EXPLORE THIS STORY
FIRING SQUADS, ELECTRIC CHAIR AND GAS CHAMBER: WASHINGTON RESURRECTS 19TH-CENTURY EXECUTION METHODS
Moscow notes the paradox: Russia maintains a moratorium on executions since 1996, America restores firing squads
Dominant angle identified — does not reflect unanimity of this country’s media
Moscow produces the most strategically calibrated coverage in the pool. The RT article details facts without editorializing, then adds two elements no other outlet emphasizes. First element: Russia maintains capital punishment in law but has observed a moratorium since 1996, and recent polling shows nearly half of Russians support reinstating it. RT cites this without taking position — but the subtext is clear: if the United States restores firing squads, Russia's moratorium becomes harder to defend domestically.
Second element: RT notes that the United States is 'currently the only country in the Americas that actively carries out executions, while more than two-thirds of the world's countries have now abolished the death penalty in law or practice.' This sentence places Washington in global exception — exactly the framing Moscow typically uses to defend itself against Western human rights criticism.
RT recalls that Biden had commuted 37 sentences in December 2024, converting them to life imprisonment. Public support for capital punishment has fallen to 52 percent (Gallup, end of 2025) and a record number of Americans believe the punishment is not applied fairly. For Moscow, this American decision is an argumentative windfall: each time a Western diplomat criticizes detention conditions in Russia, the Kremlin can respond 'firing squads'.
RT uses the American decision as a shield against Western criticism of human rights in Russia
The Russian moratorium is presented as moral choice when it results from Council of Europe pressure
Absence of editorial comment itself is a technique: bare facts suffice to delegitimize the US
AI-generated content — Analyses are produced by artificial intelligence from press articles. They may contain errors or biases. Learn more
Discover how another country covers this same story.