December 15, 2023 - 7:00am
Following the failure of Ukraine’s summer counteroffensive, an air of despondency has settled into Western coverage of the war. Momentum now seems to be with Russia, attacking all along the eastern front and slowly bringing its superiority in men, materiel and industrial capacity to bear as Ukraine struggles to maintain American support.
Yet the situation is not as desperate as the recent pivot in coverage implies. Ukraine can still make Russian advances slow and costly and a determined strategy of defence, such as the Pentagon is now urging on Kyiv, could well stabilise the line over the course of the coming year.
The current doom-laden discourse, while more realistic than the frantic boosterism of the past two years, is therefore perhaps better understood as a product of social media dynamics than of the battlefield situation. In its urge to win the support of Western publics and policymakers, Ukraine leant into social media activism in a way we have never previously seen from wartime governments. Whether this, in the end, helped the Ukrainian cause now seems doubtful.
The clash of online supporters on the virtual battlefield helped obscure the war’s real-world dynamics through their parasocial relationship with the conflict. Like the weaponisation of consumer drones, the fusion of war and social media was a development pioneered in the Syrian Civil War that reached full fruition in Ukraine. Yet the Syrian rebel success in social media narratives did not translate into battlefield victory, and Ukraine risks a similar mismatch paving the way for military defeat.
As a result of the internet attention economy, much of the discourse around the Ukraine war turned into reckless boosterism. Voices urging Ukrainian caution as the Kyiv government’s war aims escalated were shouted down as defeatists or pro-Russian propagandists. An unhealthy dynamic was created, where the most accurate analysis either retreated into closed discussion spaces or was carefully hedged into vapidity to avoid trolling by Ukraine’s online army of foreign cheerleaders. Most dangerously, to even broach the idea that Russia retained vast and underused military potential would bring accusations of closet Putinism.
As only the most optimistic Kyiv claims were shared, it created, according to the former Ukrainian defence minister Oleksiy Reznikov’s head of communications Iryna Zolotar, “a confusing narrative where ‘expectations are overstated and do not correspond to the real state of affairs.’” And as Zolotar remarks, “the current strategy had left audiences in the West asking why they should contribute their taxpayers’ money if Ukraine was always ‘about to win.’”
A Top Trumps-like overemphasis on supposedly war-winning high-tech weapons, delivered in small quantities after interminable debate, likewise outcompeted the argument for Western munitions factories to scale up the unglamorous but vital production of basic artillery rounds, like those with which Russia is now pounding Ukrainian lines. The West gave Kyiv symbolic support, while Kyiv pursued symbolic war aims, such as the wasteful struggle over Bakhmut: both appeared dangerously downstream of social media incentives.
Yet while the war has entered a dangerous phase, it is far from lost. Much of the current doomerism is arguably an overcorrection to the enforced over-optimism of the past two years. As the Ukrainian flags are virtually lowered from social media accounts, and the grifter economy moves onto the higher levels of engagement now offered by the Gaza war, Ukraine will be better served by supportive but objective realism, rather than a superficial and ultimately counterproductive boosterism.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeRousisinos is right that social media has had a role in warping the expectations of the outcome of the Ukraine war, but seems to imply that this was a result of the ‘normal’ to-and-fro of the exchanges there. That it was because of the reaction of the on-line herds that people who ran against the tide were suppressed or driven down. In the wake of the ‘Twitter Files’ – where ample evidence of direct government interference has been exposed – this is quite an assumption. Prior to that many of us on the anti-war left were well aware of the tools of shadow-banning, de-monetising and follower-culling. Beyond that we had all sorts of evidence of Wikipedia being manipulated to serve (for want of a better short-hand) Western Imperialist narratives.
These were all deployed in spades following Russia’s invasion – and extended way beyond social media- see the typically ‘roudy’ (i.e. dementedly borish) Parliamentary exchanges and the frankly hysterical banning of RT across the West – their output would be just too much for our pretty little heads to cope with.
It has been very similar to the experience of those who questioned covid vaccines online.
No one, NO ONE, was forced to have the vaccine. In fact I know many who didn’t, caught Covid and said “so what “ and I have some respect for those people who made that choice for themselves. I add, that the Covid conspiracy mob are now more irritating than the remainacs.
Many of us remember the initial “propaganda “ from Russia and the West that the “conflict/war would be over in 3-days so there was no point helping Ukraine”.
That was wrong. Let’s hope for Ukraines sake that the current trend of “Russia has won , it’s just a matter of time “, is wrong too.
RT was bad enough before the Ukraine War. I hate to think what it would have been like during it.
“Ukraine will be better served by supportive but objective realism, rather than a superficial and ultimately counterproductive boosterism.”
The agreement to open EU-accession talks with the Ukraine indicates that the latter is still governing in the EU. With the possible exception of Hungary, except Orbán will always take the money and run.
Of all the stupid things that have ever been decided in Brussels, this must have shot straight into the top 3. It is truly a triumph of emotions over rational thinking and I don’t understand how anyone is going to be helped by it. Ukraine can be supported in other ways.
Ukraine should be in the EU (and NATO for that matter). Hungary should be out.
All doubtless true. And it would be bad enough if it were genuinely organic but let’s not pretend that the idiotic boosterism of the last couple of years was bottom up.
The fact is that politicians and military brass were constantly on the telly taking the “forward to total victory” line. As we have seen a substantial eco-system of intelligence, academia and NGOs was built in order to suppress dissenting voices online and legacy media figures who didn’t take the right view were unceremoniously hauled off their shows.
Meanwhile, as we now know, peace talks were being deliberately scuttled – against Ukraine’s wishes. And it’s hardly organic that confirmation of that story has merited hardly a blip on the media radar.
This isn’t a new media story. “Warmongering government deploys current state of the art in propaganda techniques in support of the war they chose to fight” is a story as old as mass communication.
What about the boosterism that Russia will defeat Ukraine in 3-days?
As the Ukrainian flags are virtually lowered from social media accounts, and the grifter economy moves onto the higher levels of engagement now offered by the Gaza war – no further comments other than saying I love this description.
I hope to God that real- life military decisions were not made in response to social media posts. This would bring incompetency to a whole new level.
I doubt they took much notice of social media, but they were under enormous pressure from western allies to make use of the equipment donated and push on with the counteroffensive (remember all the complaints at the beginning about nothing happening and how the aid would dry up if it wasn’t being used)
Now that counteroffensive has failed all those same western allies are now distancing themselves from the situation and accusing Zelensky of being too gung ho. If the Ukrainians had broken the Russian lines you just know every western leader would be trying to take credit for it however
The bad news is…….
Twitter is not real life.
I am pretty sure the author was pumping that bubble non stop just a few months ago
blaming social media conveniently leaves out the rest of the media, which led the charge on the “you’re either all in or a Putin stooge” approach. Now, we’re in a position where the West is hoping that the Russians will still accept the deal they were ready to make two years ago.
Over the weekend, a talking head guest on CNN lamented the possibility of Trump winning because his desire to end the war amounts to “conceding to Putin.” Conceding what, reality? Our govt has largely destroyed a country, killed off the better part of a generation of young men, and watched millions flee never to return. I imagine Black Rock is excited but few others are.
You think that Ukraine would be a great place now if only the Russian Army had won the war in the first week?
Why doesnt Ukraine produce their own basic artillery rounds? They were the world’s 4th largest arms manufacturers in 2014.
Because the Russians can bomb any factory at any time
Also most of Ukrainian industry was located in the Donbass, Russia now controls it, eg there is a massive steel works in Mariupol, it was badly damaged during the war but the Russians are close to starting production again
Corruption on the part of Ukrainians, and corruption fed by foreign interests who did not like the idea of an arms industry as capable and more productive as their own… …..Ukraine became independent in 1991, plenty of time to move and integrate armament industries to western Ukraine, just as is being planned now. Corruption
Because we want the money,it’s about all the manufacturing we’ve got left.
The “Ukraine” industrial area is in the bit that wants to be Russian so fat chance of any cooperation there.
Speaking of boosterism – Here are some quotes from Russians for you:
“we will take Kiev in three days”, Head of Russian Defence, Sergei Shoigu.
This war will last 3-4 days at the most”, President Lukashenko of Belarus.
“It’s no secret that this operation is going to be over in mere hours”, the LATE Russian Lieutenant General Yakov Rezantsev.
“Kyiv will be taken so quickly! In a day and a half or three days!”, Russian TV Propagandist, Vladimir Solovyov.
But actually BOTH SIDES are making huge profits from continued,low level sustained conflict. They like it. They don’t want to stop.
“As a result of the internet attention economy, much of the discourse around the Ukraine war turned into reckless boosterism. Voices urging Ukrainian caution as the Kyiv government’s war aims escalated were shouted down as defeatists or pro-Russian propagandists.”
The first line above is partially true however people forget there was a lot of pessimism in the summer of 2020 after Ukraine’s early success in halting the invasion faded from memory and Russia’s relentless artillery barrages in the south east allowed them to creep forward. That was before more “boosterism” following Ukraine’s successful offensive around Kharkiv and Kherson. Now the pendulum has swung back once again.
My main problem with this article is how it suggests Ukrainian difficulties are an inevitable product of fighting a much larger enemy without factoring in the slowness of Western military aid deliveries. The ability to change the outcome of this war lies pretty much entirely in Washington DC and the main consequence of “Ukraine fatalism” is to deter further aid deliveries. Nothing about the Russian performance since the beginning of this war suggests they can’t be beaten if Ukraine has enough materiel.
The playground bully argument. Me and my mates are strong and if you don’t hand over your dinner money we’ll beat you up.
Any peace with Russia is simply not possible. Putin will never negotiate in good faith and has broken every promise he has made. He’ll take any pause in the fighting as a chance to prepare for a second attempt. However costly it may be, defeating him is cheaper and easier than coming to a negotiated settlement.
None so blind as will not see.
However costly it may be? Put your own money down. But not mine …
If its that important to him he should join the fight, claiming to be too old is no excuse, the Ukrainians are sending old men and women out to fight now
Watch YouTube channel Pavlo of Ukraine,see how many fit,young men of fighting age have got Exemption Certificates.
Good for Pavlo,his cousins + his mates,the crafty sly bastards. I’m not handing out White Feathers. I’m saying it’s not how were told it is.
Off you go then. But make sure your life insurance is up to date.
Russia is the “forever enemy” of freedom and democracy. Money spent grinding Russia now will save money and lives in the future.
Go to Specsavers.