Reframing Ukraine's Strategic Messaging

By shifting its messaging strategy towards the collective Eurasian identity of former Soviet satellite nations, Ukraine has the potential to outmaneuver Russian hybrid warfare.

Executive Summary: On Monday August 26th, the Russian military began a ferocious air assault across fifteen regions of Ukrainian territory, bombing several cities with rockets, missiles, and drones. It is likely in response to the Ukrainian military’s incursion into Kursk inside of Russia a few weeks earlier. It is likely Vladimir Putin will address the wide-spread bombings of Ukraine to highlight Russia’s victimization and to use the Ukrainian military’s assault on Kursk as further evidence of “the Ukrainian terrorist threat” to justify operations against Ukraine. These latest events further demonstrate Ukraine’s precarious position in its war of independence.

To strengthen its military efforts and counter Russian hybrid warfare, I suggest in this article that Ukraine shift towards a more inclusive strategy that embraces a collective Eurasian identity. This modern approach would unify its diverse population, broaden its recruitment base, and foster greater domestic and international support, countering Russian narratives and enhancing Ukraine's resilience in its fight for independence and sovereignty. By shifting its messaging strategy towards the collective Eurasian identity of former Soviet satellite nations, Ukraine has the potential to outmaneuver Russia's military ramp efforts and global terrorism accusations.

Reframing Ukraine's Strategic Messaging to Strengthen Military Recruitment and Counter Russian Hybrid Warfare

A pressing and complex issue that hampers Ukraine's battlefield success is attrition in the military. This, coupled with the need for equipment and weapons from NATO nations to secure its independence from the Russian Federation's incursions, underscores the urgency of the situation. Ukraine needs to reevaluate its global strategic messaging regarding culture and language to counter Russia's overall hybrid war fighting capacity. 

Background: Russia's Annexation of Crimea and Support for Separatists

In 2014, Russia challenged Ukraine’s sovereignty by annexing Crimea. This was followed by the Russian government’s support for separatist movements in the border regions of Donetsk and Lugansk. Russian President Vladimir Putin defended Russia's actions to protect its border security based on Russo-Slavic culture. As a result, Ukraine's leadership was confronted with a significant cultural dilemma.

At this time, the Ukrainian government was defending its borders, grappling with internal political turmoil, and seeking international support for aid. President Putin's narrative had a profound impact on Ukraine's messaging strategy. In response, Ukraine focused its esprit de guerre on an ethnocentric Ukrainian messaging campaign that aimed to differentiate its cultural identity.

Impact of Language Policy Changes on Recruitment Pools

While initially effective, the focus on Ukrainian identity narrowed the recruitment pool, ultimately complicating its current military efforts. Ukraine has ethnic diversity, with an estimated one-third of its domestic population a mix of Muslims, Caucasians, Jews, Belarusians, Hungarians, Russians, and Tatars. For the sizable minority who actively speak Russian, Ukraine's sovereignty means more than simply defending Ukrainian culture. This public support is necessary for Ukraine to win the war.

Other under-leveraged factors in Ukraine's messaging strategy are the cultural legacies of the Soviet era. When the Ukrainian government changed the national language to Ukrainian in 2019, polling showed complex reactions from citizens. Even in Lugansk, some ethnic Russians empathized with Ukraine's right to redefine the national language. However, other citizens regarded the government's decision as dismissive of their ancestral lineages and daily life. At the time, president elect Volodymyr Zelenskyy cautioned against the ruling, urging the need to “…adapt laws and decisions that consolidate society, and not vice-versa”.

The issue of Ukraine's language policy becomes increasingly divisive as the government takes steps to eliminate Russian as a de facto language, impacting these ethnic minorities. The Ukrainian government pressed local businesses to request customers speak Ukrainian first rather than Russian. Then, Ukrainian officials attempted to offset social irritations over the reforms by offering free Ukrainian classes. The expectation that citizens learn Ukrainian after speaking Russian for decades has unintended consequences that create social instability in the community.

As a present-day reality, Russian remains a common language among most people from the former Soviet satellite states. There are Ukrainians themselves who are either part Russian, have Russian family members, or were raised in a Russian language environment. The full support of the culturally Russian-identifying segment of Ukrainian society, with their potential as soldiers, resistance fighters, and community builders, is not just beneficial but absolutely essential. 

Whatever the Ukrainian government's intent, the global message seems to some that Ukraine is fighting for a future specific to ethnic Ukrainians. Effectively, this perception alienates and isolates portions of Ukrainian society near and abroad. It will serve Ukraine's war effort to connect more fundamentally, based on common goals, to the broader Russian-speaking community.

Given the impact of AI on communication technologies and machine translation, people are connecting globally on shared commonalities. Consequently, it makes highly ethnocentric and nationalistic war fighting messaging campaigns seem outdated in today’s international environment. By Ukraine shifting its messaging strategy towards an outward-facing concept like collective identity, its fight for independence will have the opportunity to resonate more broadly to communities that Ukraine needs.  

Collective Identity vs. Ethnocentric Narratives

The Russian language is necessary to evolve Ukraine’s messaging campaign. On a primordial level, language is a connective cultural tissue that binds people. In Soviet popular culture, the films, shows, music, literature, and jokes were constructed in the Russian language. Despite any loathing for having to use Russian by native peoples, this interconnectedness is still present in modern popular culture. Thus, a societal stigma now ferments, causing a negative perception of the Russian language and culture.

The Ukrainian government's aspiration to preserve and promote its native language and culture is a commendable goal —nonetheless, a cultural reform to integrate socially after the war is won. Drawing from the successful  strategies of the Roman Emperor Constantine and founder of the Turkish Republic Kemal Mustafa Atatürk illustrate this point.

Respectively, the immense cultural reforms involving religion, mentality, and language of the Christian Roman Empire and the secular Turkish Republic occurred postwar. In reverse order, this approach is akin to the state demanding people fight for a future to which they do not belong. Instead, to expand the audience for Ukraine's efforts, inclusivity of the global Russian-speaking community and Eurasian identity should be key themes.

Despite the complexities, there is a palpable desire for freedom from Russia's prerogatives across Eurasia. A prospect that may entice other nations to risk a move against Russia by offering or passively allowing money, resources, and soldiers to arrive in Ukraine. In recent history, successful and unsuccessful bids for post-Soviet state independence illustrate the benefits of collective identity.

Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania effectively leveraged collective identity to unite against the Soviet invasion between (1986-1991). Despite the threat, all three nations maintained their separate cultural identities but found common ground in the desire for autonomous governance. The bonds of the Singing Revolution were so strong that the trio forced the impending Soviet army to back down.

Contrarily, the Chechen Wars (1991-2000) show a failed, ethnocentric campaign for independence. The Chechens of this time concentrated uniquely on preserving Chechen-Ingush culture. Slowly, the Russian government divided the previously tightly knit Chechen population.

Today, roughly half the Chechen community remains under political asylum, refusing to return permanently to Russia. The Chechen wars are still a touchy subject because, after taking 20 years to secure the North Caucasus, Russia nearly lost its power in Eurasia. Ultimately, Russia’s leadership recognized its odds and risked state collapse to win.

The fate of the first Chechen Republic of Ichkeria (1994-1996) foreshadows Ukraine's future at its current trajectory. In the early 1990s, President Herbert W. Bush's administration supported Chechnya’s fight for an independent democratic state. Technically, Ichkeria won the first war for autonomy led by the former Soviet Air Force General Dzhokhar Dudayev. Yet, the warfighting skills of the Vainakh could not compete with Russian subterfuge, cluster bombs, and power of numbers in drafts.

By the second Chechen war, Ichkeria's forces resorted to criminal and terrorist organizations for weapons and recruitment. Once discovering evidence, Russia demonstrated to the international community that Chechnya’s soldiers were bandits and jihadists —the counterparts to al-Qaeda's 1991 Twin Towers bombing and the infamy of September 11th, 2001. Over time, the Chechens' popularity as freedom fighters and victims of Russian tyranny devolved into Islamic extremism and terrorism. 

Russia’s “denazification” narrative in Ukraine mirrors the eradication policies of “Wahhabism” early in the Chechen Wars. Already, President Putin is working to establish this strategic narrative by labeling Ukraine a hotspot of neo-Nazism in Europe. Lest we ignore Russia's domestic Nazi culture, President Putin's proof is the existence of a few within Ukraine's military.

Alongside its ground battle, President Putin's strategy is to defeat Ukraine on the premise of global terrorism. However, the Russian government must show "plausible evidence" to create doubt and alter perceptions to achieve such an international political coup. Hence, the Russian Investigative Committee formally charging U.S. and NATO officials with financing terrorism as of April 2024.

Moreover, President Putin has blamed Ukraine and the Allies twice for domestic terrorism issues in Russia. The first such incident occurred on October 29th, 2023, when Mr. Putin held Ukraine and its "neighbors" accountable for a racially charged mob in Makhachkala. Although ISIS-Khorasan claimed responsibility for the tragedy at Crocus City Hall on March 22nd, 2024, Mr. Putin labeled Ukraine and the West complicit.

Russia is searching for an excuse to justify international counterterrorism operations to weaken Ukraine’s military leadership. Despite the blatant hypocrisy, Russia will present any shred of evidence to the UN to justify the further occupation of Ukraine.  More shrewdly, President Putin seeks international support from the UN Security Council and members like China, Algeria, and Ecuador because it will benefit Russia's global posture in the future.

Potential Benefits of Inclusive Messaging

As resources and ranks deplete, Ukraine may fall into Russia's counterterrorism trap. In interviews, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy maintains Ukraine's unwavering commitment to fight against Russia's territorial incursions, regardless of international aid. The consequences will be dire if the Ukrainian military fails to replenish its ranks.

Currently, the Russian army is larger than at the start of the war, as attested to by USEUCOM Commander General Cavoli. Over the past two years, Russia's significant conscription efforts have grown the army by fifteen percent. The stark reality of these numbers on the battlefield will become more apparent, as evidenced by Ukraine's recent draft and consular decisions. If the NATO Allies and Members do not send reinforcements, inevitably, the criminal networks that facilitate global terrorism will be a perilous recourse.

Ukraine, unlike the 1994 Ichkeria Republic, has the advantage of significant aid from the West, including the U.S., U.K., Germany, and Finland. However, it lacks the generational recruitment pools that the Chechen ethnic identity provided. Despite the U.S. Congress passing the 2024 Ukraine military aid package valued at $61 billion, the soldier gap remains, underscoring the unique challenges Ukraine faces in recruitment.

Russia’s official act of war against Ukraine on the historical date of February 24th, 2022, was executed under the guise of a special military operation. This key Russian narrative is relevant to Ukraine's current military attrition. In reality, the Ukrainian population and military have been suffering causalities at the hands of Russian regular and irregular forces since 2014.

The current recruitment problem is partially due to Ukraine's battles over the last decade. Nevertheless, given Russia's historical capacity to weather high and low-intensity conflict, Ukraine's military vulnerabilities were destined to surface. Shifting Ukraine's messaging campaign now to collective identity to counter the recruitment gap dovetails with recent NATO engagements.

In March 2024, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg visited the South Caucasus region. Concurrently, Armenian Prime Minister Pashinyan ended a forces agreement with Russia while motioning Armenia’s bid for EU membership. The Ukrainian leadership could capitalize on the momentum of these regional efforts for its war of independence.

Overcoming the risks of national political dynamics across Eurasia

By and large, the people of the former Soviet Union have neither love lost for Stalin nor communism. Yet, paradoxically, some feel nostalgia for the unity and predictability of Soviet times. This complex sentiment reflects a human connection between loving their identity and wanting to defeat aspects of the corrupt Russian system. For instance, BYPOL in Poland is a Russian-speaking group of former Belarusian officials attempting to dispel Moscow's influence in modern Belarus.

The relationship between the former Soviet states and Russia is a complex one. Some people of the Soviet Era cast a cynical eye on Ukraine's bid for freedom as a duel between Russia and NATO. It seems too idealistic that one of the satellites could break free from Mother Russia. The leaders of these nations restrain support due to this belief, evaluating the longevity of U.S. and Western partners’ steps to enable Ukraine. In some cases, the fear of Russia's retaliation is greater than the desire for concrete autonomy.

The role of Eurasian Identity in Russia's Alliances

Several former Soviet nations will be unlikely to provide or permit support on a governmental level. For one, Belarus hosts Russia's tactical Iskander nuclear ballistic missiles. Chechnya regularly provides special police forces to augment Russia's military campaigns. Publicly, President Putin maintains a close relationship with Belarusian President Lukashenko and Chechen President Kadyrov.

In Central Asia, Kyrgyzstan’s position is slightly complicated due to trade agreements with Russia involving China. Over the decades, Kazakhstan's leadership has shown a tendency to align with Russia. However, Kazakh Foreign Minster Tokayev pushes back on specific topics important to Russia. Chiefly nuclear weapons and non-acceptance of Donetsk and Lugansk as breakaway regions.

Culturally, Kazakhstan is transitioning its alphabet from Cyrillic to Latin, a form of social distancing from Russian culture. Other nations in the margins, such as Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan, are potential audiences. In 2023, Tajik President Rahmon called it a "lack of respect," referring to President Putin's absent investment in and care of the Central Asian states. The Uzbek government also began switching the alphabet to Latin. These subtle signals may indicate Russia's declining influence in Eurasia despite shared cultural heritage.

Moldova aside, the nations of Eastern Europe, and Armenia are outspoken in their interest in affirming autonomy from Russia. Although Georgia has declared intent to join NATO, the parliament passing a recent Foreign Agents bill creates some doubt. Despite the challenges, the prospect of detangling themselves from Russia's hold on their respective domestic affairs, borders, and energy security may be enticing.

To overcome these challenging dynamics, a cohesive, inclusive narrative is critical. The commonalities of identity, including the Russian language, that intertwine the destinies of all nations across the Baltics, the Caucasus region, and Central Asia. This type of momentum, starting at the local level among opposition groups, may eventually rise to the national level over time to mitigate the otherwise bleak impending outcome for Ukraine.

After all, a win for Ukraine allows for further self-determination across Russia's satellite nations. These regions encompass the core Eurasian audiences with vested cultural and economic interests in a democratic, autonomous Ukraine with EU and NATO membership. Ukraine needs the will of these former Soviet neighbors, especially considering Russia's nuclear leverage over the NATO Allies.

In February 2024, President Putin issued a chilling nuclear threat during his national assembly address after French President Macron mentioned the possibility of sending troops to Ukraine. In Europe, the prospect of nuclear war caused public protests against the Ukrainian-Russo conflict. Swiftly, German Chancellor Scholtz clarified troops were not part of the discussion. This incident further underscores the urgent need for Ukraine to explore alternative military recruitment solutions, without necessarily relying on NATO's intervention. 

Obstacles for refining Ukraine’s messaging to collective identity

There are challenges inherent in placing Ukrainian-centric narratives second to broader issues impacting other Russian-speaking and Eurasian peoples. Firstly, the Russian government promotes collective identity among Russian-speaking Slavic peoples. Secondly, many Ukrainians also strongly support Ukrainian-centric and culturally relevant narratives that emphasize their country's independence.

The Russian government leverages the Russian language and shared Slavic heritage and history in its messaging campaign, which has seen some measure of success inside Russia and within Russian-speaking diaspora communities. Russia’s spin on the war in Ukraine resonates in certain Asian nations as a fight against the West, further illustrating the need to counter Russia’s narratives dimensionally. However, the weaknesses in Russia’s campaign of distortion and influence lies in its alienation of Mongol-Asian, Caucasian, and western-Slavic peoples who were once under Soviet control.

If Ukraine reframes the next chapter of the war as a battle for the freedom of Eurasian peoples from Russia’s corrupt influence, this message could resonate with many nations and communities beyond Russia’s borders. While this approach is not exclusive of Ukraine’s suffering, the narrative must include the struggles and plights of its neighbors to rally the support Ukraine needs. There will be resistance to accepting a narrative that shifts the perspective away from the Ukrainian people, but the right to self-governance, independent of Russia’s prerogatives, is a theme broad enough to garner substantial support to effectively and thoroughly pressure Russia.

In Summary

Given Ukraine’s asymmetric manpower and weaponry compared to Russia, Ukraine’s ability to leverage culture and language becomes a matter of existential importance. A concerted collective messaging effort, involving the European, Caucasian, and Asian fronts, is necessary to exert more pressure on Russia. This is the moment for Ukraine to fine-tune its messaging strategy, which must effectively reflect the hybrid warfare it is engaged in with Russia. The time has come for Ukraine to adopt more innovative and creative measures to bolster its war of independence.

Ukraine's path to bolstering its military recruitment and countering Russian hybrid warfare lies in strategically shifting its messaging towards a more inclusive collective Eurasian identity. Embracing the cultural and linguistic diversity within Ukraine, particularly the Russian-speaking communities, is essential to expanding its recruitment pool and strengthening internal unity. Historical examples from the Baltic states and the Chechen conflicts stress the potential benefits and risks of collective versus ethnocentric identities.

As Ukraine navigates its existential struggle against Russian aggression, it must fine-tune its messaging to resonate not just with ethnic Ukrainians but with the Russian-speaking peoples across the former Soviet satellite states. This inclusive approach can garner broader support, both domestically and internationally, and counteract Russia’s narratives of terrorism and denazification. Ultimately, a cohesive and inclusive strategic communication campaign can enhance Ukraine's resilience and fortify its efforts to secure independence and sovereignty.

The global messaging environment has evolved rapidly over the course of only ten years as a result of an increase in Internet access, dynamic social media applications, and readily available AI-empowered machine translation. This evolution in communication creates an atmosphere in which people from different countries, cultures, and backgrounds can understand one another more fundamentally as part of humanity. As a result, highly ethnocentric and nationalistic messaging campaigns that look inward lose momentum on global audiences. Thus, Ukraine’s challenges in strategic messaging require evolving with the modern times as much as combating with Russia in hybrid warfare.

~E

Gray Truths©2024