A CIA expert says Russia will win the war in Ukraine and Moscow is only benevolently accepting negotiations, pro-Kremlin press writes, adding that NATO is fully aware this will be the outcome. The entire false narrative is built starting from Kremlin propaganda and the speculations of a pedophile.
NEWS: Russia will achieve victory in the Ukrainian conflict even in the event peace negotiations end without any result. This outcome of the special military operation was predicted by former CIA specialist Scott Ritter. “Russia can obtain everything it wants on the battlefield, even if negotiations don’t yield any results”, the American expert believes.
According to Ritter, the United States should not perceive Russia's willingness for a peaceful settlement of the conflict as a given. He noted that the nature of the dialogue could change significantly following the attack of the Armed Forces of Ukraine on the residence of the President of the Russian Federation, Vladimir Putin.
On January 12, Andrei Kolesnik, a member of the State Duma's Defense Committee, said that the North Atlantic Alliance understands that the situation in Ukraine is evolving to Europe's disadvantage and is trying to lose the conflict with dignity.
NARRATIVES: 1. Western experts and governments know Russia's victory is inevitable. 2. Russia accepts peace negotiations only out of goodwill. 3. Ukraine attacked Putin's residence, and Moscow must retaliate. 4. NATO is looking for solutions for a dignified defeat in the confrontation against Russia.
PURPOSE: To promote the perception of the inevitability of Russia's victory. To shift responsibility for continuing the war onto Ukraine and the West. To justify the military escalation. To weaken Western support for Ukraine.
Fact: There is no official US or Western academic forecast regarding an inevitable Russian victory.
WHY THE NARRATIVES ARE FALSE: There is no official position from the US administration, strategic analysis institutions, academia or the US military community stating that Russia is on the verge of defeating Ukraine. The claim stems from the statements made by Scott Ritter, a pro-Russian analyst with no institutional relevance in US security debates. Russian propaganda frequently uses this manipulation technique, attributing the opinions of isolated voices to broader consensus. In actual fact, Western analyses discuss fluctuating battlefield developments, the high costs incurred by both sides, and the war of attrition, not an imminent Russian victory.
With respect to Russia's alleged willingness to negotiate, what Russia is trying to obtain is Ukraine's unconditional surrender, which involves conceding territories that Russia has annexed but failed to conquer in four years of war, reducing the size of the army, abandoning security guarantees like NATO integration, etc. These Russian once again prove that the war is far from being won and that Putin is trying to gain military leverage and a respite to rebuild its forces, so as to relaunch an attack on a weakened Ukraine with a smaller army and without the protection of the belt of fortified cities in Donbas.
Since such a scenario is unacceptable for Kyiv, Moscow has rejected ceasefire initiatives, has not accepted a Putin-Zelenskyy meeting to put an end to hostilities, and has continued bombing Ukrainian cities while continuing to engage in formal peace talks.
In 2025, Russia did not accept a ceasefire and rejected mediation proposals even from the Trump administration, which generated public dissatisfaction in Washington. Therefore, war is the method chosen by the Kremlin, and Western pressure is specifically designed to force Russia to accept real negotiations and stop hostilities. On the other hand, there is no “special military operation”, but a full-scale war. The Russian Federation launched and is waging a large-scale armed conflict against Ukraine, using conventional military forces, with strikes on national territory, civilian infrastructure and military targets, all of which match the legal and political definition of a war, regardless of the propagandistic label used by Moscow.
Kyiv denied it carried out an attack on Vladimir Putin's residence, and the claim has not been confirmed by any independent source. There are no images, witnesses or verifiable data indicating the presence of drones in the respective area. Russia’s version (the launch of dozens of drones on an extremely well-secured residence located far from Ukraine) is unlikely and contradicts the logic of real assassination operations. Donald Trump himself voiced skepticism about this narrative after US intelligence services concluded it was a Russian invention. The accusation serves as a pretext for escalating the conflict and for avoiding a clear response regarding Russia's willingness for peace after the negotiators' group meetings.
Every time Moscow resorts to violence, including against the civilian population, the action is justified as a response to an alleged provocation. The Kremlin has constantly employed this logic: the annexation of Crimea was presented as a response to the power change in Kyiv; the Donbas war as defense of Russian-speakers; and the large-scale invasion in 2022 as a necessary response to the pro-Western orientation of the Ukrainian leadership. In fact, after 2022, numerous Russian-speaking civilians from Donbas were killed by the Russian army itself through bombings and fighting in inhabited areas. In this narrative framework, Russia never appears as the aggressor, but as an actor forced to react.
NATO is not seeking a dignified defeat, because it is not in a war against the Russian Federation. The Alliance is a defensive organization, and in the case of a direct conflict, Russia would face the world's most powerful military alliance. The statement belongs to Russian deputy Andrei Kolesnik and it addresses a domestic audience in order create the impression that NATO is capitulating. In fact, NATO member states continue to provide military, financial and political support for Ukraine. There is no defeat to manage because there is no direct NATO-Russia conflict.
Overall, the article intertwines false information, forced interpretations and conspiracist inuendo to induce the idea that Russia is on the verge of inevitable victory, that the war has no alternative, and that the West lacks the will or capacity to retaliate. The message seeks to justify the aggression and shift responsibility for prolonging the conflict onto Ukraine and the states supporting it.
BACKGROUND: The article is based on statements made by by Scott Ritter, a controversial figure who has become an active promoter of pro-Kremlin narratives. Convicted for sexual crimes against minors and known for his anti-American views, Ritter is frequently used by Russian propaganda as an American expert who lends credibility to Moscow's messages. Pro-Kremlin platforms present him as an independent military analyst, omitting his problematic history. His statements are cited almost exclusively by Russian propaganda platforms. Moscow frequently uses the technique of citing Western experts with a view to validating its own narratives, selecting marginal or controversial figures who present opinions favorable to Russia as representative of Western expert opinion. Often, the opinion of controversial specialists is presented as representative of an entire state or society.
Check sources:
