Statements by Russian propagandists have attracted significant attention in the region
At the beginning of 2026, two well-known Russian media figures made statements that caused serious concern in Kyrgyz society. First and foremost, Vladimir Solovyov, referring to the actions of the United States in Venezuela, called to ignore international law and focus on other "points of influence" for Russia.
Vladimir Solovyov, host of Russian television, supporting the authorities:
- If it was necessary for our national security to start a special military operation in Ukraine, then why... can't we do the same in other parts of our sphere of influence? The loss of Armenia is a colossal problem. Central Asia is also a huge problem, and we must clearly define our goals and objectives. We must make it clear — the games are over.
Following him, similar ideas were voiced by Russian ideologist Alexander Dugin.
Alexander Dugin, philosopher and ideologist advocating for the expansion of Russia's influence:
- It is impossible to recognize the existence of sovereign Armenia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, and Uzbekistan... Either they will be with us, or they will become a springboard for the West or China.
Reaction in Kyrgyzstan
These controversial statements sparked a wide response in Kyrgyz society.
For example, Deputy of the Jogorku Kenesh Dastan Bekeshev proposed declaring Solovyov a persona non grata.
Dastan Bekeshev, Deputy of the Jogorku Kenesh of the Kyrgyz Republic:
- I believe our Foreign Ministry should respond, summon the ambassador and deliver a note, and probably declare Solovyov a persona non grata. Such a person has no place in Kyrgyzstan.
Even public figure Kanat Khasanov, who usually takes a pro-Russian stance, expressed dissatisfaction with such statements.
Kanat Khasanov, public figure, lawyer:
- Russian state institutions should give a clear assessment of such statements and stop the transformation of federal media into a source of radicalization and interethnic conflicts. This is not about censorship, but about protecting strategic interests and maintaining trust between peoples...
In his opinion, such statements should be recognized as destructive and potentially dangerous for long-term stability in the region and Russia's image.
After the widespread public reaction, Kyrgyzstan's Foreign Minister Jeenbek Kulubaev commented on Solovyov's words, noting that they do not deserve special attention from the Foreign Ministry.
Jeenbek Kulubaev, head of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Kyrgyz Republic:
- The Kyrgyz side considers it impractical to give additional attention to individual provocative statements that appear in the media landscape and have no relation to the real inter-state agenda.
Later, the official representative of the Russian Foreign Ministry, Maria Zakharova, also commented on Solovyov's statement, calling it "the personal opinion" of the television host of a private channel:
Maria Zakharova, official representative of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Kyrgyz Republic:
- This is the opinion of a journalist, I emphasize: an opinion. Moreover, it was expressed on the private channel "Solovyov LIVE". I read the quotes, based not on out-of-context phrases and not on indirect speech, but on direct. This opinion was essentially formulated as a question: there was no statement, only a question, rhetorical or otherwise — that is not for me to say.
Discussion in Central Asia
Representatives from other countries in the region also expressed their dissatisfaction. For example, Doctor of Political Science Sherzodkhan Kudratkhodja from Uzbekistan emphasized the danger of a situation where norms of international law become objects of doubt.
Sherzodkhan Kudratkhodja noted that Ukraine has become a precedent, and Central Asia is the subject of open fantasies, with "sphere of influence" used as a justification for violence disguised as security.
Sherzodkhan Kudratkhodja, Doctor of Political Science, political scientist from Uzbekistan:
- If international law is "non-binding," and sovereignty is conditional, then in the world that propaganda offers, there are no allies, agreements, or guarantees left. Only the law of the strong remains, renamed as "security." In such a worldview, states cease to be subjects and become mere fragments of a map that can be moved, erased, or appropriated depending on current television arguments.
Historical context and imperial rhetoric
According to Ukrainian political scientist Oleg Posternak, such statements are not random but fit into a stable tradition of Russian foreign policy rhetoric based on imperial logic that has existed since the 14th century. He believes that Russia continues to view neighboring countries as part of its sphere of influence, disregarding their sovereignty.
Oleg Posternak: “The imperial logic that emerged in the 14th century remains the foundation of Russia's foreign policy. It continues to perceive the CIS countries as part of its sphere of influence and demonstrates contempt for their sovereignty.”
Posternak suggests paying attention to the book by Ukrainian historian Kuzari titled “The Disappeared Civilization – An Unnoticed Catastrophe,” which offers a new perspective on the formation of Russia's imperial ambitions and reveals many historical events and processes that have influenced the modern political map of the South Caucasus, Eastern Europe, and Central Asia.
In Posternak's opinion, imperial logic still influences Russia's foreign policy thinking. It manifests in the desire to view the post-Soviet space as its "zone of interests" and is often accompanied by rhetoric that questions the full sovereignty of neighboring states.
The book also addresses the ideological constructs that have been used in different historical eras to justify expansion, such as the opposition of "defenders of the faith" and "the foreign world," which legitimized the advance into Turkic-Muslim territories.
Posternak emphasizes that for the countries of Central Asia, including Kyrgyzstan, the rhetoric of the Kremlin and the ideas described in the book are not abstract reflections.
- The historical memory of the region preserves the experience of the inclusion of Turkestan into the Russian Empire in the second half of the 19th century, when military advancement was accompanied by rhetoric about a "civilizing mission," administrative control, and subjugation of local societies to an external decision-making center, - concludes Oleg Posternak.
