Images of Threat and the “Russian Trace”: Securitization of Russia in the Media Discourse of Baltic and Scandinavian States after the Inception of the Special Military Operation in Ukraine

The escalation of Ukrainian conflict in February 2022 has radically changed the security parameters in the Baltic-Scandinavian macroregion. Russia is perceived as the main source of military and hybrid threats. The aim of the study is to show how media images of Russia as a security threat in the Baltic Scandinavian macroregion contribute to the securitization of the regional agenda and the transformation of international security practices after 2022, as well as to identify the consequences of systemic demonization of the “enemy” for the stability of the regional order. The concept of collective securitization as well as critical security studies and approaches to the analysis of media framing form the theoretical and methodological basis of the research. The empirical data include academic and expert publications as well as reports on the safety of the Baltic Sea by international organizations. The study shows that three interrelated images of Russia are fixed in the media discourse of the Baltic-Scandinavian macroregion after 2022: existential and unpredictable threat, source of “hybrid attacks” in the “gray zone”, universal culprit of any failures and crises. These images legitimize the expansion of emergency measures, including a sharp increase in defense budgets, the construction of defensive lines, restrictions on Russian media, and tougher policies towards Russian-speaking minorities. The conclusion to be drawn is that the formation of Russian image as an overarching threat as well as the exploitation of the cliche of the “Russian footprint” increase the short-term consolidation of states in the macroregion, but at the same time narrow the space for dialogue, create risks of escalation due to erroneous interpretation of events and undermine the long-term stability of the regional order. For the Russian Federation, such securitization means institutionalizing a hostile environment in the immediate vicinity of its borders and requires the development of strategies for targeted desecuritization of certain areas of cooperation while maintaining military stability.

1. Vorotnikov, Vladislav V., and Natalia A. Ivanova. “Russian Soft Power in the Baltic States Through the Lens of Research: Traditions, Competition, Confrontation.” Baltic Region 11, no. 3 (2019): 107–124 [In Russian].

2. Grinyaev, Sergey N. “Rearming Europe by 2030: Challenges and Prospects.” Russian Journal of Regional Studies 33, no. 3 (2025): 518–530 [In Russian].

3. Gromyko, Alexey A. “Baltic-Scandinavian Macroregion: Regionalism of a New Type.” Contemporary Europe, no. 6 (2025): 5–24 [In Russian].

4. Mezhevich, Nikolay M. “Russia and the Baltic States: Some Results and a Few Perspectives.” Baltic Region, no. 2, (2015): 7–18 [In Russian].

5. Mezhevich, Nikolay M. and Yury M. Zverev. “East Baltics: Economic Dilemmas of Security.” Baltic Region 10, no. 1 (2018): 73–88 [In Russian].

6. Sergunin, Alexander A. “Russia and the European Union in the Baltic Region: a Treacherous Path to Partnership.” Baltic Region, no. 4 (2013): 53–66 [In Russian].

7. Bobylev, Nikolai, Sebastien Gadal, Viktar Kireyeu, and Alexander Sergunin. “EU-Russia Cross-border Co-operation in the Twenty-first Century: Turning Marginality into Competitive Advantage.” Regional Science Policy & Practice 12, no. 5 (2020): 847–866. https://doi.org/10.1111/rsp3.12316.

8. Buzan, Barry, Ole Waever, and Jaap de Wilde. Security: A New Framework for Analysis. Boulder, Colo.: Lynne Rienner Pub., 1998.

9. Crowther, Alexander G. “The Baltic Sea Region at an Inflection Point.” PRISM 10, no. 2 (2023): 6–17.

10. Dudzińska, Kinga. Acute Need for Security of Critical Infrastructure in the Baltic Sea Region. Bulletin no. 5 (2506). PISM, 2025. https://pism.pl/publications/acuteneed-for-security-of-critical-infrastructure-in-the-balticsea-region.

11. Hartwell, Leon, Agnė Rakštytė, Julia Ryng, and Ēriks K. Selga. Winter is Coming: The Baltics and The Russia-Ukraine War. LSE IDEAS Special Report. LSE, 2022. https://www.lse.ac.uk/ideas/publications/old-reports/baltics.

12. Hedling, Elsa. “Transforming Practices of Diplomacy: The European External Action Service and Digital Disinformation.” International Affairs 97, no. 3 (2021): 841–859. https://doi.org/10.1093/ia/iiab035.

13. Oğuz, Şafak. “The New NATO: Prepared for Russian Hybrid Warfare?” Insight Turkey 18, no. 4 (2016): 165–180.

14. Pataccini, Leonardo. “The (Un)usual Suspects? Exploring the Links Between Illicit Financial Flows, Russian Money Laundering and Dependent Financialization in the Baltic States.” Competition & Change 28, no. 1 (2024): 3–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/10245294231177352.

15. Schulze, Jennie L., and Juris Pupcenoks. “Securitizing Russian-Speakers in Estonia and Latvia: The Frame-Policy Nexus Before and After Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine.” Nationalities Papers 53, no. 5 (2025): 1035–1059. https://doi.org/10.1017/nps.2024.97.

16. Sutkutė, Rūta. “Constructing Security Discourse During the Russia–Ukraine War (2022–2025): The Cases of Lithuania, Hungary, and Ukraine.” Discourse & Society, ahead of print, January 19, 2026. https://doi.org/10.1177/09579265251395300.

17. Vériter, Sophie L. “The Collective Securitization of ‘Disinformation’ and the EU’s Ban on Russia Today and Sputnik.” International Affairs 101, no. 5 (2025): 1853–1876. https://doi.org/10.1093/ia/iiaf139.

18. Vihalemm, Triin and Jānis Juzefovičsю “How Baltic Russian-Speaking Audiences Outmaneuver Securitization, Essentialization, and Polarization in Times of Crisis?” Journal of Baltic Studies 53, no. 4 (2022): 495–517. https://doi.org/10.1080/01629778.2021.2006728.

19. Veebel, Viljar. “Strategic Challenges for Baltic States in Dangerous Times.” Journal on Baltic Security 9, no. 2 (2023): 1–4. https://doi.org/10.57767/jobs_2023_e1.