Over the past week, global media have seen a surge in attention to the events in the occupied Crimea, comparable only to the situation in the first month of the occupation in 2014.
Among other things, articles on the logistical, economic, and energy situation on the peninsula have been repeatedly published by “DW”, “BBC”, “CBS”, “PBS”, “TRT”, “El Mundo”, “Fox News”, “New York Post”, “The Economist”, “The Hill”, “The Telegraph”, “The Washington Post” and many other publications, with the placement of relevant materials both in news feeds and in analytical materials and editorial columns, which often receive millions of views.
The main attention is paid to the course and consequences of drone attacks, the role of Crimea in the political system and in the military logistics of the Russians, with special attention to the possible impact of events on the peninsula on the prospects for ending Russian aggression against Ukraine.
For example, analysts at “The Hill” write that the Kremlin dictator’s rule “may not survive the inevitable fall of Crimea,” and a similar assessment of the prospects of the Putin regime is expressed in The Economist.
At the same time, most publications assess the state of affairs in Russian society, the budget, and military potential, with a reminder of the recent three-year anniversary of Yevgeny Prigozhin’s coup.
Under these conditions, the Russian occupation propaganda demonstrates the absence of any new “messages” or “narratives,” except for the latest threats by the Crimean “speaker” Vladimir Konstantinov about a nuclear war against Europe as a “force for peace.”
In general, the current global media situation indicates the beginning of a discussion by analysts of democratic countries of the de-occupation of Crimea, as well as the fall of the current Kremlin regime, as processes that have every chance of occurring in a real historical perspective.
