A group of “alternative” online outlets in Sweden systematically amplifies Russian narratives and disinformation, demonises the West, and delegitimises Ukraine.
Russia’s propaganda machine does not need official channels to reach European audiences. It needs proxies — and in Sweden, it has plenty. A cluster of alternative online outlets has been amplifying Kremlin narratives without any visible coordination with Moscow, each through its own ideological lens: some are far-right, some are left and anti-globalist, and some position themselves as courageous truth-tellers exposing what mainstream media refuses to cover. What they share is a consistent editorial pattern seen on RT&Sputnik: “Ukraine is illegitimate or already losing, NATO is the real aggressor, the West deliberately prolongs the suffering, Swedish taxpayers are being robbed by their own politicians, and anyone who challenges any of this is a tool of a globalist elite.”
Insight News examined a cluster of online outlets in Sweden for the presence of seven core Kremlin-aligned narratives — platforms ranging from far-right tabloids to personal blogs and conspiracy hubs, each with its own ideological lens but a shared editorial destination and citations of Russian state media. The analysis is based on article content, direct quotes, and source patterns across these platforms. Together, they reach hundreds of thousands of Swedish readers monthly.
The outlets are not identical. They differ in format, political background, and degree of sophistication. But across all of them, the same narrative architecture recurs, built from the same story shapes, the same framing choices, and often the same sources.
List of Russian-Friendly Outlets in Sweden
Nya Dagbladet (nyadagbladet.se) was founded in 2012 by Markus Andersson, who had previously led the far-right National Democrats party. It operates alongside an English-language counterpart, The Nordic Times, which deliberately obscures its connection to Nya Dagbladet when reaching international audiences – a move that has allowed it to be cited as a legitimate source by foreign media unaware of its background. Swedish investigative outlet Expo has described it as “pro-Nazi” and a “bridge between the conspiratorial milieu and the far-right milieu.” In 2022, it published a document it claimed was a leaked RAND Corporation report alleging US responsibility for provoking Russia’s invasion – a piece immediately shared by RT and the Russian Embassy in Sweden. RAND debunked the document’s existence, and fact-checkers identified it as a fabrication.
Nyhetsbanken (nyhetsbanken.se) is edited by Stefan Lindgren, who since 1997 has also published Ryska Posten — a weekly newsletter on Russia. The site runs on Blogger and is effectively a one-person operation. It presents itself as providing silenced facts and balance against biased Western media, yet its Ukraine coverage regularly cites Russian state sources and pro-Kremlin analysts alongside selected Western outlets as if they were equivalent – a form of source laundering that gives the editorial line an appearance of analytical rigour it does not have.
SwebbTV (nyheter.swebbtv.se) is a video and news platform funded entirely by viewer donations. Its co-presenter Lennart Matikainen represents the far-right Alternativ för Sverige party in Sweden’s Church Assembly and has been investigated for incitement against ethnic groups. Expo concluded in 2022 that SwebbTV broadcasts content forming “the core of the Kremlin’s talking points used to defend the war in Ukraine.” In 2025, the outlet conducted a full interview with Russia’s ambassador to Sweden, presenting his statements without challenge or critical context.
Vaken.se (vaken.se) was founded in 2004 and functions as a general conspiracy hub, mixing 9/11 revisionism, anti-vaccine content, and anti-globalist politics with a consistent pro-Russian tilt on Ukraine. Researchers identify it as part of Sweden’s “Sanningsrörelsen” — a conspiracist information sphere with documented overlap with Russian state-supported narratives. It has tens of thousands of monthly visitors, almost exclusively from Sweden, and cross-links directly to SwebbTV as a recommended source for Ukraine coverage.
Globalpolitics (globalpolitics.se) presents itself as a left-orientated, party-politically independent alternative media site run by Anders Romelsjö. It regularly republishes material from pro-Kremlin resources Steigan.no, Antiwar.com and similar anti-NATO outlets, framing its Ukraine coverage as a left-anti-imperialist counter-narrative. In practice, it produces a de facto pro-Kremlin editorial line: Ukraine is a fascist-infiltrated failed state, Russia is defensive, and the West is the root aggressor — with the same conclusions as the far-right outlets, delivered in left-wing vocabulary.
Lindelöf (lindelof.nu) is the personal blog of Knut Lindelöf, with its readership almost entirely in Sweden. It publishes anti-NATO, anti-EU content and defends Russia’s invasion as a response to Western provocation. It shares authors with Nyhetsbanken and cross-links to GlobalPolitics, forming part of the same anti-establishment left ecosystem. Its tone is more measured than SwebbTV or Vaken, but the editorial conclusions are structurally identical: “Ukraine cannot win, the West is to blame for the war, and Swedish support for Kyiv is waste.”
Carl Norberg (carlnorberg.se) runs a personal blog and podcast connected to the anti-globalist movement De Fria. Despite its personal-blog format, it registered approximately 85,500 visits in the December 2025–February 2026 period – more than Nya Dagbladet. Norberg publishes near-daily posts amplifying statements from Russian officials, including Lavrov, Peskov, Medvedev, and Zakharova, without critical framing and is an explicit promoter of propagandist Alexander Dugin’s xenophobic ideology, regularly publishing the Russian ultranationalist philosopher’s work as legitimate political thought.
Pro-Kremlin media ecosystem in Sweden
We identified these websites through a combined analysis of content similarity, backlink structures, and their connections to known Russian sources. Using web analytics and semantic clustering techniques, we observed systematic patterns of content reuse, where identical narratives are repackaged under varying headlines. This ecosystem also relies on authority laundering through the selective use of so-called “experts”, alongside the consistent adoption of Kremlin-aligned terminology that legitimises Russia’s war while reframing responsibility onto Western actors.
The interactive infographics below illustrate how semantic mapping, cross-site content comparison, and link network analysis enabled us to uncover a tightly interconnected ecosystem. These websites are not only aligned through shared pro-Russian narratives but are also structurally linked via reciprocal citations and backlinking, and referral traffic flows.
Our analysis also indicates that Sweden demonstrates strong resilience to pro-Kremlin, anti-EU, and anti-NATO narratives. The identified Kremlin-aligned websites collectively attract only around 100,000 monthly visits on average, which remains marginal compared to Sweden’s leading media outlets that generate millions—or even tens of millions—of monthly visits. This significant disparity in reach highlights the limited penetration and influence of such narratives within the Swedish information space.
Narrative 1: Delegitimising Ukraine and Zelenskyy
The most foundational narrative across these outlets treats Ukraine not as a sovereign state under invasion but as an artificial Western construction, run by an illegitimate government installed through a coup and sustained by American money. Zelenskyy is framed as a criminal, a puppet, a money launderer, or a dictator — not a president.
Globalpolitics provides one of the most systematic articulations of this framing, describing the 2014 Maidan events as “an anti-democratic, fascist-inspired coup in Kyiv against the democratically elected president Yanukovych” and portraying the post-Maidan government as reliant on “radical, nationalist elements and their militias” with laws glorifying figures like Bandera. A lengthy historical piece on the site describes Ukraine as an entity with no real autonomous identity: “Industrially depleted Ukraine is a ruin, a failed ruin… Soldiers with broken rifles… a navy that barely floats, 6,000 combat-ready soldiers against Russia, morale at the absolute zero point, minus 273 degrees.” The same piece concludes that “Ukraine today is a picture of what Russia would have been in 1999 if the ship had been left to drift… The country is bottomless bankruptcy. The oligarchs have milked Ukraine.”
- https://www.globalpolitics.se/ukrainas-spannande-och-kontroversiella-historia/
- https://www.globalpolitics.se/dags-att-erkanna-statskuppen-i-kiev-efter-fem-ar/
Nya Dagbladet consistently frames Zelenskyy as a corrupt figure propped up by Washington. One article reported claims that “the US has given the green light to remove Zelenskyy”, portraying him as a disposable Western puppet facing removal amid corruption scandals. The outlet quoted John Mearsheimer under the headline “Mearsheimer’s brutal message to the EU: Go to Moscow and capitulate”, a framing that collapses the distinction between academic analysis and editorial advocacy, presenting surrender to Russian demands as the only rational position. Another article declared that EU war support “makes Ukrainian oligarchs rich” — enriching a corrupt elite rather than defending a country under attack.
- https://nyadagbladet.se/utrikes/ukrainas-ex-premiarminister-usa-har-gett-klartecken-for-att-avsatta-zelenskyj/
- https://nyadagbladet.se/utrikes/john-mearsheimers-brutala-besked-till-eu-ak-till-moskva-och-kapitulera/
- https://nyadagbladet.se/insandare/eus-krigsstod-gor-de-ukrainska-oligarkerna-rika/
SwebbTV goes further, publishing a piece that describes Ukraine as “a large money-laundering institution where corruption flourishes under Zelenskyy’s rule, steered by Western interests following the CIA-backed Maidan coup, without genuine sovereignty”. Another SwebbTV article describes the Ukrainian government as “a gang of gangsters made up of oligarchs and Nazis, where Zelenskyy acts as a puppet for Washington’s corrupt agenda”.
- https://nyheter.swebbtv.se/ukraina-en-stor-penningtvattsinstitution/
- https://nyheter.swebbtv.se/ukraina-styrs-av-gangstergang-darfor-kriget-fortsatter/
NewsVoice amplified an investigation claiming Zelenskyy owns over 100 luxury properties, quoting a source: “The system was built to conceal everything. Money from state contracts was transferred to friendly companies in Kyiv, then split into smaller sums and moved through Latvia, Cyprus, or Switzerland… Zelenskyy owns nothing. In reality, he owns everything.” The outlet also hosted Viktor Medvedchuk — a Putin ally sanctioned by the EU — presenting his portrayal of Zelenskyy as “an unelected dictator rejecting peace without editorial challenge”.
- https://newsvoice.se/2025/08/zelensky-100-lyxfastigheter/
- https://newsvoice.se/2025/02/viktor-medvedtjuk-fredsavtal/
Vaken frames Ukraine’s illegitimacy through the biolab conspiracy narrative, claiming the country is “funded by the US to be used as a proxy against Russia following the CIA coup on Maidan”, while another article states that “the CIA admits it initiated war with Russia by supporting Nazi elements during the Maidan uprising, turning Zelenskyy into a Western puppet in a non-sovereign state.”
- https://www.vaken.se/avslojande-av-amerikanska-biolaboratorier-i-ukraina-en-pandoras-ask-av-korruption-och-fara/
- https://www.vaken.se/cia-medger-att-de-initierat-krig-med-ryssland/
Carl Norberg publishes near-daily posts amplifying Russian officials on this theme. One post reproduces Medvedev’s claim that “Ukraine is of course Russia” and that the concept of Ukraine as a separate country “should disappear forever”. Another mocks Zelenskyy as “unwilling to sign a peace deal” — framing a wartime leader’s refusal to capitulate as personal obstinacy rather than a sovereign decision. Norberg also shared a Facebook video of Zelenskyy’s statement at a meeting of the “coalition of the interested” – in which the Ukrainian president discussed conditions for elections and security guarantees – captioning it: “An illegitimate comedian changes shoes on the run to stay in power.”
- https://carlnorberg.se/2024/04/16/medvedev-om-ryssland-ukraina/
- https://carlnorberg.se/2026/02/25/fredsavtalsovillig-zelensky/
- https://www.facebook.com/reel/831549336362063
The delegitimisation narrative serves a precise function: if Ukraine is not a real sovereign state but a Western puppet run by a criminal gang, then Russia’s military action ceases to be aggression and becomes something closer to a correction. Every subsequent narrative in this ecosystem rests on this foundation.
Narrative 2: NATO as the True Aggressor
If Ukraine is delegitimised as a state, the next step is to identify who the real aggressor is. Across all outlets, the answer is the same: NATO — and more broadly, the West. Russia’s invasion becomes a defensive operation, an understandable reaction to decades of provocation, or at minimum a predictable consequence of Western recklessness.
SwebbTV states this most directly. One article quotes Thomas Jackson – a retired US Army colonel and frequent contributor to pro-Russian outlets – stating: ‘It is completely obvious that it is NATO’s provocations that have caused this crisis. It could have been resolved without violence.” Another hosts Jeffrey Sachs — a Columbia University economist who has become a prominent voice arguing against Western arms support for Ukraine — declaring that “the Western world is governed by a government that ‘lies about everything’… In 2008, Bush said we’re going into Ukraine… that was the most absolutely provocative thing we could have done.” Russia’s invasion — referred to on the site as the “special military operation” — is consistently framed as a forced response to this accumulation of provocations.
- https://nyheter.swebbtv.se/sjalvklart-att-nato-provocerade-fram-ukrainakriget/
- https://nyheter.swebbtv.se/mearsheimer-vast-har-sjalva-skapat-hotet-fran-ryssland/
Nyhetsbanken published a defence of Jacques Baud — a former NATO adviser whose analyses consistently align with Kremlin narratives — under the headline “Jacques Baud punished for correct analyses”, presenting EU sanctions against him as proof that Brussels punishes objective analysis. The article quotes Baud’s argument that “the greatest threat to Europe right now does not come from Russia, China, Iran or anyone else… Russia is not going to attack NATO” and asserts that “Moscow has repeatedly expressed concern over the alliance’s military build-up in Europe” — presenting Russian complaints about NATO as legitimate security concerns rather than justifications for aggression. A further article on Nyhetsbanken reproduces Russian SVR intelligence claims that “Paris’s and London’s intention to transfer nuclear weapons to Kyiv shows their desire to disrupt the peace talks” — citing Russian intelligence as an authoritative source without any critical framing.
- https://www.nyhetsbanken.se/2026/01/jacques-baud-straffas-for-korrekta.html
- https://www.nyhetsbanken.se/2026/02/karnvapen-kan-stoppa-fredssamtal.html
Carl Norberg publishes Russian foreign minister Lavrov’s statements with no editorial distance: “The USA and NATO ignore Russia’s security interests through Ukraine’s rearmament, which forced the special military operation.” He also posts pieces about “Russophobic NATO cohesion” — framing Western unity in defence of Ukraine as pathological hatred of Russia rather than a response to invasion. Norberg regularly cites GlobalPolitics as a source, creating a circular amplification network between these outlets.
- https://carlnorberg.se/2026/02/07/lavrov-nato-ukraina-smo/
- https://carlnorberg.se/2026/01/31/russofobisk-natosammanhallning/
GlobalPolitics constructs the NATO-as-aggressor argument through elaborate historical narratives. One article argues that ‘the US Deputy Secretary of State, Victoria Nuland… allegedly spent 5 billion dollars on Maidan… The moral support takes the form of foreign interference in Ukraine’s internal affairs. NATO and the EU had a permanent presence at Maidan II… The European country that did not interfere is Russia.” Another states that Russia is being driven by “the West’s attempt to fill yet another vacuum after the fall of the Soviet Union, a geopolitical continuation of the Cold War that never really ended. Russia is to be fenced in and forced to its knees.”
- https://www.globalpolitics.se/ukrainas-spannande-och-kontroversiella-historia/
- https://www.globalpolitics.se/vem-startade-egentligen-krigen-i-ukraina/
Lindelöf states the NATO-as-aggressor argument as historical fact: “30 years of hostility, military expansion of NATO, threats and conspiracies in neighbouring states, and constant provocations have at any rate convinced Russia’s leadership” — framing NATO’s enlargement as the decisive cause of Russian aggression, with Russia’s leadership as rational responders to objective threats.
- https://www.lindelof.nu/det-var-inte-ryssland-som-skapade-de-politiska-fientligheterna-efter-berlinmurens-fall/
Vaken uses Lars Bern to make the same argument: “France and Britain have talked about sending ‘peacekeeping troops’ to Ukraine. But this collapses under its own absurdity. Because they are a party to the war… They are participating on Ukraine’s side in the war” — framing European countries considering security guarantees as military aggressors rather than potential peacekeepers.
- https://www.vaken.se/lars-bern-ukrainakriget-en-total-forlust-for-vast-men-europa-vagrar-acceptera-det/
NewsVoice hosts a retired US Army colonel, Douglas Macgregor — known for his contrarian pro-Russian commentary — stating, “We caused this coup [Maidan]. It was essentially staged by the CIA and the MI6… We took over the government. We installed our puppets and began massively building up Ukrainian forces” — presenting a former US military officer’s conspiratorial reading of Ukrainian history as credible expert analysis.
- https://newsvoice.se/2024/12/nato-intervention-i-ukraina/
The NATO-as-aggressor framing removes the moral case for supporting Ukraine. If the West started this war through decades of provocation, then weapons deliveries are not solidarity — they are escalation, and the logical conclusion is not support for Ukraine but pressure on the West to stop. And that’s exactly what the Kremlin needs and is trying to achieve.
Narrative 3: “The West Is Prolonging the War”
Closely connected to the aggressor narrative is the argument that Western arms and political decisions are not helping Ukraine but extending the war — and therefore the suffering. This converts support for Ukraine from a moral positive into a moral negative: every weapon sent kills more Ukrainians unnecessarily.
SwebbTV advances this argument in its most explicit form. One article asserts, “The West sabotaged peace in Ukraine — ‘overwhelming evidence’ that the US and allies blocked the Istanbul negotiations despite Russia’s readiness,” presenting contested and disputed claims about the 2022 peace talks as established fact. A separate piece hosts the Russian ambassador to Sweden, stating that “the EU is the biggest obstacle to peace, as it refuses to accept realistic compromises while Russia strives for diplomacy” — again, a Russian official’s statement presented without challenge or context.
- https://nyheter.swebbtv.se/statsvetare-vast-saboterade-fred-i-ukraina-overvaldigande-bevis/
- https://nyheter.swebbtv.se/ambassadoren-eu-storsta-hindret-for-fred/
Globalpolitics builds this argument through multiple layered claims about sabotaged peace opportunities. One article states: “After a month of fighting, Ukraine and Russia were close to a peace agreement in Istanbul… Britain’s then-Prime Minister travelled to Kyiv and managed to persuade Zelenskyy to abandon the peace talks.” Another claims “UN-backed Minsk II… was in practice sabotaged by the guarantor states France and Germany, according to statements by former President Hollande and former Chancellor Merkel.” And a third asserts “NATO and the US opposed Russia’s proposal for mutual security based on earlier international agreements in December 2021.” These claims — presenting Western countries as having consistently blocked achievable peace — directly mirror the Kremlin’s diplomatic narrative.
- https://www.globalpolitics.se/hur-kriget-i-ukraina-kommer-att-sluta-en-multipolar-varld-ar-pa-vag/
A second GlobalPolitics article frames Western arms deliveries as driven not by solidarity but by cynical profit: “War hysteria and hatred of Russia are used to get the population to accept the welfare state being slaughtered in favour of the arms industry and its owners, the financial capitalists.” It continues: “When the Norwegian parliament… distributes tens of billions of kronor in weapons to Ukraine, the lion’s share of that money goes to the American arms industry.” The framing turns arms support into a class war against European workers, fought for the benefit of American defence contractors.
- https://www.globalpolitics.se/ut-med-valfardsstaten-in-med-krigsstaten/
Nyhetsbanken accuses Western capitals of actively sabotaging peace proposals. One article states that “war-hungry forces in Europe are trying to intercept Trump’s peace plan… Ukraine’s sponsors are looking for a way out”—framing European countries seeking security guarantees as “war-hungry” actors blocking a peace that Russia supposedly supports. Another piece carries the title “Rape of the US peace proposal” — accusing Ukraine and the EU of sabotaging an American peace initiative with counterdemands.
- https://www.nyhetsbanken.se/2025/11/trumps-fredsplan-och-de-krigsvilligas.html
- https://www.nyhetsbanken.se/2026/02/valdtakt-pa-usas-fredsforslag.html
Lindelöf has argued consistently that Western weapons deliveries guarantee only more death. One post states: “We are fooling ourselves into thinking that current weapons deliveries would be a game changer — which they won’t be.” Another discusses how “Western countries ‘prevented an early end to the war'” — treating disputed claims about Boris Johnson’s role in the Istanbul talks as established history. The conclusion is always the same: weapons sent by Sweden and its allies do not protect Ukraine; they prolong the killing.
- https://www.lindelof.nu/det-ar-inte-klarlagt-att-vastlander-hindrade-ett-tidigt-slut-pa-kriget/
- https://www.lindelof.nu/fred-i-ukraina-och-myten-om-rysslands-vastliga-expansionsplaner/
Carl Norberg reproduces Kremlin spokesman Peskov’s statement: “Putin is ready for negotiations, but Kyiv and Washington are sabotaging them with weapons deliveries that prolong the suffering” — presenting Russian diplomatic messaging as objective fact and Swedish arms support as sabotage of peace.
- https://carlnorberg.se/2026/03/09/peskov-putin/
The prolongation argument is strategically important because it does not require the reader to endorse Russia. It only requires them to believe that continued support makes things worse — which is enough to neutralise the moral case for standing with Ukraine.
Narrative 4: “Ukraine Is Losing and Doomed to Defeat”
Running parallel to the prolongation argument is a relentless presentation of the military situation as hopeless for Ukraine. The goal is not to inform but to demoralise: to convince the Swedish reader that resistance is futile and that continued support is throwing good money after bad.
Lindelöf states this with unusual directness: “Today there are no signs that Ukraine can win the war against Russia. On the contrary. Continued war means more killed and maimed.” Another piece declares: “The Ukrainian army and all its Western-imported weapons are now being blown to atoms at the front. The piles of corpses grow, but no one knows whether Russia’s war against imperialism will succeed.” And in a particularly blunt formulation: “When the Ukraine adventure ends with a Russian victory – which it will” – predicting Russian victory as an established certainty while simultaneously accusing Swedish elites of misleading the public about the war’s prospects.
- https://www.lindelof.nu/fred-i-ukraina-och-myten-om-rysslands-vastliga-expansionsplaner/
- https://www.lindelof.nu/jag-tror-att-ukrainakriget-snart-kommer-att-ta-slut/
- https://www.lindelof.nu/varifran-kommer-hotet-mot-sverige/
SwebbTV builds the defeat narrative through dramatic statistics, citing TASS: “Ukraine has lost more than 1.5 million soldiers… The worst losses were during the counteroffensive and in Kursk, with 670 combat aircraft and 27,835 military vehicles destroyed” — reproducing Russian state military figures as fact. A second article hosts the Russian ambassador telling Swedish audiences: “Ukraine must face reality: military collapse is inevitable without Western support; the only way out is negotiations on Russia’s terms.” The framing is clear: the only exit is capitulation on Moscow’s terms.
- https://nyheter.swebbtv.se/ukrainas-forluster-15-miljoner-soldater-enligt-nyhetsbyra/
- https://nyheter.swebbtv.se/ryska-ambassadoren-ukraina-maste-inse-verkligheten/
Nyhetsbanken publishes repeated articles framing Ukraine’s economic situation as terminal. Titles such as “Ukraine close to state bankruptcy” and “The Kiev regime heading for bankruptcy” frame Ukraine’s state finances as collapsing, with the leadership portrayed as clinging to power through Western subsidies while the population endures blackouts and military evacuations. A separate piece titled “Blackout threatens all of Ukraine” presents Russia’s deliberate attacks on civilian infrastructure as evidence of Ukraine’s inevitable collapse rather than as war crimes.
- https://www.nyhetsbanken.se/2025/08/ukraina-nara-statsbankrutt.html
- https://www.nyhetsbanken.se/2025/12/kievregimen-mot-bankrutt.html
- https://www.nyhetsbanken.se/2025/11/blackout-hotar-hela-ukraina.html
Nya Dagbladet amplifies the defeat narrative through imported authority. An article titled “Military expert warns: Ukrainian losses catastrophic” uses the credentialed biography of Jacques Baud to give weight to the claim that Ukraine faces inevitable defeat. Another piece quotes John Mearsheimer — a University of Chicago political scientist whose offensive realism framework has made him a favoured citation source for pro-Russian outlets across Europe — predicting “a full Russian victory — a situation where Russia controls perhaps 20–40 per cent of Ukraine’s territory, while the rest becomes a weak, dysfunctional rump state, permanently dependent on European support.”
- https://nyadagbladet.se/utrikes/militarexpertens-varning-ukrainska-forluster-katastrofala/
- https://nyadagbladet.se/utrikes/john-mearsheimers-brutala-besked-till-eu-ak-till-moskva-och-kapitulera/
Carl Norberg amplifies Medvedev directly, reproducing the Russian former president’s warnings that “Ukraine’s forces are disintegrating” and that “victory is impossible without surrender terms”. Another post reports “massive Ukrainian losses, brink of collapse amid Russian advances” without any sourcing other than pro-Russian channels.
- https://carlnorberg.se/2026/02/16/medvedev-28/
- https://carlnorberg.se/2026/02/25/smo-utlosning/
Globalpolitics contributes the structural version of this argument — not claiming Ukraine has already lost, but painting it as so militarily hollow, economically ruined, and politically extremist that meaningful resistance is framed as impossible: “No money has been invested in Ukraine’s armed forces. Soldiers with broken rifles… morale at the absolute zero point, minus 273 degrees.” Combined with the narrative that Western weapons cannot change the outcome, this creates a cumulative argument: Ukraine is broken, the West cannot fix it, and every day of fighting only produces more corpses.
- https://www.globalpolitics.se/ukrainas-spannande-och-kontroversiella-historia/
Narrative 5: Undermining Support for Ukraine Within Sweden
While the previous narratives address the war in general terms, this one locates the argument specifically in Sweden — converting geopolitical framing into a domestic grievance. Swedish taxpayers are being robbed; Swedish politicians are betraying the Swedish people; the money going to Kyiv is money not going to Swedish hospitals, schools, and pensioners.
SwebbTV has developed this argument most systematically. One article reveals: “Since February 2022, Sweden has contributed approximately 128 billion kronor to Ukraine… these are weapons we have to reacquire, prolonging the war at the expense of Swedish taxpayers.” A separate programme features politician Gustav Kasselstrand warning, “The money has run out because of the Ukraine policy… NATO is dragging Sweden into someone else’s war — the elite’s betrayal of the people.” The framing converts Swedish security policy into personal betrayal — elected officials spending Swedish families’ money on a foreign war their voters never chose.
- https://nyheter.swebbtv.se/sveriges-politiker-har-skickat-128-miljarder-till-ukraina/
- https://nyheter.swebbtv.se/kasselstrand-vem-sager-det-slutar-med-gronland-varfor-inte-gotland/
Nya Dagbladet frames EU support as enriching the wrong people: “EU war support makes Ukrainian oligarchs rich” — claiming that the money sent by Sweden and its allies goes not to defence but to Kyiv’s oligarch class, while the article simultaneously implies that “NATO membership risks Swedish lives in someone else’s war.”
- https://nyadagbladet.se/insandare/eus-krigsstod-gor-de-ukrainska-oligarkerna-rika/
Nyhetsbanken pursues the same argument through economic framing. One article on Ukraine’s finances states that “in June, Ukraine’s deficit in foreign trade in goods and services reached a record level of 5.1 billion USD… The government raised 3.0 billion USD in foreign concessional loans during June — presenting Western lending not as support but as an accelerating spiral of waste. The same piece concludes that “an acknowledgement of the payment default would mean an immediate end to military operations… something that the war’s Western sponsors cannot allow”—implying that Sweden and its allies are prolonging a bankrupt country’s war purely to avoid admitting failure. A second article describes Norway’s planned 100-billion-euro loan from its sovereign wealth fund as money that “can become weapons for the Kyiv regime’s terror attacks deep into Russian territory”, framing Nordic solidarity as direct financing of terrorism while ordinary Scandinavian citizens bear the cost.
- https://www.nyhetsbanken.se/2025/08/ukraina-nara-statsbankrutt.html
- https://www.nyhetsbanken.se/2025/11/norge-forlanger-kriget-med-100.html
Vaken quotes Viktor Orbán directly as a validator of this narrative: “It is lost money… The EU’s giant loan to Ukraine of a thousand billion is wasted — Sweden and Europe are paying for a hopeless war while the sanctions harm us.” Using an EU head of government as a source gives the argument an appearance of political legitimacy that pure conspiracy content cannot achieve.
- https://www.vaken.se/tusen-nya-miljarder-till-ukraina-forlorade-pengar-enligt-orban/
Lindelöf frames the Swedish political establishment as captured and complicit: “Here, the old party establishment — including the Left Party and the Sweden Democrats — with their obedient media still has the situation under control” — positioning virtually every Swedish political party as a servant of an elite agenda, with Ukraine support as the proof. A companion piece warns: “The war is getting closer. Sweden could be drawn in” — using fear of direct Swedish involvement as a lever against continued support.
- https://www.lindelof.nu/an-sitter-de-still-i-baten/
- https://www.lindelof.nu/kriget-kommer-narmare-sverige-kan-bli-indraget/
Carl Norberg frames Swedish rearmament and NATO engagement as elites dragging ordinary Swedes into someone else’s war. In one post, he republishes Lavrov’s warning — delivered in an interview broadcast on NTV — that “we have no plans to attack any European country; it is simply not necessary for us. But if Europe suddenly begins to attack the Russian Federation, the president has said it will not be a special military operation on our part but a full military response with all available military means.” The quote is presented without context or challenge, functioning as a direct threat to Swedish readers: stay out of this war, or face the consequences.
- https://carlnorberg.se/2026/02/09/forsvarsberedda/
The domestic wedge works because it does not require the reader to endorse Russia. It only requires them to resent the politicians and institutions that “waste” Swedish resources — which is sufficient to generate opposition to continued support.
Narrative 6: Discrediting Swedish Media and Authorities
For pro-Russian narratives to take root, mainstream sources of information must first be delegitimised. Across all seven outlets, SVT and Swedish mainstream journalism receive particular attention as targets, described variously as propaganda organs, tools of globalists, NATO mouthpieces, or institutions that hide the truth to serve elite interests.
Nyhetsbanken publishes an article titled “Ukraine kills — in total media shadow”, asserting that Ukrainian attacks on Russian territory are systematically hidden by Western media: “without being reported by the Swedish establishment’s mass media.” A second piece attacks SVT directly: “Your reporting is highly one-sided. You constantly deceive citizens in your Russophobia and with your NATO propaganda. Shameful!” By defending the pro-Kremlin propagandist Jacques Baud against EU sanctions, the outlet simultaneously positions itself as the venue for suppressed truth that official media refuses to publish.
- https://www.nyhetsbanken.se/2025/04/ukraina-dodar-i-total-mediaskugga.html
- https://www.nyhetsbanken.se/2026/01/jacques-baud-straffas-for-korrekta.html
SwebbTV is the most aggressive in this space. One article simply declares: “Everything is propaganda in the old media like SVT, which spreads Western disinformation while we give the true picture of the war.” A second mocks “Swedes gaping about Putinists while the Ukraine madness kills its own people, hidden by elite-controlled media” – simultaneously dismissing Sweden’s security concerns as elite propaganda and positioning SwebbTV as the corrective.
- https://nyheter.swebbtv.se/allt-ar-propaganda-i-gammelmedia/
- https://nyheter.swebbtv.se/ukrainavansinnet-folket-dor-och-svenskar-gapar-om-putinister/
Nya Dagbladet calls for “balanced reporting on the war in Ukraine” – demanding balance from SVT and mainstream outlets while systematically adopting one-sided interpretations in its own coverage. The article criticises Swedish media for “simplified stories and fear narratives” while presenting NATO expansion, Western regime-change operations, and proxy-war framing as the “hidden facts” that mainstream journalism refuses to report. This self-positioning as the outlet that restores context is precisely the mechanism by which one-sided content reaches audiences who would reject explicit propaganda.
- https://nyadagbladet.se/debatt/viktigt-med-en-balanserad-rapportering-om-kriget-i-ukraina/
Lindelöf builds a more subtle version of this argument, framing the entire Swedish public debate as captured by propaganda: “The situation in the propaganda war is so extremely heightened today that it is almost impossible for one side to reach the other with arguments.” By presenting both sides as equally propagandistic, the blog positions itself as uniquely balanced — “we inform ourselves from both sides” — while its editorial conclusions consistently align with one side.
- https://www.lindelof.nu/om-debatten/
Globalpolitics goes further than any other outlet in naming specific Swedish journalists and institutions as agents of disinformation. One article targets Sveriges Radio journalist Maria Persson Löfgren directly, asking rhetorically: “Is Sveriges Radio’s Maria Persson Löfgren a witness to truth?… What you say in your answer is that facts and truth are irrelevant to Sveriges Radio.” The same piece accuses Patrik Oksanen — described as “the most eager liar in Sweden” and a “NATO lobbyist connected to the think tank Frivärld” — of having pressured SVT’s documentary and science editor Axel Arnö to alter a newly published documentary about Putin, changing it “from truth to lie”. The site accuses Sweden’s fact-checking outlet Källkritikbyrån of using Oksanen as a source when “fact-checking security policy and Russia” — framing the entire Swedish media verification infrastructure as a circular system of elite-approved disinformation.
- https://www.globalpolitics.se/maria-persson-lofgren-sverige-radio-sanningsvittne-inkompetent-omedvetet-ombud-for-usa-natos-imperialism/
- https://www.globalpolitics.se/ukrainanarrativet-och-generaldirektoren/
NewsVoice warns readers of an “information bubble on Ukraine” where SVT and mainstream outlets spread propaganda while alternative media offer truth. It reports that Sweden’s Agency for Psychological Defence labelled the site “pro-Kremlin” for its anti-NATO stance — presenting this as proof of government censorship rather than as a legitimate assessment.
- https://newsvoice.se/2022/06/informationsbubblan-ukraina/
The media discrediting narrative is architecturally necessary. It does not need to be believed entirely to be effective. It only needs to plant enough doubt that readers begin treating mainstream journalism and pro-Russian framing as equally biased — at which point there is no authoritative source capable of refuting the other six narratives.
Narrative 7: Conspiracy Theories as a Gateway Mechanism
The final cluster connects the war in Ukraine to a broader framework of elite manipulation, hidden agendas, and globalist control. This is the entry point for audiences not primarily interested in Ukraine but already disposed to distrust official institutions, mainstream media, and multilateral organisations. Once inside the conspiracy framework, the war becomes just another example of hidden power operating against ordinary people.
Carl Norberg is the most systematic promoter of this framing. He has published multiple articles promoting Russian neo-imperialist ideologist Alexander Dugin’s books and arguments as legitimate intellectual frameworks – treating a Russian ultranationalist philosopher who has explicitly called for the dissolution of Ukrainian statehood as a serious thinker deserving of a Swedish audience.
One piece reviews Dugin’s book “Trumprevolutionen”, presenting it as “the definitive guide to the coming battles” and summarising the argument that “Trump’s America is no longer the powerhouse of globalism but a traditionalist empire in progress”. Another article on “The Eurasianists” describes the Russia-Ukraine war as part of “an existential war between the Eurasian civilisation and Western globalists led by the WEF, Soros, and Anglo-Saxon elites who are using NATO and Ukraine as a proxy to crush Russia’s sovereignty and impose a unipolar world order.” A third promotes a Dugin interview in which the philosopher explains that “Western globalists are manipulating governments and media to drive the Ukraine war as a step toward total control, while Eurasianism represents the resistance of traditional civilisations.”
- https://carlnorberg.se/2025/04/28/dugin-trumprevolutionen/
- https://carlnorberg.se/2026/03/15/eurasianisterna/
- https://carlnorberg.se/2024/09/17/intervju-med-dugin/
Presenting Alexander Dugin — a man who has explicitly advocated for the dissolution of Ukrainian statehood — as a legitimate philosopher is not an oversight. It is a choice to normalise a specific imperial ideology within a Swedish readership unfamiliar with its origins and implications.
Vaken integrates the Ukraine war into its broader conspiracy architecture. One article invokes Dugin directly: “War awaits between globalists and anti-globalists, where Ukraine is the globalists’ tool — WEF, Soros, the Anglo-Saxons — to crush Russia and impose a new world order.” Another states: “To understand the globalists, we must understand their psychopathic religion, which uses the Ukraine war, COVID, and biolabs for total control, while the media brainwashes the population.” This framing connects the war to vaccines, pandemics, and digital surveillance as components of a single elite project — making Ukraine support look like complicity in global authoritarianism.
- https://www.vaken.se/dugin-krig-vantar-mellan-globalister-och-anti-globalister/
- https://www.vaken.se/for-att-forsta-globalisterna-maste-vi-forsta-deras-psykopatiska-religion/
SwebbTV frames this narrative around WEF and Klaus Schwab. One article declares: “Our principal is the SWEDISH people, NOT globalists like the World Economic Forum, Klaus Schwab, George Soros, or Ursula von der Leyen.” Another claims, “The skyrocketing energy prices are a deliberate attempt by the globalist group World Economic Forum — which believes it controls the world — to push through its agenda. ‘Crises’, like the war in Ukraine and Russia’s alleged supply cut-off, are just excuses to deceive ordinary citizens.” Founder Mikael Willgert has stated that “the globalists’ goal is world communism”—a formulation that positions the WEF and Soros in the same sentence as Soviet ideology.
- https://nyheter.swebbtv.se/afs-globalister-ska-inte-fa-styra-sverige/
- https://nyheter.swebbtv.se/wef-globalister-skyller-pa-kriser-men-egentligen-ar-det-en-medveten-agenda/
Nya Dagbladet describes the Munich Security Conference as an event run by “the ultra-globalist movement”, listing among its sponsors “George Soros’s Open Society Foundations, the Rockefeller Foundation, and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.” In a separate piece, it presents Dugin — quoting him arguing that “an independent Ukrainian state should not exist” — as a philosopher whose critique of Western liberalism deserves serious engagement, describing Putin as “a traditional leader whose worldview runs counter to the agenda pursued by the power holders of the Western world.”
- https://nyadagbladet.se/utrikes/globalistisk-maktelit-flockas-till-nato-konferens/
- https://nyadagbladet.se/utrikes/ryske-filosofen-vasts-liberalism-innebar-totalitart-minoritetsstyre/
The globalist framework serves the same function across all these outlets: it positions opposition to Russian aggression not as principled policy but as submission to hidden power. And once that move is accepted, the six preceding narratives become not propaganda but common sense.
Shared Mechanics: What Makes This a Network
These seven outlets are not formally connected. They operate under different ownership structures, political identities, and formats – a far-right newspaper, a one-person blog running on Blogger, an anti-immigration video platform, a general conspiracy hub, and a left-anti-imperialist site. What makes them function as a network is not coordination but convergence.
They share sources — the same rotating cast of Western contrarians, retired military officers, and Russian ideologues appear across multiple outlets with no apparent editorial coordination, yet always to make the same argument. They share framings: “proxy war”, “NATO provocation”, “Kiev regime”, “globalists”, and “prolonging the war”. They share targets: SVT, Swedish politicians, and the EU. And they share a function: each outlet reaches a slightly different slice of the Swedish audience and delivers the same narrative architecture through the cultural vocabulary most familiar to that audience. A far-right reader and an anti-establishment leftist end up in the same place by different roads.
There is also documented cross-amplification. Vaken explicitly directs readers to SwebbTV for more content. Carl Norberg links to Globalpolitics as a source. Lindelöf shares authors with Nyhetsbanken. And all of them link to Russian state propaganda websites, primarily those under EU sanctions. This is not a coordinated network; it is an ecosystem where content naturally flows between outlets that share an audience and a worldview.
Sweden’s Agency for Psychological Defence has documented that Russia targets Swedish audiences through both direct state channels and indirect proxy actors, exploiting domestic cleavages – immigration, energy costs, NATO scepticism – to insert narratives that serve Russian strategic interests. The outlets examined here do not need to be funded or coordinated by Moscow to serve that function. They only need to keep repeating the same story shapes.
The Anatomy of a Narrative Ecosystem
None of these outlets presents itself as a “Russian propaganda platform”. They are “alternative, independent, free, truth-seeking” — or so they say. That self-positioning is precisely the mechanism by which the content reaches audiences who would immediately reject anything labelled ‘Kremlin messaging’. The narrative arrives pre-translated into the language of Swedish domestic grievance, anti-establishment identity, and geopolitical scepticism.
The seven narratives documented here are not a list. They are a structure. Each one weakens a different load-bearing wall: delegitimising Ukraine removes the moral case for the invaded country; framing the EU/NATO as aggressors removes the moral case for the alliance; arguing that the West prolongs the war converts solidarity into complicity; declaring Ukraine’s defeat inevitable makes continued support seem not just wrong but pointless; attacking Swedish media removes the information sources capable of challenging any of the above; and the globalist conspiracy framework makes the entire apparatus of resistance look like submission to hidden elite control.
What remains at the end is not a reader who loves Russia. It is a European reader who has been given seven separate reasons to stop supporting Ukraine and avoid blaming Moscow for its war – and who reached each of those conclusions through sources they consider independent.
That is how the ecosystem works. And Sweden, with its high media trust, significant Ukraine aid commitments, and recent NATO membership, is precisely the kind of environment where dismantling that trust piece by piece is worth the effort.