Over the past several months, a connection has become a frequent target of memes and jokes. Elon Musk, often described as the wealthiest person on the planet and the founder of major ventures like Tesla and SpaceX, is seen by many as a proxy for Vladimir Putin and Russia’s interests. Critics argue that Musk has publicly aligned with perspectives on the Ukraine war that resemble Kremlin positions, even as he remains the owner of X, the social platform formerly known as Twitter. Observers contend that the business and communication choices on X increasingly echo Russian narratives and tend to favor the Kremlin’s view during the intense, ongoing conflict in Ukraine.
One recurring piece of online lore often circulating among Ukrainian users on social media, including on X, depicts Musk and Putin merging into a single portrait. A post circulating in these circles questioned what a defender of Russia and proponent of Musk would tell Ukraine to do in its struggle, quoting a Ukrainian-American economist from Cleveland who criticized the approach on X from the United States.
Experts in Russian affairs, including Fiona Hill, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and former adviser on Russia to Donald Trump, have publicly discussed Musk’s proximity to Russian interests. They note that there are individuals in Musk’s circle who may maintain ties with Russian institutions. Hill has argued that Musk’s messaging about ending the war, including remarks on possible peace terms and provincial status for areas like Zaporizhzhia and Kherson, could reflect Kremlin-style messaging. She emphasized the specificity of the water theory linked to Crimea and suggested it aligns with typical Kremlin strategies of using business figures as intermediaries, particularly given Musk’s vast follower base.
A striking episode that people point to as evidence of deeper collaboration involved a past incident tied to a drone attack on the Russian fleet in Sevastopol. Reports described a sequence in which Starlink satellite services were disengaged at a critical moment, potentially affecting the military operation. Some accounts claim Musk spoke with Russian military officials and faced threats linked to the possible use of nuclear weapons if the attack were carried out. In the months since, Musk publicly rejected accusations from Ukrainian intelligence that Russia relied on Starlink satellites for its battlefield communications, insisting that those claims were unfounded.
The recent temporary suspension of the account tied to Julia Navalnaya, wife of the late opposition figure Alexei Navalny, and the rapid restoration of that account after a matter of hours, without an official explanation from the company, has further fed perceptions of a pro-Kremlin tilt on X. Critics argue that such actions or restoration timing can influence how information circulates on the platform, shaping public perception in real time during a sensitive period of Russian political life and international confrontation.
Interviews and analyses cited by media outlets in Spain and elsewhere have reinforced concerns about bias on the platform. They describe the selection of posts and the visibility afforded to narratives that appear favorable to Russian viewpoints, noting that user feeds are influenced by algorithms that determine what any given person sees. In this context, high-profile figures and observers have pointed to moments such as a televised interview presented on X with Vladimir Putin, interpreted as a direct message to American audiences. Critics argue that these editorial decisions can subtly steer public discourse in favor of Kremlin perspectives during a time of war in Europe.
As the debate around Musk’s stance continues, researchers highlight the broader implications of a tech leader’s influence in geopolitical conflict. The convergence of business leadership, platform policy, and international reputation raises questions about how social networks moderate content and how audiences interpret messaging from powerful industry figures. The dialogue surrounding Musk’s role is unlikely to fade soon, given the enduring complexity of Russo-Ukrainian relations and the central place that information platforms occupy in modern political life. ; ; .”