Russian State Propaganda Since Ukraine Invasion: Insights from Nina Khrushcheva

In a recent campus lecture, international affairs expert Nina Khrushcheva offered a rare glimpse into the evolving landscape of Russian propaganda since the country’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine, revealing how the Kremlin is struggling to reframe its military campaign as a national cause.

Speaking at the College of William and Mary last Thursday, Khrushcheva, a professor at the New School and great-granddaughter of former Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev, shared insights from her extensive travels throughout Russia during the ongoing conflict.

“I wanted to understand by going there how Putin’s propaganda works,” Khrushcheva told the audience, challenging the common assumption that the Russian propaganda machine operates with overwhelming effectiveness. “What you are hearing or reading in most reports is that it works tremendously well. People support the war, as they call it, the Special Military Operation, in great numbers.”

Her lecture, “Russia 2025: Failures and Successes of Vladimir Putin’s Propaganda,” was hosted by the Russian, East European and Eurasian Studies department and co-sponsored by several academic programs at the college.

Khrushcheva’s analysis points to a fundamental miscalculation in the Kremlin’s initial messaging strategy. When Russia launched its invasion in 2022, Putin presented the conflict as a distant affair that would not disrupt everyday Russian life. This approach, she argued, has backfired.

“Since people were allowed to live normal lives, it never became a national cause,” Khrushcheva explained. “Putin is fighting the war somewhere, and normal life is somewhere else.”

This disconnect has created an unusual social dynamic within Russia, where the government has been forced to intensify propaganda efforts through various channels. According to Khrushcheva, recent years have seen increased public displays of Stalin, a surge in military imagery, and renewed emphasis on traditional Russian culture through weddings, music, and conservative fashion trends.

The government has simultaneously tightened restrictions on Western cultural influences. Khrushcheva noted that since early this year, foreign language materials have been banned from bookstore displays, with enforcement carried out through random inspections by government agents. In response, many retailers have adapted by relocating foreign books to upper floors, maintaining facades of normalcy with non-book merchandise at street level.

“If you’re in this bookstore, you wouldn’t know that there was a special military operation,” she observed. “You wouldn’t know there was Putin altogether.”

Despite Putin’s claims of 80% public approval, Khrushcheva estimates actual support is likely closer to 60% or below. Her assessment suggests Russians have maintained a complex relationship with Western culture even as the government attempts to distance itself from it. She noted that many Russians continue to engage with global entertainment phenomena like “Barbenheimer” and international food brands.

Perhaps most tellingly, Khrushcheva reported that George Orwell’s dystopian classic “1984” is currently the second most frequently stolen book in Russia, behind only the Russian Constitution itself – suggesting a population that remains politically aware despite state messaging.

The human cost of the conflict was starkly illustrated in Khrushcheva’s observations of returning veterans, many of whom she described as facing indifference and struggling with poverty. She recounted seeing amputee veterans begging in metro stations and grocery stores, highlighting the social consequences of a war that many Russians have been conditioned to mentally distance themselves from.

For students like Nicholas Valyayev, a freshman with Soviet-born parents, Khrushcheva’s perspectives resonated deeply. “I’ve been very invested in the region and also very concerned about what has been going on recently,” he said, while acknowledging her privileged position. “She is connected to a very influential family, and so that gives her opportunities to travel in Russia and speak to people and say these things that average people would not.”

Sasha Prokhorov, a Professor of Russian Studies at the college, emphasized Khrushcheva’s credentials and critical stance: “She’s very critical of Russian imperialist aggression against Ukraine.”

Despite her sobering assessment of current conditions, Khrushcheva concluded on a note of historical optimism, drawing on her family legacy. “Historically, for every Stalin, there’s a Khrushchev,” she said, alluding to her great-grandfather’s role in initiating de-Stalinization reforms following Stalin’s rule.

As Russia’s war in Ukraine continues into its third year with significant global repercussions, Khrushcheva’s insider analysis offers valuable context for understanding the complex relationship between the Kremlin’s propaganda efforts and the Russian public’s reception of them.