• Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Global logoCarnegie lettermark logo
DemocracyIran
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [
    "Andrei Kolesnikov"
  ],
  "type": "commentary",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
    "Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "",
  "programs": [],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [],
  "topics": [
    "Economy"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

Commentary

Why are Russians Ignoring the DNC Hack?

Even if Putin didn’t know about the cyber initiative, what‘s truly important is that he is seen as omnipotent by the media and the politicians in the West. Perhaps the blame is undeserved, and Putin’s power is once again being overstated. But that’s the price you pay for creating a political system where everything hinges on the whims of one man.

Link Copied
By Andrei Kolesnikov
Published on Aug 4, 2016

Guess what? The DNC email hacking scandal is barely making waves in Russia even though Russia’s formidable intelligence services are widely blamed and President Obama has suggested that the Kremlin might even be trying to sway the U.S. election.

Russia’s parliamentary elections are just seven weeks away, and the Kremlin’s propaganda machinery is dutifully churning out claims that Russia’s economic woes are all due to U.S. machinations. Even the Olympic doping scandal is being portrayed in Russia as yet another sign of the undying hostility of the West and the United States, in particular.

But, believe it or not, this “blame America first” campaign isn’t getting much traction with average Russians. Sure, popular attitudes toward the United States are very negative, but they have crested from the historic highs registered back in January 2015. For better or worse, Russians have started to move on, a state of affairs which lends itself to new jokes like “Life has never been as bad as it’s been under Obama.”

While Russian public opinion usually follows Putin’s lead on major issues, voters are not terribly impressed by scandals these days. That helps explain both why Putin’s popularity rating remains stubbornly high amid the current economic doldrums and why suggestions that the Kremlin may have been working behind the scenes to boost Donald Trump’s position are likely to fade from the news after just a day or two.

If put on the spot, average Russians would doubtlessly say that they were impressed by Putin’s craftiness and that it was pretty cool for the Kremlin to try to use covert tools to influence events far beyond the country’s borders. And if they were given a chance to vote in the U.S. election, we can assume that plenty of Russians would break for Trump, given the stubborn appeal of ultra-right political populists. Unfortunately, there are only two state-sanctioned opposition parties in Russia these days, the Communists and the Liberal-Democrats. Their main purpose is to provide outlets for those who want to protest but aren’t wild about the idea of ending up in prison. Both parties have succesfully impersonated the country’s political opposition for over 20 years.

The Liberal-Democrats’ founder and public face is Vladimir Zhirinovskiy, a seemingly tireless figure who can lay claim to being the original “Trump.” He emerged in the early 1990s and owes his popularity to being everything Trump is today: rude, crude, politically incorrect, and downright erratic. Since the Yeltsin era he has played a role unlike that of any other post-Soviet politician in a country that had quickly grown disenchanted with its entire political class. In that way, Russia is Trump’s true birthplace and homeland.

For their part, Russian officials have predictably denied any meddling in US domestic politics and disavowed responsibility for the cyber attack on the DNC. Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said, half-jokingly one assumes, that he didn’t want to use any Trump-like four-letter words when questioned about the scandal. In fairness to Mr. Lavrov, Russia’s intelligence services probably don’t feel any obligation to talk about their doings with the Foreign Ministry, which they consider an inferior branch of government charged merely with executing policies that are devised and decided upon by others with access to the inner sanctum.

Putin is unlikely to offer any substantive comment on the scandal. That leaves a lot of tough unanswered questions. For example, assuming that Russian intelligence agencies were indeed behind the DNC attack, does that mean that Putin himself ordered it? Amid Russia’s Byzantine, highly secretive politics, nobody ever knows for sure exactly what Putin discusses with his war cabinet. 

What an image problem Putin has created for himself! He barely had any time to put to rest scandals about Russia’s involvement in Brexit, funding for European populist parties like France’s Front National, and the high-tech tampering with Russian athletes’ urine samples when the DNC email mess erupted. Did the FSB fail to keep him informed about these initiatives, too? Didn’t anybody remember to keep him in the loop about the cyber attack on the DNC? Or did they somehow forget that any and all allegations would invariably lead to Putin’s being put in the dock once again as the world’s personification of evil? 

Even if Putin didn’t know about the cyber initiative, what‘s truly important is that he is seen as omnipotent by the media and the politicians in the West. Once again, perception is reality. Regardless of whether Putin’s hidden hand was part of these scandals, Western media and politicians will surely continue to blame him for them. Perhaps the blame is undeserved, and Putin’s power is once again being overstated. But that’s the price you pay for creating a political system where everything hinges on the whims of one man.

About the Author

Andrei Kolesnikov

Former Senior Fellow, Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center

Kolesnikov was a senior fellow at the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center.

    Recent Work

  • Commentary
    How the Putin Regime Subverted the Soviet Legacy

      Andrei Kolesnikov

  • Commentary
    Putin’s New Social Justice

      Andrei Kolesnikov

Andrei Kolesnikov
Former Senior Fellow, Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center
Andrei Kolesnikov
Economy

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

  • Article
    From Labor Scarcity to AI Society: Governing Productivity in East Asia

    The debate over AI and work too often centers on displacement. Facing aging populations and shrinking workforces, East Asian policymakers view AI not as a threat, but as a cross-sectoral workforce strategy.

      Darcie Draudt-Véjares, Sophie Zhuang

  • Article
    Governing AI in the Shadow of Giants: Korea’s Strategic Response to Great Power AI Competition

    In its version of an AI middle power strategy, Seoul is pursuing alignment with the United States not as an endpoint but as a strategy to build industrial and geopolitical leverage. Whether this balance holds remains an open question.

      Darcie Draudt-Véjares, Seungjoo Lee

  • China Financial Markets
    Commentary
    China Financial Markets
    Is China’s High-Quality Investment Output Economically Viable?

    China’s rapid technological progress and its first-rate infrastructure are often cited as refuting the claim that China has been systematically overinvesting in non-productive projects for many years. In fact, as the logic of overinvestment and the many historical precedents show, the former is all-too-often consistent with the latter.

      Michael Pettis

  • Article
    India’s Press Note 3 Gamble: Opening the FDI Door to China

    On March 10, 2026, India’s Union Cabinet approved amendments to Press Note 3, a regulation that mandated government approval on all foreign direct investment (FDI) from countries sharing a land border with India. This amendment raises questions primarily about whether its stated benefits will materialize and if the risks have been adequately weighed. This piece will address the same.

      Konark Bhandari

  • Humanoid robots follow technicians to learn job skills at the data collection area of an embodied AI robot innovation center on September 14, 2025 in Shaoxing, Zhejiang Province of China.
    Paper
    The AI Labor Debate: Three Views on the Future of Work

    AI could hollow out jobs, reshape them gradually, create entirely new ones—or do all three at once. The case for starting to act now doesn’t depend on knowing which.

      • Teddy Tawil

      Teddy Tawil

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Carnegie global logo, stacked
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NWWashington, DC, 20036-2103Phone: 202 483 7600
  • Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
  • Donate
  • Programs
  • Events
  • Blogs
  • Podcasts
  • Contact
  • Annual Reports
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Government Resources
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.