{
  "id": 2553652,
  "title": "It Is Not Putin’s War. It’s Russia’s",
  "url": "https://urgent.news/2026/08/22/it-is-not-putins-war-its-russias",
  "topic": "world",
  "section": "World",
  "published": "2026-08-22T10:31:00.000Z",
  "source": {
    "name": "Kyiv Post",
    "slug": "kyiv-post",
    "url": "https://www.kyivpost.com/opinion/82754"
  },
  "original_language": "en",
  "account": "In a recent opinion piece, sanctioned Russian oligarch Andrey Melnichenko contends that the West should focus less on Ukraine and more on Russia. According to Melnichenko, the war did not begin due to Russia's decision to invade Ukraine; instead, it started when trust between great powers deteriorated, and politics took over. The Ukrainian situation is portrayed as inconsequential in this narrative. This perspective is a typical tactic used by Russia to avoid accountability for its actions.\n\nWestern media often attribute Russian missile strikes on Ukraine to \"Putin's missiles,\" implying that the president personally carried out these attacks. This is a factual error and a form of moral dishonesty, as the missiles are launched by Russian officers, engineers, and journalists. It is Russia's war, not Putin's war.\n\nIt is inaccurate to say that wars are fought by dictators. Russia's war is fought by its army, which relies on millions of Russian men and women who maintain the war machine. While individual guilt for war crimes may vary, the broader political and historical responsibility lies with the nation. Historically, nations have been held accountable for wars, even if individual culpability differs.\n\nCalling it \"Putin's war\" is not only incorrect but morally negligent. The author argues that this narrative serves to absolve ordinary Russians of any guilt or responsibility. While there are Russians who genuinely oppose the war, they are not representative of the broader national sentiment. According to the latest Levada survey in February 2026, 72.2% of respondents supported the actions of the Russian army, while only 16.7% opposed it.\n\nThe author draws a connection between the lack of Russian unrest over the war and the comfort level of citizens, who have not been significantly impacted by fuel shortages, internet outages, or other consequences of the Ukrainian drone strikes. The discrepancy between the Kremlin's rhetoric and the realities faced by Russians has become a source of growing dissatisfaction and anger. This is a stark contrast to the apparent lack of unrest in response to the Ukrainian suffering.\n\nThe piece suggests that Melnichenko's argument is a strategic move to avoid alienating ordinary Russians and to maintain the myth of an innocent and almost holy Russia. This narrative allows Russians to distance themselves from the war's consequences while blaming others or the state for their actions.",
  "summary": "Those who bet that Russians would be appalled at the slaughter they inflicted on Ukraine have lost the wager. Four years of Ukrainian suffering and senseless meatgrinder tactics have not shaken Russian society. Disruption to Russian comfort is all that’s made a mark.",
  "key_points": [
    "War not Putin's, Russia's, according to Melnichenko's op-ed",
    "Trust between great powers deteriorated, politics took over",
    "72.2% of Russians support Russian army, 16.7% oppose"
  ],
  "editors_take": null,
  "illustration": null,
  "coverage": {
    "outlets": 1,
    "also_reported_by": []
  },
  "ai_generated": true,
  "disclaimer": "Summaries, key points and the editor’s take are written by software from other outlets’ reporting and may contain errors — always check the linked original."
}