Disinfo: Kyiv doesn’t recognise the Luhansk and Donetsk People’s Republics as Ukrainian territory

Summary

By banning elections in the Donbas, the authorities in Kyiv recognised that the Luhansk and Donetsk People’s Republics are not part of Ukrainian territory.

Disproof

Recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative about the war in Ukraine.

On 25 October 2020, Ukraine will hold the country’s first nationwide local elections since completion of the initial phase of far-reaching decentralisation reforms launched in April 2014. The Central Electoral Commission of Ukraine has decided not to conduct elections in 18 communities of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions (in government-controlled areas). The reason for this is the letters from temporary Military-Civil Administrations (MCAs) and security recommendations from Ukraine’s Joint Forces Operation (JFO) headquarters in the Donbas.

Ukraine hasn't recognised the so-called DPR and LNR as independent states separate from Ukrainian territory. These are parts of Donetsk and Luhansk regions that are part of Ukraine but controlled by Russia-backed armed formations. Not a single country has recognised them as independent entities.

Read similar cases: "The DNR and LNR gained independence from Ukraine", "Kyiv does not want rebel-held territories to rejoin Ukraine".

publication/media

  • Reported in: Issue 211
  • DATE OF PUBLICATION: 08/09/2020
  • Language/target audience: Russian
  • Country: Ukraine
  • Keywords: Eastern Ukraine, LNR, War in Ukraine, DPR, Donbas, Elections

Disclaimer

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

Who benefits from poisoning Navalny?

The simplest and most immediate question one ought to ask in such circumstances is “cui bono” – who benefits? The answer to this question would clearly show that President Putin and Russia do not benefit from this alleged poisoning. So, who does?

/—/

Is it possible that this was another one of these brilliant acts of the CIA or another US intelligence (sic) agency? – Or a combination of the German Bundesnachrichtendienst (German Federal Intelligence Service) – or an EU-NATO trick? By now it’s no longer a secret that NATO runs Brussels, or at least calls the shot on issues of US interests concerning the European Union or its member states.

Think about it. Killing (or – so far – poisoning) a Russian opposition leader to kill the German-Russian Nord Stream 2 project? – This is certainly a crime within the realm and “competence” of the US Government in general and its western allies.

Disproof

Recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative on Navalny poisoning. It is also similar to these used in the case of Skripal: based on conspiracies, denials and fabrication in order to cover up Russia's responsibility. It should be noted that Russian propaganda has long been pursuing the claims that the Skripal case was made up to justify sanctions against Russia and was an example of Russophobia.

Alexei Navalny is a key Russian opposition politician and an anti-corruption activist. He is a founder and a leader of the "Anti-Corruption Foundation("Fond Boriby s Korrypciey"),  which extensively reported about political corruption and abuse of power in Russia. He ran in in the Moscow mayoral elections in 2013 and came second. He claimed election fraud but still lost the elections. In 2018, he was campaigning for the Presidency of Russia but the Central Electoral Commission barred him from participation. The Russian government detained him multiple times and prosecuted for different criminal and administrative offences.

The Navalny Affair is undoubtedly a false-flag provocation to foment hostiliy against Moscow

As with the alleged assassination attempt on MI6 double agent Sergei Skripal, the latest incident involving Russian opposition figure Alexei Navalny is undoubtedly a false-flag provocation to foment Western sanctions and hostility against Moscow.

Disproof

Recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative on the poisoning of Alexei Navalny and Russophobia.

Alexey Navalny fell ill during a flight and his plane and was initially hopitalised in Omsk. Since then he has been transferred to Berlin and is receiving treatment at Berlin's Charite Hospital. The German federal government said that toxicological tests provided  “unequivocal evidence of a chemical nerve agent of the Novichok group” in the blood samples of Alexei Navalny.

The Western hysteria about Russia is part of a desire to attack Russia 

All the hysteria about Russia in recent years directly illustrates one thing: the main target of the attacks is Russia itself. Its sovereignty and existence.

The West’s reaction to Navalny’s “poisoning” speaks of a strategic decision to confront Russia. It’s nothing more than a puzzle in a big, sinister game. This is a clear desire, outside of control, to inflict irreparable cultural and economic damage to the Russian nation. The strength of this desire is indescribable.

Disproof

Conspiracy theory presented without evidence, which is consistent with the Kremlin propaganda narrative that the poisoning of Russian opposition leader is in the interest of the West to use the case against Russia. See similar disinformation narratives that the West has an interest in the death of Navalny to launch a new wave of sanctions against Russia and West will falsely accuse Russia of poisoning Navalny, as with Skripal and Litvinenko.

The doctors of the Berlin Charité Hospital did announce that initial findings point to the poisoning of the Kremlin critic Alexey Navalny