Civil Network OPORA developed an online tool "War Speeches" to track the official position and public discourse of the occupying state about the war against Ukraine and forecasts for the future aggressive plans. The monitoring focused on statements and speeches delivered by officials from the occupying state, as well as on official documents of government institutions. In addition to a detailed timeline of public positions presented on the website, we offer weekly analytical summaries on the key changes in the public rhetoric of the parties to the military confrontation.
Last week, the russian leadership renewed the vigour to portray the war against Ukraine as a confrontation with the West, thus diminishing Ukraine's role and role in the current situation. Leaders of russia, as evidenced by their statements, had to somehow explain to their citizens the absence of significant military and political achievements in Ukraine. They did so by reinforcing the propaganda concept of russia's “historical struggle” against the West's “attempts” to thwart its development. Strengthening rhetoric about a global conspiracy against russia most likely means preparing internal public opinion for a long war and prospects for general mobilization. Politicians and diplomats from russia have systematically shared messages about the threat of "shadow" proliferation of weapons transferred to Ukraine, and also added bogus stories and provocative statements about the course of negotiations with Ukraine. The russian authorities also openly supported repression of local OSCE SMM officers by L/DPR terrorist groups, accusing observers of espionage and other “illegal” actions.
Instead, the Ukrainian authorities paid much attention to the safety of nuclear facilities on the territory of the country, the food crisis in the world, humanitarian issues, the restoration of housing and infrastructure and, as usual, the sanctions policy. During the past week, representatives of Ukraine responded to provocative statements by russian officials regarding negotiations between the delegations. In particular, they replied to lavrov's allegations about discussions with Ukraine on the possibility of "lifting" the sanctions.
The “enemy on the doorstep”: the kremlin intimidates its citizens and political elite
The headliner of another wave of russian propaganda was vladimir putin. Although uncommon for him since the beginning of the war, he made "policy statements" several times a week.
On April 27, at the council of lawmakers at the federal assembly of the rf, the kremlin's head informed about the "preparation of an attempted assassination" on the well-known propagandist, vladimir solovyov, and accused the Ukrainian authorities of organizing "terror" against russian journalists. According to the dictator, he knows the curators of the Ukrainian authorities from Western intelligence, who, "probably", give advice on the assassination of russian journalists.
Putin's message was that "they are trying to use the methods of killing journalists and political figures in the streets, and shift them from Ukraine to russia." The position gained sarcastic publicity among russian opposition circles, given the impunity of demonstrative killings of opposition activists and journalists in the aggressor state.
Summing up his claims about the "attempted assassination" on vladimir solovyov, putin said that the Western countries did not achieve their goal within the russian information space, and now resorted to terror on russian territory. The purpose of “terror”, according to putin, is to divide society in rf. Despite the farcical "evidence" of the attempted assassination of solovyov and direct references to Lukashenko's post-election hysterical statements about "Western plans" to kill his own propagandists, the fact that putin voiced this information himself indicates a transition to intimidation of the internal russian audiences. The image of the enemy, which has already penetrated into Russia, is also a signal to political elites about the need to consolidate. At the same time, none of them can surely know when real threats may arise, and when they will be punished for lack of loyalty to the kremlin.
In the context of the war against Ukraine, putin has repeatedly presented relations with the "collective West" as their consistent policy to contain and weaken russia. In his understanding, the Russia weakening course includes the intentions of the Nazis to "drive" the Soviet people into slavery, to support separatists in the North Caucasus, the economic war against the rf, and the creation of "anti-russia" on the territory of Ukraine. He labelled the latter “method” as the “geopolitical weapons”. Although this rhetoric is traditional for putin, its concentrated replication during the war testifies to the readiness of the russian leaders to shift into a mode of increasing self-isolation and explain to citizens the long war through the prism of fighting Western societies.
A condensed summary of putin's statements about confrontation with the West can be seen in his repeating the threats to respond decisively to "external" intervention in the war. “If anyone is to pose strategic threats to russia, they need to know that our strikes will be instantaneous and swift,” said putin. In addition, the dictator said that for such a response, he had tools unachievable for other countries. What catches attention is that putin himself recalled his similar statements at the beginning of the war. This may indicate that he retains the hope of restraining the civilized world from supporting Ukraine through threats. Putin repeated his words after the meeting of defense ministers of 40 countries in Germany, where they opened a new stage in the promotion of Ukraine's defense.
The increasing trend of depicting the war against Ukraine as a conflict with the West was also observed in numerous statements of other russian officials. The speaker of the State Duma of russia, vyacheslav volodin, explicitly stated that Ukraine "lost its sovereignty" and is governed by NATO countries. In his comments, russian Foreign Minister, sergei lavrov, tried to turn the line of discussion about the war with Ukraine into the context of relations between russia and the United States, accusing America of destroying the arms control system and trying to create a unipolar world.
Putin's hope to curb international support for Ukraine is also evidenced by the systematic promotion by the russian Foreign Ministry of allegations about the inability of the United States and other civilized countries to control the use and spread of weapons transferred to Ukraine. In particular, the term “shadow circulation of weapons” is disseminated through the mouths of minister lavrov and spokesperson of the russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, in the context of strengthening the defense capacities of Ukraine. The diplomatic leaders of the aggressor state keep reiterating their threats to launch missile attacks on cargo from Ukraine's partners.
As to the visit of the UN Secretary General, Antonio Guterres, to moscow, kremlin used it as a pretext for internal political publicity — putin again became an "expert" in international law and a "historian". The russian leader tried to lecture the UN representative about the analogies between the Kosovo “precedent” and the situation in Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk. According to him, in exercising its right to self-determination, a certain territory of any state is not obliged to apply to the central authorities for permission to declare its sovereignty. In response, the Secretary-General noted that the UN does not recognize Kosovo as an independent state and considers the war against Ukraine an invasion. The theatrical discussion between the parties ended with a rocket attack on Kyiv during the meetings of Antonio Guterres with the President of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelenskyi, and other officials, which could not have been an accidental coincidence. However, despite the ostentatious and sharp discussion between the russian leader and the UN Secretary General, the parties managed to agree on the start of the evacuation of some civilians from Azovstal in Mariupol.
During the week, the kremlin's head and the head of the russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs made several statements about the course of negotiations with Ukraine. Firstly, vladimir putin expressly rejected the possibility of any agreement with Ukraine, without resolving the “territorial issue of Crimea, Sevastopol and the Donbass Republics” (isolated districts of Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts — OPORA). ” Secondly, sergei lavrov provocatively announced the discussion with Ukraine on the prospects of lifting sanctions from russia. At the same time, the "chief diplomat" of the rf tried to pinpoint the inconsistency in the position of President Volodymyr Zelensky and Ukraine as a whole.
The reaction of the Ukrainian side to the statements of the russians shows that russians are not set on a real dialogue. Member of Ukrainian delegation, Mykhailo Podoliak, said that the issue of sanctions is not considered in the negotiations, and sergei lavrov tends to comment on things where he does not participate personally. Podoliak emphasized that Ukraine could not even theoretically conduct a dialogue on the reduction of international sanctions, since it had not imposed them. However, the Head of the Office of the President of Ukraine, Andrii Yermak, highlighted last week that the security agreement should ensure the status of Ukraine as a democratic, sovereign and integral state, without taking off the table the issues of Donbas and Crimea. As a matter of fact, President of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelenskyi, replied to putin's words about the impossibility of any deal with Ukraine without "resolving the issue" of Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk. In his address, he said that the war began with the occupation of the Crimean peninsula and that it should end with the return of the Ukrainian flag to the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol. Thus, the non-face-to-face dialogue between Ukraine and russia in the public space shows meager prospects for the current online dialogue between the delegations of the two countries.
The tendency to strengthen russia's self-isolation is also noticeable in statements by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, where OSCE SMM staff were accused of “illegal” actions.“These circumstances indicate that the SMM staff their management acted in a politicized and biased manner. They engaged in illegal activities leading to an aggravation of the situation. A number of employees served the interests of Kyiv and its Western curators,”the russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in an official comment. Previously, illegal "L/DPR" formations reported the detention and interrogation of former Mission staff from among local residents.
Food Crisis, Nuclear Security and Sanctions: What Ukraine's Leaders Talked About
Unlike the russian authorities, busy promoting new propaganda concepts, Ukrainian officials paid attention to a wide range of practical problems. One of the top topics was about ensuring nuclear security in Ukraine and Europe which has been significantly challenged by the russian aggression.
President Volodymyr Zelenskyi and other leaders of Ukraine focused on food security.“Rising food prices have already reached critical levels in many countries. Well, the worst is ahead. If russia does not start searching the ways to peace, the issue of food security in many countries will turn into a question of the physical survival for millions of people, and therefore the stability of state systems, ”— said Volodymyr Zelensky on April, 25. Later, the leader of Ukraine stressed that russia used trade as a weapon, the trade in all kinds of products, not just gas alone. According to Zelensky, the aggressor state is buying time to be able to take advantage of a certain trade area and blackmail Europeans in political terms. It should be noted that food challenges could be seen not only at the level of market trends and global supply, but also as a result of russian attacks on Ukrainian grain elevators and the removal of grain from the temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine. As regards this crime, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine made a separate comment. "The criminal export of Ukrainian grain is another evidence of destructive actions of the rf, which, in particular, violate the basic principles of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) — guaranteeing food security and overcoming hunger," stressed the Ukrainian Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
For Ukraine and its officials, it was significant to get an announcement of the European Commission's plans to lift all duties and quotas on Ukrainian exports and suspend anti-dumping tariffs for a period of one year.
Traditionally, the Ukrainian authorities have consistently and systematically promoted the need to strengthen sanctions pressure on russia and impede any evading schemes. In particular, the leaders of Ukraine have repeatedly spoken about the recognition of russia as a sponsor of terrorism, which opens the way to strengthening the scale and effectiveness of sanctions. In addition, the Ukrainian authorities stated the need to impose an embargo on russian oil and gas supplies. “No more excuses and half-measures while Ukrainians are bombed, killed, tortured, and raped. Russian oil is full of Ukrainian blood,” said the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine, Dmytro Kuleba.
In their statements, Ukrainian officials paid much attention to the evacuation of citizens from Mariupol, in particular, from the premises of the Azovstal plant, and to the situation in the destroyed city. “They claimed in Moscow that they had purportedly stopped the fire in Mariupol. Russian strikes on Mariupol did not stop even when Mr. Secretary-General of the United Nations was on the visit in Moscow,” President Zelensky informed.
With the approach of the "sacred" date for the russian elites on May 9, we could predict more intense provocative acts of the aggressor state against Ukraine and its Western partners, the destabilizing acts on their own territory and in other countries (for example, in Moldova). The aggressor state needs it all to preserve the legitimacy of the war in the eyes of its citizens and, accordingly, to retain power.