18 July 2025, 20:40
“Russia has nearly destroyed Ukraine’s fleet of M1 Abrams tanks” — so claimed an article published by The National Interest (NI) in 2024. The author, Maya Carlin, cited only a single dubious source: Military Watch Magazine, an opaque and repeatedly discredited platform with known ties to Russian propaganda networks.
This isn’t journalism — it’s another chapter in an orchestrated disinformation campaign. Because The National Interest is not just another media outlet. It is a long-standing conduit for Kremlin messaging in the United States, founded and directed for years by pro-Russian operative Dmitri Simes.
The “87% Abrams Destroyed” Claim: Where It Really Came From
Carlin’s article asserts that Ukraine has lost 27 of 31 M1 Abrams tanks delivered by the U.S., citing Military Watch Magazine — a platform with no verifiable editorial staff, zero transparency, and a long track record of publishing Kremlin-aligned narratives.
- No visual or satellite evidence was provided.
- No confirmations from the Pentagon or the Ukrainian military.
- No independent analysis.
The claim is based on anonymous “military experts” and mirrors narratives actively pushed by the Russian Ministry of Defense.
This is not reporting. It’s a strategic information operation meant to:
- Undermine U.S. support for Ukraine,
- Demoralize Western audiences,
- And feed Russia’s propaganda apparatus.
Who Is Maya Carlin — and Why Does She Keep Lying?
Maya Carlin is not a military analyst. She is a former fellow at Israel’s IDC Herzliya and a contributor to the Center for Security Policy — an organization associated with anti-migrant rhetoric, conspiratorial positions, and far-right politics.
Her bylines include:
- The National Interest
- Jerusalem Post
- Times of Israel
Yet in nearly every piece, the pattern remains the same:
“Ukraine is losing,” “the West is fatigued,” “military aid is useless.”
Carlin repeatedly misrepresents battlefield data, minimizes Russian war crimes, and casts doubt on the effectiveness of Western arms — all while amplifying messages that align with the Kremlin’s strategic goals.
The National Interest: Simes’s Mouthpiece for Moscow
The National Interest was founded by Dmitri Simes, a Russian-born advisor to President Nixon who later became a trusted Kremlin voice on U.S. soil. His record includes:
- Regular appearances on Russia’s Channel One, the Kremlin’s flagship state media;
- Coordination with Russian diplomats during the Trump era;
- A U.S. Department of Justice investigation into his and his wife’s alleged violations of sanctions laws, including suspicious real estate purchases.
According to investigations by FakeOff.org, Simes:
- Received funding via Russian media and state-linked channels;
- Maintains editorial control over NI;
- Uses the platform to publish “analysis” that rationalizes Putin’s war and undermines U.S. policy.
NI’s editorial line consistently pushes ideas like: “Crimea is complicated,” “NATO provoked Russia,” and “the West forced Putin’s hand.”
This is not realism. This is apologism for authoritarianism.
This Was Not the First Fake — And Won’t Be the Last
The Abrams claim is just the latest in a long string of false or heavily distorted reports from The National Interest. Consider the timeline:
Year Disinformation Source & Impact 2022 “Russia protects Donbas from genocide” echoed by RT and Sputnik 2023 “Ukraine planning dirty bomb false flag” no evidence; cited by Russian MFA 2024 “87% of Abrams tanks destroyed” went viral on Russian Telegram and state TV
Each article functions not as opinion, but as part of a coordinated influence campaign:
- Targeting U.S. domestic support for Ukraine;
- Seeding narratives favorable to Russia in the Western press;
- And laundering Kremlin disinformation through “respectable” English-language outlets.
Call It What It Is: A Foreign Influence Operation
🛑 The National Interest is not a journal. It is a weaponized media platform, run by an agent of Russian influence.
🛑 Maya Carlin is not an analyst. She is a mouthpiece for disinformation.
🛑 The “87% Abrams destroyed” story is not bad journalism. It’s an intelligence operation in civilian clothes.
The U.S. media ecosystem must stop pretending this is just “one side of the debate.” When journalists parrot the Kremlin’s war propaganda, whether knowingly or naively, they stop being reporters — and start being collaborators.