 Minutes show, adding that Russia’s destruction of critical Ukrainian infrastructure signaled a turning point in Russia’s strategy and the entire operation.
“Two months ago, Putin said Russia hadn’t even started anything serious,” she said. “Now it seems so.”
Skabeeva added: “Despite the limited successes of the Ukrainian armed forces, the West still gives Russia dominance in this war. And the most important ally – time – is playing in our favour.”
War in Ukraine: What you need to know
The newest: Grain shipments from Ukraine are picking up speed under the deal negotiated by Ukraine, Russia, Turkey and the United Nations in July. Russia’s blockade of Ukraine’s Black Sea ports had skyrocketed food prices and raised fears of more hunger in the Middle East and Africa. At least 18 ships, including cargoes of wheat, corn and sunflower oil, have sailed.
The fight: The conflict on the ground continues as Russia uses its advantage with heavy artillery to beat Ukrainian forces that have at times been able to put up stiff resistance. In the south, Ukrainian hopes rest on the liberation of the Russian-held Kherson region and eventually Crimea, which Russia captured in 2014. Fears of a disaster at the Zaporizhia nuclear power plant linger as both sides accuse each other of shelling it.
The weapons: Western arms shipments help Ukraine slow Russian advance. US-supplied High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS) allow Ukrainian forces to engage further behind Russian lines against Russian artillery. Russia has used a variety of weapons against Ukraine, some of which have drawn the attention and concern of analysts.
Photos: Washington Post photographers have been on the ground since the war began – here is some of their most impressive work.
How can you help: Here are ways people in the US can help support the people of Ukraine, as well as what people around the world have donated.
Read our full coverage of the Russia-Ukraine crisis. Are you on Telegram? Subscribe to our channel for updates and exclusive videos.