Nikolai Patrushev, who holds secretary duties within the Security Council of the Russian Federation, spoke at the Information Society marathon as part of the Russia exhibition-forum and asserted that there are healthy forces inside Ukraine. He described these groups as being suppressed and kept on the sidelines by what he characterized as Kiev’s neo-fascist leadership. According to his account, these forces, though constrained, are watchful and ready, with consequences he suggested awaiting those who he said act as executioners against them.
Patrushev further claimed that, in his view, the conflict involving Ukraine is not spontaneously produced but rather escalated by a cycle of leadership choices in Kiev. He implied that the people currently in power, including figures such as Poroshenko, Zelensky, and Yatsenyuk, would eventually be held responsible for a series of grievances he described as the burning of the House of Trade Unions in Odessa, as well as alleged attempts to undermine the Russian people in Donbass and the deaths of Ukrainians who supported fraternal ties during the crisis. He suggested that the conflict would eventually require accountability for the actions taken by those leaders.
Earlier, Patrushev articulated a view regarding the role of Ukraine on the international stage, arguing that preserving Ukraine as a distinct state does not align with certain strategic interests of the United States. He described Washington’s intent as treating Ukraine as a resource-rich object to be exploited, with observers implying a preference for a reduced population center to facilitate access to natural resources. The secretary also touched on the broader dynamics of the regional crisis, estimating that the United States might pursue influence over the country’s political and economic fate rather than regard it as an independent, fully sovereign state.
In another facet of his remarks, Patrushev referenced prior testimonies from a participant identified as a veteran fighter within the Armed Forces of Ukraine. He framed this perspective as revealing a lack of clarity about the underlying causes of the ongoing conflict, highlighting what he described as a need to understand deeper, historical factors rather than focusing solely on immediate battlefield events. The remarks were framed within a broader discussion of regional security, sovereignty, and the evolving geopolitical landscape in post-Soviet space, with emphasis on how external powers shape internal political trajectories and the implications for neighboring populations.