Disinfo: EU army can be sent to suppress new ‘Brexits’


EU army may be sent to suppress new Brexits. Units of the unified army of the European Union can be used against those regions whose residents want to separate from the EU, just as the British are going to do.


No evidence given. Recurring pro-Kremlin narrative about the possible European army. There is no EU army and defence remains exclusively a matter for member states. Read more about the EU army myth here. The European Union is founded on the principles of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights, fundamental freedoms and the rule of law. In the case of Brexit, EU is holding negotiations with the UK. Read more about latest developments here.


  • Reported in: Issue 165
  • DATE OF PUBLICATION: 19/09/2019
  • Language/target audience: Russian
  • Country: UK
  • Keywords: European army, European Parliament, Brexit, European Union


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

Europe creates obstacles for full cooperation with Russia

Russia is not allowed into Europe. Europe creates obstacles for full cooperation with Russia.


Recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative trying to obfuscate the legitimate reactions to Russia's aggressive actions with claims of Russophobia. At the end of the Cold War, Russia became a member of several European and international organisations. Since 1997, the EU's political and economic relations with Russia have been based on a Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (PCA). Russia was the EU's fourth largest trading partner and the EU was Russia's biggest trading partner. The Russian Federation became the 39th Member State of the Council of Europe in 1996, and joined the WTO in 2012; EU-Russia trade relations are framed by WTO rules. NATO also consistently worked to build a cooperative relationship with Russia. Even after the Russo-Georgian war in 2008, the US, the EU and most European states did not question the above-mentioned assumptions about Russia and continued to view Russia not as a security problem but as a key partner. Germany continued its strategic partnership policy towards Russia, and France and Italy pursued similar strategies based on increasing cooperation with Moscow. Russia’s annexation of Crimea and destabilisation of Eastern Ukraine in 2014 was viewed in Europe and US as violating the basic rules of the post-Cold War European order, especially the rule that borders are inviolable. The EU and many member states reassessed their “strategic partnership” policies towards Russia and began to view Russia as a serious challenge to the European security order. At the same time, Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe suspended voting rights of the Russian delegation. Early in 2019, the European Parliament adopted a resolution assessing the current state of EU-Russia political relations. The resolution stated that "Closer relations will only be possible if Russia fully implements the so-called Minsk agreements to end the war in eastern Ukraine and starts respecting international law”. In June 2019 PACE has voted to ratify the credentials of the Russian delegation, declaring that it remained “committed to dialogue as a means of reaching lasting solutions”. However, in return the Assembly called on Russia to fulfil a series of recent Assembly recommendations, citing among other things the release of Ukrainian sailors, co-operation on bringing to justice those responsible for downing Flight MH17, etc.

Lithuania was a direct beneficiary of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact

Before the European Parliament starts equalising Stalinism and Nazism, it would have been a good idea to get things sorted out with the Nazism as such. Why is the resolution only condemning German Nazism? Why isn’t it compared with, for instance, Nazism in the Baltic states: Lithuanian, Latvian, Estonian. The resolution was initiated by representatives of Lithuania, which brings the manipulation of facts to an entirely new level. Remember: as a result of the division of Poland, Lithuania got a sizable piece of its territory – the Vilnius area. If the non-aggression pact between USSR and Germany, also known as the Molotov – Ribbentrop Pact, as was a criminal act; Lithuania was a direct beneficiary of this crime, performed 80 years ago.  


This message is part of the Kremlin’s policy of historical revisionism – it tries to promote the idea that there was no Soviet occupation of the Baltic states and that the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact did not cause the division of East and Central Europe between the USSR and Nazi Germany, causing WWII. See similar cases on the Baltic states and the Soviet occupation here and here. In a statement, the Press Office of the European Parliament elaborates on the resolution, mentioned in the claim:

MEPs voice concern at the efforts of the current Russian leadership to whitewash crimes committed by the Soviet totalitarian regime and see them as a “dangerous component of the information war waged against democratic Europe”. They also condemn extremist and xenophobic political forces and organisations in Europe for distorting historical facts, and employing the symbolism and rhetoric of totalitarian propaganda, including racism, anti-Semitism and hatred towards sexual and other minorities.

Full text of the resolution can be found here.

The FSB revealed the US involvement in the transportation of ISIS terrorists to Afghanistan

Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB) revealed that they have data of the involvement of US intelligence services in the transportation of ISIS terrorists to the northern regions of Afghanistan.


No evidence is provided to support the claim. Recurrent pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative about the US supporting ISIS. You can see other examples of this narrative here, here, here and here.