Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the West has clung to the comforting delusion that Vladimir Putin’s war was a one-man crusade, however this illusion is collapsing under the weight of hard intelligence, warns Bruno Kahl.
This narrative—that Putin was a tyrant ruling over an unwilling and misled population—offered a convenient moral distinction. It allowed liberal democracies to maintain the illusion that, despite the Kremlin’s aggression, the Russian people remained a potential partner for peace, separate from the regime that rules them.
Bruno Kahl, the head of Germany’s foreign intelligence agency, the BND, has delivered an unvarnished assessment that cuts through the wishful thinking. In an interview with the Table Briefings podcast, Kahl declared that “the entire Russian people are ready to follow Putin,” driven by a belief that the war in Ukraine is not only necessary, but righteous. He describes a nation where NATO is seen as the true aggressor, and the annihilation of Ukraine’s democratic government is viewed as a glorious mission.
This is not the rhetoric of a nation held hostage. It is the outlook of a population that, through years of propaganda, militarism, and manufactured grievance, has come to embrace a vision of imperial revival. Kahl’s words are not those of a hawk seeking confrontation—they are a sober assessment from the man charged with understanding Russia’s long-term intentions. And those intentions, he warns, extend far beyond the Donbas.
The West can no longer pretend that Russia’s internal dissent will somehow rise up to check Putin’s ambitions. Kahl makes it plain: “There is no opposition that would in any way stand in Putin’s way.” What little political plurality existed in Russia was snuffed out in the aftermath of Navalny’s imprisonment and death. Independent media has been crushed, civil society neutered, and critics driven into exile, prison—or worse. In this atmosphere, any variation of opinion is limited to military strategy, not moral opposition.
Indeed, the Russian state has succeeded not merely in quashing dissent, but in forging consent. The propaganda machine is not a background instrument—it is the engine of national cohesion. And it is working. The saturation of patriotic messaging, revisionist history, and relentless demonisation of the West has created an information ecosystem in which war is not a tragedy, but a patriotic duty. Russians are not simply misinformed; many are fervently loyal to the cause, because that cause is indistinguishable from their national identity.
Kahl further warned that his agency has “concrete” evidence that Russia is planning an attack on NATO territory.
He stated his belief that the Russian leadership no longer believes NATO’s article 5 guarantee of mutual assistance will be honoured — and may seek to test it.
“We are very sure, and we have intelligence evidence to back this up, that [Russia’s full-scale invasion of] Ukraine is only one step on Russia’s path towards the west,” he warned.
This, then, is the reality confronting the West: a nation mobilised in mind and spirit for protracted confrontation. NATO’s new Secretary General, Mark Rutte, has echoed Kahl’s assessment, warning that Russia is rebuilding its military and could pose a direct threat to NATO within five years. The strategic implications are grave. If Russia tests the alliance’s resolve—through hybrid attacks, cyberwarfare, or pressure on the Baltic states—what will be the West’s response?
Complacency must end. The narrative of a passive, peace-loving Russian public held hostage by a rogue regime has lulled Europe into a strategic slumber. The truth is more uncomfortable: the regime and much of the population are aligned in purpose. This is not a case of state versus society, but a state reinforcing society to justify endless war.
This doesn’t mean the West should abandon the idea of supporting individual Russians who dissent, but policy must reflect reality, not fantasy. Sanctions should be broadened to target enablers of the regime beyond the political elite—cultural institutions, media actors, and state-aligned businesses that help propagate the Kremlin’s worldview. The security architecture of Europe must be rebuilt on the assumption that Russia is not an aberration to be reformed, but a hostile power to be deterred, and if necessary, defeated.
Putin may have lit the match, but the fire has taken hold. As Kahl rightly identifies, the real danger lies not only in Russia’s actions in Ukraine, but in its appetite to test NATO directly. This is a nation that sees itself not as a violator of peace, but as the spearhead of a righteous struggle against Western “decadence” and “aggression.”
It’s time we saw Russia as it sees itself: not as a country dragged into war by a despot, but as a willing empire, reawakening. Appeasement failed a century ago, and romantic illusions may do worse still today. The sooner we accept that this is not just Putin’s war, the better prepared we’ll be to meet what comes next.
Main Image: BND.
