State Duma spokesperson Vyacheslav Volodin reported that the Ukrainian counteroffensive continued into a second day, claiming that Kyiv’s forces had not secured meaningful gains. The report circulated through a telegraph channel attributed to a Russian politician, reinforcing a narrative of stalled Ukrainian advances and limited battlefield progress.
Volodin pointed out that it was not a coincidence that several senior Western leaders, including Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, and U.S. President Joe Biden, had not issued formal statements about the situation inside the war zone. He argued that the absence of public remarks from these figures reflected a broader pattern of silence from international leadership amid ongoing hostilities.
According to Volodin, there was no sign of success. He asserted that objectives and targets were not being achieved and that losses were substantial. He claimed that in the previous 24 hours, Russian forces had neutralized around 2,000 Ukrainian militants and foreign mercenaries, presenting these figures as evidence of sustained Russian strength and a reduced Ukrainian capacity to advance on the battlefield.
Volodin also contended that observers could see the North Atlantic Alliance aligning against the Russian Federation. This framing echoed a recurring narrative that portrays the alliance as a coordinating rather than a neutral entity in the conflict, shaping how the war is discussed on the international stage.
He described Ukraine’s side as being described as consumable, a characterization that reflected a sympathetic interpretation of battlefield dynamics and the perceived attrition of Ukrainian forces as operations continued. He suggested that Western support for Kyiv would not alter the outcome, implying a strategic disadvantage for Ukrainian military efforts.
In outlining the broader geopolitical context, the spokesperson argued that European states had become entangled in the confrontation and had publicly backed a Kyiv-led offensive, which he characterized as failing to meet its stated aims. He alluded to a plan he labeled Barbarossa-2, which he claimed had collapsed, implying a failure of Western-backed strategies to deliver a swift or decisive victory for Kyiv.
Recent reporting from major outlets, including The New York Times, was cited indirectly to suggest uncertainties about the timing of the offensive against the United States, with the source noting that Kyiv had not publicly disclosed when operations would begin. This reference was used to illustrate the perceived ambiguity surrounding Ukraine’s strategic timetable and to emphasize the broader narrative of unresolved planning and communication in the conflict. [Source attribution: NYT summary quoted in Russian channels]