How Telegram Became a Communication Aid in the Russian Military

Since the start of the full-scale war between Russia and Ukraine, Telegram has become a key communication tool within the Russian Armed Forces. Over the last two and a half years, its usage has evolved, especially on the tactical level and in logistics support.

However, recent developments, including the detention of Telegram’s founder Pavel Durov in France, have sparked renewed discussions about the messenger’s role in military operations, questioning its actual significance for the Russian Armed Forces and the broader war effort.

Telegram, known for its encryption and user-friendly interface, has become widely used in the Russian military. Soldiers, particularly those stationed in the rear and in tactical units, have come to rely on it for everyday tasks such as logistics coordination, gathering donations for supplies, and sharing internal updates. Compared to WhatsApp, which has faced scrutiny due to perceived security vulnerabilities linked to its parent company Meta, Telegram has won favour among Russian troops due to its reputation for stronger privacy.

For instance, many Russian military units use Telegram group chats to manage logistical needs, such as raising funds for essential equipment like drones or body armour. This stands in contrast to the Ukrainian Armed Forces, who rely more on WhatsApp and Viber for similar purposes.

However, despite its popularity, Telegram’s role in direct combat operations, especially on the front lines, is less pronounced. The absence of reliable internet access in many conflict zones prevents widespread use of the app in real-time battlefield coordination. While some elite Russian units, such as reconnaissance and drone operators, have access to Starlink antennas provided by volunteers, most frontline troops do not have the luxury of such equipment, limiting their ability to utilise Telegram for more than basic communications.

Exaggeration of Telegram’s Role

While Telegram is undoubtedly useful for certain logistical and operational purposes, its role in coordinating large-scale military actions is often exaggerated. Pro-military bloggers, often referred to as “military correspondents” or “voenkors,” have vested interests in portraying the messenger as an indispensable tool. These bloggers depend on Telegram to publish exclusive content, such as footage of battles, and to solicit donations from their followers, which are then used to purchase equipment for soldiers. This cycle of content creation, popularity, and donation drives has led to the inflated perception that Telegram is critical for the Russian military.

For example, the notion that Telegram has become a vital part of Russia’s network-centric warfare efforts — connecting different branches of the military, from artillery to reconnaissance, into a unified system — is largely overstated. While there are instances where the app is used to share target coordinates and intelligence, it is not the primary or indispensable platform for such tasks. Most of these functions are still handled by traditional military communication systems, such as drones paired with artillery units, rather than civilian messaging apps.

The hype surrounding Telegram’s role in the military is also fuelled by concerns over its security. The arrest of Pavel Durov in France and the potential compromise of the app’s encryption raised fears in Russia that Telegram’s “keys” might be handed over to Western intelligence agencies, jeopardising the security of military communications. However, it remains unclear how significant a threat this would be, as military operations, particularly at higher levels of command, generally do not rely on civilian messengers for sensitive communication.

Alternatives and Challenges to Military Communication Systems

Despite Telegram’s usefulness for certain non-combat functions, the Russian military has long been working on developing its own secure communication systems. Efforts to build an integrated network-centric warfare system date back to the Soviet era and have continued through the 2000s and 2010s. The Russian Ministry of Defence aimed to create a unified management system for tactical operations, which included a dedicated military messenger as part of the “Constellation-M2″ system.

This system, designed to facilitate real-time data sharing between reconnaissance units, artillery, aviation, and command centres, was supposed to revolutionise Russian battlefield communication. However, by 2024, it had largely failed to materialise. The system’s implementation was plagued by technical shortcomings and bureaucratic inefficiencies, leaving Russian forces to rely on a mix of civilian technology, such as Telegram, and traditional military systems.

One of the reasons for this failure is the dependence on foreign components in some of the military hardware. For example, equipment used in the “Constellation” system was found to include parts sourced from Western civilian manufacturers, including tablets developed in Germany and manufactured in Taiwan. As sanctions tightened, obtaining these components became increasingly difficult, further hindering the development of the Russian military’s proprietary communication infrastructure.

The Limitations of Telegram

Telegram has proven to be a useful tool for the Russian military in specific contexts, particularly for logistics and lower-level communication. However, its role in frontline coordination and higher-level strategic operations is limited. The exaggeration of its significance by military bloggers stems from their reliance on the platform for content creation and fundraising rather than from its irreplaceable military function.

Ultimately, while Telegram provides a convenient solution for certain tasks, it cannot replace a dedicated military communication network. The challenges faced by the Russian Ministry of Defence in developing such a system highlight the limitations of relying on civilian technology for military purposes.