Executive Summary
This week's Kremlin information campaigns focused on two topics: Iran and the continuation of the war with Ukraine. Despite addressing different issues, the core narratives remained consistent, portraying Russia as the party interested in peace while shifting responsibility for escalation onto the United States, European countries, and Israel. The Ukraine-focused campaign was built around an overarching claim that "peace is not in the West's agenda"; therefore, Russia remains the only party genuinely willing to negotiate. This narrative was amplified across official statements, state media, and international proxies, portraying the war as Russia's conflict against "forty to fifty NATO nations," wishing to "sow internal unrest, unable to beat [Russia] on the battlefield," according to Vladimir Putin. Kyiv is framed as a transnational threat through allegations of terrorism, drug trafficking, illicit arms sales to terrorists and criminals, as well as resurfacing claims of "US-sponsored bio labs." According to figures like Julian Assange and Pascal Najadi, "Ukraine is sharing that training with Mexican Cartels via the Ukrainian International Legion Intelligence," and "Mexican Drug Cartels have Javelin Missile Systems that we sent to Ukraine," while RT claims that Ukraine is "in bed with Mexican drug lords." Claims of systematic abuse in the Ukrainian army, based on one investigation in Ukrainian media, were reinforced by portraying Ukraine as a country that "had already lost around two million people and that the casualty ratio was at least two-to-one in Russia's favor," thus amplifying the idea of the uselessness of Western support.
The Iran conflict was systematically repurposed to support broader anti-Western messaging, portraying U.S. and Israeli politics as the primary source of regional instability. Alongside claims that sanctions against Russia had failed and calls to "lift the ban on Russian gas and oil," presumably for Europe's benefit, propaganda also portrayed U.S. and Israeli actions as "an unprovoked鈥llegal war of aggression," attempting to "overthrow legitimate power" in the region. The campaign promoted increasingly radical allegations, including the "Greater Israel" project that "envisages the expansion of the Jewish state, including at the expense of part of Lebanon." The U.S. and Israel are presented as a danger to Europe, with calls to support AfD's statement on "the withdrawal of all U.S. troops from Germany," while climate change is weaponized as a reason to admit that "leftist governments exiled the EU Atlas early this century," calling EU policies "suicidal." Israel was also systematically portrayed as the real driving force behind the conflict, with some channels even alleging Israeli "colonial expansion" beyond the Middle East. All in all, these narratives sought to discredit U.S. foreign policy, portray Israel as a dangerous destabilizing force, demonstrate sanctions' futility, and reinforce the Kremlin's broader claim that Western unity and leadership are steadily eroding.
Ukraine: "Peace Is Not On The West's Agenda"
小entral narrative surrounding the war in Ukraine revolved around the claim that the West is not interested in peace, while Russia remains the only party willing to negotiate. Within this framework, support for Ukraine was portrayed as a tool for strategically weakening Russia and preparing for a broader conflict. This narrative was consistently amplified from the top down across the entire ecosystem of Russian information operations. Vladimir Putin (1) and Sergey Lavrov (2) once again stated that Russia remains ready for negotiations, but would not agree to a ceasefire as a precondition and would not allow itself to be "deceived." At the same time, they emphasized that the West should abandon the expansion of its influence into Russia's "vital interests," while Europe's position on Ukraine was characterized as "inadequate."
Following the Anchorage meeting, Russian officials and RT promoted the claim that no new agreements had been reached (3) because Kyiv and its European allies were not interested in ending the war and refused to make territorial concessions. An additional element of this narrative consisted of Putin's statements that Western countries seek to destabilize Russia from within (4), "sow internal unrest, [鈥 unable to beat it on the battlefield," continue increasing military spending, and then use those very actions as grounds for accusing Moscow of aggression. The narrative about "internal unrest" is used to justify escalating domestic repression and tightening internet restrictions. It also serves to intimidate the Russian public against the increasingly realistic prospect of a new conflict beyond Ukraine, at a time when public demand for peace is growing and dissatisfaction with the domestic situation continues to increase, as an April survey by the independent research organization Levada Center found (5).
Official statements were reinforced by RT and affiliated outlets, where Russia was consistently portrayed as the victim of the collective West. These publications claimed that Europe ignores alleged Ukrainian war crimes, lives in a "bubble of lies" (6) regarding Ukrainian strikes on Russian territory, and deliberately obstructs any peace initiatives. Ukrainian drone attacks on Moscow and the Moscow region were framed as "terrorist attacks" resulting in civilian casualties (7), while reports of Russian strikes against Ukraine were either omitted entirely or ignored. Particular attention was devoted to an investigation by the Ukrainian outlet Babel (8) into violence within the Skelya Assault Regiment, which was repackaged as evidence of systematic human rights abuses within the Ukrainian military (9), (10). At the same time, claims about violence in Ukrainian mobilization camps and the mass flight of citizens from the "world's most democratic prison" (11) were amplified, reinforcing the portrayal of Ukraine as a state that keeps its own population under coercion.
The next layer of the campaign consisted of international proxies and foreign commentators, who echoed official Kremlin messaging while adapting it for foreign audiences. In the Spanish-language information space, Fernando Morag贸n (12) and Uruguayan blogger Ariel Umpierrez (13), speaking on the Geopolitica channel (14), claimed that Russia was not fighting Ukraine but rather "forty to fifty NATO countries," arguing that Ukrainian strikes on Russian territory would be impossible without Western weapons deliveries and intelligence support. Morag贸n, president of the Spanish-Russian Association for Eurasian Studies and a regular participant in Roscongress events and RT programming, repeated the claim that European countries are direct participants in the war. The same narrative was echoed through the English-language InfoDefense Telegram channel (15), part of an international network of Telegram channels operated by the popular pro-war Russian blogger Yuri Podolyaka (16), and the Spanish-language channel Ukraniando (17). The Slovak outlet Advance (18) released a similar text on June 23. The same narratives appeared in Tucker Carlson's interview (19) with Viktor Bout (20), in which the conflict was portrayed as Russia's war against a U.S.-led Western coalition rather than against Ukraine.
At the same time, the narrative portraying Ukraine as a source of transnational security threats was further amplified. RT (21), the Telegram channel Rokot Tormenta (22), Chay Bowes' posts (23) on X, the Russians with Attitude network (24), and content circulated by Alex Jones (25), Pascal Najadi (26), and Julian Assange (27) promoted claims that Ukrainian weapons were being sold to Mexican drug cartels, that Ukraine was involved in drug trafficking to Europe, and that it was recruiting cartel militants. During his interview with Tucker Carlson, Viktor Bout claimed (28) that Ukraine had already lost around two million people and that the casualty ratio was at least two-to-one in Russia's favor. These claims sought not only to discredit Ukraine as a recipient of Western assistance but also to provide arguments against continued arms deliveries.
A separate cluster of messages specifically targeted audiences in the Baltic states and Northern Europe. RT (29) reported on joint Latvian-Ukrainian drone production. On June 14, the Telegram channels of InfoDefense Latvia (30) repeated the narrative by claiming that Ukrainian drones regularly crash on Latvian territory and that local authorities deliberately conceal these incidents because "the main goal is to harm Russia." Claims about a planned reduction in U.S. deliveries of reconnaissance and strike drones to Europe (31) were amplified in an effort to portray the United States as an unreliable ally. This campaign was further reinforced by Maria Zakharova's (32) covert threats directed at Finland, as well as by her speculation, made on June 24 (33), about the alleged use of British depleted uranium to produce a "dirty bomb."
Speculation about biological laboratories in Ukraine also received renewed attention. Tulsi Gabbard reportedly claimed (34) that the United States was funding "more than 120 bio labs in more than 20 countries [鈥 including Ukraine." The same claim was echoed on June 14 by InfoDefenseEng (35) and on June 15 was reiterated (36) by the pro-Russian "anti-globalist and neo-Marxist" member of the Slovak National Council, 慕ubo拧 Blaha.
Overall, the campaign demonstrates clear audience segmentation while maintaining a single overarching narrative framework. Messaging targeting European audiences focuses primarily on the risk of Europe being drawn into the war, the alleged futility of supporting Ukraine, and the unreliability of the United States as an ally. Messaging targeting American audiences emphasizes the perceived futility of assistance to Kyiv, Washington's involvement in someone else's war, and the need to end further support for Ukraine. Across all audiences, the ultimate objective remains undermining public support for Ukraine, weakening transatlantic solidarity, and reinforcing the perception that the principal obstacle to peace is not Russia but the "collective West." At the same time, the Kremlin continues to portray the European Union as being responsible for the increasingly realistic prospect of a broader conflict with Europe.
Iran As A Vehicle For Anti-Western Narratives
Information campaigns surrounding the conflict with Iran are being used as an extension of broader anti-Western messaging. The central narrative holds that instability in the Middle East is the result of U.S. and Israeli policies, while Russia is portrayed as a rational observer benefiting from the West's strategic mistakes.
One of the campaign's key components is the energy dimension. RT emphasized (37) that, despite sanctions, India had sharply increased imports of Russian oil to 2.7 million barrels per day. This was presented as evidence of the ineffectiveness of Western sanctions. At the same time, Vladimir Putin stated (38) that "pressuring Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi is pointless; it only damages international relations." On X, Kirill Dmitriev (39) and other pro-Russian accounts (40) used the opportunity to link Europe's energy and economic problems to sanctions against Russian oil and gas. Dmitriev also supported (41) statements by Germany's Alternative for Germany, a party accused of receiving Russian funding (42), calling for "lifting the ban on Russian gas and oil" as a solution to Europe's energy problems. He also blamed "the left" for Europe's energy crisis. According to Dmitriev (43):
"Simple explanation for EU failures and suicidal policies: leftist governments exiled the EU Atlas early this century. And the EU Atlas Shrugged. Only the RIGHT policies will lure Atlas back."
Israel was simultaneously portrayed (44) as the principal beneficiary of the conflict: "Israel cannot do anything without US firepower, and the US was not willing to commit the amount of men and materiel to do what Israel needed." Rossiyskaya Gazeta (45) cited an official Iranian source claiming that Iran had "no choice" but to develop a nuclear weapon. Similar narratives were adapted and amplified through Spanish-language YouTube channels (46) targeting Latin America, such as the aforementioned Geopolitica. Within the expert community, these narratives were reinforced through publications by Anatol Lieven (47), a regular participant in the Valdai Discussion Club (48), and the Quincy Institute. In his article "Is the Iran War Breaking NATO Forever?" (49) published in March 2026, Lieven argued that European countries are increasingly unwilling to become complicit in the campaign. He quoted:
"Tino Chrupalla, federal spokesman of Germany's AfD party, declared (50), 'Let's [鈥 put into practice what our party manifesto says: the withdrawal of all U.S. troops from Germany.'"
Now on X he develops this line of argument (51), quoting the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft:
"Like Bush's 2003 war on Iraq, the war on Iran is an unprovoked, illegal, offensive, unilateral war of aggression, potentially aimed at regime change, and sold to the public based on lies about nonexistent weapons of mass destruction."
The InfoDefense network promoted even more radical claims (52), alleging that Israel is deliberately provoking a civil war in Lebanon: "The 'Greater Israel' project envisages the expansion of the Jewish state, including at the expense of part of Lebanon." The Rokot Tormenta channel went even further, alleging Israeli "colonial expansion" beyond the Middle East (53).