The Kremlin had its pick of the press corps to conduct Russian President Vladimir Putin’s first one-on-one interview with a Western media figure since he ordered the invasion of Ukraine in 2022. But rather than have Putin sit down with The New York Times or NBC News, the BBC or Le Monde, it provided access to Tucker Carlson, who posts his videos to X and his self-named website.
That’s because the Russians aren’t seeking a credible interview for a mass audience. They want to target right-wing Americans with propaganda at a crucial moment when Republicans have put the prospect of future U.S. aid to Ukraine on the ropes, without needing to worry about the interviewer’s forcing Putin to answer difficult questions. Carlson fits the bill perfectly.
This pretense — that only Carlson was willing to break the media blockade — fits with his broader shtick.
Carlson framed the interview to his fans as an intrepid act of journalistic truth-telling. He tried to focus attention on “why I’m interviewing” Putin, posturing that “corrupt” Western reporters hadn’t “bothered” to speak with the Russian strongman since he ordered the illegal invasion of Ukraine in 2022. This pretense — that only Carlson was willing to break the media blockade — fits with his broader shtick, which relies on presenting himself as the source for secret knowledge that mainstream journalists refuse to reveal.
But Carlson was lying. Reporters for outlets like CNN and the BBC pointed out that they had repeatedly sought their own interviews with Putin, only for their entreaties to be rejected (others noted the audacity of making such a claim when American journalists Evan Gershkovich and Alsu Kurmasheva are languishing in Russian jails for reporting from that country).
Indeed, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov subsequently acknowledged: “Mr. Carlson is not correct. In fact, there’s no way he could know this. We receive numerous requests for interviews with the president.” Rather, Peskov explained that the Kremlin has “no desire to communicate” with “traditional TV channels and large newspapers” because they aren’t “impartial.” Putin deigned to speak with Carlson because, by contrast, “he has a position that differs from the rest.”
What is that “position”? Carlson touts the aesthetics and policy outcomes of ethnonationalist, illiberal autocracies that punish immigrants and LGBTQ people while castigating pluralist, liberal democracies that do not. He has turned his programs, before and after leaving Fox, into showcases for the likes of Hungary’s Viktor Orbán, Poland’s Andrzej Duda and Serbia’s Aleksandar Vučić. Putin fits firmly within this framework. And as the host soured on America’s diversity and its traditional creed in recent years, he groomed the GOP to be more sympathetic to Russia and its interests.
During Putin-friendly Donald Trump’s presidency, Carlson argued that the U.S. had no interest in deterring Russia from “messing around” in Eastern Europe, including the Baltic member states of NATO. He fiercely criticized U.S. military aid to Ukraine, arguing that it would only “antagonize Russia” and exclaiming that he was “root[ing] for Russia” (he later claimed to have been “joking,” though he added that “we should probably take the side of Russia if we have to choose between Russia and Ukraine”).
As Western intelligence agencies warned in late 2021 and early 2022 of Russian troops massing on the Ukrainian border, Carlson alternated between offering passionate defenses of Putin, arguing that the Russian president “just wants to keep his western border secure,” and scoffing at the possibility of a Russian invasion. Once Russia invaded in February 2022, Carlson pivoted to blaming the war on Ukraine and President Joe Biden and doing everything in his power to convince his viewers that aiding Ukraine wasn’t in America’s interest.








