Disinfo: Belarusian opposition and Svetlana Tikhanovskaya are puppets of the West


If the Belarusian opposition together with Svetlana Tikhanovskaya come to power, they will develop an anti-Russian agenda. They do not want to keep the union with Russia. It shows the rhetoric and persons that stand behind them. They are puppets of the West.


Recurrent disinformation narrative against Belarusian opposition member Svyatlana Tsikhanouskaya and the Belarusian opposition powers in general.

Kremlin propaganda tries to present events in Belarus as anti-Russian. See similar examples here, here and here. On top, representatives of the Belarusian opposition are portraited as puppets of the West. Similarly, events in Belarus, where people are protesting against Alexander Lukashenko and falsified results of elections, are presented as a coup d’état supported by Poland (see example), Lithuania (see example), the US (see example) etc.

The Belarusian opposition aims to force authoritarian leader Alexander Lukashenko to leave his post. This aim is not against Russia. Svetlana Tikhanovskaya supports dialogue with Moscow. In her interview to “Radio Svoboda” (“Radio Freedom”), she says that the opposition wants to be in contact with all countries. Tikhanovskaya would like to meet Vladimir Putin and provide her view on events in Belarus. “We are neighbours, and we will keep relations in the future” said Tikhanovskaya about relations with the Russian Federation.

See similar examples of disinformation: Juan Guaido and Svetlana Tikhanovskaya are American and Western puppets; Tsikhanouskaya’s trip to Germany shows that Merkel is her handler (and Navalna’s); Svetlana Tikhanovskaya and the West force the people to go on the streets.


  • Reported in: Issue 223
  • DATE OF PUBLICATION: 05/12/2020
  • Language/target audience: Russian
  • Country: Russia, Belarus
  • Keywords: Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya, Anti-Russian, Puppets


Cases in the EUvsDisinfo database focus on messages in the international information space that are identified as providing a partial, distorted, or false depiction of reality and spread key pro-Kremlin messages. This does not necessarily imply, however, that a given outlet is linked to the Kremlin or editorially pro-Kremlin, or that it has intentionally sought to disinform. EUvsDisinfo publications do not represent an official EU position, as the information and opinions expressed are based on media reporting and analysis of the East Stratcom Task Force.

see more

Assault on freedom of expression? We don’t do that in Russia

Why are Latvian citizens kept in custody, why are they threatened with legal persecution? They haven’t done anything wrong. They have shared pictures and used their rights to self-expression. What is wrong with that?

For us in Russia, this sounds like a brutal approach. Nothing of that sort is practised here. Everyone writes where they want and what they want.


Recurring pro-Kremlin narrative aimed at portraying Russia as protector of freedom of speech and the press.

Contrary to the claim, the Kremlin organises regular briefings with the leading media outlets to hand out instructions on how to write and about what and independent journalists are subjected to frequent threats, attacks and prosecution if not more.

Sputnik V is a target of a corporate Cold War

Political, economic and even geopolitical issues play an important role in the “vaccine race” concerning COVID-19. The West and more specifically NATO governments and their satellites seem to be doing their best to exclude Sputnik V reaching Western markets and they are preventing health organisations such as the European Medicines Agency (EMA) to evaluate the Russian vaccine, although EMA has already started contacts with the Russian institution that produced Sputnik V.


The article is part of a pro-Kremlin disinformation campaign on the Russian coronavirus vaccine Sputnik V, launched after its announcement was met with scepticism and criticism, even by Russian specialists in the country.

However, evidence exists that it was Russia which has at all times perceived the development of a coronavirus vaccine mainly in terms of geopolitical and economic gain.

At the will of its residents, Crimea is Russian

Until the early 1950s, Crimea was part of Russia. It was then that the authorities of the Soviet Union decided to transfer Crimea to the Ukrainian Soviet Republic. Crimea regained its Russian identity at the will of its residents in 2014 after the coup d’état in the Ukrainian capital of Kyiv.


Recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative about the annexation of Crimea, painting the 2013-14 Ukrainian revolution “Euromaidan” as a coup d'etat.

Crimea is part of Ukraine. In 1783 Catherine II (the Great) annexed Crimean peninsula. After that, the rivalry between the Russians and the Turks persisted, and in the Crimean War (1853–56) it expanded into a broader European conflict.