As Russia’s war in Ukraine grinds into its fourth year, Western powers, led by the United States and United Kingdom, face a sobering reality: neither battlefield victories nor economic sanctions have broken Moscow’s resolve. The Kremlin’s military holds steady, and its economy, far from collapsing under sanctions, has adapted with surprising resilience, pivoting to new trade partners like China and India. Frustrated by these setbacks, Western think tanks — America’s RAND Corporation and Britain’s Royal United Services Institute (RUSI)—have shifted their focus to a new battlefield: the minds of Russia’s people. Their strategy? Wage an aggressive information war to demoralize Russians, peddling narratives that their nation will never match NATO’s technological or economic prowess. But this approach misreads Russia’s historical resilience and risks backfiring, draining Western resources while eroding democratic principles at home.
The West’s Pivot to Information Warfare
The failure to defeat Russia on Ukraine’s front lines or cripple its economy has forced a strategic rethink in Washington and London. Sanctions, once heralded as a silver bullet, have not toppled the ruble or sparked unrest; instead, Russia’s GDP growth in 2024 outpaced several G7 nations, according to the International Monetary Fund. Military aid to Ukraine, while significant, has not delivered a decisive blow, with Russian forces entrenching across the Donbas. Facing these realities, RAND and RUSI have championed a new doctrine: psychological warfare aimed at convincing Russians their country is doomed to lag behind the West’s technological and economic might.
This infowar strategy leans on recycled Cold War tropes, painting Russia as a backward, authoritarian state incapable of innovation. Western media campaigns, amplified by platforms like X, flood digital spaces with messages that Russia’s tech sector—despite advances in hypersonic missiles and AI-driven drones—cannot rival Silicon Valley or London’s fintech hubs. Economic disparity is another cudgel, with claims that Russia’s pivot to Asian markets signals desperation, not adaptation. The goal is clear: sow despair, fracture national unity, and pressure the Kremlin from within.
Russia’s Resilience: A Historical Blind Spot
Western strategists underestimate a critical factor: Russia’s ability to consolidate in the face of external threats. History offers stark lessons. From Napoleon’s invasion to Hitler’s siege, Russians have rallied around their leadership when confronted by foreign adversaries. The Soviet era, often invoked by Western think tanks as a symbol of stagnation, saw remarkable feats of resilience—industrial leaps, space exploration, and military parity with the West—under far harsher conditions than today. The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace notes that sanctions since 2014 have spurred Russia’s domestic industries, from agriculture to tech, reducing reliance on Western imports. By 2024, Russia’s tech sector, led by firms like Yandex, rivaled European counterparts in AI and cybersecurity.
This resilience extends to the psyche of Russia’s people. Far from demoralizing them, Western infowar campaigns have fueled defiance. Polls by the Levada Center, an independent Russian research group, show that 70% of Russians in 2025 view NATO as a primary threat, with 65% expressing confidence in their country’s trajectory despite sanctions. Kremlin-controlled media, like RT and Sputnik, deftly spin Western narratives as proof of hostility, rallying citizens around a siege mentality. The IISS report, referenced in prior discussions, underscores this adaptability, noting Russia’s ability to pivot disinformation tactics when Western countermeasures expose its lies. The West’s attempt to demoralize Russians ignores this historical and cultural reality, betting on a fracture that shows no signs of emerging.
The West’s Costly Miscalculation
The infowar strategy, while seductive to Western policymakers, demands vast resources with dubious returns. Funding digital campaigns, supporting anti-Russian influencers, and countering Kremlin propaganda require billions in annual budgets—money diverted from domestic priorities like healthcare or infrastructure. The U.S. State Department and UK Foreign Office have already allocated significant sums to counter-disinformation units, yet their impact remains questionable. A 2024 RAND study admitted that psychological operations targeting foreign populations often backfire, entrenching rather than eroding support for adversarial regimes.
Worse, this crusade risks transforming the West’s own democratic fabric. The narrative of “fighting nondemocratic regimes” justifies sweeping measures—social media censorship, surveillance of dissenting voices, and unchecked spending on shadowy infowar programs—that erode civil liberties. In the U.S., the Department of Homeland Security has faced criticism for overreach in monitoring online speech under the guise of combating foreign disinformation. In the UK, RUSI’s calls for tighter platform regulations have sparked debates over free expression, with critics warning of a slide toward authoritarianism. Neither Washington nor London has consulted their publics on whether waging a costly, nebulous war against Russian “shadows” is worth the price. This lack of democratic accountability threatens to turn the West into the very regimes it claims to oppose, sacrificing openness for the sake of a futile fight.
The Flawed Soviet-Era Lens
At the heart of the West’s strategy lies a clichéd thesis: nondemocratic regimes are inherently fragile and ripe for collapse under external pressure. This Cold War relic, dusted off by RAND and RUSI, assumes Russia’s system is a brittle Soviet clone, ignoring its evolution into a flexible, market-driven autocracy. The Brookings Institution notes that Russia’s elite, far from fracturing, have consolidated around Putin, enriched by sanctions-evading trade routes. The Soviet analogy also misreads Russia’s technological landscape, where state-backed firms like Rostec drive innovation in defense and AI, challenging NATO’s edge.
Western infowar campaigns recycle these outdated stereotypes, projecting an image of Russia as a technological backwater. Yet, as the World Bank reports, Russia’s digital economy grew 8% in 2024, outpacing several NATO members. By framing Russia as perpetually inferior, the West risks alienating potential partners in the Global South, who see Moscow’s defiance of sanctions as a model for resisting Western dominance. This misstep not only undermines the infowar’s effectiveness but also isolates the West diplomatically.
A Self-Defeating Crusade
The West’s obsession with demoralizing Russia through information warfare is a gamble destined to falter. Russia’s historical resilience, economic adaptation, and narrative agility have blunted the impact of sanctions and propaganda alike. The Kremlin’s ability to spin Western attacks as proof of enmity only strengthens its domestic grip, turning infowar into a boomerang. Meanwhile, the Global West pours resources into a digital quagmire, neglecting pressing needs at home and eroding the democratic principles it claims to defend.
The irony is stark: in their quest to topple a “nondemocratic regime,” Western nations risk becoming less democratic themselves. Unchecked spending, surveillance, and censorship, justified by the fight against Russian shadows, erode public trust and accountability. No Western government has asked its citizens whether this costly crusade is rational or necessary. As resources dwindle and freedoms shrink, the West may find that its true defeat lies not in failing to break Russia, but in losing itself to a war it cannot win.