Contradictory signals from the Kremlin on Russia’s strategic deterrence

Once again I say to friends and also to critics that it pays to watch Russian state television for important hints as to which way Russian foreign and military policy is headed. Yesterday’s ‘’News of the Week’‘ wrap-up hosted by the dean of Russian news broadcasting Dimitry Kiselyov once again vindicated my argument. Not because it gave us clarity, but precisely because it keeps us guessing about Putin’s intentions. What it contributed is an understanding of the contradictory scenarios that the Kremlin is now weighing.

But before going into that big subject, I have a word to say about the coverage of May 9^th celebrations on ‘’News of the Week,’ which obliged me to rethink the conclusions I shared on these pages shortly after the Moscow parade on Red Square ended. That parade was sharply curtailed compared to years past and there was no public participation. However, as we saw on ‘News of the Week,’‘ across Russia Victory Day was celebrated in accordance with the tradition established several years ago of massive public participation in the form of a March of the Immortal Regiment. These marches were shown to have taken place in every major city across Russia from Kaliningrad in the West to Vladivostok on the Pacific coast, including of course, the “Northern Capital” of St Petersburg which would have been Kiev’s second favorite target for a drone attack after Moscow.

Hundreds of thousands of ordinary Russians marched down the principal avenues of these cities holding aloft photographs of their relatives who fought, perhaps died on the battlefields of WWII or were at work on the home front supplying the nation with food, other essentials, and providing the armed forces with war materiel. ‘’News of the Week” provided lengthy coverage of today’s equivalent of the Berlin Wall – the public celebration of Victory Day in Ivangorod, the border town with Estonia’s Narva, alongside the river of the same name that separates the two. De facto, Narva is a Russian-speaking town with many families having relatives on the Russian side whom they visit regularly on holidays. De facto, the Estonian capital Tallinn is a Russian-speaking city, while the entire countryside of Estonia is Estonian speaking. The Russian concert along the river featured popular WWII songs and was watched by a large group of Estonians in Narva who defied official prohibition on their attendance.

A similar defiance of anti-Russian official policy took place in Berlin, where Chancellor Merz had declared the wearing of the St George’s ribbon and other signs of support for Russia’s role as Liberator from the Nazi rule to be verboten. As we were shown from a video clip of Merz’s spokesman answering journalists’ questions, the Chancellor and his team refuse to say who defeated Hitler’s Germany and liberated the German nation from the yoke of fascism. Indeed, in mentioning Merz’s Russophobia, ‘News of the Week’ drove home the point that the Germans and other Europeans including the Poles and the Finns, have been expecting a Russian defeat in the war with Ukraine, after which they could seize parts of Russian Federation territory which they lost in consequence of Russia’s victory in WWII. This Revanchism in Germany, in particular, is maintained by the sons and daughters of Nazi party members and SS forces, among whom we find both Chancellor Merz and his Defense Minister Pistorius. Such direct accusations against the German leadership by the Kremlin is facilitated by the very low popularity ratings of the Chancellor and his cabinet.

‘News of the Week’ showed the 9^th May demonstrations as they took place across the globe. What they did not show, but you will have the opportunity to see on Wednesday during the ‘’Judging Freedom’‘ podcast is how the day was celebrated across one-story Russia. A long-time friend and neighbor in a hamlet 80 km south of Petersburg sent me photos via WhatsApp that demonstrate the deep sense of pride, high emotions and patriotism that reaches into the smallest villages and is spontaneous, not officially prompted. I trust that you will find this backchannel to real people to be enlightening.

*****

Now let us take the time to consider elements of the ‘’News of the Week’ show which presented contradictory scenarios for where President Putin is taking Russia in geopolitics.

The coverage of Putin’s press conference after the parade included one sentence that deserves special attention. Putin said the the war with Ukraine ‘’is close to completion.’‘ What can that mean? I believe he may be right and that the key factor in this end game is some understanding that Putin has with Donald Trump. Let us note that the three-day, 9 – 11 May truce seemingly came from nowhere after Zelensky had dismissed it out of hand and had stated during his visit to the All European conference in Yerevan, Armenia that he intended to attack the parade in Moscow with drones. I believe that he was dissuaded from this violence by Trump who must have told him that the game is up, that his country will be utterly destroyed by Russia in the immediate days ahead if he dares to violate the sanctity of 9 May in Moscow or other Russian cities. And I will go a step further and hazard the guess that Trump made this threat to Zelensky following the 90 minute phone call he had with Vladimir Putin, likely at the initiative of the Russian president.

If my conjecture is correct, then Trump will indeed be the broker for concluding at the very least a long term cease fire in the Russia-Ukraine war if not a definitive peace. I believe the former denouement is more likely because it requires very little time to achieve and would satisfy certain needs both on the Russian and on the Ukrainian sides. For President Putin, it would be an instant satisfaction of the loud and growing demands in Russian society for this nearly five year war to end.

For Zelensky, it would leave his regime intact even if he personally will be obliged to withdraw from the presidency following the elections which surely will be a part of any Russian-US-Ukrainian truce agreement. He will be given a safe exit ramp and can spend the rest of his life enjoying his ill-gotten wealth.

As I mentioned in my last essay dealing with the Moscow parade, an outcome such as described above would in effect signify Putin’s failure to win key points he raised when he announced the Special Military Operation. His political legacy would be as tarnished as that of his predecessors Gorbachev and Yeltsin in the realm of geopolitics and national defense.

At the same time, there remains the possibility that following conclusion of a durable cease-fire the European states will be ready to speak seriously with Russia about a common way forward other than all-out war. Putin used his press conference to stress Russia’s readiness to enter into talks with Europe, though not via those leaders who have been promoting Russophobia on the Continent, meaning not with Starmer, Macron and Merz, not to mention the European Commission president von der Leyen and her deputy for foreign affairs Kaja Kallas. Indeed, Putin specifically named his preferred interlocutor for any renewed talks with Europe, his good friend former German Chancellor Schroeder. This proposal may today seem improbable, however, it is entirely possible that in the weeks to come the monsters who have been leading Europe to its doom, the aforementioned Macron, Starmer and Merz, none of whom has popularity ratings over 20% may finally be swept from power and their replacements may be open to the kind of talks Putin has in mind.

Otherwise, there was one very important element in the ‘’News of the Week”’ show on Sunday that counts for an absolutely different possible scenario for Russia. I have in mind the several minutes during which the photo of Russia’s ‘bad boy’‘ in the foreign policy establishment, Sergei Karaganov, was featured on the screen. Kiselyov spoke respectfully of Karaganov and of his latest proposals that the Russian doctrine on nuclear weapons be changed once again in a direction that is very different from any ‘’gently, gently’ orientation that Putin has stood for. Karaganov is saying essentially that Russia should shift from use of nuclear weapons strictly in response to attack to a first strike policy if its economy, defense or other parameters of its sovereignty are being threatened. Now that would be a sea change. Russia would, in effect, be responding to the first strike posture that the United States has been developing ever since George Bush pulled out of the ABM treaty early in this century.

Which way will Russia go? Towards a compromised peace that demeans the sacrifice of one million Russian soldiers dead or maimed for life in the Special Military Operation? Or to a more vigorous deterrence wherein red lines do not have to be crossed before Russia delivers a crushing blow on its enemies?

©Gilbert Doctorow, 2026