The war in Ukraine has become a proving ground not only for military strength but for the power of propaganda, disinformation, and psychological manipulation. As Russia seeks to destroy Ukraine’s sovereignty, some experts believe the conflict demands a coordinated response rooted in commitment to truth.
Peter Pomerantsev, a senior fellow at the SNF Agora Institute at Johns Hopkins University, is one of those experts.
Born in Soviet Ukraine to dissident parents, Pomerantsev later emigrated to the United Kingdom. His unique heritage—British by nationality, Ukrainian by birth, and deeply embedded in Euro-Atlantic values—positions him to understand the psychological, political, and cultural implications of authoritarian propaganda.
A seasoned author and researcher, his works on Russian information warfare have earned international recognition, and he continues to analyze how disinformation shapes modern democracies and conflicts.
Pomerantsev explains that a recent Ukraine-initiated proposal for a joint investment fund with the U.S. reflects a desire “to move beyond just kind of rhetoric around values and help and be more concrete.”
However, he highlights a fundamental tension: “Is this about the future or the past?”
The Ukrainians are pushing for forward-looking economic partnership, while Trump has framed the deal as a kind of reimbursement for past aid. “That’s just basically weird,” Pomerantsev says bluntly, noting that military support is governed by contractual frameworks—not political IOUs.
He cautions, though, that any such deal remains “just a piece of paper” without peace. “Ukraine needs security and peace and stability” before economic development can take root. And that peace remains elusive.
“Russia continues bombardments and hasn't backed off its initial aims, which is to destroy Ukraine as an independent state,” he says. Until Russia commits to peace, diplomatic and economic agreements are largely symbolic.
Pomerantsev’s perspective is shaped by personal and academic experience. “I was born in Ukraine during the bad days of the Soviet Union,” he says. His father was arrested in the 1970s for the crime of reading and sharing banned books. This history informs his research into propaganda, authoritarianism, and the evolution of democracy in the digital age.
At Johns Hopkins, he explores how media can “create cohesive publics” while also leading projects that support local American media in tackling division—an especially timely focus ahead of America’s 250th anniversary.
His work in Ukraine includes documenting war crimes, particularly focusing on the deportation of Ukrainian children. “Thousands of children have been taken by Russia from occupied territories,” he says, describing it as a Soviet-era tactic to “break the families and indoctrinate the new generation.”
His team at The Reckoning Project, an NGO he co-founded, pairs lawyers with journalists to build legal cases and raise global awareness. “It reveals the scale of Russia’s ambitions… This really is about breaking Ukrainians’ right to have an identity.”
Pomerantsev draws connections between historical and modern propaganda. While Putin’s messaging is more segmented and less ideological than Soviet or Nazi propaganda, it still relies on similar psychological mechanisms. “It gives people a communal sense of identity where they can victimize others,” he says. That identity is rooted in “supremacism, sadism, and very toxic desires for empire.”
His research shows that when Russians are prompted with questions reinforcing these ideas, they’re more likely to support continued war.
The current phase of the conflict, he argues, is not uniquely propagandistic but part of a consistent pattern. From Chechnya to Syria, the Russian government has used war propaganda to manufacture public support. “The sense of being besieged by enemies and the dehumanization of the enemy” are longstanding tactics, he says.
Even now, surveys show that appeals to Russian superiority increase support for aggression.
Despite this, Pomerantsev believes Putin is not invincible. “He’s constantly calibrating,” he says. When faced with real pressure—sea drone attacks in the Black Sea, mass emigration during mobilization, or economic instability—Putin retreats.
The key to restraining him, according to Pomerantsev, is to apply pressure strategically and in quick succession: “You’ve got to sanction the central bank, announce more support for Ukraine, do NATO exercises in Finland, unmask spy networks, demoralize the Russian army.”
But this kind of coordinated pressure requires political will, something Pomerantsev says Biden lacked. “Biden never tried it. Biden’s approach was very incremental.” Trump, he suggests, might have the “guts” to escalate—but whether he will embrace the necessary strategy is unclear.
Oil, too, remains a central lever. “There’s no magic bullet,” Pomerantsev says, “but oil is a bullet without which nothing else works.” Europe’s recent crackdowns on Russia’s shadow fleet—tanker ships used to smuggle oil—are finally having an impact, limiting Russia’s ability to finance its war.
As for negotiations, Pomerantsev warns against mistaking Russian engagement for goodwill. “They’re the masters of negotiating while bombing,” he says, citing Syria as a precedent.
Putin’s ideal, he suggests, is to normalize relations with the U.S. on the economic front while continuing the war on his own terms. “We must not let him compartmentalize Ukraine.”
In Pomerantsev’s view, Russia’s war is not just territorial—it is existential. For Ukraine and for democracy itself, he believes, the outcome depends not only on weapons, but on stories, truths, and the will to act.
