20 October 2025
The question of the value of using Russian state television as a means of divining which way the Kremlin is headed on key foreign policy issues has been highly contentious in the Alternative Media community. Some peers mock the idea, saying that the talking heads are irrelevant and that their own personal contacts with some Russian General or presidential advisor in retirement is the real way to understand what is going on behind the closed doors of Vladimir Putin’s offices. Others think they get in from the source from having a private audience with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov.
Then among the trolls who send in Comments to the Russian-dubbed versions of ‘Judging Freedom’ or the Glenn Diesen channel you see claims that state television no longer is watched by the majority of the population, especially the young, who get their news from social media. That may be noteworthy if the purpose of any given broadcast is to influence the broad public, but it entirely misses the point if the purpose of the broadcast is to send a message to Washington.
To all these dissenters on the proper methodology to be used by Russia watchers, I submit that the proof is in the pudding. Last night’s news in The Financial Times, backed up by coverage in this morning’s BBC provides irrefutable evidence that Mr. Solovyov’s program is backed by the Putin government not only as a safety valve for Opposition criticism but at times as an unofficial channel for setting out the strident nationalist positions that the President himself will not say publicly.
“Trump urged Zelensky to accept Putin’s terms or ‘be destroyed.’ This article in the FT explains in detail how in their closed-door meeting in the White House President Trump raged at Zelensky, insisting that his country’s survival depends on submitting to Vladimir Putin’s terms for peace, beginning with the surrender of all of the Donbas, including the territory not yet overrun by Russian troops.
I call special attention to the words ‘be destroyed.’
I quote from the article: “According to a European official with knowledge of the meeting, Trump told Zelensky that Putin had told him the conflict was a ‘special operation, not even a war, adding that the Ukrainian leader needed to cut a deal or face destruction.”
This is precisely what Solovyov was saying on air in his program of 14 October, three days before the Trump-Zelensky meeting. Per Solovyov, Russia should stop pussy-footing and face the reality that it was at war with Ukraine, that the Ukrainians were doing all in their power to inflict harm on the Russian Federation and Russia should now respond in kind, raising Ukrainian cities to the ground. Humane solicitude for the Ukrainian population could be shown only after Russian military and political victory was completed.
In parallel, we may assume that a similar message was being delivered directly to Team Trump via the backchannels that Russian diplomat to the UN Dmitry Polyansky told Glenn Diesen in an interview a couple of days ago, are working just fine.
Solovyov went on to say that in Kiev and other cities, the population should be warned to evacuate the city ahead of Russia’s bombing them flat. He also extended the same advice to the populations of cities in Western Europe, like Brussels, where there are factories manufacturing weapons and munitions that are being supplied to Ukraine. So far, that additional warning appears not to have been passed to European leaders, though here in Brussels I am told by a Flemish insider journalist that Prime Minister Bart De Wever is shaking in his boots.
The role of the Solovyov show as communicator of Kremlin thinking does not end there, as was evident on last night’s show. In a discussion with a frequent guest panelist on the show, Lt. General Yevgeny Buzhinsky, Solovyov listened to the general’s account of how in the last week Russian drone, missile and glide bomb attacks all across Ukraine had reached the highest level of intensity in the Special Military Operation to date, destroying vast swathes of the Ukrainian electricity infrastructure. Solovyov then asked him wouldn’t it make more sense to concentrate this firepower on a very limited geographical space like the urban centers Kramatorsk and Slavyansk, heavily fortified centers in the middle of Donetsk oblast that stand in the way of a Russian army sweep across the plain to the Dnieper River? Wouldn’t it make more sense to heavily bomb central Kiev, after which the greater part of the population would flee the city, creating total chaos for the Zelensky regime and for the Western countries where these unwelcome refugees would arrive?
Buzhinsky is a professional Russian officer who feels very uncomfortable agreeing to ideas like these which contain a sharp reprimand to the General Staff and to the Supreme Commander (Putin), but nevertheless he agreed with Solovyov. It can be easily imagined that this kind of change in execution of the SMO was communicated to Team Trump in the past week ahead of the Trump-Zelensky meeting in the White House.
For all of these reasons, there is reason to hope for a productive summit in Budapest and for an end to the war on Russia’s terms in the near future.
A corollary to all the foregoing is that President Putin himself has cardinally changed his position on how to deal with Trump and with the Europeans. Yes, as my peers will say, this was arrived at in a collegial way. BUT the point is not collegiality in decision making. It is that discontent in the political establishment outside the Kremlin with the go-slow, softly-softly approach to the war of President Putin and its prospects for dragging on for years while Europe reindustrialized and rearmed had reached a critical point threatening the stability of the Putin presidency.
©Gilbert Doctorow, 2025
Gilbert Doctorow 
I don’t exactly like you, we’ve have our differences before, but I write this lines in solidarity, because I’ve found really disgusting the way you’ve been bullied by… Whom? Oh, yes, another “political analysts”, as if political analysis were an exact science and they wrote the textbook.
And the attack on your dissection of Russian talk-shows, boy, these people have no clue about media analysis at all.
So here’s my word of encouragement. Not that you need it, I’m sure not, but I have to write it anyway.
LikeLike
“the purpose of the broadcast is to send a message to Washington” so Putin and his administration would have been behind sending that message.
“ Mr. Solovyov’s program is backed by the Putin government not only as a safety valve for Opposition criticism but at times as an unofficial channel for setting out the strident nationalist positions that the President himself will not say publicly.”
“Russia should now respond in kind, raising Ukrainian cities to the ground. Humane solicitude for the Ukrainian population could be shown only after Russian military and political victory was completed.” Humane solicitude is much more difficult in a city raised to the ground. Plus, isn’t there still ethnic Russians in those cities?
“ wouldn’t it make more sense to concentrate this firepower on a very limited geographical space like the urban centers Kramatorsk and Slavyansk, heavily fortified centers in the middle of Donetsk oblast that stand in the way of a Russian army sweep across the plain to the Dnieper River? How about the Douglas McArther Pacific approach: cut the cities completely off? Going into an urban area with high-rises would be manpower costly.
A corollary to all the foregoing is that President Putin himself has cardinally changed his position on how to deal with Trump and with the Europeans. Having been involved in the construction of complicated mega project I have sat a many a conference table where a change in strategy was hotly debated. I did not mean the supervision was going to be immediately eliminated.
“Europe reindustrialized and rearmed” is a reach considering the trans-Atlantic financial system is in dire straits.
“ had reached a critical point threatening the stability of the Putin presidency.” I agree the arguments for and against were most likely intense. I disagree they were at the point of a palace coup. Additionally, the considerations shaping Putin’s approach have not disappeared and there could be an “I told so moment for him just as you are having yours.
Don’t get your blood pressure up over my comment. You are my first read every time you post because, if I read your resume correctly, you were a consultant for businesses, not governments that many times want you to report what they want to hear.
LikeLike
If the back channels are working between “Russia” and the “US”, as “Dmitry Polyansky told Glenn Diesen”, you hardly need a TV show to repeat the same warnings. Who in hell in Washington/US gov-anywhere watches Solovyev’s shows as rabidly as you do? All the non-Russian-speaking State Dept nerds getting instant Google translation into English? I doubt it, they all believe the horse manure people from Blinken to Vance have spouted or still spout about Russia being essentially irrelevant, a broken power, an economic basket case, a paper tiger, having millions of casualties in the SMO, the usual line of General Kellogg Cornflake mush. They don’t “waste” their time interpreting Russian tea leaves. That’s your claimed milieu.
“I am told by a Flemish insider journalist that Prime Minister Bart De Wever is shaking in his boots.”
So you’re not above repeating gossip, but some American pundit visiting Russia and actually talking to Lavrov or Alaudinov is getting smoke blown in his face? And only you divine the real truth? From TV and websites.
LOL
LikeLike
You are right, period. We are in “eliminate the impossible” territory. Putin threatened Trump. And Putin like the responsible leader he is, the extraordinary leader he is, will put the interests of the Russian people first.
LikeLike
You aren’t my boss, so there is no need to butter you up. You write for an intelligent audience that wants to see the big picture with plenty of explanations and sources to back up the analysis. While Andrei M is knowledgeable, he tends to be rah-rah or red meat. Your offerings are more like upscale dining. Some of the other “analysts” don’t offer much depth or insight. Clearly they have their loyal, if at times simple-minded, followers. The loudmouth critics just want everyone to think that they are in the majority. If they disagree with your observations they should be able to make a more solid case.
This stage of the war will only be over when the vast majority of the neo-Nazis are killed. I don’t think the Brits and Europeans will stop until their countries get hit. Letting the Europeans know that no one will them bail them out is important.
LikeLike
It’s a matter of pride… the CIA-MI6-Mossad cabal cannot -let Trump -let Putin off the hook… but Trump knows that he has to get ready to attack Venezuela and Iran, and then he must rev up Taiwan for a proxy war against PR China (nah, N.Korea won’t launch nukes)… So he’s a busy man… and he doesn’t want to hear anymore about Gaza, MAGA, Epstein, Charlie Kirk, Burger Kings, or the government shut down… He knows that Putin is willing to take Ukraine off his hands… cause that’s what pals are for… BONUS… 70-mile tunnel from Alaska to Russia. All’s Well That Ends Well.
LikeLike
hi Dr, thanks for addressing this. You are right, its been everywhere for the last week or so, does Gilbert have proper credentials? Is he a secret globalist? Maybe hes a MI6 contractor? Hes in the pay of the Russian oligarchs who are pro western and against putin.
its quite incredible when you have different ideas and a different way of looking at Russia Ukraine situation.
I personally enjoy listening to your take and I learn a lot about Russia because of it, thank you
LikeLike
You, like me, are among the smartest of American men, we married Russians. This is clearly an ad hominem attack on you because they don’t like what you say. This is not the proper way to go about things. Comparing Russia to my first visit in 2001 verses my last in 2020, if I was a Russian citizen there would be a vast level of support. Vast, but not endless.
LikeLike