Russian propaganda changed its tune, but so has America
It's a sign of these extraordinary times that even the Kremlin's old propagandists are scrambling to change their tune.
Across state-controlled Russian media, disparaging references to 'the collective West' and 'Anglo-Saxons' – thinly-veiled diplomatic code for US-led states – have been quietly dropped. Instead, it's just what the Kremlin calls 'the old world' of Europe, without its US partner, being singled out for criticism.
On his top-rated news show, Dmitry Kisylov, a prominent state mouthpiece who once boasted how Russia could reduce the United States to a smouldering pile of radioactive ash, is now talking about a 'great troika,' dominating the globe: China, Russia and the US.
'Now the European war party wants to further escalate the Ukrainian conflict,' Kisylov tells his millions of Russian viewers.
But 'if we simplify it, everything now is decided by the great troika - Russia, China and US - that will form the new structure of the world. The European Union as a single political force no longer exists,' he adds.
It is a bleak vision already being played out on the battlefields of Ukraine, where the Trump-administration, determined to end the bloodshed, is piling pressure on an embattled Kyiv.
To the alarm of the Western allies, US President Donald Trump has made breathtaking concessions to the Kremlin, most recently suspending US military aid to Ukraine – to the glee of the Kremlin. Trump has also rejected the idea of future NATO membership for the country, which has been fighting a full-scale Russian invasion since February 2022, and have US security guarantees.
By unilaterally starting negotiations with Russia over the heads of Ukraine and Europe, Trump has begun a controversial process of bringing Moscow in from the diplomatic cold, sowing disunity among Washington's traditional allies. Both are longtime Kremlin objectives.
Trump's public humiliation of Ukrainian President Zelensky during a recent visit to the White House underlined for many Russians just how seismic the US shift has been.
At times, Kremlin-controlled media struggled to reconcile the shocking events.
'On the one hand, Trump speaks about peace, and politicians close to him say they're interested in Ukraine's success,' observed Igor Naymushin, a reporter for Russian state media.
'But on the other, from Washington it looks like he's giving Russia all the cards and tools to successfully continue the special military operation and directly achieve success on the battlefield,' Naymushin added, using a common euphemism in Russia for its actions in Ukraine.
In Russia, the heavily-controlled media reflects the mood of the Kremlin, as do the words of Russian officials now driving home US-European divisions while flip-flopping on Washington's historical record.
'I do not want to be anti-European,' claimed Sergey Lavrov, the veteran Russian foreign minister. 'However…. all the tragedies of the world originated in Europe or happened thanks to European policy. Colonization, wars, crusaders, the Crimean War, Napoleon, World War One, Adolf Hitler. If we look at history in retrospect, the Americans did not play any instigating or even inflammatory role,' he insisted in an interview posted on the official foreign ministry website.
Beyond the flattery, however, it's hard to see what the US has extracted from Russia in return for Washington's geopolitical about-face.
Privately, one Russian official told me the US-Russian economic cooperation deals being discussed behind closed doors may have appealed. Such deals are Putin's 'Kryptonite' for a transactional Trump, as one Russian commentator put it.
'Trump is like Superman, and our President (Putin) has found his weakness,' said Nikita Danyuk, a member of the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation to Russian state media outlet Channel 1.
'As soon as Trump hears 'rare earth metals', it doesn't matter if those metals are there or not. He forgets about anything and is ready to accept any terms. It's truly a grandmasters game by our President,' Danyuk said.
Other pro-Kremlin figures, like Olga Skabaeva, a state TV presenter, highlight the free hand the Trump administration appears to have granted Moscow.
After a senior Ukrainian official, Andrey Yermak, posted a social media calling for Russia to 'stop its daily shelling of Ukraine, and immediately, if it really wants to end the war,' Skabaeva responded: 'This morning Yermak woke up and thought he was Trump…'
'But he forgot that Trump does not set any conditions for Russia and Putin. Only for Zelensky and Ukraine.'
Little wonder the Kremlin's propagandists have been falling over themselves to praise the United States.
They have changed their tune. But America has too.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
UPI
8 minutes ago
- UPI
Army, Trump ready June 14th birthday parade with tanks, rocket launchers
President Donald Trump congratulates a cadet at the United States Military Academy graduation ceremony in Michie Stadium at West Point, New York, on May 24, and will review the Army's 250th birthday parade on June 14. Photo by John Angelillo/UPI | License Photo June 7 (UPI) -- The U.S. Army celebrates its 250th birthday on June 14th in the nation's capital, which coincides with President Donald Trump's 79th birthday, and will be marked by a parade that may include tanks, rocket launchers and more than 100 military vehicles. With the two birthdays occurring on the same day, the previously scheduled parade that was intended as a relatively small event at the National Mall in Washington, D.C., has grown in size and cost. Up to 300 soldiers and civilians, the U.S. Army Band and four cannons were initially slated to honor the Army's 250th birthday, with seating available for 120 attendees, The Washington Post reported. U.S. Army leaders last year sought a permit for the event, but Trump's election victory has changed its scope, while doubling as an unofficial celebration of the president's birthday. Axios reported the parade will live up to Trump's request for a showcase the U.S. miliatary's might, with dozens of tanks, rocket launchers, missiles and more than 100 other military aircraft and vehicles participating. About 6,600 Army troops will participate, and the Army is paying to house them in area hotels. The parade route has been moved to the northwest portion of Constitution Avenue and will include a flyover of F-22 fighter jets, World War II planes and Vietnam-era aircraft. The event is scheduled to start at 6:30 p.m. EDT at 23rd Street and continue along Constitution Avenue N.W. to 15th Street. Trump will review the parade on the Ellipse. The event has an estimated cost of nearly $45 million, including more than $10 million for road repairs after the heavy military equipment passes over. The parade's estimated cost has Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Roger Wicker, R-Miss., skeptical about its benefits. "I would have recommended against the parade," Wicker told an interviewer on Thursday, but the Department of Defense wants to use it as a recruiting tool. "On the other hand, [Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth] feels that it will be a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for thousands of young Americans to see what a great opportunity it is to participate in a great military force," Wicker said. "So, we'll see."
Boston Globe
9 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Russia pummels Kharkiv with drones and bombs, Ukraine says
On Saturday afternoon, Russia dropped two more glide bombs on the city, killing at least one more resident and injuring at least 16 others, Terekhov said. Advertisement Photographs released by Ukraine's emergency services showed the upper floors of a residential block ablaze after the overnight strike, with white smoke pouring into the early morning sky. In other images, rescuers sifted through the charred wreckage of a gutted apartment. Parts of the photos were blurred, likely to hide the remains of two people killed in that strike, according to the rescuers. A third person died elsewhere in Kharkiv, and about 20 others were injured in the assault. Advertisement The local prosecutor's office said Saturday afternoon that six people were most likely still trapped under the rubble of an industrial facility in Kharkiv that was struck during the overnight attack. The attacks Saturday came as Russian forces about 100 miles north of Kharkiv pushed deeper into Ukraine's northeastern Sumy region, seizing two more villages and advancing their effort to carve out a buffer zone along the Russia-Ukraine border. Even in Kharkiv, a city of 1.3 million that over the years has learned to live with near-daily Russian bombardments, Saturday's attacks were a clear sign of Russia's strategy to intensify air assaults in a bid to overwhelm and break through Ukraine's air defenses. They came just a day after Russia launched one of its biggest air assaults of the war across Ukraine, involving more than 400 drones and more than 40 missiles, in what Russia described as retaliation for Ukraine's audacious attacks on its strategic bomber bases last weekend. President Donald Trump this past week compared the dual air assaults between Russia and Ukraine to 'two young children fighting like crazy.' 'They hate each other, and they're fighting in a park, and you try and pull them apart,' Trump said Thursday in an Oval Office news conference. 'They don't want to be pulled. Sometimes you're better off letting them fight for a while and then pulling them apart.' In an interview with ABC News released Friday, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy responded to the comment. 'We are not kids with Putin at the playground in the park,' he said, referring to Russian President Vladimir Putin. 'He is a murderer who came to this park to kill the kids.' In April, a Russian missile struck a playground in Zelenskyy's hometown, Kryvyi Rih, killing 19 civilians, including nine children. It was the deadliest strike against children since the beginning of the war, according to the United Nations. Advertisement Russia's intensified attacks have come alongside a new offensive in the east and in the northeastern Sumy region. The push into Sumy follows Russian forces driving Ukrainian troops back from parts of Russia's Kursk region, just across the border from Sumy. To prevent future incursions into Kursk, Putin announced last month that Russian forces would launch an offensive in Sumy to create a buffer zone along the border. In the past three weeks, Russian troops have seized about 10 villages in the area, gaining control of roughly 75 square miles of territory. 'It's clear this is already an offensive on Sumy region -- a full-scale offensive,' said Andrii, a 44-year-old company intelligence commander fighting there who declined to be identified with his full name for security reasons and due to military protocol. He said he saw the offensive not only as an effort to establish the buffer zone that Putin called for, but also as a strategy to pin down Ukrainian forces and prevent their redeployment to other front-line hot spots in the east. Andrii said Russian troops were currently pushing toward the village of Khotin, 6 miles from the border. If they seize it, he warned, the situation could turn critical. Khotin sits on high ground and lies less than 12 miles from the city of Sumy, the regional administrative center, close enough for Russian forces to strike it with drones and artillery. Sumy is home to about 250,000 people. More than 200 villages and settlements have been evacuated from the Sumy region over the past year because of the fighting. Advertisement This article originally appeared in
Politico
12 minutes ago
- Politico
Negotiate or fight? Trump has colleges right where he wants them.
President Donald Trump's campaign against two of the planet's best-known universities is laying bare just how unprepared academia was to confront a hostile White House. Schools never imagined facing an administration so willing to exercise government power so quickly — targeting the research funding, tax-exempt status, foreign student enrollment and financial aid eligibility schools need to function. That's left them right where the president wants them. Even as Ivy League schools, research institutions, and college trade associations try to resist Trump's attacks in court, campus leaders are starting to accept they face only difficult choices: negotiate with the government, mount a painful legal and political fight — or simply try to stay out of sight. Groundbreaking scientific research, financial aid for lower-income students and soft power as an economic engine once shielded schools' access to federal funds. Trump has now transformed those financial lifelines into leverage. And the diversity and independence of U.S. colleges and universities — something they've seen as a source of strength and competition — is straining efforts to form a singular response to the president. 'Perhaps it's a failure of imagination on the part of universities,' said Lee Bollinger, the former president of Columbia University. 'It feels now like there has been a naïveté on the part of universities. There's been no planning for this kind of thing.' Schools are accustomed to tension with their faculty, governing boards, legislatures and governors. But punishments for resisting the Trump administration plumbed untested levels of severity this week when the president issued an executive order to bar foreign students from entering the country to study at Harvard University as his administration threatened Columbia's academic accreditation. Even though Project 2025 — The Heritage Foundation's roadmap for a second Trump administration — previewed some of the tactics the administration would use, many school leaders may have underestimated the president's determination. 'It just seemed inconceivable that we would be in this position of having massive amounts of federal funding withheld, threats to have legislation that attacks your tax status, and now these new issues with international students,' Bollinger said. A federal judge issued a temporary restraining order Thursday night that blocked Trump's directive to restrict Harvard's access to international students. But the administration is brandishing its response to Harvard's resistance as a warning to other schools who might resist, as federal officials pressure schools to negotiate the terms of a truce over the administration's complaints about campus antisemitism, foreign government influence and its opposition to diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives. 'We've held back funding from Columbia, we've also done the same thing with Harvard,' Education Secretary Linda McMahon told House lawmakers this past week. 'We are asking, as Columbia has done, to come to the table for negotiations,' she said, just hours before telling the school's accreditor it was violating federal anti-discrimination laws. 'We've also asked Harvard. Their answer was a lawsuit.' A Harvard spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment. 'What we've seen so far when it comes to Harvard is the playbook for holding these radical schools accountable is way deeper than anyone anticipated or expected,' a senior White House official told POLITICO. 'You're starting to get to the bone, so to speak, of holding these people accountable,' said the official, who was granted anonymity to freely discuss White House strategy. 'Harvard knows they cannot endure this for long, they just can't. They're going to have to come to the table, and we'll always be there to meet them. But this was a test case of what to do.' The university described Trump's latest foreign student order this week as 'yet another illegal retaliatory step.' A federal judge in May blocked a separate administration attempt to prevent Harvard from enrolling international students. Harvard is still locked in a legal fight over more than $2 billion in federal grants the White House blocked after the school refused to comply with demands to overhaul its admissions and disciplinary policies. Trump announced plans to cancel Harvard's tax-exempt status in early May, then later floated redistributing billions of dollars in university grants to trade schools. 'It is not our desire to bring these schools to their knees. The president reveres our higher educational facilities. He's a product of one,' the White House official said. 'But in order to hold these people accountable, we will be unrelenting in our enforcement of the law and hitting them where it hurts, which is their pocketbook.' Many institutions have chosen a more muted response following months of conflict, including major public institutions in states that have also grown reliant on the full-freight tuition paid by international students. 'Universities don't have as many degrees of freedom, at least in the public sector, as you might think they do,' said Teresa Sullivan, the former president of the University of Virginia. 'One reason they seem to be relatively slow to act is there's a certain disbelief — can this really be happening?' 'We seem to be in uncharted territory, at least in my experience,' Sullivan said. 'All of a sudden, the rules don't seem to apply. I think that's disconcerting. It shakes the ground beneath you, and you don't necessarily know what to do next.' Still, some higher education leaders are trying to confront the government. More than 650 campus officials have so far signed onto a joint statement that opposes 'the unprecedented government overreach and political interference now endangering American higher education.' Sullivan and a group of other former presidents used an op-ed in The Washington Post to argue the Trump administration's offensive 'won't be confined to Harvard University.' Trade associations including the American Council on Education, Association of American Universities, and Association of Public and Land-grant Universities have joined schools in a lawsuit to block some of Trump's research funding cuts. The Presidents' Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration, a collective of school leaders, has also sued to challenge the Trump administration's attempts to target the legal status of thousands of foreign students. 'Your first obligation as president is you don't want to hurt the institution you represent,' Sullivan said of the relative silence coming from non-Ivy League institutions. 'These days it's hard to tell what hurts and what doesn't. I think that's the motive. The motive is not cowardice.' Schools still face a choice between negotiating with the government — and risk compromising on their principles — or inviting Trump's rage by putting up a fight. 'Every school has had an option to correct course and work with the administration, or stand firm in their violations of the law,' the administration official said. 'They have an option, they know very well what to do.' The real question, according to Bollinger, the former Columbia president, is how far the White House will go and how much resistance the schools are willing to put up. 'The power of government is so immense that if they want to destroy institutions, they can,' he said. 'What you do in that kind of environment is you stand on principle.'
