Kremlin's Narrative Faces Scrutiny Amid Ukrainian Advances in Kursk Region
As Ukraine's bold offensive in Russia's Kursk region intensifies, Moscow's repeated assertions that the situation is under control are increasingly being challenged. A recent broadcast on Ukrainian television showcased a reporter from the town of Sudzha, with no evident signs of conflict in the backdrop, seemingly undermining Russian claims made earlier that Ukrainian forces had lost momentum and that the Russian army had regained the upper hand.
Ukraine is increasingly asserting its dominance, claiming control over 74 settlements in the Kursk region, including Sudzha, where humanitarian aid is being distributed and Russian flags are being dismantled, according to local reports. The long-term strategic objectives of Kyiv remain ambiguous, but the protraction of hostilities is increasingly complicating President Vladimir Putin's efforts to dismiss the developments as mere blips in an otherwise successful military campaign.
Evolving language from Russian elites is often a telltale sign of anxiety within the Kremlin. Initially, Russia's large-scale military operation in Ukraine was euphemistically referred to as a 'special military operation.' Putin notably avoided naming opposition leader Alexei Navalny directly during his life, opting instead for phrases like 'a certain personage.' Now that Ukrainian forces have made significant inroads into Russian territory, a similar trend in linguistic evasiveness is apparent. The FSB, Russia's primary security agency, has framed their responses as measures against an 'armed provocation,' while Putin and other officials have used terms like 'situation,' 'terrorist attack,' and 'events in the Kursk region' without acknowledging Ukrainian control or referring to it as an invasion.
This subtle linguistic pivot was further evidenced on a recent video link where the acting regional governor began to list the settlements reportedly overtaken by Ukrainian forces. An exasperated Putin abruptly cut him off, urging that such discussions be left to military officials and instead focusing on the needed humanitarian response. This exchange exposed an underlying tension, as the governor seemed unprepared for a war being fought on his own soil.
Olga Vlasova, a visiting scholar at the Russia Institute at King’s College London, articulated that the governor’s anxiety was palpable, suggesting a deeper concern about the war's impact at home. Putin's apparent need to curtail communication that might escalate public anxiety signals the Kremlin's precarious balancing act.
The Kremlin is caught in a dilemma regarding its messaging about the war on Ukraine: it must decide whether to portray it as an existential struggle against the West — potentially leading to World War III — or to diminish it to a regional conflict under control. State-controlled media has oscillated between these conflicting narratives, favoring the latter in recent days. Coverage has primarily highlighted Russian forces repelling incursions and emphasized humanitarian efforts rather than detailing the unprecedented sight of foreign troops occupying parts of Russia for the first time since World War II.
So far, this strategy appears to be effective, with no observable spike in public interest on the issue of the Kursk incursion, as noted by Ekaterina Schulmann, a nonresident scholar at the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center in Berlin. Analysis reveals that key moments of interest among the Russian populace — such as the initial invasion of Ukraine or the ensuing mobilization — have not coincided with the recent events in Kursk. This routinization of the situation seems to align with the desires of both the political elite and the general public.
However, Putin’s reaction has been less than convincing, lacking the gravity of a leader responding to a crisis. Notably, he has refrained from visiting the affected locales or delivering impassioned speeches rallying for defense. This behavior bears resemblance to his past responses to crises, exemplified by his slow reaction during the Kursk submarine disaster in 2000 soon after he assumed the presidency.
The elite are now observing whether Putin will once again reestablish control after an initial shaky response to the Kursk situation. According to Schulmann, the question lingering in the minds of Moscow’s elite is whether 'the power is still strong,' and if the aging leader still possesses the capability to regain his authority in turbulent times.
The unfolding events in Kursk pose a distinct challenge to the Kremlin's messaging and could shape the political landscape in Russia as the ongoing war continues to evolve, with implications that reach far beyond the immediate battlefield.
Related Sources: