Russian officials predict the US’s collapse amid the protests in Los Angeles. Alexei Pushkov, chair of the Russian Federation Council’s Commission on Information Policy, has claimed that the US is now “the top candidate for disintegration” due to mounting internal divisions, Ukrinform reports.

Pushkov, a prominent member of the ruling United Russia party, has shared his statement on Telegram.

“California is in a state of chaos and lawlessness. Rioters are pelting police cars with bricks, conveniently pre-positioned on pallets throughout Los Angeles, just like during the 2020 riots,” he writes. 

He has also accused California Governor Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, of siding with rioters and blaming federal authorities.

“While Brussels fantasizes about Russia’s collapse, which won’t happen, it is the US that may not survive the deep divisions shaking its society,” Pushkov has argued. 

He has concluded with a provocative prediction: “In the 21st century, the US may well become the Disunited States.”

Pushkov is no ordinary lawmaker. A career diplomat, he also heads the Russian delegation to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and was among the authors of the constitutional amendments that enabled Vladimir Putin to extend his presidency indefinitely.

Meanwhile, Konstantin Blokhin, a political scientist with the Russian Academy of Sciences, has advised Trump to suppress the California protests by force. He has downplayed concerns over public opinion in what he described as a “non-Republican” state.

“I’m 100% certain that Democrats and liberals will immediately label him a dictator, despot, fascist — they’ll do it no matter what. If the situation develops rapidly and unpredictably, force will be necessary. If national security is at risk, no one will sit idly by,” he has claimed. 

Earlier, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio issued a formal message congratulating the Russian people on Russia Day, which coincided with Kyiv’s announcement that Russian troop losses in Ukraine have surpassed one million.

Rubio’s greetings come as Russia continues its escalated daily airstrikes on Ukrainian cities, causing numerous civilian casualties.

Russia is quietly building a pro-Kremlin power base across Africa by targeting the continent's youth and academic institutions with state-funded educational programs and cultural influence campaigns, Ukraine's military intelligence agency (HUR) said on June 12.

According to Andrii Yusov, the agency's spokesperson, the Kremlin's strategic aim is to shape a future generation of African elites that are politically and ideologically aligned with Moscow's interests.

"African education and sports are increasingly being used by Russia as tools of hybrid influence with a view to forming a new generation of political and administrative elites loyal to the Kremlin,” Yusov said in a statement.

HUR says that Russia has been preserving and even expanding government-funded university quotas for African students, particularly in fields such as agriculture, engineering, pedagogy, and medicine. These programs are designed to build networks of influence while providing young professionals with technical skills under the umbrella of Russian ideology.

In parallel, Moscow is pushing to introduce Russian language courses and teacher training initiatives in prominent African universities. The long-term goal, according to Yusov, is to synchronize African educational systems with Russian standards.

Russia has long been using hybrid warfare and disinformation in Africa, particularly since it started the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

While some African countries have maintained a neutral stance or abstained from key U.N. votes condemning Russian aggression, Ukrainian officials and independent analysts say the Kremlin is actively working to tilt that neutrality in its favor by exploiting historical Soviet ties and offering academic and economic incentives.

Beyond education, HUR also flagged the Kremlin's growing investment in youth sports programs on the continent as part of its broader hybrid warfare toolkit.

Bloomberg reported in June 2024 that the Kremlin is coercing thousands of migrants and foreign students, particularly from Africa, to fight in its war against Ukraine.

African POWs on how they ended up fighting for Russia

In this exclusive interview, the Kyiv Independent interviews Somali and Sierra Leonean prisoners of war who fought for Russia in its war against Ukraine.

The Kyiv IndependentDaria Shulzhenko

Russian President Vladimir Putin claimed that Moscow possesses the world's most advanced nuclear systems but must significantly strengthen its ground forces, Russian state media reported on June 11.

As Russia continues its war against Ukraine, Moscow has increased investment in its military. Russian defense spending has reached its highest level since the Cold War at 6.3% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP).

Putin claimed that Russia's nuclear triad has the highest share of new equipment among nuclear powers.

"Currently, the share of modern weapons and equipment in the strategic nuclear forces is already 95%. This is a good indicator, in fact, it is the highest of all nuclear powers in the world," Russian state media reported Putin saying.

Putin then called for Russia's ground forces to be improved as quickly as possible.

"The dominant force in conducting modern military operations of any scale and intensity remains the ground forces. And it is important to increase their combat capabilities in the shortest possible time," he said.

Russia began its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. Russia first began its armed aggression against Ukraine in 2014, when its proxies occupied territory in eastern Ukraine and Russia annexed Crimea.

Russia regularly strikes civilian infrastructure in its ongoing war against Ukraine. On June 11, a Russian drone attack on Kharkiv killed at least three people and injured 64 others.

Putin’s suspected daughter found working in anti-war galleries in Paris

Nastya Rodionova, a Russian writer and artist who has been based in Paris since 2022, had only met gallery manager Luiza Rozova in passing at events before she learned who the 22-year-old’s parents were. Described by a number of people as a “very nice and well-mannered girl,” Rozova is

The Kyiv IndependentKate Tsurkan

Errol Musk, the father of U.S. billionaire Elon Musk, has arrived in Moscow to attend the Forum of the Future 2050, a pro-Kremlin event scheduled for June 9-10,  the Russian newspaper Kommersant reported on June 8.

The report comes amid a high-profile public conflict between Elon Musk, the world’s wealthiest businessman, and his former ally, U.S. President Donald Trump. In May, Musk announced he would step down as an advisor to Trump and as the de facto head of the Department of Government Efficiency. Since then, he has emerged as a major critic of the president.

The pro-Kremlin event will be hosted by the Tsargrad Institute and led by far-right Russian ideologue Alexander Dugin.

"I am eager to meet everyone. As far as I know, Russians are among the most intelligent people on the planet. It would be foolish not to ask their opinion on all sorts of issues," Errol Musk was quoted as saying by the Russian state news agency TASS.

Among the forum's panels are sessions titled "Russian Space: The Race for Mars" and "The Battle for Hearts and Minds: The Ideology of Sovereign Russia."

According to Kommersant, scheduled speakers include Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, oligarch Konstantin Malofeev, and prominent state TV anchor Ekaterina Andreeva.

Errol Musk, a former South African businessman and politician, has publicly praised Russian President Vladimir Putin, calling him "a strong leader" and saying that "it would be foolish not to admire Putin" in an April interview with BBC Russia.  

Join our community

Support independent journalism in Ukraine. Join us in this fight.

Support Us

Errol's attendance at the far-right event comes amid growing scrutiny of his son, Elon Musk, whose role as the head of SpaceX and the Starlink satellite network places him at the center of both U.S. defense operations and Ukraine's battlefield communications.

SpaceX holds billions in Pentagon and NASA contracts, including a $1.8-billion agreement with the U.S. intelligence community to build a classified spy satellite system.

Despite initially aiding Ukraine by providing Starlink terminals to stabilize battlefield communications, Elon Musk has increasingly echoed Kremlin-aligned narratives.

He has suggested that President Volodymyr Zelensky lacks public support in Ukraine and has repeatedly called U.S. aid a driver of a "never-ending draft meat grinder."

Those statements have been warmly received by Russian officials, military bloggers, and state media outlets, which have praised Musk as a voice of reason and a critic of Western involvement in the war.

Dmitry Novikov, deputy chairman of the Russian parliament's international affairs committee, said on June 6 that Moscow is ready to grant political asylum to Musk following his public dispute with U.S. President Donald Trump.

US expects Russia’s retaliation for Operation Spiderweb to continue soon

One official told Reuters that while the timing remains unclear, a retaliatory strike could be expected in the coming days and is likely to be “asymmetrical.”

The Kyiv IndependentTim Zadorozhnyy

Errol Musk, the South African billionaire and father of Elon Musk, traveled to Moscow to take part in a Kremlin-aligned ideological forum “Future-2050” organized by Alexandr Dugin, a central figure in Russia’s Kremlin-backed nationalist movement. During his visit, Musk Sr. expressed support for Russian President Vladimir Putin and repeated several Ukraine-related narratives of Kremlin propaganda.

Forum hosted by Russian World ideologist Alexandr Dugin

On 7 June, Russian propaganda outlets Tsargrad and REN TV reported that Errol Musk had arrived in Moscow to attend the “Future Forum-2050.” The event is organized by Alexandr Dugin, who is widely known as the chief ideologist of the “Russian World” concept and a vocal supporter of Russia’s armed aggression against Ukraine. Dugin has long advocated for the destruction of Ukrainian statehood and played a role in pro-Russian protests in 2014.

The forum is backed by Konstantin Malofeev, a Russian Orthodox businessman recognized for financing projects promoting radical anti-Western and anti-democratic ideologies.

Musk Sr. repeats Kremlin claims about Ukraine and Putin

Speaking to journalists at the event, Errol Musk once again expressed his support for Vladimir Putin, according to Liga. He repeated several well-known Kremlin talking points, including false claims about “biolaboratories” in Ukraine and the supposed need to “protect Russian-speaking populations.” These themes are central to Russia’s narrative justifying its aggression in Ukraine.

WSJ uncovers Musk’s regular communications with Kremlin since 2022

Earlier, on 4 April 2025, Musk Sr. told the Russian-language BBC service that his family holds “a certain admiration” for Putin.

Forum agenda includes Russian ideological and military themes

The forum is structured around a series of panels and discussions focusing on Russia’s ideological future and military aspirations. The announced topics include:

• “The fight for souls and minds. The ideology of sovereign Russia”
• “Russian cosmism. The race for Mars”
• “Digital sovereignty. Artificial intelligence in the service of Russia”
• “Patriotic education. The image of the hero of our time”
• “Wars of the future. Gamification of war”

Among the invited speakers are Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, state TV host and top propagandist Ekaterina Andreeva from Channel One, and a number of propagandists from Western countries.

Elon Musk claims Odesa could fall if Russo-Ukrainian war drags on

Ukrainian officials have denied Russian claims that Kyiv failed to participate in a prisoner of war (POW) exchange and body repatriation effort planned on 6 June, saying no official date had yet been agreed upon.

The Institute for the Study of War (ISW) reported on 7 June that Russian officials publicly accused Ukraine of refusing to engage in an exchange of POWs and bodies of killed in action (KIA) soldiers.

According to ISW, the claims were made by Russian Presidential Aide Vladimir Medinsky, Russian GRU Deputy Chief Alexander Zorin, and Deputy Defense Minister Alexander Fomin. They alleged that Russia was prepared to hand over severely wounded and sick POWs, those under the age of 25, and approximately 6,000 KIA bodies as agreed in Istanbul on 2 June.

Zorin further claimed that Russian representatives had waited on the Belarusian border for the Ukrainian side to finalize technical details of the exchange. Russian Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Maria Zakharova and Federation Council Committee Deputy Chair Andrei Klimov also echoed accusations that Ukraine refused to accept the return of the bodies.

Ukraine refutes Russian claims

In response, the Ukrainian Coordination Headquarters for the Treatment of POWs denied all Russian allegations. The office clarified that no date for the repatriation had yet been set and emphasized that lists for the POW exchange were still being finalized between both sides.

The Ukrainian headquarters reaffirmed Ukraine’s “full commitment” to constructive engagement aimed at ensuring the successful implementation of both the KIA repatriation and POW exchange agreements.

“The Kremlin’s unwillingness to engage in good faith in lower-level confidence building measures designed to facilitate larger peace negotiations further demonstrates Russia’s disinterest in peace negotiations,” ISW wrote.

A Trump official who dismantled a counter-disinformation office in the United States government has links to the Kremlin, the Telegraph reported on June 3.

Darren Beattie, who was appointed to the State Department in February 2025 as under secretary for public diplomacy and public affairs, has come under scrutiny for his pro-Russian views. According to the Telegraph, Beattie is married to a Russian woman with links to the Kremlin.

His wife – Yulia Kirillova – is the niece of Sergei Chernikov, a former Russian official who reportedly helped Russian President Vladimir Putin in the election campaign which first brought him to power in 2000.

Beattie notably played a role in dismantling the Counter Foreign Information Manipulation and Interference office, or R/FIMI, which was previously tasked with tracking and countering disinformation from Russia, China, and Iran.

R/FIMI was officially shut down in April 2025, according to a press statement from Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who claimed that the office "spent millions of dollars to actively silence and censor the voices of Americans they were supposed to be serving."

According to sources cited by the Telegraph, Beattie relentlessly pursued R/FIMI after his appointment to the State Department. Secretary Rubio confirmed that Beattie played a significant role in dismantling the agency.

Beattie also showed a keen interest in classified materials related to Russia, raising concerns about granting him access to sensitive information. The sources also expressed concerns about whether he had been adequately vetted – a process that can take anywhere from a couple of months to over a year to complete.

Beattie previously served in the first Trump administration but was ousted after allegedly attending a white nationalist conference in 2018. Since then, he reinvented himself as an "alt-right media" figure and founded the news outlet Revolver.

Through Revolver, Beattie has long criticized R/FIMI and promoted narratives aligned with Kremlin disinformation. He has argued that the U.S. orchestrates "color revolutions" around the world, including in Ukraine – a common narrative used in Kremlin propaganda to delegitimize pro-democracy movements as Western-backed coups.

Beattie has also written social media posts suggesting that Western institutions should be "infiltrated" by the Kremlin, and has attacked the so-called "globalist American empire."

Two months before Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, Beattie wrote on X: "Imagine the whining from the Globalist American Empire if Putin 'invades' Ukraine... love it when our national security bureaucrats fail!"

The Trump administration has repeatedly come under fire for its perceived sympathies toward Russia. It has also been criticized for shuttering R/FIMI, particularly amidst a global "information war."

According to the National Endowment for Democracy, Russia spends an estimated $1.5 billion annually on disinformation and foreign influence campaigns. In Europe alone, the Kremlin is believed to be behind 80% of disinformation operations.

US House Speaker Johnson backs Senate bill to toughen sanctions on Russia

“There’s many members of Congress that want us to sanction Russia as strongly as we can,” U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson said. “And I’m an advocate of that.”

The Kyiv IndependentKateryna Denisova

Today, we will discuss the increased Russian provocations and calls for the denazification of the Baltic countries. Not wanting to be caught off guard and taking these threats seriously, these countries are already taking measures to improve their security.

He accused these nations of showing high aggressiveness and claimed they were underestimating the devastating consequences of provoking Moscow.

This statement echoed a wave of similarly hostile rhetoric from Russian state officials and media figures over the past two years.

Questioning the sovereignty of nations

Russian officials, including former president of Russia, Dmitry Medvedev, now deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council, have repeatedly questioned the sovereignty of the Baltic countries.

Medvedev declared that the Baltic states belong to Russia and accused NATO of harboring anti-Russian intentions. State television host Vladimir Solovyov has gone even further, stating that these countries don’t need independence and that their sovereignty is a joke.

Such statements are not isolated; they reflect a coordinated campaign to frame the Baltics as illegitimate states and NATO’s eastern flank as a battleground ripe for denazification, a chilling repeat of the Russian justification for its war on Ukraine.

The return of a dangerous word: “denazification”

The term denazification is particularly troubling, as it has historically been used by Russia as a pretext for aggression. Prior to its 2022 invasion of Ukraine, Moscow framed its war aims in identical terms, alleging that Kyiv needed to be cleansed of Nazis despite Ukraine being a functioning democracy with a Jewish president.

Now, with similar language being used against Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania, the fear is that these statements may not be mere propaganda but early signs of a more expansive regional strategy.

NATO’s Achilles heel

From a military standpoint, the Baltic states represent a significant weakness for Russia, making them a tempting target.

Kaliningrad, Russia’s exclave on the Baltic Sea, is completely isolated and surrounded by NATO territory, so prominent Russian media and political figures are constantly calling for the establishment of a direct land route to Kaliningrad.

Most important is the narrow Suwalki Gap between Poland and Lithuania, as control over it would either sever or restore Russian land access to Kaliningrad, depending on who holds it.

Russia’s Baltic fleet faces a NATO wall

At the same time, since Finland and Sweden joined NATO, the Baltic Sea has become almost entirely encircled by NATO members, severely limiting Russian maritime maneuverability.

Russia’s Baltic Fleet, already small and aging, is no match for the combined naval power of NATO states in the region. On land, the Baltic countries host forward-deployed NATO battle groups and conduct regular military exercises to prepare for rapid mobilization.

These factors make any quick land grab by Russia, a tactic used in Crimea and eastern Ukraine, far less likely to succeed here. This only seems to enrage the Russian government further, fueling its hostile campaign.

No longer just words

Russia’s scare tactics extend beyond mere threats. The Kremlin actively invokes the presence of Russian-speaking populations in the Baltics, around 24% in Estonia and Latvia, as a rationale for intervention, much like it did in Ukraine.

These demographics are a legacy of Soviet-era population transfers and remain a sensitive issue.

Russian state media routinely portrays these ethnic Russians as oppressed and in need of protection, laying the narrative groundwork for a potential future military action.

Russia repeats Ukraine’s playbook

The Baltics are not ignoring these signals. They have witnessed firsthand how Russia used similar rhetoric to justify its invasion of Ukraine.

What was once dismissed as empty words has become a forerunner of real war. As such, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania are bolstering their defenses, strengthening their ties with NATO, and preparing for the possibility of battle.

The line between information warfare and justification for full-scale war is growing thinner, and with every new threat from Russia, the sense of urgency increases.

Overall, Russia’s repeated calls for the denazification of the Baltic states and its threats of direct retaliation are viewed with the utmost seriousness by their governments.

The parallels with the lead-up to the war in Ukraine are stark, and after a series of provocations in the last months, the stakes are higher than ever.

For Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania, preparing for the worst is not paranoia. It’s a necessity, and they are actively working to improve their security.

In our daily frontline report, we pair up with the military blogger Reporting from Ukraine to keep you informed about what is happening on the battlefield in the Russo-Ukrainian war.

The Czech court has convicted a teacher of pro-Russian propaganda in class, iRozhlas reports.

A court in Prague has delivered a guilty verdict in a case that stirred the country back in April 2022. Hana Bednarzová, a stylistics teacher, denied Russia’s invasion of Ukraine during a class, claimed that “nothing is happening” in Kyiv, and called ČT1, a public television channel, “controlled by George Soros.”

The teacher justified Russia’s actions against Ukraine and called Ukrainian soldiers “Nazis” who “remove skin from alive people and kill children.” Bednarzová also claimed that “the Russians have been killed in Donbas since 2014.”

When 13- to 14-year-old students objected, she dismissed their arguments, citing “edited footage” and “media fakes.”

Bednarzová was fired in May 2022. She tried to sue for reinstatement but failed. During the trial, she did not retract her words and even claimed that “everything about the war is a lie.”

The judge emphasized that the teacher exploited the trust of underage students, who could not critically assess her statements, a key point in the conviction.

Bednarzová called the case a “political witch hunt” and announced plans to run for parliament with the pro-Russian Stačilo! movement, which advocates lifting sanctions on Russia and Belarus.

Earlier, a Czech citizen who joined the Russian Armed Forces contacted Czech diplomats for help, said Daniel Dreik, the spokesperson for the Czech Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Russian forces increasingly rely on poorly equipped infantry assaults, often described as “meat-grinder” attacks. Its leadership often sends waves of infantry soldiers into fire with minimal artillery or drone support, resulting in heavy casualties.

On 25 May, the Institute for the Study of War (ISW) reported that Russian President Vladimir Putin is conducting a coordinated campaign of military escalation and psychological warfare aimed at weakening Ukraine and eroding Western support.

ISW wrote that Putin “is leveraging long-range strikes against Ukrainian cities, aggressive rhetorical campaigns, and excessive pessimism in the West about the battlefield situation in Ukraine in a multi-pronged effort to degrade Ukrainian morale and convince the West that a Russian victory in Ukraine is inevitable and that supporting Ukraine is futile.”

Russia attacks Ukraine with 355 drones. Zelenskyy says Moscow escalates attacks to defy global diplomacy

According to ISW, Russia has intensified long-range missile and drone attacks over the last eight months, launching seven of the largest combined strikes of the war since January 2025.

Weaponizing pessimism and pressure

ISW emphasized that the Kremlin is simultaneously saturating the information space with calls for Ukraine to accept concessions on sovereignty and territorial integrity. These demands, however, are not new. ISW notes they are in line with longstanding Russian war aims, and this shows that “Russia’s demands have not changed over the last three years of war.”

Trump slams Putin as “crazy” after deadly Russian attack, but also blames Zelenskyy and Biden

Despite the messaging, ISW points out that the battlefield situation has changed significantly since early 2022. Russia has suffered three years of manpower and equipment losses, weakening its military’s capacity to achieve large-scale offensive success.

On the ground, Russian progress stalls

ISW reports that Russian advances have slowed, with forces relying increasingly on poorly trained and poorly equipped infantry to sustain pressure. Nevertheless, Putin remains committed to masking battlefield realities with a media and missile campaign intended to disrupt international unity and end Western military assistance.

“Putin remains deeply committed to distracting from the realities of the battlefield situation, however, as bringing about the cessation of Western military assistance to Ukraine is Russia’s only real hope of winning this war,” ISW concludes.

Russia’s massive missile and drone assault kills at least 12 civilians, injures 52, between two prisoner swaps

It happened so quickly.

On Friday afternoon in Delhi, I was at my daughter's school, waiting to pick her up and straining to eavesdrop on knots of parents and -- this being Delhi -- separate knots of household staff. Every tightly bunched group was absorbed by conversation on the only subject anyone in Delhi, and no doubt the rest of India, was talking about: are we going to war with Pakistan?

By Saturday afternoon, my assumption that India and Pakistan would find a way to step back from the brink because they had no other serious choice, seemed wildly optimistic. On the jingoistic, cacophonous, largely unwatchable Indian news channels, there were still reports of drones being shot down and air bases and military infrastructure being attacked. War seemed imminent. So imminent that India’s largest-selling weekly newsmagazine went with “War!” and a battalion of fighter jets on its cover. 

But by five pm on Saturday, Donald Trump announced a complete ceasefire. Before anyone from the Indian or Pakistani government had said anything. Entire nations were caught off guard. The screeching newsreaders, still foaming at the mouth, were outraged – “who moved my war?” 

And then the media swiveled on a dime (rather, a one-rupee coin). Spinning furiously, crazed hamsters on their wheels, the analysts and anchors insisted India had won. In Pakistan, their counterparts were doing much the same. The truth is, both countries had lost 

India and Pakistan had been locked in a clumsy, deadly two-step while the rest of the world looked away. It began on April 22, with a terrorist attack in Pahalgam, Kashmir, in which 26 men, almost all of them Hindu, and singled out for their religious affiliation, were killed. United States Vice President JD Vance, was in India on a “private trip” at the time, with his Indian-American wife and children.

The attack was a provocation that the Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi's Hindu nationalist government could not tolerate. Their supporters bayed for vengeance. And Modi, whose personal brand as the protector of the Hindu nation – boasting in campaign speeches about his 56-inch chest – is predicated on him being the leader of a newly vigorous, aggressive India, an emerging superpower, had to respond with overwhelming force.

It took two weeks -- during which India did not provide proof of the Pakistani state's involvement in the April 22 attack beyond an established history of Pakistan’s financing of terror. The country featured on the Financial Action Task Force's grey list between 2018 and 2022, though it insists it has since largely cleaned up its act. Indian retribution came in the form of the bombing of what India described as terrorist camps. This was, Indian officials said, a restrained, responsible response to Pakistan-sponsored terrorism. No military sites, for example, were hit.

Pakistan said civilians were killed and that mosques were bombed. They then retaliated to India's retaliation. And India retaliated to Pakistan’s retaliation against India’s retaliation. Inevitably, there was a retaliation to the retaliation to the retaliation against the retaliation. And so on, until Trump announced the ceasefire. As the bombings intensified, both India and Pakistan insisted they didn't want war and were taking responsible actions to de-escalate. In the warped logic of this fighting, the bombs being dropped actually signaled both countries' understanding that they could go so far and no further.

Initially, the United States, which has played a part in brokering peace in previous clashes between India and Pakistan, seemed content to let both countries duke it out. It’s “none of our business,” said Vance. While Donald Trump seemed to think the dispute over Kashmir was the latest episode of a show that dated back "1,000 years, probably longer." Later, he modified this assessment to mere centuries.

The truth is, this conflict is a product of British colonial rule, of the hastily conceived and disastrously executed partition of India in 1947. The Cliffs notes, with considerable nuance lost through inadequate summary, are as follows: Kashmir, a Muslim-majority state with a Hindu king, wanted to be independent of both India and Pakistan. But when Pakistani forces invaded Kashmir in October, 1947, the king asked India for help and signed an agreement binding Kashmir to the Indian union. 

It led to the first war between Pakistan and India, nations that were born just weeks earlier as the British departed. Under the terms of a United Nations-negotiated ceasefire, India gained control of about two-thirds of Kashmir. But this was temporary until a plebiscite to determine the future of Kashmir was held. This plebiscite never happened. As a result, both countries believe they have an inalienable right to the entirety of Kashmir: India because of the king's decision to sign the instrument of accession; Pakistan because Kashmir is a Muslim-majority state and Pakistan was created as a homeland for the subcontinent's Muslims. In 1965, both countries fought another inconclusive war. 

But as long as India continues to pretend there is a viable military solution to its disputes with Pakistan, the prospect of conflict, if not outright war, remains an ever-present Damoclean threat.

But since 1989, as the Soviet Union collapsed and there was a proliferation of US-funded mujahideen in the region, separatist sentiments in Kashmir spiraled into violent insurgency. India says these militants are a proxy, a tool of the Pakistani deep state. So Kashmir became a theater of both postcolonial and post-Cold War conflict.

Between 1999 and 2019, the U.S. reliably talked both countries off the ledge and leading international diplomatic efforts to get India and Pakistan to back off when overly aggressive gestures and posturing threatened to become kinetic. The U.S. has Cold War-era strategic and security ties with Pakistan but only recently has India become a close partner with an active role to play in containing China’s emerging dominance. India, Australia, Japan and the U.S. are part of the Quad, a loose grouping intended to counter China’s designs on the Indo-Pacific.

Modi and Trump have made several displays of personal friendship, each supporting the other’s election campaigns. But the Trump administration had declined to intervene in current tensions. It was a position of apathy, as if it had no stake in preventing war. For Modi, it must sting that carefully choreographed hugs with Western leaders had not resulted in more diplomatic support for his military action against Pakistan. 

Modi also received little support from institutions. For instance,  India had lobbied for the IMF to withhold funds from Pakistan. But the IMF chose to release $1 billion in loans to Islamabad, even as Pakistan was engaged in artillery exchanges with India. With the U.S. seemingly taking a back seat, Saudi Arabia and Iran had offered to mediate, as had Russia. Even China, which provides over 80% of the Pakistani army's weaponry and also administers part of Kashmir, said it would help broker peace. 

But it was the U.S. that swooped in over the weekend. Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio both posted about the negotiations, with Trump even saying he had used trade as leverage to prevent a nuclear war. “Millions of people,” he said, “could have been killed.”

While Pakistan were happy to acknowledge the U.S. role in forcing a truce, Indian diplomats and politicians were either tight-lipped or disapproving. India has long resisted external interference in the Kashmir dispute, insisting that negotiations have to be strictly bilateral. Ultimately, neither India nor Pakistan can afford full-scale war. This is not asymmetrical combat. India may be much larger than Pakistan and conventionally more powerful. It may have a growing economy, while Pakistan is struggling to finance its debts. But, as one British analyst said, if this is a Goliath-David struggle, David has a nuclear weapon in his sling. 

The Trump-brokered ceasefire may only be temporary respite – so temporary, indeed, that barely hours after the agreement was announced, the chief minister of Indian-administered Kashmir posted on X that he had heard explosions in the state capital Srinagar. “What the hell,” he wrote, “just happened to the ceasefire?” But as long as India continues to pretend there is a viable military solution to its disputes with Pakistan, the prospect of conflict, if not outright war, remains an ever-present Damoclean threat.

As an Indian citizen and a parent, I find both governments' confidence that they can toe an invisible line more than a little disconcerting. But, judging by the political and media response to the prospect of war, only a few shared my scepticism. In India, since April 22, there have been very few calls for peace, very few questions about the need for a military response to a terrorist attack, even though bombing Pakistan has not deterred subsequent terrorism.

One of those calls for peace, though, came from Himanshi Narwal, whose husband of six days, an Indian navy officer, was shot in front of her. Narwal, who was photographed kneeling beside her husband's prone body, became a symbol of India's grief and outrage. 

That was before she spoke. Narwal told reporters that she only held the men who had murdered her husband responsible and not all Muslims or all Kashmiris. "We want peace," she said, "and only peace."

This sentiment made her a target of Hindu nationalist scorn on social media. Narwal was excoriated as a "woke secular" – a particularly Indian insult, mixing American right wing culture war tropes with the Indian use of the word "secular" to mock Indian liberals who supposedly kowtow to minorities, particularly Muslims.  

India's initial retaliation was given the code name "Operation Sindoor", a reference to the deep red powder some married Hindu women dab on the parting of their hair or on their foreheads. India's military action, in other words, was being taken on behalf of the women who had lost their husbands on April 22. Women like Himanshi Narwal. Though what she, and others like her, might think is apparently besides the point or even worthy of contempt. 

The contrast between Narwal's dignity and the absurd propaganda peddled by the mainstream Indian media would have been comical if it were not simultaneously so depressing. On Friday evening, a friend, an editor at a national magazine, sent me a collection of screen grabs of headlines in India, mostly from television news. Each claim was remarkable -- Pakistani planes being shot out of the sky, rebels from Balochistan capturing the city of Quetta, the Indian navy bombing Karachi, even reports of a coup -- and each claim was either knowingly false or entirely unverified. On Indian TV screens every night, since Wednesday night when India first bombed its targets in Pakistan, we've been exposed to a tale told by idiots.

 Was it too much to hope for some restraint? But the tone taken by the mainstream media, a mimicking of the abrasive arrogance of Hindu nationalist trolls on social media, was matched by the Indian government. I watched a spokesperson from the BJP, India's governing party, tell a British news channel about Modi's "3E policy -- evaporate, eradicate, eliminate... shameless Pakistan needs to be taught a lesson." Oy vey! 

And now, does the ceasefire mean that the so-called 3E policy has been abandoned? Would the Modi government – which had blocked the few critical, independent voices – have the courage to reimagine its response to Pakistan, to reevaluate the belligerence of its rhetoric, and to instead embrace the inherent strength in India’s secular, constitutional values and enter into constructive dialogue?

The signs are not encouraging. In a late bid to wrest the narrative momentum from Donald Trump, Indian politicians, journalists and commentators spread word of the country’s new approach to terrorism. Modi, having been silent through much of the fighting, elaborated on the “new normal,” in an address to the nation on Monday night. India, he said, would no longer distinguish “between the government sponsoring terrorism and the masterminds of terrorism.” The words were belligerent, the policies no kind of solution. 

Perhaps, India’s wounds are still too raw for self-reflection. But the question remains: Is India going to be held hostage to its own anger? Or will it acknowledge that talks, and people to people contact, must resume.

A version of this story was published in last week’s Sunday Read newsletter. Sign up here.

The post The Truth Social Truce appeared first on Coda Story.

Last week, Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky spoke to right wing influencer Ben Shapiro, founder of "The Daily Wire". The interview showed how much stock Zelensky puts in speaking to a MAGA and Republican audience. It is with this audience that Zelensky has little credibility and Ukraine little sympathy, as Donald Trump calls for a quick peace deal, even if it means Ukraine ceding vast swathes of territory to the Russian aggressor. Zelensky needs Shapiro to combat conservative apathy about the fate of Ukraine, and combat its admiration and respect for Putin as a supposed bastion of traditional values and religious belief. 

Two questions into the interview, Shapiro confronts Zelensky with a conservative talking point. Is Ukraine persecuting members of the Russian Orthodox Church? It is a view that is frequently aired in Christian conservative circles in the United States. Just two months ago, Tucker Carlson interviewed Robert Amsterdam, a lawyer representing the Ukrainian Orthodox Church. Amsterdam alleged that USAID, or some other U.S. government-sponsored organization, created an alternative orthodox church "that would be completely free of what they viewed as the dangerous Putin influence." This, Amsterdam said, is a violation of the U.S. commitment to religious freedom. Trump-supporting talking heads have frequently described Ukraine as killing Christians, while Vladimir Putin is described as a defender of traditional Christian values.

On April 22, Putin met with the Patriarch of the Serbian Orthodox Church and Patriarch Kirill, his Russian counterpart. The Serbian Patriarch told the Russian president that when he met with the Patriarch of Jerusalem, the latter said "we, the Orthodox, have one trump card... Vladimir Putin." It was the Serbian Orthodox Church's desire, the Patriarch said, that "if there is a new geopolitical division, we should be... in the Russian world." It is Orthodoxy's perceived political, rather than purely spiritual, link to Russia that the Ukrainian parliament was hoping to sever in August last year by passing legislation to ban religious groups with links to Moscow.

The Russian orthodox church, which is almost fully under Kremlin’s control, is one of Moscow’s most potent tools for interfering in the domestic affairs of post-Soviet countries. Its ties to Russian intelligence are well-documented and run deep. Patriarch Kirill, head of the Russian Orthodox Church, spent the 1970s spying for the KGB in Switzerland. Today, he blesses Russian weapons and soldiers before they’re deployed to Ukraine.

While Christian conservatives in the U.S. accuse Ukraine of violating religious freedoms and "killing" Christians, Zelensky says that it is, in fact, Russian forces that are persecuting Ukrainian Christians. On Easter, Zelensky said 67 clergymen had been "killed or tortured by Russian occupiers" and over 600 Christian religious sites destroyed. I spoke to the Emmy-winning journalist Simon Ostrovsky who said Russia targets Christian denominations.

"If we're talking about an evangelical church," he told me, "then the members of the church will be accused of being American spies. And if we're talking about the Ukrainian Catholic Church, they'll consider it to be a Nazi Church.” But, Ostrovsky added, "Russians have been able to communicate a lot more effectively than Ukraine, particularly to the right in the United States. Russia has been able to. make the case that it is in fact the Ukrainians who are suppressing freedom of religion in Ukraine and not the Russians, which is absurd."

Back in 2013, Pat Buchanan, an influential commentator and former Reagan staffer, asked if Putin was "one of us." That is, a U.S.-style conservative taking up arms in the "culture war for mankind's future". It is a perception Putin has successfully exploited, able to position himself as the lone bulwark against Western and "globalist" decadence. Now with Trump in the White House, propelled there by Christian conservative support, which has stayed steadfastly loyal to the president even as other conservatives question policies such as tariffs and deportations without due process. With the Christian right as Trump's chief constituency, how can he negotiate with Putin free of their natural affinity for the president not just of Russia but arguably traditional Christianity?

The battle over religious freedom in Ukraine is not just a local concern – it’s a global information war, where narratives crafted in Moscow find eager amplifiers among U.S. Christian conservatives. By painting Ukraine as a persecutor of Christians and positioning Russia as the last defender of “traditional values,” the Kremlin has successfully exported its cultural propaganda to the West. This has already had real-world consequences: shaping U.S. policy debates, undermining support for Ukraine, and helping authoritarian leaders forge alliances across borders. The case of Ukraine shows how religious identity can be weaponized as a tool of soft power, blurring the line between faith and geopolitics, and revealing how easily domestic debates can be hijacked for foreign influence. In a world where the persecutors pose as the persecuted, understanding how narratives are manipulated is essential to defending both democracy and genuine religious freedom.

A version of this story was published in this week’s Coda Currents newsletter. Sign up here.

The post The Christian right’s persecution complex appeared first on Coda Story.