Putin’s Western certifier

Searching for Marco Travaglio in Russian means coming across a figure very different from the one known in Italy. Almost nothing remains of the court reporter, the anti-Berlusconi polemicist, or the editor-in-chief who puts the powerful on trial every morning. For the Russian media, Travaglio is above all a Western endorser: the journalist useful for demonstrating that Moscow’s version is not merely Moscow’s version, but a truth that is gaining ground even in Europe. Gazeta.ru does not simply write ‘Travaglio claims’, but ‘In Italy they have stated that Russia continues to win’, ‘In Italy, Zelensky has been described as a Frankenstein’, ‘In Europe, Zelensky has been compared to Snow White’. An individual opinion becomes a national statement: Travaglio speaks, Italy confesses.

His ‘Ukrainian season’ in the Russian media began in June 2022, when the claim was revived that Moscow’s defeat exists only in the newspapers, not on the ground, where Russia takes whatever it wants. In 2025, European leaders are portrayed as the seven dwarfs accompanying Snow White—Zelensky—to the White House; the story covers corruption in Kyiv, the ‘golden cabinet’ and the message to Ukrainian soldiers.

The pattern is consistent. From the thousand topics addressed by Travaglio, Mosca selects those that form a perfect narrative: Russia reacts, it does not attack; it is threatened, it does not threaten; Ukraine does not resist, it is being used; Europe does not defend, it provokes. It is more accurate to describe him as the ‘editor of an Italian daily newspaper’ or a ‘well-known Italian journalist’: his propaganda value stems from his Western credentials. There is no need to enlist him.

This was evident once again in the case of the explosive drone found at Leipzig Airport. On 2 September, TASS ran a headline stating that Travaglio considered the accusations levelled at Russia to be ‘absurd’; Ura.ru included his words in an article supporting the theory of a Ukrainian provocation. On 3 September, however, Travaglio went a step further. He wrote that one might almost hope that Putin had indeed sent the two alleged saboteurs. Because, if he were guilty, he would have shown himself to be among the ‘responsible criminals’ seeking to avert a third nuclear world war, rather than among the irresponsible criminals who are preparing for it. And if Russia had reacted to ‘our undeclared war’ merely with a drone, causing no deaths or damage, that would be good news: it might even have blown up two gas pipelines.

Here, the principle of presumption of innocence in geopolitics reaches its perfect form. If there is no definitive public evidence, Putin is innocent and the West is lying. If the allegations are true, Putin remains guilty but is portrayed as moderate, because he could have done worse. This argument cannot fail: innocence exonerates Moscow, guilt ennobles it. There is always a NATO false flag operation, a provocation by Kyiv, or any other hypothesis – provided that the Kremlin’s responsibility is the last thing to be taken seriously.

So here is what they say about Travaglio in Russia: they do not celebrate his professional career, but exploit his role. He is the European voice that transforms propaganda into a quote, the Kremlin’s line into ‘news from Italy’, and the reversal of responsibility into Western dissent. Travaglio sends kisses to Moscow; Moscow stamps them, translates them and puts them back into circulation. The latest is perhaps the most affectionate: Putin, the criminal who almost deserves a thank-you because, whilst he could set Europe ablaze, he would be content merely to give it a light slap.