The Russian Art of Manipulation

How Russians craftily manipulate the minds of the Western public and abuse their victims psychologically.

Much has been discussed about Russia's geostrategic and military threat, particularly the notion that failing to support Ukraine could embolden Russia to target a NATO member next. The idea that Russia poses a constant threat to its neighbors and the broader Western world, as long as it maintains its current form, is widely accepted.

For instance, a recent report by the German Council of Foreign Relations outlines recommendations for the German government's strategy towards Russia. The report predicts that Russia will revamp its military capabilities within the next 6-10 years and possibly attempt another invasion of Europe. It suggests that Germany, and by extension NATO, should pursue a substantial re-armament program to build sufficient military strength within this period, aiming to deter any potential Russian aggression against Europe. Soon after, statements by the Swedish Defence Minister and Commander-in-Chief of the Dutch army echoed the same sentiment.

Such a realization is of course heartening and an indication that the West is finally waking up after a long period of slumber and missed opportunities. However, this awakening does not go far enough. In general, it’s assumed that as long as we can deter Russia, or otherwise dissuade it from attacking us, then everything will be fine. Such an attitude basically consigns the West to a purely defensive posture, waiting for a Russian attack. It further assumes that the only threat to the West emanating from Russia is that of a direct physical invasion.

But there's also another more covert dimension to Russia's threat to our way of life. Another way in which Russia will continue to disturb and threaten us as long as it exists and remains unitary, even if it never attacks anyone anymore. It's the psychological threat, which is not being emphasized enough. It’s the way Russian narratives sow confusion into our minds and undermine our societies from within. And it would be an understatement to call it “Russian propaganda”. It’s much more sinister and abusive. The proper word for it is “psychological manipulation”. Russians manipulate Western societies. And they are indeed very crafty manipulators, having perfected the art of manipulation over decades.

Over the long haul, this threat is far greater and damaging than direct Russian aggression. Falling victim to Russian manipulation and being undermined from within is in fact a greater threat to Western societies than outright Russian invasion. When one is attacked directly, this prompts them to consolidate around the danger, much like it happened with Ukrainians in February-March of 2022. It is in fact far easier in such a case to unequivocally recognize the enemy for what it is, which in turn increases the chances of the attacked party to prevail in the end. But when one is being gradually demoralized, confused and disoriented, they become more vulnerable. And under such circumstances, the aggressor, in the end, may not even need to attack directly to destroy its victim.

In fact, initially and for a long time, Russia had adhered to this latter approach with regards to Ukraine since the Orange Revolution in 2004. By infiltrating the secret service, government, and media, Russia has sought to demoralize, sow confusion & discontent, and manipulate the public opinion. Then starting from 2014, Russia was obfuscating its direct physical invasion of Ukrainian soil by fake narratives about a contrived “Russian minority” that’s being oppressed, some imaginary “Ukrainian Nazis” that allegedly threaten the Russian speakers and so on, thereby shifting the blame on the victim of its aggression, namely on Ukraine.

And such manipulative tactics were indeed partly successful. In the years from 2014 leading up to the full-scale invasion Ukrainian public was confused, disoriented, and embroiled in infighting. All of this was in no less part due to covert Russian manipulation of the public opinion. One can argue that this Russian psychological influence during the last decade thwarted Ukrainian attempts to properly prepare for the upcoming invasion. So, Putin and his advisors were not entirely wrong in assuming that the Russian army will march into Kyiv meeting little resistance. Putin's mistake was in launching a premature physical invasion, which had the unintended effect of uniting and strengthening Ukraine. As mentioned earlier, a direct blatant attack unites and mobilizes the nation, paradoxically boosting the morale and inducing its members to set to rest their internal disputes. Had Russians remained faithful to the well-tried methods of demoralization and manipulation, they could have achieved a more substantial control of Ukraine, like they currently control Belarus. One needs to be reminded that Russia hasn’t fired a single shot to occupy Belarus. But Belarus is effectively a Russian-controlled territory.

This is how the Soviet Union has been primarily waging war against the West since decades. But its methods have been perfected by the present-day Russia. One could reliably argue that Russian influence & manipulation of the Western public has been far more insidious and more destructive than anything the Soviet Union could achieve. Most obviously, the Soviet Union was unequivocally regarded as the enemy and as a threat. But regarding Russia there has never been such a clear stance in the West. Even after its blatant aggression against Ukraine in 2014, and still even after its full-scale invasion of the country and the ongoing war, it still somehow feels kind of controversial and even “politically incorrect” in certain parts of western society to unequivocally call Russia as our enemy. Over the last two years, even in the face of the ongoing war and blatant atrocities committed by Russians, the West only grudgingly and with a certain level or discomfort, came to the conclusion that Russians are indeed bad, and Russia truly is our enemy. This was especially acutely felt in the German society over this time period.

Over the last several decades, with a notable intensification in the past 10-15 years, Russia has already been poisoning the minds of the Western public by its subtle, crafty, and sophisticated manipulation tactics, thereby sowing confusion and instilling distrust in our institutions and values.

At the heart of this manipulation is the deliberate blurring of the line between truth and falsehood. The Russian approach has been insidious, aiming to embed seeds of doubt in the Western consciousness, even at the level of subconsciousness, challenging the very notions of good and evil, and reversing the perceptions of truth and falsehood. In fact, even denying the very existence of such concepts. This strategy has led to an alarming rise in nihilistic attitudes in Western societies, where the belief in absolute good and evil in conflicts has been eroded. The question arises: is this shift in perception a result of Russian manipulation seeping into our collective consciousness? I believe the answer is a definite yes!

An example of such manipulation is the claim particularly peddled in contrarian populist circles in the West of the allegedly equal malevolence of Soviet/Russian hegemony and EU/NATO membership for countries of Eastern Europe. What makes this framing all the more insidious and craftier is that it doesn’t explicitly claim that Russia is good. Therefore, it actually appeals to neutral, well-meaning people. But it neuters and eliminates the distinction between the good and evil, essentially equalizing them. True, Eastern Europeans were once subjugated by the Soviet Union, and it was bad, so the reasoning goes, but now they’re “subjugated” by the EU & NATO and therefore are still not independent, just like during Soviet times. Such an insidious line of reasoning leads to the inevitable conclusion that it would make no difference if they were occupied by Russia again.

Moreover, Russians don’t shy away from contriving the most asinine lies and narratives. Examples of this are numerous and often shockingly blatant. Claims such as Ukrainian "Nazis" being responsible for the massacres in Bucha, or the bombing of the Drama Theatre in Mariupol are stark illustrations. Yet, what is more concerning is the impact of these narratives on Western public. Even well-meaning individuals, not necessarily pro-Russian, have initially expressed doubts about the veracity of reports on Russian atrocities, suggesting a deep-seated suspicion of Western mainstream media. This skepticism, while normally healthy in a free society, can also be indicative of the effectiveness of Russian manipulative tactics in swaying public opinion.

Russian tactics in propaganda and manipulating public opinion are indeed unique and differ markedly from those of other state or non-state actors. As a matter of fact, one can reliably claim that Russians have perfected the art of manipulation and are the craftiest manipulators that have ever existed.  Unlike groups that openly boast of their crimes and literally telegraph them for the whole world to see, like ISIS or HAMAS, Russians aim to obfuscate and confuse, creating alternate narratives that shift blame and responsibility. For example, in a hypothetical scenario where Russians, instead of HAMAS, were to commit a terror act, their approach would likely involve denial and the construction of a counter-narrative, possibly accusing Israeli forces of the act. One can reliably assume that Russians would even frame the alleged perpetrators as “Israeli Nazis”. Logical or semantic consistency never bothered Russians.

In the current war, and even going back to Russian annexation of Crimea and invasion of Donbas in 2014, Ukraine has emerged as a particularly poignant example of a vilified victim. The country, suffering from aggressive military actions, has been subjected to a dual assault of physical violence and narrative manipulation. Despite Russia clearly breaking the international law by annexing Ukrainian territories, its manifold missile attacks on Ukrainian cities, and clear evidence of atrocities including torture, rape, and killing of civilians and POWs, international calls egregiously urge Ukraine to show restraint and not to “escalate” the situation, thereby subtly shifting the burden of responsibility from the aggressor to the victim. Moreover, in their campaign to vilify Ukraine and demonize Ukrainian national identity, Russians sensed very well which buttons to push to enter the minds, and even the subconsciousness, of the Western public. By slandering Ukrainians as “Nazis”, they were making use of the scare word that triggers people in the West and is being used quite indiscriminately in western society to silence political opponents or people one happens to disagree with on various issues.

A similar pattern was observed in the Chechen wars in the 1990s and early 2000s. This time Russian propaganda adeptly tapped into another Western fear, namely of radical Islam, and made use of another hackneyed scare word by portraying Chechen independence fighters as "Islamic terrorists." This narrative gained traction, to the extent that the extradition of the Chechen leader in exile Akhmed Zakayev, who sought refuge in the West, was seriously considered. Thankfully, in the end, it didn’t come to pass, but the very fact that such extradition was even on the table demonstrates the effectiveness of Russian propaganda & manipulation in shaping Western perceptions.

Currently we observe an analogous framing playing out in the context of the struggle of various Russian regions and national republics for independence. Freedom fighters and advocates for independence in these regions, and more broadly proponents of Russian disintegration often find themselves in a paradoxical position. For some reason, it’s always they who have to justify themselves. It’s the intra-Russian freedom fighters who are expected to make a lot of disclaimers about denuclearization, about peaceful partition and so on to qualify their desire for independence and self-determination. In a fair and just world, one would expect the onus to fall on proponents of Russian unity to justify their stance, regardless of whether they’re imperial nationalist or liberal, anti-western or pro-western. Normally they should owe everyone a lot of explanations as to why Russia should remain as it is and not be dismantled & destroyed. Proponents of Russian unity should feel the shame and moral burden in every step they take and in every word they utter in defense of their worldview. However, as we can see, here also the burden of proof is placed on the victim, rather than on the abuser.

These examples, and many others, highlight a consistent pattern in Russian manipulation tactics. By skillfully crafting narratives and exploiting existing fears and biases in the Western consciousness, Russia has managed to obscure its involvement in various crimes, shift blame, and even vilify victims of aggression.

This manipulation seems to find fertile ground particularly in the Franco-German sphere of the West, where there appears to be a persistent desire to see Russia in a positive light, despite evidence to the contrary. This tendency can be likened to an abusive relationship, where the abused party seeks to rationalize and forgive the abuser's actions, clinging to any sign of change or remorse. A case in point is the Berlin State Opera's decision to reinstate its collaboration with Russian opera singer Anna Netrebko, a known supporter of Putin's regime, following her superficial denunciation of the war in Ukraine. This incident symbolizes the willingness of some in the West to embrace even the most insincere gestures from Russian figures as evidence of change.

The challenge facing the West in confronting Russian propaganda & manipulation is immense. In fact, it’s as critical as prevailing over Russia militarily. And here is where the activists of intra-Russian national & regional liberation movements can make a significant contribution. Since the onset of Russian full-scale invasion of Ukraine, Ukrainian bloggers, influencers and activists have flooded the internet and substantially increased their presence in the social media. Their immense role in enlightening the Western public about the true nature of Russia, in dispelling common myths and misconceptions, and awakening the West from its slumber cannot be overstated. Activists from the future independent states of post-Russia can play a similar role. Like their Ukrainian and other Eastern European counterparts, they must expand their presence online. Of course, they currently have the task of reaching out to their compatriots inside of Russia and convince them of the need for independence, but reaching out to the Western public, convincing it of the need of Russia’s disintegration and dispelling the myths about the unitary nature of Russia is of no less importance.

It’s true that those freedom fighters are yearning for Western help, but in fact the West needs them at least as much! They can help cure the western societies of the unhealthy attachment to Russia, as Ukrainians have been doing already. They should tell their stories – i.e., the unique stories of their regions and their own personal stories. Western societies are morally upright and very empathetic. Their stories will therefore resonate deeply with the western public.

Moreover, it is imperative for Western governments and policymakers to adopt a more proactive stance in supporting intra-Russian liberation movements or establishing direct connections with current regional governments within Russia, strategically bypassing the central government in Moscow. Such a strategy would not only aid these regions & national republics in obtaining independence, but also would foster confusion and dissent within the Russian Federation. Historically, Russia has adeptly manipulated and sown seeds of discord within Western societies. Now, the tables must turn. By engaging directly with these regional entities, the West can effectively mirror Russia’s own tactics, leveraging the underlying currents of dissent and disenchantment that are, in fact, more pronounced within Russia than in the West. It's not just about countering propaganda; it's about strategically undermining the unitary perception of Russia by amplifying the diverse voices yearning for independence within its borders. This approach would not only weaken the influence of Russian propaganda in the West by diverting its energy to internal problems, but also gradually erode the fabric of its perceived unity, sowing the seeds for its disintegration and eventual collapse.

The West has been desperately looking for some “good” Russians, even searching for them with a magnifying glass. But up until now the search was being done in the wrong place. The only real good Russians (without the usual quotation marks) are the ones who aim for the disintegration of Russia, the ones who are involved in the struggle for the independence of their regions and national republics. Those are the ones, and the only ones, who should be the reference point for the West and with whom it should work when dealing with Russia. The Western public can maintain its admiration and empathy for the people of Russia, but this should be reframed to recognize the distinct national & regional identities within that large Eurasian space. Instead of a unitary “Russian” identity, there should be the recognition of distinct identities of Uralians, Siberians, Ingrians, and others. This shift in perspective wouldn’t just avoid the psychological toll that has historically accompanied the West's relationship with Russia; it would actively foster the growth of regional identities within the Russian Federation. By communicating a clear message that the inhabitants of the Russian Federation would be welcomed and respected as part of the global community, not as “Russians” but only with their regional/national identities, Western nations can play a pivotal role in nurturing these emerging identities. This approach not only disentangles the West from its problematic attachment to a unitary Russian identity but also lays the groundwork for the emergence of independent states on the post-Russian territory that are likely to be friendly to the West.