The beginning of the end? – Colonel surprised by war criticism on Russian TV

Basically “everything” what is broadcast on state television is accurately recorded, especially in times of war,” political analyst and Russia expert Alexander Dubowy told krone.at. The views of Khodaryonok, who is considered a hardliner but also a realist, are well known in Russia , and certainly also to the moderator of the political show, who openly expressed her displeasure: Already in early February – three weeks before the start of the invasion – he published an opinion piece in which he stated that Russian troops could not defeat Ukraine in a short time.

Expert: fake debate in public
However, the ex-colonel’s appearance in the program is notable, as he has not been invited to the studio since the beginning of the war, explains Dubowy. “In short, Mikhail Khodaryonok’s statements confirm the apparent expansion of the spectrum of opinion on state television that has been going on for weeks,” he says. This reflects the ongoing debate within the Russian elite. There is a “war party”, to which Chechen ruler Ramzan Kadyrov belongs, and which advocates even more brutal action in Ukraine, and a “peace party” which supports the invasion but strives for a diplomatic solution.

The fact that both sides have their say in discussions on state television “is intended to give the impression of different points of view in order to appeal to different social interest groups,” explains the Russia expert. However, the Kremlin determines the framework within which this happens. State television broadcasts are considered his mouthpiece.

During the show, the former Russian General Staff officer contradicted a number of claims made by Russian state propaganda, which he criticized as “information sedatives.” Ukrainians’ motivation to fight for their country is quite high, Khodaryonok said – clearly positioning himself against the claim, often repeated on state television, that many Ukrainians are describing Russia’s “special military operation” as an alleged “liberation”. consider.

“It doesn’t take courage, it takes permission”
“It doesn’t take courage to say something on Russian television, you need permission,” Russian dissident and former world chess champion Garry Kasparov said on Twitter about Khodaryonok’s TV appearance. Being allowed to express his criticism openly was “part of a broad Kremlin campaign” designed to dampen expectations in his own country. Putin’s harsh critic wrote that diplomacy and ceasefires could then be used to save Russia’s remaining gains.

Russia expert Dubowy comes to a similar assessment. In any case, he warns against overestimating such mock debates. The conflict between the parties is by no means a sign of a palace revolt: “Peace Party” and “War Party” are calling Putin as their witnesses, “thereby trying to secure their own hard-won inner-litaristic position,” says Dubowy. In a way, Putin has the ability to stay out of the discourse and control it indirectly.

Preparation for exit strategy?
Khodaryonok’s statements that Moscow must find a way out of the situation “that the whole world is against us” are to some extent a “test balloon” – one of many publicly made demands. In this way, Putin expands his options and can prepare for an exit strategy – possibly a negotiated solution. With the mock public debate, Putin expands his decision-making space.

The demands placed on the public space “ultimately relieve him of any need to justify his decisions. Of course, the last word remains exclusively with Putin,” said Dubovy. He alone made the decision to invade and ultimately decides on everything. One thing is equally clear, according to the expert: “Others are taking responsibility for the consequences of this decision.”