Mendel’s 96 Minutes: Carlson Interview Sparks Accusations of Coordinated Kremlin Operation

(KYIV, UKRAINE) – A former press secretary for Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has given a lengthy interview to American presenter Tucker Carlson, triggering immediate amplification by Russian state propaganda networks and prompting accusations of coordinated information warfare.

Iuliia Mendel, who served as Zelenskyy’s press secretary from June 2019 until July 2021, appeared on the Tucker Carlson Show on 11 May 2026. Across 96 minutes, she delivered a series of allegations that align precisely with long standing Kremlin strategic narratives. The interview was published two days after a brief three day truce brokered by Donald Trump expired, one day after Russian forces resumed missile and drone strikes on Ukrainian cities, and three days after Zelenskyy issued Decree 374, which satirically granted Russia permission to hold a hollowed out Victory Day parade in Red Square. On the same day, Ukrainian anti corruption bodies announced a suspicion notice against Andriy Yermak, a senior official.

The timing of the broadcast is being assessed by analysts as an operational signature. Within hours of the interview appearing, Russian state media including TASS, Pravda, and the Urbar Telegram network had published multiple stories amplifying Mendel’s claims. The speed and coordination of the Russian response suggest advance knowledge of the interview’s content. The event forms part of a pattern occurring at a moment when Russian forces are under significant pressure and the Kremlin is seeking to impose a disadvantageous ceasefire on Ukraine.

The catalogue of ten major claims made by Mendel was cross referenced against Russian state outlets and independent Ukrainian media. First, she alleged that Zelenskyy personally demanded Goebbels style propaganda, telling Carlson that the president assembled his communications team and demanded thousands of talking heads spreading messaging akin to that of Adolf Hitler’s propaganda minister. The Kremlin has justified its full scale invasion for over four years using the framing of denazification. Mendel’s allegation, delivered in English and reinforced with a short speech in Russian, repackages that exact rationale. To accuse Ukraine’s Jewish president of modelling himself on Hitler’s henchmen is, to put it mildly, an obscene allegation.

Second, Mendel claimed that Zelenskyy agreed to surrender the Donbas during abortive negotiations in Istanbul in spring 2022. The Ukrainian presidential office responded via presidential adviser Serhii Leshchenko, captured by Liga.net, confirming that Mendel was not present at the Istanbul talks and had already left government in July 2021. The claim is unverified and third hand at best, yet it directly supports Moscow’s current ceasefire pressure campaign demanding Ukraine withdraw from Donetsk and Luhansk.

Third, she repeated the Kremlin signature smear that Zelenskyy uses cocaine. She told Carlson, “Every time I spoke to people who know him for more than 20 years, everyone is talking about cocaine.” This line has been delivered for nearly four years by Dmitry Peskov, Vladimir Solovyov, Maria Zakharova, and every senior Russian propaganda operative. Mendel presented it with no caveats and no evidence.

Fourth, she characterised Zelenskyy as one of the biggest obstacles to peace today. This is the exact phrase used repeatedly by Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and by Donald Trump. The framing reverses reality: the obstacle to peace is not the leader resisting invasion but the invader refusing to withdraw. Peace in this construction means Ukrainian capitulation.

Fifth, Mendel described Zelenskyy as cruel and mentally unstable, emotionally uncontrollable, often hysterical, an insanely great actor but detached from reality. No clinical basis or contemporary witness corroboration supports this personal demolition. It is standard Kremlin pathologisation strategy applied to every leader who resists Russian power. Describing a male democratically elected wartime president as hysterical deploys the gendered slur that Kremlin Telegram channels use constantly.

Sixth, she framed Zelenskyy as a dictator who cancelled elections. The suspension of wartime elections is a measure required under Article 19 of Ukraine’s constitution during martial law. Trump deployed this exact framing in February 2025, and Russian state media repeated it for three consecutive months. Mendel has now validated that narrative from within Zelenskyy’s former administration.

Seventh, she claimed the Nord Stream 2 pipeline was allowed to complete because the Biden administration was furious with Zelenskyy over Naftogaz corruption reforms. The claim is historically inverted. Nord Stream 2 was completed in September 2021 because Russia and Germany pushed it through despite years of United States opposition. It was not permitted as punishment for Zelenskyy.

Eighth, Mendel asserted that the Nord Stream sabotage of September 2022 was linked to a corruption dispute with Zelenskyy. This explosive claim was picked up by multiple Russian outlets within hours, as if they knew it was coming. The framing shifts responsibility for one of the most consequential acts of energy infrastructure sabotage from Berlin and Moscow to Kyiv, for which no credible evidence exists.

Ninth, she claimed hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians have died and that Ukraine is on the verge of extinction. She stated, “If you want to support Ukraine, the only way to support Ukraine today is to push for a peace deal.” The operational translation is that Western pressure on Kyiv to accept Russia’s terms is the only way to save Ukraine. It implies resistance is pointless and weapon supplies should cease. This claim does not accord with logistical reality.

Tenth, Mendel attacked Ukraine’s wartime sanctions regime against Russian linked figures and accused collaborators as illegal and unconstitutional, claiming they create a climate of intimidation. TASS is leading with this claim. The narrative serves the Kremlin and its oligarchic elites by arguing Ukraine should not sanction entities associated with the invading state.

Every single one of these ten high impact claims serves Kremlin narrative priorities. The convergence is too comprehensive for coincidence. Mendel’s statements do not merely echo Russian propaganda; they constitute a full alignment with Russian strategic intent. The question is no longer whether she is acting in the strategic interests of the Kremlin. She absolutely is. The question that remains is one of motive. The timing, the content, and the immediate Russian amplification all indicate a carefully coordinated operation designed to destabilise the Ukrainian government and force capitulation on Moscow’s terms.