In the rapidly evolving landscape of information warfare, a striking new study sheds light on an underexplored facet of the Kremlin’s online influence efforts: the strategic deployment of official diplomatic channels on Telegram as vehicles for disinformation and hostile messaging. This research uncovers a sophisticated network of Russian embassy and consulate Telegram accounts, casting them not merely as diplomatic voices but as active participants in a hybrid information campaign that blurs the lines between formal state diplomacy and covert foreign influence and misinformation (FIMI) operations.
Telegram, a messaging platform acclaimed for its encryption and resilience against censorship, has emerged as a cutting-edge arena for state actors aiming to circumvent traditional media controls. The Kremlin’s use of Telegram diplomatic channels reveals a novel semi-public grey zone where official state communication morphs into a tool for propagandizing and spreading content previously restricted or removed from other digital spaces. This phenomenon raises critical questions about the nature of digital diplomacy itself and challenges the conventional boundaries separating legitimate state messaging from disinformation campaigns designed to distort political realities.
At the heart of this investigation is the identification of a tightly interconnected network, operating through the frequent forwarding of messages between official Telegram channels. This network functions as a coordinated mechanism for amplifying narratives that serve the Kremlin’s geopolitical interests, with a particular focus on undermining Western support for Ukraine. The study’s granular analysis reveals how these channels disseminate tailored content that actively seeks to erode sympathy and political backing for Ukraine in the West, forging a digital front in the broader information conflict surrounding the ongoing war.
Beyond the political dimension, the research delves into the discursive strategies underlying this Kremlin messaging, highlighting how narratives are constructed through selective historical references and cultural myth-making. Notably, the Kremlin-linked channels embed their content with allusions to conspiratorial themes, including the notorious “Golden Billion” theory, which posits a global elite conspiring against the masses. Such vernacular and symbolic undercurrents operate as semantic frameworks through which propagandistic messaging gains resonance and emotional potency, making these digital communications not just vehicles of falsehood but instruments of cultural influence.
This nuanced understanding of the Kremlin’s Telegram channels contributes a novel theoretical insight to media studies. It posits that the platform acts as a digital frontier where diplomacy and misinformation intermingle, forging an ambiguous communicative zone difficult to regulate and challenging to analyze. Telegram’s technical features—such as channel anonymity, forwarding behaviors, and minimal content moderation—facilitate an ecosystem where state actors can persistently reintroduce contentious narratives that would be prone to removal elsewhere on the internet, thereby complicating efforts to hold disinformation accountable.
The findings also invoke broader concerns about platform governance and the political economy of online social media, drawing attention to the technological affordances that enable and sustain these hybrid messaging strategies. The study urges a more comprehensive investigative approach that transcends textual analysis to encompass multimodal content, including images, audio, and video, which are increasingly instrumental in contemporary FIMI and propaganda operations. The convergence of multiple media formats within Telegram channels implies a new frontier for computational social science and media forensics to decode and counteract this multifaceted digital propaganda.
Moreover, the Kremlin’s activity on Telegram must be contextualized within a broader ecosystem of state-controlled digital diplomacy that spans numerous platforms. The Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs maintains official presences not only on Telegram but on a wide array of social networks such as Facebook, VKontakte, Instagram, TikTok, X, Rutube, YouTube, Periscope, Flickr, Viber, and Odnoklassniki. Each platform carries its unique affordances and audience dynamics, suggesting that an effective analysis of Russia’s digital diplomacy and disinformation efforts must adopt a cross-platform, comparative lens, analyzing how narratives are adapted, intensified, or diffused across these diverse digital channels.
A further dimension proposes expanding research to analogous digital operations conducted by other influential state actors, such as China, which also engages in sophisticated digital diplomacy and information manipulation. Comparative studies could illuminate the shared tactics and distinctive modes of state-driven propaganda under changing geopolitical contexts, contributing to a richer understanding of the evolving architecture of global information warfare. This comparative perspective is crucial as digital authoritarianism and state-coordinated influence efforts continue to proliferate worldwide.
An essential component yet to be fully explored is audience reception. While this study predominantly focuses on the dissemination of pro-Kremlin narratives within limited Telegram channels characterized by modest follower counts, the impact on audiences—how users consume, interpret, and potentially propagate these messages—remains a significant research gap. Understanding the reception and amplification mechanisms among both domestic and international audiences will be vital in gauging the actual efficacy and reach of these digital diplomatic undertakings and misinformation campaigns.
Equally, detailed narrative analyses are needed to comprehend how content is culturally and linguistically tailored to specific regions and communities. The resonance of conspiracy theories and historical allusions in different locales suggests deliberate calibration of messaging strategies to exploit local sociopolitical fault lines. Insights into the temporal dynamics of narrative trends—whether certain claims survive, mutate, or are abandoned—and the degree to which channels moderate their own original postings versus forwarding content from external sources could yield important clues into the operational logics of Kremlin digital diplomacy.
Technologically sophisticated methods such as machine learning-assisted narratological techniques could enable the systematic analysis of these evolving narratives at scale, offering promising tools for both researchers and practitioners engaged in countering disinformation. The development of refined textual analysis protocols capable of handling the nuances of digital narratives would contribute to more effective identification, categorization, and ultimately dismantling of harmful propaganda streams.
In essence, this study uncovers a critical blind spot in current efforts to comprehend the full extent of Kremlin influence operations: the subtle, semi-official presence of state diplomatic channels operating within the permissive ecosystem of Telegram. This platform acts as both shield and amplifier, sheltering disinformation behind the veneer of official diplomacy and facilitating the recirculation of divisive and conspiratorial narratives. As digital landscapes continue to evolve and state actors adapt their strategies, the intersection of diplomacy, social media technology, and misinformation emerges as a pressing arena for scholarly attention and public scrutiny.
The broader implications extend into policy and platform regulation. Current moderation frameworks struggle with the challenge posed by state actors occupying this liminal space, where official diplomacy intersects with covert information warfare. Policymakers and platform operators must grapple with balancing freedom of expression, state sovereignty, and security considerations, while researchers continue developing robust empirical foundations to inform these contentious debates.
As digital diplomacy becomes a double-edged sword—serving as both a tool of intergovernmental communication and a means of digital weaponization—the academic and policy communities face a formidable task of disentangling these complex dynamics. This study’s meticulous analysis of the Kremlin’s Telegram network marks an important step toward illuminating the dark corners of state-led digital influence, highlighting the urgent necessity for interdisciplinary approaches that integrate media theory, political communication, and narratology within the technological realities of contemporary social media platforms.
Subject of Research:
The analysis centers on the Kremlin’s use of official Russian diplomatic Telegram channels as instruments for disseminating disinformation and propagandistic foreign influence and misinformation (FIMI), particularly in the context of Russia’s narratives regarding Ukraine and Western support dynamics. It explores the intersection of digital diplomacy and information warfare through network and narrative analysis.
Article Title:
From denazification to the Golden Billion: an inductive analysis of the Kremlin’s weaponisation of digital diplomacy on Telegram.
Article References:
Willaert, T., Tuters, M. From denazification to the Golden Billion: an inductive analysis of the Kremlin’s weaponisation of digital diplomacy on Telegram.
Humanit Soc Sci Commun 12, 989 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-025-05382-x
