Reactions to Russian annexation and changing attitudes in Russian society. What the worldʼs leading publications wrote about the war in Ukraine on October 1.

Due to "referendums" and Russian nuclear threats, the editorial board of The Washington Post writes that the facts on the ground are more important than the Kremlinʼs statements. The current state of affairs is that Russia doesnʼt control the territory it allegedly annexed, and the mobilization in the Russian Federation led to the fleeing of thousands of men abroad and about a hundred protest actions. The return of Lyman will probably mean the further retreat of the Russian army, in particular from the Luhansk region. Now the West should continue arms deliveries and strengthen sanctions against Russia, the publication says. The editorial board believes that NATO leaders should not react to Ukraineʼs application to join the Alliance at the moment, but instead focus on limiting the price of oil and preparing Europe for winter. At the same time, the West should continue diplomatic efforts towards China, India and Turkey to persuade Putin to end the war.

The Financial Times also published an editorial column that insists that the world should not allow the annexation of four regions of Ukraine. Eight years have passed since the annexation of Crimea ― and Russia is scaling up a similar scenario. The world should not allow another such precedent, the publication writes. The holding of "referendums" and the announcement of annexation seem to have given Putin an opportunity to show "victory" to his audience. It was probably the Russian Federation that damaged the Nord Stream gas pipelines, which underscores the message that the Kremlin has no way back. Threats to use nuclear weapons should be taken seriously, the editorial board writes, and NATO countries should closely monitor any hints that the Russian Federation is preparing such a scenario. At the same time, support to Ukraine must increase, including the provision of air defense systems, so that eventually Moscow becomes unable to continue the war. Putinʼs intimidation should not work. It should lead to the opposite effect ― for example, the removal of legal obstacles to the confiscation of billions of dollars of Russian assets.

• Bloombergʼs Tobin Harshaw spoke with Russian experts about the dynamics of public opinion in the Russian Federation. Harshawʼs interlocutors are the head of the research "Levada Center" Denys Volkov and the researcher of the "Carnegie Foundation" Andriy Kolesnikov. Here are the main points of the interview:
• the announcement of the annexation was intended to cause joy in society and to motivate the army. It turned out the other way around. Although formally the share of support for Putin and the war is falling only slightly, in reality distrust of the regime is growing;
• about a third of Russians are passive conformists who donєt have their own opinion and are afraid to have it in the conditions of authoritarianism. At the same time, these people can be a source of dissatisfaction. There is also a large group of ultra-conservatives who support Putin;
• the announcement of mobilization "brought Russian society out of a coma", growing pessimism and uncertainty about the future;
• currently there are no scenarios for a change of power, all power is concentrated in the hands of Putin, the elites are disunited and weakened by sanctions;
• although Russians fear the third world, Putinʼs nuclear blackmail is perceived as a belief that Russia is a strong state and aims to make the masses proud.