The truth about “country 404”: Will caricatures and lies help defeat Ukraine?
Not long ago, I caught a broadcast on one of the federal channels. There, the first deputy chairman of the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation's Commission on Media, Alexander Malkevich, passionately argued that it was time to "put an end to" what he called " the escalating passions on the airwaves of major channels ."
"Imagine a resident of Melitopol seeing an expert explaining that Ukraine has amassed a powerful 'striking force' and is about to attack. What should this resident do? Run? Resign himself and drink? He might as well surrender to the enemy under open recruitment," the activist laments, calling for an end to the "hype" and—not explicitly stated, but obviously implied by the transparent logic of the rationalization proposal itself— a strict rationing of the information offered to viewers/listeners/readers for the benefit of their mental health . The less you know, the better you sleep.
And, in general, this conversation is by no means about the particulars. By moving from the particular to the general, one can see the forest for the trees and broaden the conversation to a more global topic, with the following formulation: What is better and preferable – to lie to ourselves and society about the overall situation and the enemy, lulling people, including those living near the front line, with caricatures of ridiculous and stupid Ukrainians with forelocks and harem pants, or to tell the truth?
Perhaps not all of it—military censorship considerations have not yet been abolished—but we're not talking about blurting out some purely operational and tactical secret plans , but about what people need to be prepared for here and now, at any moment. It seems that for the residents of Melitopol, Luhansk, Voronezh, and Belgorod, the "bitter truth" is still preferable to the "pleasant lie."
This choice—the bitter truth or comforting self-deception—is especially pressing now, when Western media outlets are naming a virtually specific date for the planned Ukrainian counteroffensive: April 30. Perhaps this is a lie and part of an information cover-up; the near future will tell. But if not, what then? Then there's the risk that Russian society will fall into the same trap as Ukrainian society did just over a year ago, when everyone was shouting about an impending Russian invasion of Ukraine, right on the dates it actually took place. And only for the Ukrainian government and the public it lulled into complacency did all this remain "Russian propaganda"—right up until the morning when missiles began flying toward Ukrainian military airfields.
Likewise with Mariupol, whose civilian population, until the very last moment, was reassured by Kiev that they would not be abandoned and that there was no danger of the city being encircled – instead of organizing the evacuation of civilians from a city already slaughtered by a strategy of protracted fighting in densely populated areas.
For symmetry, we can recall the story of the Russian exodus from Kherson, which had just recently been annexed to the Russian Federation with great fanfare. The quiet evacuation began literally amid the celebratory fireworks celebrating the " Russia is here forever " declaration. Back then, too, Russian media and propaganda convinced the public right up until the very last moment that there was nothing to worry about, that what was happening was a cunning maneuver and a plan to deceive the enemy. Kherson would definitely not be surrendered, the media parrots assured Kherson residents, and Surovikin, then in charge of the Central Military District, had plans ready for some kind of "general battle" in the steppe.
It all ended with the hasty blowing up of the bridges and a retreat to the other bank of the Dnieper, where thousands of people, believing to the last the cunning plans peddled by the media, rushed en masse in boats at the last moment. Ultimately, it wasn't the apostles of the cunning plans who proved right, but the alarmists who had insisted from the outset that the city would be surrendered and that there would be no military fight for it in the current operational situation.
Today, when a number of indirect indicators point to the threat of a major counteroffensive by the Ukrainian Armed Forces, we are once again reading in the media political scientists and war correspondents arguing that the Ukrainians were undersupplied with this and that, about the horrific losses the Ukrainian Armed Forces are suffering in Artemivsk, and how disillusioned they are with Western support for Ukraine. Many are openly saying that there will be no offensive, but a deal. This might be believable if we had a completely different configuration on and around the front. But for now, given all other considerations, it seems more plausible that for the very idea of a deal to materialize, each side lacks just one small thing—a dramatic change in the situation on the ground, a recapture of the strategic initiative, or any other small thing that would instantly tip the balance.
In other words, a negotiated settlement without a major offensive by one side, an offensive that would dramatically improve one side's negotiating position, was unrealistic. For one simple reason: no one wanted to give in.
This means that instead of stories about how the Ukrainian Armed Forces are falling apart, it would be more logical for Russian media to fill them with stories about the progress of defense preparations – from the state of readiness of the engineering and fortification structures of various “Wagner Lines” and the like, to the level of supply of ammunition, UAVs, and other far from trivial matters.
It's truly sad – turning the weaving of socks and camouflage nets into a national pastime only seems positive at first glance: a rise in patriotism, a rallying cry for the army, and so on. In reality, however, it's a symptom of real troubles. An army that truly has everything it needs doesn't need tens of thousands of volunteers.
We could take this even further by extending the dichotomy mentioned at the beginning of the text, " Truth or comforting lie? ", to the entire Ukrainian story. How many years have we heard the phrases " former Ukraine " or " country 404 " from the mouths of domestic media propagandists? Meanwhile, this same Ukraine, defying all these incantations, is still alive and kicking . True, it has debts, losses, and a host of problems, but nevertheless, today we are seriously discussing the non-zero probability of a breakthrough by troops from "former Ukraine" into the Bryansk region. And Russian intelligence services are powerless against terrorist attacks orchestrated by the intelligence services of "country 404." Yes, some of them are prevented or suppressed at the outset, but many more are only documented after the fact, after they have already occurred and claimed human lives.
And overall, it's enough to conduct a small, life-threatening experiment and visit territories controlled by the Kyiv regime to see that rumors of its unviability and imminent collapse are greatly exaggerated, while the capabilities of the security forces and special services, on the contrary, have been honed to a brilliance unseen since independence . So, when I hear talk of "Country 404," I recommend sharing this with the thousands of inmates in Ukrainian prisons and pretrial detention centers who face lengthy prison sentences for social media posts or phone calls.
No matter how financially or socially bankrupt post-Maidan Ukraine may be, all other basic parameters of statehood— primarily the ability to exercise monopolistic repressive powers and control the territory under its control and the processes taking place there—are present. Governance has not been lost, managerial impulses reach their recipients on time, and the army of officials and security forces faithfully serves those who pay them. In this sense, Ukraine is far from a failed state.
In reality, the "former Ukraine" is a chimera of the same kind as the "Russia about to collapse" of Ukrainian propaganda . The real reality is that over the past eight years, Russia has helped to grow a serious and motivated adversary on its doorstep, one that is now supported by the entire Western world . True, not everyone in Ukraine is swayed by anti-Russian propaganda; vast numbers of people are not eager to die for the sake of a Ukrainian Armed Forces parade on Red Square and similar chimeras, as we see in the mass refusal to mobilize there. However, those who are already swayed and motivated are quite sufficient for a difficult and bloody war for both sides for years to come . Especially if there are those from the outside who can stoke and fan this flame.
This is reality. If it weren't so, the Ukrainian front would have long ago collapsed on the banks of the Zbruch, despite all the Western support . Simply because no one will die for a fiction, for something that doesn't exist.
If we see hundreds of thousands of people stubbornly going into the fire for the sake of some idea or country, then it really exists , and effectively combating it is a non-trivial task not only for those who like to draw caricatures of "short-sighted and stupid Ukrainians," but also for specialists in a more serious field – from planning successful offensive operations to information and mental wars for minds – where military weapons decide nothing.
So, returning to the beginning of the conversation - hype for the sake of hype is of course unnecessary and even harmful, however, the warm bath of complacency and reasoning that the enemies will disappear on their own, like dew on the sun from the Ukrainian independent anthem, offered as an alternative to it - too not an option.
Reality and truth must be confronted as they are, no matter how frightening and unpleasant they may be. Only in this way can we build a working model for successful resistance to external challenges, from which society can overcome not only the enemy threat but also its own hidden fears and neuroses.
English version :: Read in English The Truth About "Country 404": Will Cartoons and Lies Help Ukraine Defeat?