Disinfo: Four EU countries requested to start negotiations with the producers of the Sputnik V vaccine


The Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF) agreed with companies from Spain, Italy, France and Germany to produce the vaccine against the coronavirus, Sputnik V, in their respective territories, the general director of the fund Kirill Dmitriev stated. This statement came after it was reported that some European Union countries are considering the possibility of starting negotiations with the manufacturers of the Russian vaccine against the coronavirus, Sputnik V . This is about the requests of four countries that proposed to start negotiations with the manufacturers of the Russian vaccine, a diplomatic source told the Reuters agency.


This is a deliberate manipulation of information to promote a misleading narrative of direct interest to Russia. The original article by Reuters states: “It would take requests from four EU states to start the process” of launching talks with the Sputnik V developers, which is completely different from saying that “there are requests from four countries that proposed to start negotiations”, as the translation into Spanish, formulated in a very strange way, actually says.

By mixing this sentence with the previous paragraphs, the goal of this disinformation piece is to imply that four EU countries, Spain, Italy, France and Germany, took the initiative of purchasing the Sputnik V vaccine. It is true that the general director of RDIF Kiril Dmitriev announced agreements for the production of vaccines with companies of these countries. However, in all cases, these are strictly private agreements: the Swiss-based pharmaceutical company Adienne for Italy, IDT Biologika for Germany, and Zendal and IberAtlantic for Spain. Previously, France had categorically denied that any French company had signed such agreement. While the Spanish and German authorities showed their disposition to use Sputnik V in the future, they strictly conditioned it to its eventual approval by the European Medicines Agency. Comments by representatives of Italy’s Chamber of Commerce or Germany’s head of the regulatory authority have also been amplified by pro-Kremlin disinformation to suggest an official involvement in the deal.

This is part of a long-term pro-Kremlin disinformation campaign about the Sputnik V vaccine, such as claims that Emmanuel Macron allowed its use in France, that Ukrainians are massively travelling to Russia to get vaccinated with Sputnik V, that Russia’s enemies are afraid of the advantage of Sputnik V and Russia’s leadership, that EMA’s delay in approving Sputnik V is political, that the most influential European media are backing away from propaganda against Sputnik V, or that Josep Borrell couldn’t criticise Russia because Europe needs the Sputnik V vaccine.

This disinformation message appeared in the same article as the claim that "The West aims to intensify its campaign against the Sputnik V"


  • Reported in: Issue 236
  • DATE OF PUBLICATION: 19/03/2021
  • Article language(s) Spanish, Castilian
  • Countries and/or Regions discussed in the disinformation: EU, Russia, Germany, Spain, Italy, France
  • Keywords: Sputnik V
see more

Joe Biden wants to provoke a New Cold War with Russia to distract the Americans from domestic problems

US President Joe Biden wants a new Cold War with Russia. Biden deliberately provokes Russia and seeks to bring about a new Cold War in order to distract US public opinion from domestic problems.


Recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative about the US and the West allegedly pursuing a belligerent and hostile agenda against Russia. The article’s message is also consistent with the pro-Kremlin narrative that seeks to discredit US President Joe Biden.

There is no evidence to support the article’s claim that the Biden administration is seeking to launch a “Cold War” with Russia. The Biden administration reacted to specific Kremlin actions that harm the US and its allies, such as ongoing aggression against Ukraine, cyber-attacks, influence operations targeting the US 2020 elections. The administration has also denounced the violation of human and civil rights in Russia, such as the poisoning of an opposition politician Alexei Navalny.

Ukraine never had a legal right to Crimea

Ukraine has never had the legal right to Crimea. The peninsula has always been and will always remain Russian land.


This is a recurring disinformation narrative from pro-Kremlin media trying to deny that Crimea is a part of Ukraine.

Crimea has a very long and complicated history with many peoples living there. Its population was diverse and included in various historical periods Crimean Tatars, Turks, Ukrainians, Russians, Greeks, Bulgarians, Armenians, Italians from Genoa, Urums, Karaites etc. Alans, Scythians, Sarmatians, Goths, Cimmerians, Huns and other ancient nations had also lived there.

NATO needs Georgia as a military platform for a conflict potential with Russia

Georgia, just like the Baltics, is a platform for the deployment of foreign NATO troops in possible operations against Russia, the long-term strategy does not provide for anything else, the leadership of NATO does not care much about the safety of the population of these republics.

[The NATO] partners need Georgia for the constant development of a conflict potential with Russia, and as a platform for the likely deployment of the NATO troops in the regional theatre of military operations. By agreeing to be a kind of anti-Russian "instrument" of the US and NATO in the Caucasus, the Georgian leadership deliberately "frames" its people.

Of course, in a situation of local (regional) conflict, none of the Western partners will sign up for a catastrophe for Georgia's sake . "Younger" allies are needed by the collective West as a consumable in the long-term confrontation with major opponents.


This is a recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative about NATO allegedly pursuing a belligerent and hostile agenda against Russia particularly in the Caucasus as well as about Georgia's cooperation with NATO.

The narrative is part of a larger campaign aiming to influence public support against Georgia's NATO aspirations and portraying neutrality as the most rational foreign policy choice for Georgia. Georgia's movement to join NATO was intensified after the de-facto occupation of a part of its territory.