By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Recent Ukrainian drone strikes have targeted Russian-occupied areas, including factories believed to be command centers. These attacks, showcased in social media videos, highlight a growing sophistication in Ukrainian air assaults. However, Russia has responded by increasingly censoring footage of the attacks, banning the distribution of unofficial images and videos in various regions to control information flow and prevent public panic. This censorship complicates the assessment of strike results and underscores the ongoing information war alongside the physical conflict.
Read the original article here
Moscow expands censorship as Ukrainian strikes reach deeper into Russia, a predictable response to an increasingly complex situation. The Kremlin’s reflex, historically, has been to clamp down on information flow when reality intrudes on the carefully constructed narrative. But in the modern era, with its ubiquitous smartphones and the ease of information sharing, this task becomes exponentially more difficult. It’s like trying to hold back the tide with a sandcastle. The sheer volume of readily available visual evidence – the smoke billowing from burning oil refineries, the visible destruction – makes censorship a reactive measure, not a proactive one. How can you silence what everyone can see?
The strikes themselves, the physical manifestations of the war’s impact deep within Russian territory, play a crucial role in eroding the government’s control. The visual spectacle, the tangible evidence of vulnerability, directly contradicts official pronouncements. This creates a gap between the official story and lived experience, a space where doubt and skepticism can flourish. The more these strikes occur, the more the Kremlin will need to amplify censorship, and the harder it will be to maintain it, because it will be fighting an even more overwhelming reality.
This evolving situation isn’t just about bombs and smoke. It’s also about the economic strain, which in turn feeds the discontent. With fuel production capacity down by over 20%, the government is likely scrambling to maintain the illusion of normalcy in key population centers, diverting resources and causing shortages elsewhere. This fuels the perception that the government is prioritizing its own survival over the well-being of its citizens. And while the Russian core may feel okay, the periphery is likely to feel the brunt of the pain first, and they will be talking.
The return of veterans from the front lines compounds the challenges. Imagine, these men, likely carrying both physical and psychological scars, return to a society where the official narrative clashes with their experiences. They become living embodiments of the war’s true cost. The Moscow Times already reported on the Kremlin’s unease regarding returning veterans. Add to this the economic hardship and the loss of civil liberties, and you have a recipe for unrest. It’s not difficult to imagine a scenario where these veterans, burdened by PTSD and disillusioned by the war, become a significant source of instability, amplifying the pressure on the regime.
The parallels to historical events, particularly the failure of the Russo-Japanese War and its role in sparking the Russian Revolution, are hard to ignore. The veterans, having seen the reality of war, could become the new agitators, spreading the truth and further undermining the narrative that the Kremlin tries to control. The more the government tries to silence them, the more they could be viewed as martyrs and the more people would start to realize something is truly wrong.
Furthermore, with censorship failing to keep up with reality, a new breed of resistance could emerge. The “rumor mills”, the oral tradition that thrived even in the Soviet era, could resurface, spreading accurate information outside the official channels. Word of mouth, fueled by the visible impact of the war, becomes the new weapon against the propaganda machine. The truth has a way of breaking through, and in Russia, where information has always been a precious commodity, it may just be the most potent one.
The government’s response, in the face of all of this, will likely involve measures to control the population by cutting off their freedom. The use of fear to control the population by enforcing that no one come back, and returning soldiers being arrested is just another indicator of the problem and the pressure that the Kremlin will feel. However, that will be hard to control in a country of 140 million, when everyone has a smartphone.
The broader strategic implications of the Ukrainian strikes also must be considered. The strikes serve as a distraction, pulling resources and attention away from the front lines. They stretch Russian military and economic capabilities, forcing difficult choices and weakening the regime’s hold. This, in turn, could open up opportunities for Ukraine or its allies to exploit.
This isn’t a simple conflict, and the impact will continue to change. The Kremlin’s reliance on censorship is a symptom of weakness, not strength. It indicates a recognition that its narrative is failing to withstand the pressure of reality. As the war continues and as the Ukrainian strikes push further into Russia, we should only expect the pressure to increase. The situation is changing, and the Kremlin is losing control of the narrative.