The tone and vocabulary shift as the conflict begins, not always in a constructive way. Evidence grows that Kremlin propaganda channels in Russia’s official media adopt increasingly radical rhetoric, even suggesting scenarios like atomic war or armed actions against NATO. More markedly, they openly defend punitive measures against Ukraine, including population deportation and re-education programs. A large portion of the Russian population, including Russian speakers, opposes the occupation and Moscow’s plans. In a country with shrinking space for freedom of expression, media consultants act as a thermometer for the mood inside the Kremlin.
The most emblematic voice among pro-government commentators is Vladimir Solovyov. As reported by EL PERIODICO, Grigori Gólosov heads a department of political science at a prominent Petersburg university. The mainstream commentator, according to the publication, has become markedly more radical in recent times. Notably, he once called for NATO troops to withdraw from Eastern Europe to their pre-1997 positions, an action that would redraw Cold War-era outcomes. He did not hesitate to threaten consequences for non-compliance, remarking on a broadcast that Ukraine is merely a middle stage in Russia’s broader mission to ensure strategic security. He stated on his show that the conflict must persist and that a grim calculus would be inevitable if demands are ignored.
The looming threat of nuclear conflict is a recurrent topic on the same program. A journalist quoted a line from a Russian film that serves as a sharp critique of the army and society after the USSR’s collapse: if measured, the sanctions will still be tested, and the world could suffer devastation. Solovyov even speculated about retaliatory measures with nuclear weapons if Europe and the United States confiscate Russian assets, recounting an incident involving his Italian properties and a provocative image of blood. He urged those who seize funds to act within a 24-hour window, warning that consequences would be theirs to choose between tactical and strategic responses.
Concerns are rising about the drift of Russian propagandists following a lengthy article published recently. In the state outlet Ria Novosti, Timofei Sergueitsev, a political scientist with ties to influential figures around Vladimir Putin, presented a controversial stance. The piece triggered intense debate among analysts, who discussed the idea of a drastic resolution for Ukraine. The piece argued for drastic steps that would reshape regional borders and political loyalties, provoking strong disagreement among experts and observers.
According to the author, a significant portion of Ukrainian national identity is framed as problematic by design, with the notion that certain groups should be restrained or redirected. The document argues for strict censorship that would extend beyond politics to culture and education. The term Ukrainianism is portrayed as a threat that justifies a heavy-handed response from Moscow, including the demilitarization or neutral status of contested western provinces. The plan envisions redrawing borders and reordering the region so that loyalty to Moscow becomes the guiding principle, a process estimated to require generations to complete.
Analysts noted that Gólosov and other officials have little weight in formal authority but see themselves as amplifiers of a broader Kremlin narrative. The ideas discussed in the letter do not yet represent official policy; however, the sentiment exists within the political elite and is treated as a possible direction for future policy. It is understood that the government uses such discourse to shape public perception and justify ongoing support for armed intervention in Ukraine.