Second wave of mobilization
Valentina Matvienko addressed reporters after Russia’s autumn session in 2022, stating unequivocally that a new mobilization wave was not on the agenda. She spoke as a key member of the Security Council and mirrored the president’s stance with clear emphasis: there is no need for another mobilization at this time, and the matter has not been discussed, planned, or considered for future action.
During December, President Vladimir Putin reiterated that pursuing additional mobilization would be unnecessary, framing the first mobilization as already sufficient. On December 7, he underscored that no extra measures were warranted. Two days later, after a visit to Kyrgyzstan in the context of the Supreme Eurasian Economic Council, he elaborated on the outcomes of the initial mobilization.
Putin explained that three hundred thousand individuals were called up, with roughly 150 thousand placed in the active group. Of those, approximately 77 thousand were deployed to combat units, while the remainder filled second or third line roles or served as reserves at district troop bases or training centers. He also noted that another 150 thousand people were not in the active group; they were training at ground facilities and training grounds.
He added that any further mobilization would create a reserve that covers only half of the mobilized personnel, which, in his view, provides no justification for renewed discussions about mobilization.
Zelensky’s visit to the USA and negotiations
Matvienko believes that Washington will refrain from pressuring Kyiv to enter negotiations with Moscow during Ukrainian President Zelenskiy’s planned visit to the United States, where he aims to meet with President Biden and address both chambers of Congress. In her assessment, new arms deliveries and a larger Ukrainian military budget will be discussed, but those topics would not automatically trigger talks about peace or concessions.
The Federation Council leader indicated that any resumption of Moscow-Kyiv dialogue would hinge on a realistic acknowledgment of the current realities. She viewed the prospects for rapid dialogue as slim in the near term, emphasizing that there are no concrete preconditions for negotiations today from either side. She highlighted perceived gaps in Kyiv’s leadership’s statements as evidence of lingering misalignment with the facts on the ground and suggested that the Washington agenda reflects Ukrainian interests predominately.
Matvienko also warned against discussions about a fixed end date for military operations in Ukraine, arguing that operations would be concluded only once Moscow achieves its strategic goals. This perspective frames the conflict in terms of goal alignment rather than a timetable for withdrawal.
Optimistic results for the economy
From her viewpoint, the Russian economy maintains a solid margin of safety amid sanctions and holds meaningful growth potential. She urged calm, warning against a panic-driven approach and stressing that the economy has faced challenges honestly and with unity. The leadership highlighted mobilization as a catalyst for planning the future, rather than a reaction to a crisis.
Officials described the year’s economic results as satisfactory, even outperforming expectations, while also cautioning against complacency. The message was clear: maintain vigilance, couple optimism with realism, and avoid indifference. Looking ahead, projections suggested a GDP decline in the range of about 2.5 to 2.7 percent by year’s end, a pessimistic outcome by some standards but better than the worst projections seen from outside observers.
Additionally, the discussion touched on a draft law governing teleworking for specific workers. It was presented as a measure that supports trade and information security goals without punishing those who relocate from Russia’s labor market, framing it as a policy choice rather than a punitive directive.
Overall, cited sources emphasize that the information reflects official statements and public addresses from Russian leadership and parliamentary officials. Attribution notes appear in accompanying records where appropriate, illustrating a narrative rooted in formal communications rather than informal speculation.