June Information Environment: Putin’s Next Target in the West, and Russia as a Bastion of State-Sponsored Russophobia

The volume of propaganda related to Estonia decreased by about a third in June, but the core narratives largely remained unchanged, according to an information environment overview compiled by the Government Office.

Persistent Narratives About Estonia

Russophobia as State Policy—Estonia continued to be portrayed as a country hostile to Russia, where “the rights of Russians are violated” and “institutionalized Russophobia” is widespread.

Estonia as a NATO Outpost—Estonia’s position on NATO’s eastern flank was framed as a security threat to Russia, highlighting “provocative” military exercises conducted on its territory.

War on History—Efforts to remove Soviet symbols and diminish the role of the Red Army were depicted as “attempts to rewrite history” and “rehabilitation of Nazism.”

Estonia Leading Anti-Russia Policy—Estonia’s proactive stance in strengthening sanctions and isolating its eastern neighbor was framed as the exaggerated posturing of a small country and as the actions of a “Western great power’s stooge.”

The sharpest backlash was provoked by Foreign Minister Margus Tsahkna’s statement to the U.S. outlet Defense One, in which he said that if Russia were to attack, Estonia would bring the war to Russian soil in cooperation with NATO. The Russian propaganda media swiftly responded by personalizing the attacks.

A Worthy Counterattack Against Tsahkna

Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova dismissed the idea as absurd and claimed that Tsahkna “doesn’t understand what he’s talking about.” Others, including deputy chairmen of the Duma’s defense and foreign affairs committees, responded even more colorfully:

“This statement from an Estonian politician is a sign of mental illness or drug-induced hallucinations.”
“Estonia’s foreign minister clearly lives in a parallel reality, where Estonia, having stumbled into NATO and the EU by mistake, imagines itself a capable superpower.”
“Politics today is full of idiots. They don’t even understand what they’re talking about.”

They also sneered that if such a war began, Estonia would be “erased from Google Maps.” Efforts to strengthen Estonia’s defense capability were likened to self-soothing aromatherapy. Ultimately, they concluded that if the Baltic states insist on playing at triggering the end of the world, Russia might not give them a second chance.

Estonian Defence Minister Hanno Pevkur’s comment that Estonia is ready to host NATO aircraft equipped with nuclear weapons also provoked dissatisfaction in the Kremlin. Presidential press secretary Dmitry Peskov personally responded, calling such a move a direct threat to Moscow and adding that “unfortunately, the leaders of the Baltic states express many absurd ideas.”

Again, more fringe “experts” and “analysts” offered harsher takes: “The Estonians and their foolish generals don’t understand that the closer they place their weapons to the Russian border, the easier they are to hit. They won’t even have time to pull up their underwear before an ‘Oreshnik,’ ‘Kinzhal,’ or ‘Kalibr’ missile hits them.” “In the end, the Baltic republics have no future but to become a testing ground for the ‘Oreshnik.’”

The interview with President Alar Karis and Lithuania’s LRT unexpectedly drew significant attention, spawning dozens of stories, some quoting him out of context. Headlines suggested that Estonia wants to restore relations with Russia, that Ukraine’s NATO membership is in doubt, or that “Estonia’s president made a surprising accusation against Russia.”

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov compared Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania to childhood neighborhood bullies extorting 15 kopecks or sandwiches. He also asserted that the Baltic states lack political independence and are merely puppets of major European powers, which use them to attack Russia.

NATO Summit Keeps Estonia in the Picture

stonia’s visibility in Western media during the first summer month was about as modest as the number of sunny days in Estonia—security-related stories were roughly three times fewer than usual. However, visibility temporarily spiked at the end of the month thanks to the NATO summit in The Hague.

Foreign media focused on four topics partly related to Estonia: defense spending, the Trump factor in NATO’s future, the Russian threat to the Baltic states, and the potential basing of UK-purchased, nuclear-capable F-35 fighters in Estonia.

On defense spending, Estonia received positive coverage in U.S., British, German, and French media. However, this was often accompanied by narratives emphasizing the Russian threat, with headlines such as:

• “These countries may be the first targets in a major military conflict”
• “Frontline countries prepare to fight alone” (Foreign Policy)
• “NATO faces its darkest scenario” (Bloomberg)

The idea that Estonia could be Russia’s next target remained prominent in June. There were suggestions that Putin might test NATO in a “small border town like Narva.” Both tabloids and serious outlets covered this topic, including The Economist in an article titled “Putin’s next target – Estonia is girding itself for an invasion as its Russian minority grows restless.”

The most alarming warning came from Bruno Kahl, head of German foreign intelligence, who said Russia might test NATO’s resolve specifically in Estonia. However, more balanced views were also presented—such as Finnish expert Minna Ålander in Germany’s Merkur, who emphasized that the readiness of the Baltic states is underestimated and that the “little green men” scenario no longer applies.

Stories continued about shadow fleets, hybrid threats, and Russian sabotage. These were prompted by the BALTOPS NATO exercise in the Baltic Sea, aimed at strengthening cooperation to deter Russian aggression, and suspicions about the crew of the ship Eagle S in connection with damage to the Estlink 2 cable. The Telegraph published an article arguing that in light of growing hybrid threats from Russia, the West must listen to the Baltic States—those whom Western Europe had previously accused of dramatizing nonexistent threats.

Another Telegraph article gained notable attention: “Russia uses nuns as spies to spread propaganda.” It focused on the Pühtitsa Convent issue amid amendments to Estonia’s church law passed by the Riigikogu. The story included comments from both the Ministry of the Interior and convent representatives. The article followed the peacetime journalistic tradition of “bothsidesism”—giving equal weight to each position regardless of factual accuracy, ethical grounding, or relevance—a practice that has drawn criticism in the context of the war in Ukraine.