Disinfo: Europeans are victims of a series of Anglo-Saxon provocations against Putin and Russia


Europe’s weakness is very obvious in its relations with Russia. If the EU wants to become stronger and turn into an independent actor, it needs to build normal relations with Russia. If it is fine being a young partner in the Atlantic project, it needs to do nothing. The outright majority of Europeans stand for normal relations with Russia, but the EU ruling establishment does not. If the residents of “European house” are unable to independently build relations with Russia, then maybe the house does not really belong to them. Possibly someone is gathering them in that house in order to shut the door and burn the house down at some moment in time.

Following Ukraine’s violent turn to the West in 2014, the EU fell into the trap and could not get out of it. The EU can neither take Ukraine in nor recognise it as a part of the Russian world. Neither the Germans nor the French benefit from playing out the Ukrainian card; the Anglo-Saxons do. They were pushing the topic of Russian interference into European affairs, demonised Russia as a whole and Vladimir Putin as the so-called Skripals’ poisoner. Lately, Navalny is used as yet another factor of the anti-EU game.

European leaders are well aware of the reality of the Navalny’s trap. As in Ukrainian history, Europeans will have two actors in the Anglo-Saxon play called “Let’s isolate Russia.” Josep Borrell tries to explain to the Anglo-Saxons and radical European Atlantists that the EU has the right to determine its own future and to speak with Russia. By delaying the normalisation of relations with Russia, the EU is only becoming weaker.


This is a mix of recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narratives about lost sovereignty/external control, Western Russophobia and anti-Russian activities, and conspiracies about the poisoning of Alexei Navalny and the Skripals. In the pro-Kremlin media, the term “Anglo-Saxons” means “evil”, “belligerent” and “morally corrupt” Westerners, as explained in our earlier analysis.

Russian opposition politician Alexei Navalny was poisoned with a military grade Novichok-type nerve agent during his trip in Siberia in August 2020. He was hospitalised and treated at the Charite Hospital in Berlin. In October 2o20, the EU sanctioned 6 individuals and one entity involved in the assassination attempt. To obfuscate responsibility for the poisoning, the pro-Kremlin media has drawn numerous parallels between the Navalny and Skripal poisonings. Most of them were coupled with the usual denials: “there is no evidence that Navalny was poisoned” or that “London has no evidence of Moscow’s complicity in the Skripals’ poisoning”. Read more about this in our past analysis titled Salisbury all over again.

The US does not control the EU. The EU Member States are sovereign countries and make sovereign decisions about their own security and foreign policies, including relations with Russia. The US is an important ally to the EU but EU policy is not determined by the US. The decisions in the EU are made by the directly elected European Parliament, the European Commission together with the European Council (the governments of the 27 EU countries).

Last but not least, the 2014 events in Ukraine were not a violent Anglo-Saxon provocation in order to harden EU-Russia relations, as implicitly follows from the article, but the outcome of the Ukrainian people's frustration with former President Yanukovych's last-minute U-turn when, after seven years of negotiation, he refused to sign the EU–Ukraine Association Agreement and halted progress towards Ukraine's closer relationship with the EU.

See earlier disinformation cases alleging that poisoning of Navalny is a provocation to spoil relations between Russia and Germany, that it is unclear, who really poisoned Sergei and Yuliya Skripal, that the Anglo-Saxons rule America “from abroad” and are now trying to control Russia, that Anglo-Saxons are at the edge of anti-Russian attack, and that Anglo-Saxons tried to control China by cancelling globalisation.


  • Reported in: Issue 231
  • DATE OF PUBLICATION: 08/02/2021
  • Language/target audience: Russian
  • Country: EU, UK, Russia, Ukraine, US, Germany
  • Keywords: Josep Borrell, Skripal, Alexei Navalny, Anti-Russian, Abandoned Ukraine, Anglo-Saxon, Puppets, Vladimir Putin, Conspiracy theory


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

EU diplomats who participated in the actions knew that they were interfering in Russian affairs

The Vienna convention on diplomatic relations, our bilateral consular conventions with the countries of the European Union, pre-suppose that diplomats have privileges and immunities. Except for those cases when they interfere in the internal affairs of the host country, and, in its comments, the UN Commission on International Law explained that the most striking example of interference in internal affairs, in a way incompatible with diplomatic immunity, is participation in public events in the host country.

Therefore, diplomats when they go out on the street in this situation, and even under the current decree of the Moscow Mayor’s Office related to the ban on such public events in the context of the coronavirus pandemic, I think, they knew very well that they were not fulfilling their functions under the Vienna Conventions, but interfering in the internal affairs of the Russian Federation.


The claim advances a pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative about the protests in Russia in support of jailed opposition activist Alexei Navalny. and the subsequent expulsion of diplomats from Germany, Poland and Sweden by Russia.

None of the three diplomats were "interfering in Russian affairs" or participating in the demonstrations. Their presence at the protests was linked solely to the fulfillment of their diplomatic duties of monitoring protests. According to the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, these duties include:

The US and NATO aim to turn the post-Soviet space into underpopulated military zone

There are signs that the Ukrainian authorities might be preparing anti-Russian military provocations in the Black sea and Donbas with the support of the US. Kyiv must have forgotten that in 2015 the advance of Donbas militiamen was stopped at Russia’s request. Russia will never allow repressions against the Russian-speaking population in eastern Ukraine and their genocide along the Yugoslavian scenario.

The US and NATO aim at creating a sparsely populated zone of permanent military conflicts out of the post-Soviet space.


This article is consistent with recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narratives about a belligerent West planning to use Ukraine in its anti-Russian policies, the persecution of the Russian language speakers and war in Ukraine.

The claim about a possible genocide of the Russian speaking population in Donbas or other parts of Ukraine is groundless and is aimed to discredit Ukraine and legitimise aggressive Russian actions there.

The Yves Rocher case against Navalny is not political

It is sometimes seen on the internet that the Yves Rocher Affair was a political affair, this is a fake!

In their complaint to the European Court of Human Rights, Alexei Navalny and his brother Oleg demanded that the Yves Rocher Affair be regarded as political persecution. The court declared this part of their complaint inadmissible.

It is also said that Navalny was cleared by the ECHR, and this is also a fake!

The European Court of Human Rights does not have the competence to exonerate or convict. It is about finding violations in the procedure, which was done in the Navalny case. Russia even paid the damages fixed by the ECHR.


Recurrent disinformation message on Alexei Navalny and the Yves Rocher case, claiming that Russia had been condemned for technical issues of procedure in the trial but the ground was correct and that Russia had fulfiled all its international commitments since Alexei Navalny was paid the damages decided by the ECHR.

On 02/02/2021 the Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe stated that: