the international risk podcast russian oil bloodshed

The Influence of Soft Power in Putin’s War on Ukraine and Continued Aggression in NATO Regions.

We are all aware of the international risks associated with autocratic regimes and their implementation of hard power tactics to exert control. History is riddled with examples and unfortunately, we just have to turn on the news to witness it in present times; look at the Assad regime in Syria, Kim Jong Un’s totalitarian methods in North Korea, and Putin’s decision to take up arms and invade Ukraine. However, the use of soft power is often overlooked and it is important that governments, business leaders and individuals are aware of how these tactics manifest, so we remain adept at tackling them head on. This article unpacks how Putin has manipulated identity politics, language and the demand for oil to justify his aggressive methods in Ukraine and in NATO territories in the Baltic Sea.

Soft power—the ability to influence others through persuasion, culture, and economic leverage rather than the use of military power.

Manipulation of Identity Politics

An example of Russia’s use of soft power is the manipulation of identity politics to divide populations and justify military aggression. Putin has long framed his actions in Ukraine as a protective measure for Russian-speaking communities, through the process of cultural othering.

Putin has full control over Russian media outlets and he has used this to his advantage. He has propagated a world view that describes the US as an “empire of lies”, the West is bent on “tearing apart Russia” and Ukraine is a “Nazi-run” country whose statehood is a historical fiction. This narrative has been instrumental in shaping an “us versus them” mentality, reinforcing a sense of existential threat to traditional Russian values. The success of these efforts is evident in polling data from September 2024, which revealed that over 70 percent of Russians held a negative view of the United States, marking a significant increase from previous surveys. Putin has successfully used propaganda to portray the West’s opposition to the invasion of Ukraine not as a defence of liberal democratic values but as a direct threat to the livelihoods and security of Russian civilians. Thus, enabling him to continue justifying his aggressive foreign policy measures, to protect the “Motherland.”

However, the power of this framing has been amplified by the West’s failure to adequately acknowledge and support the reform efforts of post-Soviet states after the Cold War. In episode 199, Dr. Leila Alieva discusses how the end of the Cold War marked a period of substantial progress for former Soviet republics in democratisation, market reforms, and alignment with Western institutions. She recounts how the lack of diplomatic efforts from the West prevented countries such as Azerbaijan from becoming fully integrated into the broader European and transatlantic community. She demonstrates how this left them isolated and in a geopolitical grey zone thus, more vulnerable to Russian influence and propaganda.

In Ukraine’s case, Putin framed the country’s Euro-Atlantic aspirations as a direct threat to its Russian-speaking population, casting Western integration efforts as an assault on Ukraine’s “true” identity. This narrative has resonated within Russia and among segments of Ukraine’s eastern regions, where historical and linguistic ties to Russia remain strong.

Through state-controlled media and cultural outreach programs, Putin has painted a picture of Ukraine as a fractured state—one that requires Russian intervention to preserve cultural and historical ties. This narrative was particularly evident in Crimea, where Moscow’s annexation in 2014 was preceded by an intense propaganda campaign emphasising ethnic solidarity and historical claims to the territory. A similar approach was employed in eastern Ukraine, where the Kremlin-backed separatist movement was strengthened through appeals to shared cultural and linguistic heritage.

Energy Dependency as Leverage

Another key aspect of Russia’s soft power strategy lies in its control over energy supplies. As one of the world’s largest exporters of natural gas and oil, Russia has used energy dependency as a means of exerting influence over European nations. Dr Alieva states in episode 199, “As the leader of an oil rich state Putin can undertake aggression with less risk because he depends on oil rents rather than global support.” Multiple studies have explored the effect oil wealth on democracy in Africa, the Middle East and the Baltics. These studies consistently show that resource wealth tends to concentrate power in the hands of elites, reduce the need for taxation (and therefore public accountability), and enable governments to suppress dissent through funding security forces and patronage networks. This has hindered the development of democratic institutions by undermining transparency, checks on power, and citizen engagement.

Furthermore, the fact that European nations are heavily reliant on Russian gas and oil means they have struggled to balance their condemnation of Russia’s actions with their immediate energy needs. This dependency has created fractures within NATO and the EU, as member states with greater reliance on Russian energy are more hesitant to adopt hardline policies against Moscow. Furthermore, the “resource curse,” often associated with oil-rich states, allows Russia to bypass the need for domestic reform or international cooperation by using oil rents to sustain its economy. This reduces the leverage of Western sanctions and emboldens Putin’s aggressive foreign policy. By tying energy exports to geopolitical influence, Russia has weaponised its natural resources, making energy policy a key battleground in the broader conflict.

Implications for NATO and Beyond

Russia’s use of soft power extends beyond Ukraine, targeting NATO territories in the Baltic Sea region. In countries like Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania, which have significant Russian-speaking populations, Moscow has employed similar tactics of cultural and linguistic outreach to amplify divisions and challenge NATO’s presence. This has included funding pro-Russian organisations, spreading disinformation, and amplifying narratives that question the legitimacy of these nations’ Western alliances. Such efforts aim to weaken NATO’s cohesion and create hesitation among member states about taking strong collective action against Russia. By blurring the lines between cultural influence and political interference, Moscow’s soft power tactics pose a significant challenge to the stability of the region.

Countering Soft Power Aggression

To effectively counter Russia’s soft power tactics, it is essential for governments, businesses, and civil society to recognise and address the subtle ways in which influence is exerted. We must focus on promoting media literacy to combat disinformation and diversify energy sources to reduce dependency.

Equally important is the need for a coordinated international response. NATO and the European Union must work together to identify and counteract soft power tactics, ensuring that member states remain resilient in the face of Russian influence. By addressing the root causes of division and vulnerability, Western nations can better safeguard their societies against both hard and soft power aggression.

While the world’s attention remains fixed on the overt military aspects of Putin’s war on Ukraine, the role of soft power should be recognised.

If you want to better understand how Russia uses soft power to exert control over it’s adversaries, listen to Dr Leila Alieva in episode 199.


Similar Posts