According to pro-Kremlin media, the strike with the Oreshnik hypersonic ballistic missile is a legitimate response to Kyiv's provocations and a final warning that Russia may escalate at any moment, regardless of the consequences.
NEWS: Former Ukrainian Prime Minister Mykola Azarov claims that the Oreshnik missile strike in the Lviv region targeted the underground gas storage facility in Stryi. According to him, the Russian leadership's patience is running out, which is why such measures are being taken. Azarov urged the Kyiv regime to stop its constant provocations against Russia, which could lead to stronger responses, and to take into account the situation of the Ukrainian people, as the strikes directly affect them.
"We call on the authorities in Kyiv, at least during the winter, not to provoke and not to create pretexts for the use of such serious and powerful weapons," the former prime minister added [...].
The Russian Ministry of Defense did not specify what target was hit by the Oreshnik. The ministry's statement said that a massive attack was carried out with long-range weapons, including the Oreshnik medium-range system, on critical targets in Ukraine. The strike damaged drone production facilities used in the attack on the residence of the President of the Russian Federation in the Novgorod region, as well as the energy infrastructure that ensures the functioning of Ukraine's military-industrial complex.
NARRATIVES: 1. Ukraine is provoking Russia, and Moscow is forced to respond. 2. The use of the Oreshnik missile is a justified response to an attack on Putin's residence. 3. Russia strikes military infrastructure, and civilians suffer because of Kyiv.
PURPOSE: To justify Russian strikes on Ukrainian infrastructure, including energy infrastructure; to discredit the authorities in Kyiv by portraying them as irresponsible towards civilians; to create a pretext for blocking or postponing peace negotiations.
Reality: The attack with the Oreshnik missile is part of Russia's attempts to intimidate Ukraine and its allies. The claim that Russia, which is the aggressor state, was provoked is ridiculous.
WHY THE NARRATIVES ARE FALSE: The article follows a well-known narrative pattern of Russian propaganda. First, a difficult-to-verify accusation is made, in this case the alleged attack on Putin's residence, which is presented as a fact. On this basis, a strike with special weaponry, the "Oreshnik" missile, is announced and described as a legitimate response. Subsequently, a "Ukrainian voice" in exile, Mykola Azarov, is introduced, calling on the authorities in Kyiv "not to provoke," reinforcing the idea that Ukraine is responsible for the escalation. In the final stage, the blame is shifted entirely onto the victim, suggesting that stopping the Russian strikes depends on Ukraine giving up its resistance.
Every time Moscow resorts to violence, including against civilians, the action is justified as a response to an alleged provocation . This logic has been used consistently: the annexation of Crimea was presented as a reaction to the change of power in Kyiv, the war in Donbas as a measure to defend the Russian speakers, and the large-scale invasion of 2022 as a necessary response to the pro-Western orientation of the Ukrainian leadership. In this discursive framework, Russia never appears as an aggressor, but as a player forced to react.
The accusation regarding the alleged attack on Putin's residence follows exactly this pattern. It is treated as fact and used as a starting point for retaliation, even though the premise has been disproved. Ukraine has denied any attempt to attack the Russian president's residence, and the United States has publicly stated, through Donald Trump, that its assessments do not confirm the Russian Federation's version.
Similarly, the report about the target of the Oreshnik missile strike is speculative. The claim that the underground gas storage facility in Stryi was hit comes from statements made by Mykola Azarov, while the Russian Ministry of Defense speaks of striking infrastructure targets in western Ukraine, including a "drone production plant" where the devices used in an alleged attempt to assassinate Vladimir Putin were manufactured. The information about the "drone factory" serves as an additional propaganda mechanism, intended to justify strikes on Ukrainian infrastructure and reinforce the message that any Russian attack is, in fact, one of self-defense.
The narrative that "Kyiv provokes and Russia responds" fundamentally reverses the causality of the war. The conflict is not the result of recent actions by Ukraine, but of aggression by the Russian Federation, which began in 2014 and expanded with the large-scale invasion of February 2022. This aggression has been condemned by UN General Assembly resolutions calling for the withdrawal of Russian troops and respect for Ukraine's sovereignty. In this context, Ukraine's actions against Russian military and logistical capabilities are defensive and represent a response to the invasion, not a cause of it. Propaganda, however, turns effect into cause.
Russian strikes on energy infrastructure have caused massive blackouts and local humanitarian crises. Attributing these consequences to Kyiv's "provocations" is a classic victim-blaming technique, designed to mask the nature of a campaign of pressure on civilians to increase war fatigue and force surrender.
Finally, pro-Kremlin narratives consistently ignore the context of war crimes and international accountability. Independent investigations have documented executions, torture, filtration camps, and the deportation of children from occupied territories. The arrest warrant issued by the International Criminal Court against Vladimir Putin for the illegal deportation of Ukrainian children directly contradicts Russia's image as a pacifist player. This omission is not accidental: it supports a false narrative that Russia's actions are necessary and defensive, and that the only "solution" offered to Ukraine is surrender.
The use of a weapon such as Oreshnik, the most modern in Russia's arsenal, is also intended to intimidate not only Ukraine but also its European allies, given that such missiles are almost impossible to stop. Dmitry Medvedev, a Russian official with one of the most aggressive discourses, who has even threatened with nuclear weapons in the past, explicitly mentioned Europe after the Oreshnik attack . Experts also agree that the use of this type of missile was a signal to Ukraine's allies, at a time when, on the one hand, Russia is seeking to delay the peace process initiated by the US by inventing pretexts and, on the other hand, France and the UK have announced that they are ready to send troops to Ukraine to guarantee a possible ceasefire.
CONTEXT: Russia has accused Ukraine of attempting to assassinate President Vladimir Putin in a massive drone attack on one of his residences, an accusation rejected by Kyiv and which the United States said it could not confirm. A few days after these statements, Moscow launched an Oreshnik hypersonic missile strike on a target in western Ukraine. Mykola Azarov plays a central role in reinforcing pro-Kremlin messages. Although he is presented as the former prime minister of Ukraine, he lives in Russia, constantly promotes pro-Kremlin ideas, and has been convicted in absentia in Ukraine to a severe sentence for serious crimes, including treason. Him being mentioned in the text aims to create the appearance of "inside" confirmation, suggesting that even former Ukrainian leaders would validate Moscow's explanations.
