Internal groups such as “Bayraktarshchina”, “Bakhmut Fortress”, “Chmons” and “Crimea by Summer” undermine their own values

Which stories have been the most destructive to society since February 24, 2022?

Since October 2022, former film critic, now Ukrainian Armed Forces soldier, Anton Filatov, published the cover of the book “The Art of War” by Sun Tzu and quoted her most famous aphorism: “The art of war is the art of deception.”

The Chinese strategist and thinker believed that lying to the enemy in order to mislead him was the shortest path to victory.

It seems that the enemy’s disinformation is the secret goal of the “telethon” created after February 24, 2022.

“Here at the front, I tried many times to watch our news broadcasts,” reflects Filatov, “but I never watched this eloquent nonsense to the end. Promises to recapture key targets in a matter of weeks are bleeding from the eyes; that we will have an abundance of modern weapons; from short-sighted generalizations that all Russians are hand-assed idiots, and their commanders are morons who do not know how to fight; from stupid generalizations that all our soldiers are military geniuses.

I am a very small cog in this huge war machine. And I look at what is happening from the inside. And what they say in our news is a sugary sedative for the laity.

In the art of lying, it is important not to deceive ourselves.”

It is this idea that is expressed in different words by dozens and hundreds of defenders. Moreover, the categorical nature of their judgments and the amount of profanity usually increases as they approach the front line.

Where is the line beyond which silence turns into injustice?

How, on the one hand, can we maintain the ability to resist the aggressor, and on the other hand, not mislead ourselves by creating an alternative reality?

Can lies mobilize society?

Which narratives have been the most harmful to society since February 24, 2022?

We looked for answers to these and other questions together with political psychologist Valentin Kim and the heroes of the UP publications, who are now serving in the Armed Forces of Ukraine - Sergei Gnezdilov and Artem Chapai. Because it is the military’s view of how the government communicates with society about war today that helps us understand the “Achilles’ heel” of this communication. You may not agree with their assessment, but it is worth hearing.

Next are their thoughts on what is wrong with communication about war today and how this can be corrected.

Sergei Gnezdilov: The truth about the number of killed defenders will keep society on its toes

Forget about “bayraktarism”, “chmona” and the alternative reality of “United News”

In the first months of the full-scale invasion, our entire information space was filled with “bayraktarism” and theses about “vanka-vstanka” and stupid Russians-“schmone”. The reality is that we face an enemy who learns very quickly, in particular from his mistakes. And theses about “chmoney” only weaken the “buns” and this will definitely not lead to victory.

It is precisely because society was lied to that today we see fatigue, despair and lack of understanding of what is happening.

“Unified Marathon” is a world divorced from reality that is fed to the Ukrainian viewer. Against this background, it is not surprising that Zaluzhny’s interview with The Economist shocked a significant part of society. Although what he said out loud was shouted by the majority of our military, who had been at the front since 2014-2015. They said that the enemy was strong and cunning, that the war would be trench-like and long.

The truth that you need to know is that the less we throw our people into “bloody assaults”, the more we fight cunningly, using modern technologies, and not the way Russia fought in the first months of a full-scale invasion, the more chances to defeat us.

Do not mirror the methods of the Russians

It seems that we are trying to construct reality based on Russian models, but in the Ukrainian language and in embroidered shirts.

Russia never talks about its failures. They call all defeats, setbacks, and withdrawals of troops “gestures of goodwill,” “reduction in combat activity,” “regrouping,” “winding down and transferring units to more advantageous positions.”

But remember, in 2023 there was not a word about our leaving Bakhmut. First there was communication with the creation of a halo of glorification - “Bakhmut fortress - all our prayers are here - we will not surrender Bakhmut.” And then there was simply silence, in particular about our people who died there.

A state that respects its people should not do this.

It seems that we are copying the Russian narrative that “they will all die, and we will go to heaven.” Unfortunately, Ukrainian society has been hooked on the thesis that the deaths of military personnel are in the order of things, because this is war, and heroes do not die. And this is actually a devaluation of those who die.

Remove the taboo from the topic of fallen defenders

If we look at the official communication not only of the Ministry of Defense, but also of individual units, we will see the results of an unspoken ban on any mentions in memoriam. You will see about victories, about how cool the military is, how they destroy the enemy, sometimes about their life before they joined the army. But it seems that our dead military personnel are some kind of no-names and they don’t exist at all.

This is a very sensitive topic, but I think that the truth about the number of Ukrainians killed in the war will keep our society on its toes.

In my opinion, hiding our losses gives Russian propagandists a wide field for manipulation. We live in a world where not only information, but also the lack of information can be used against you. The Russians said that 50 thousand Ukrainian soldiers died near Bakhmut and this was broadcast in our society, because we do not report any data on our losses.

There is no need to wait for victory to talk about those killed in the war. If we don’t talk about heroes today, then after the war we definitely won’t remember them, that’s how memory works.

Create equal rules for everyone in the information space

The huge problem of communication is that we have a privileged class of journalists who write or film the war, for example, the Liberovs. They can do anything, always and everywhere. And everyone else must agree on any material at all levels. It gets to the point of absurdity when journalists are forced to “bake” obscenities of the military on video, because this supposedly creates a negative image of the Ukrainian defender.

There are no equal rules of the game in the communication space. Remember that during the entire period of the full-scale war, in addition to foreign journalists, only one well-known travel blogger received access to the commander-in-chief.

This creates a bias in favor of those close to the political leadership who broadcast the “correct” messages.

Artem Chapai: The art of war is the art of the right messages

Silence, but don't lie

I'll start with a disclaimer. I am an active military personnel, so I cannot evaluate the policy, but I believe that I have the right to make suggestions on communication.

There are things that really shouldn’t be voiced during war, because the enemy might take advantage of it. For example, statistics of our losses. You can't talk about something, but you can't lie.

Lies in the modern world always become obvious. Therefore, the phrase “the art of war is the art of lying” today should sound like this: the art of war is the art of the right messages.

Change the message “I believe in the Armed Forces of Ukraine” to “The Armed Forces of Ukraine is me”

Now, when it has become clear that this war will last for a long time, we need to move from the abstract “I believe in the Armed Forces of Ukraine” to “the Armed Forces of Ukraine are us.”

The Ukrainian Armed Forces is not some separate minority in which we believe. People at the front end for various reasons; others must take their place. Me, my friend, my brother, my fellow villager.

We must understand that today a thin layer separates us from darkness. And if it stays the way it is now, then, firstly, this layer will quickly be erased. And secondly, society will begin to burst at the seams due to the fact that some are fighting indefinitely, while others have distanced themselves from the war as much as possible.

It is clear that for some people it is more comfortable to “believe in the Armed Forces of Ukraine” than to identify themselves with the army or be part of it. And attempts to somehow change this situation through effective rotation mechanisms will cause rejection by a large part of society.

But today you need to think not about how to win the next elections, when you have to focus on the arithmetic majority. We need to think about how to win or at least not lose the war. And for this reason, make unpopular decisions.

Involve “stars” in the service

Nowadays a situation has arisen in society where everyone is pointing fingers at each other. “Let Poroshenko’s son fight.” “Let Kvartal 95 fight.” “Let the deputies, ministers, oligarchs, stars fight.”

Therefore, in communication about the war, it is necessary to literally trumpet every public person, every “star”, every deputy who goes to serve in the Armed Forces of Ukraine, especially since there are such cases. It must be shown that in the army now not only Sentsov and Khlyvnyuk are volunteers of the first wave, but also other media people. So that there is no feeling that our mobilization is taking place on a class principle.

In my opinion, it is important to emphasize that we are joining the army not for the sake of the president, not for the sake of the government, but for our own sake. So that the Russians don’t come for my wife and rape her. So that they don’t come for my dad and put a bag over his head.

Avoid “mobilization as punishment” messages

In my job, I sometimes have to come into contact with the police. Recently I heard: “this driver is rude, let’s take him into the army.” The same thing creeps into public communications. For example, in messages from the Ministry of Internal Affairs. Someone smoked a hookah or violated traffic rules and was given a summons for it.

It’s offensive for me to hear this, but it’s even more offensive for the guys at zero. The army is not and should not be a place for re-education or punishment.

Valentin Kim: Vain hopes undermine the will to resist

Don't create high expectations

If I were to rank the most harmful messages from the Ukrainian authorities since the beginning of the full-scale invasion, they were all associated with creating false or inflated expectations for quick victories.

The war will end “in two weeks, three at the most.” This message caused the greatest harm to society in the first months of the war, when there were very few communicators from the authorities and Arestovich filled a huge share of the information space. This narrative worked at first, but ultimately led to burnout and undermined the will to resist due to false hopes.

Second in this ranking we can recall the statements of the head of the Main Intelligence Directorate, Mr. Budanov, that we will liberate Crimea by a certain date. Many Ukrainian politicians and officials joined this. You can remember how last November Podolyak promised to talk about free Crimea from de-occupied Yalta in six months.

The third message is that ours have already broken through the “Surovikin line”. A huge number of politicians, bloggers, and even military personnel also joined this narrative. And it was repeated so often that it devalued what was actually being done through the extreme efforts of our defenders at the front.

The penetration of the Ukrainian Armed Forces into the Russian defense actually happened, but a breakthrough did not occur for objective reasons, which largely depended not only on our military.

Refuse to communicate in only one direction – top to bottom

We now have not an institutionalist, but a personalist democracy, which rests on the person of Vladimir Zelensky.

After the start of the full-scale invasion, Zelensky’s phase transition occurred from the position of a politician who was losing popularity to the position of the most popular politician not only in Ukraine, but also in the world.

His ability to communicate emotionally, regardless of whether he offended anyone, was of great importance in the first period of the war. He did something that professional politicians usually do not do - he addressed their voters over the heads of the leaders of partner countries. It worked.

The next, second stage is accusatory communication. He criticized the West for not strengthening sanctions against Russia, delaying the supply of badly needed weapons and not rushing to invite Ukraine to the EU and NATO. He criticized Putin's allies or those whom he considers Putin's allies. He criticized the inability of international institutions to influence the situation. This criticism was largely justified, and most importantly, it came from the lips of a man who leads the resistance to a huge dictatorial state.

For some time this was indeed useful and effective, although the monotony of accusatory rhetoric, of course, irritated the West.

Here I am reminded of the case of Greta Thunberg. A girl who for several years was invited to Davos, the UN, she performed at all venues and platforms. She trended for a while and was heard, but in order to be effective in promoting the idea she is trying to promote, she needs to evolve and change. Switch to the language of the person or institution with which you are communicating. That did not happen.

Now we are at the third stage - ineffective communication.

The crisis became especially noticeable in the reaction of the political authorities to Zaluzhny’s article in The Economist. Zelensky gave his answer in an interview with The Sun. The President spoke in the sense that the military should be concerned with war, not politics. In fact, this statement destroys the belief that there is trust between the military and politicians. It demonstrates that political power is trying to put everyone in the places that it considers correct and does not listen to anyone but itself.

Another important point is that communication must be multilateral. The Chairman of the Verkhovna Rada does not communicate with us; he is almost absent from the information space. Everyone has forgotten what Shmygal’s voice sounds like.

In general, such an important format of communication as discussion is still missing in Ukrainian politics. It is clear that during a war there is no time for discussions, but there are platforms that, in any situation, should be for discussions, that is their meaning.

In Russia, “parliament is not a place for discussion.” In a healthy society, parliament is precisely the place for discussion. Where they conduct a dialogue, exchange opinions and make decisions. Unfortunately, we do not see this and war is not an excuse for this. It is a background, an important factor, but not an excuse.

Do not deny reality and admit mistakes

In the context of today's events, it is interesting to compare the speeches of Churchill and Stalin after Hitler attacked their countries.

Three days after his appointment as Prime Minister, on May 13, 1940, Churchill made his famous speech: “I have nothing more to offer you than blood, toil, sweat and tears.” She is still remembered as an example of communication between an adult leader and an adult society, where reality is not denied, but is recognized as it is.

But Stalin’s speech on July 3, 1941, which went down in history under the name “Brothers and Sisters,” is, firstly, an example of untimely communication - he addressed the people only 11 days after the German invasion.

Secondly, its leitmotifs are the non-recognition of mistakes (“One may ask: how could it happen that the Soviet government agreed to conclude a non-aggression pact with such insidious people and monsters as Hitler and Ribbentrop? Was there a mistake made here on the part of the Soviet government? Of course not!”), denial of reality (“The best divisions of the enemy and the best units of his aviation have already been defeated and found their grave on the battlefield”) and shifting responsibility to others.

Talk to society like adults

In Zaluzhny’s public communication, which occurs infrequently, the most important thing is that he speaks to the audience not as an adult with children who should not be frightened, but as an adult with adult people.

Zaluzhny’s communication in this case is what gives a correct understanding of the situation, because the worst thing in our case is to live in illusions.

Zaluzhny does not suppress unpleasant information, and he is ready to take responsibility for those things where he is truly responsible, including his mistakes.

This is also about adulthood. And it contrasts very much with politicians who are trying to sell illusions. They devalue our adulthood, our consciousness, our self-sufficiency, our ability to analyze and draw the right conclusions.

Avoid positive stigmatization of the Armed Forces of Ukraine

“United Marathon” offers the public illusory, very simplified information about the war. Because of this, a harmful process occurs - positive stigmatization.

We stigmatize all people who are in the Armed Forces of Ukraine as total heroes. Ask the military what they themselves think about this - they will tell you critically, balancedly and realistically. What do people think about the effectiveness of management at lower and middle levels? Regarding senseless assaults, which happen not only among Russians. Regarding the bureaucracy, all those logs that need to be kept in order to write off one cartridge.

By positively stigmatizing the entire army, we close ourselves off from truthful information, which may be unpleasant, but extremely useful for analysis and correction of actions.

Talk about the country's post-war development strategy

It is impossible to live without a planning horizon. The question is how to maintain the horizon without creating false expectations. This is really very difficult both on a personal level and on an institutional level.

On a personal level, we must live in shorter terms.

But at the societal level it is necessary to go the opposite way. Extensive strategic planning and communication of this is required. This will give people an understanding that we as a state have a future. And these visions should not be associated with war. What kind of country should we become? What needs to be done and in what time frame will we join the EU or NATO? What areas of activity should remain as the core of national identity?

For people, short-term planning is necessary, and for the state, long-term planning is necessary. And in addition to honest information about current events, it is about the future that the state should communicate with citizens today.

***

“They never lie so much as during the war, after the hunt and before the elections,” is a phrase attributed to the German Chancellor Otto von Bismarck.

It is the war and elections (the possibility of which everyone denies) that are most often talked about in Ukraine today.

The authorities will draw conclusions about the effectiveness of communication on the eve of and during a full-scale war based on its results and depending on them. In the end, it is not messages, narratives, information campaigns and communication strategies that win wars, but weapons and the people who wield these weapons. But it is communication that influences society’s ability to mobilize and resist the enemy.

“You have to lie or remain silent about the war, because no one will like the truth...” wrote director and soldier Oleg Sentsov in August 2023 after being wounded. “I can’t look at cafes crowded with bearded, pumped-up men without uniforms and empty cells in the staff of my unit.” . I don’t want to hear jokes about Melitopol cherries and kebabs in Crimea...”

Modern mythology and the heroic epic of the “collective marathon” is an undoubtedly interesting topic for researchers of wartime folklore. Unfortunately, there will be no one to study it no matter what the outcome of the war, except victory.