On 26 May 2025, something astonishing emerged from Russia: President Vladimir Putin had narrowly escaped an assassination attempt during a trip to Kursk Oblast. According to Russian state media, Putin's helicopter was allegedly in the "epicenter" of a massive Ukrainian drone strike on May 20, his commander-in-chief of an air defense regiment said, Yury Dashkin. The accusation has again fueled tensions during the Russia-Ukraine crisis, as whether the event is real or not, its strategic implications, and the geopolitical background become points of discussion. This piece goes into the details of the accusation, examines its credibility, and examines its implications for an already strained situation. The Incident: What We Know
The incident reportedly occurred during Putin's trip to Kursk Oblast on May 20, 2025—his first since Russian forces are reported to have recaptured it from Ukraine in March.
Kursk, the border area, has been a hotbed of the war, with Ukraine launching a symbolic incursion in August 2024 that defied Moscow's authority. Dashkin, in a Russian state media interview, reported that Ukrainian forces launched an "unprecedented" drone attack with 46 drones when Putin's helicopter was in the air. He described a two-fisted maneuver in which Russian air defenses were busy repelling the drones and defending the presidential aircraft. "The helicopter basically was the center of the response to the massive drone attack," Dashkin explained, noting that every one of the drones was taken out, and no damage or injury was sustained. The timing of the allegation is interesting. It emerged shortly after Putin's visit, on the same day Russia carried out its largest air strike against Ukraine since the conflict began in 2022, launching 250 drones and 14 ballistic missiles, and killing 12 individuals, including three children, and wounding 56. Ukraine has not issued an official reaction to the assassination claim, and no independent confirmation has been published to support Dashkin's testimony.
A History of Assassination Allegations
This is not the first instance that Russia has accused Ukraine of plotting to kill Putin.
In May 2023, the Kremlin alleged that Ukraine had tried to assassinate him using a drone attack on the Kremlin itself, which was denied angrily by Kyiv. In the meantime, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy subsequently stated in a press release then, "We do not attack Moscow or Putin; we defend our land," suggesting the charge was an alibi for Russian escalation. Then observers debated whether the incident was a Moscow fake to galvanize support at home or a symbolic Ukrainian raid to expose Russian vulnerabilities. The lack of evidence and the timing—on the eve of Russia's Victory Day parade—whetted suspicion, with some Western observers noting that Putin was not even in the Kremlin at all during the alleged attack. Most recently, in January 2025, former Fox News host Tucker Carlson leveled the unsubstantiated charge that the Biden administration attempted to assassinate Putin, to which most people responded with skepticism. These recurring charges suggest a pattern: Russia repeatedly frames itself as a victim of a plot to kill it, typically without the presentation of substantiative evidence, in an effort to justify warfare or gain the domestic political support necessary to justify war.
Assessing the Validity of the Claim
There are some grounds questioning the Kursk incident's credibility. First, the accusation is not independently corroborated. Dashkin's statement, which was made through Russian state-owned media like RBC and Rossiya-24, is not backed by objective resources. Ukraine's silence speaks volumes—Kyiv has a habit of dismissing or mocking accusations of this sort, but in this case, its non-response could imply the accusation is not serious enough to be denounced.
Second, the timing raises doubt.
The claim six days after the supposed attack, on the same day Russia unleashed a global backlash of missiles against Ukraine, is suspect. The delay suggests the claim may be an attempt to justify the escalation through propaganda, especially because Russia is taking a global pounding for the attack, which targeted civilian infrastructure in Kyiv and other urban centers. Ukrainian commentators noted that such claims have a tendency to portray Putin as a warlord under direct threat, rallying national opinion at a time when Russia's military are overstretched, outnumbered and financially impoverished by Western sanctions. Third, the logistics of the alleged attack are dubious.
Kursk Oblast, while a combat area, is heavily militarized, with robust air defense protecting valuable assets like Putin. The belief that 46 Ukrainian drones can penetrate Russian airspace without being detected, hit a presidential helicopter in flight, and be annihilated without reported damage or injury strains credulity. Ukrainian drones have indeed improved, as can be seen most recently in strikes against Russian military bases like the semiconductor plant in Oryol, but a military campaign of this scale and precision would require stunning intelligence and coordination—capabilities that Ukraine has not always demonstrated against such heavily defended targets. On the other hand, Russia has a history of generating or exaggerating events for geopolitical gain. The 2023 Kremlin drone attack was widely speculated to be a staged or false flag attack with some professionals arguing that it was perhaps aimed at providing justification for further bombings of Ukraine or inspiring recruitment campaigns. The Kursk accusation could be done with the same purpose, especially as Russia seeks to maintain momentum after recovering the territory and while ceasefire talks with Ukraine are at an impasse.
Strategic Implications
If the attack were to occur, it would be an enormous escalation in Ukrainian strategy, bringing the war to Putin directly in a way that previous symbolic assaults—like the 2023 Kremlin drone attack—had not.
It would signify a Ukrainian intent to bomb not only military installations but Russia's leadership as well, and it could spur a furious Russian retaliation. Already, there have been cases of pro-Kremlin politicians threatening retaliatory murders of Ukrainian politicians based on such accusations, as in 2023 when Dmitry Medvedev demanded the "physical elimination" of Zelenskyy and his circle. But the more likely explanation—that it is a Russian fabrication—has implications of its own.
By casting Putin as the victim, Russia is able to justify additional acts of aggression, seen most recently in the enormous May 26 assault on Ukraine. It also deflects attention from Russia's battlefield losses, such as recent reverses at Sumy and Donetsk, and places it on a victim narrative. Domestically, it can further enhance Putin's image as a beleaguered leader rallying his troops during a period of waning public support for the war amidst economic belt-tightening and increasing casualties. Internationally, the claim generates pressure on Western allies to respond.
Zelenskyy has already denounced the "silence" of the U.S. and others as allegedly encouraging Putin. The U.S. under Trump has been reluctant to commit to ratcheting up the effort in Ukraine, with Trump preferring economic transactions to involvement in military. The EU and UK have further tightened sanctions on Russia, but without U.S. unified support, the action might not hold the punch necessary to deter further Russian aggression. The Wider Geopolitical Framework
The Kursk charge must be appreciated against the backdrop of developments in the Russia-Ukraine conflict.
Trump addressed Putin for two hours on May 19 on a potential ceasefire, but no agreement was reached, with Putin insisting on concessions from Ukraine that are not acceptable to Kyiv. The most recent Russian offensive against Ukraine signals a disinterest in de-escalation, affirming German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul's statement on May 25 that "Putin is not interested in peace; he wants to continue this war." Russia's military position is fragile.
There have been grim shortages of weapons and men observed by Western officials, and now there is the ideal moment for Ukraine to capitalize on its advantage. Ukraine's recent drone attacks on Russian targets, like the Oryol semiconductor plant, reflect it growing in power to hit strategic targets deep within Russia. Meanwhile, Russia's utilization of long-range strikes, like the May 26 attack, reflects an attrition campaign to break civilian morale instead of achieving major battlefield victories. The Kursk claim also aligns with Trump's tour of the Middle East, which has put a "pay-for-access" model of foreign policy into question. By highlighting economic deals with the Gulf states, Trump becomes potentially lower-priority in supporting Ukraine, thereby unofficially encouraging Russia. If the U.S. reduces its investment in sanctions or military aid, Russia could fill the gap to pursue its operations, using incidents like the Kursk claim to legitimize its efforts.
Sentiment and Public Reaction
X posts vary from a mix of skepticism and worry.
There are some users who refer to the event as a "failed assassination attempt," exaggerating Russia's spin, while others question whether it happened at all, citing a lack of evidence and the quiet in Ukraine. The timing of the accusation, coupled with the Russian bombing of Ukraine, has led some to conclude it is a propaganda stunt to deflect blame for criticism and cover up killing civilians. Broader opinion on the war continues to be polarized, with pro-Ukraine opinion calling for more assertive action from the West and pro-Russia opinion portraying Putin as a victim of Western aggression. Conclusion: A Claim Tainted with Unreliability The assassination attempt on Putin in Kursk Oblast reported is not confirmed and, based on strong suspicion, was likely fabricated. There is no evidence, slowed reporting, and precedent for such attempts being reported by Russia for propaganda purposes that suggest this could be a calculated lie to justify escalation and gain domestic support. If real, however, it would be a major escalation by Ukraine, with deeply significant consequences for the war.
As the Russia-Ukraine conflict unfolds, incidents like these are used to demonstrate the role of narrative in shaping opinion and policy. Meanwhile, the global community is compelled to be cautious with such allegations, practicing restraint in favor of independent confirmation rather than hasty action. The facts of what actually happened on Kursk may never be determined, but its impact on the course of the conflict is already apparent.
Comments
Post a Comment