Disinfo: NATO deceives Russia by admitting new members


NATO deceived Russia and the entire world when it promised not to expand eastwards after the end of the Cold War. The international community was hoping that a new era had come without military blocs, without confrontation and without threats to eliminate each other.


This is a recurring disinformation narrative from pro-Kremlin media, claiming that the West promised ex-Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev not to expand NATO to the East. Western top officials allegedly made this commitment at the time of the unification of the Germanies in late the 1980s -- the early 1990s, when the Soviet Union was nearing its breakup. NATO drawing closer to the Russian border means that the West deceived Russia and the entire world. In reality, there was no recorded or otherwise documented commitment from the West to  Soviet or Russian leaders about the alleged non-expansion of NATO. Even Gorbachev himself denied this claim in an interview in 2014:

“The topic of ‘NATO expansion’ was not discussed at all, and it wasn’t brought up in those years. I say this with full responsibility. Not a single Eastern European country raised the issue, not even after the Warsaw Pact ceased to exist in 1991.”

After the Cold War, the alliance and Moscow established relations of mutual respect, which culminated in the signing of the Founding Act on Mutual Relations, Cooperation and Security between NATO and the Russian Federation in 1997. This document, which is a reference point for any questions or misunderstandings from either side, contains the following provision:

"NATO will carry out its collective defense and other missions through interoperability, integration and capability for reinforcement rather than by additional permanent stationing of substantial combat forces on the territory of new members."

Thus, Russia’s claims of NATO’s alleged promise about non-expansion are unsubstantiated because this statement already mentions “new members”, to which Russia agreed. Furthermore, the phrase “rather than” implies a high degree of improbability rather than an unequivocal commitment. Russia voiced no objection to this wording, either. The international situation has changed since then, with Moscow behaving in an increasingly aggressive manner towards its immediate neighbours and explicitly threatening whom it used to call its Western partners, which forced NATO to revise its Russia policy. It was a justified move in order to prevent further Russian threats. The document also reads:

"The Act makes clear that Russia has no veto over alliance decisions and NATO retains the right to act independently when it so chooses".

It means, among other things, that NATO can deploy its forces, both permanently and temporarily,  where it deems necessary, and not only on the territory of its member states. The United States operated a military base in the former Soviet republic of Kyrgyzstan from 2001 till 2014 to provide assistance to the anti-terrorist operation in Afghanistan. It also used it for the transport of NATO soldiers to and from Afghanistan. NATO troops were stationed there, which was not a violation to the Act. Many former Soviet satellite countries have joined NATO since 1997. Russia was vociferously opposing the admission of the Baltic nations to the alliance 2004, but its objections were of no value due to the two aforementioned provisions.

Read more similar disinformation narratives, claiming that NATO allegedly vowed not to expand eastwards and that the alliance poses a threat to Russia’s security.


View more
  • Reported in: Issue 249
  • DATE OF PUBLICATION: 15/06/2021
  • Article language(s) Russian
  • Countries and/or Regions discussed in the disinformation: Russia, US, Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia
  • Keywords: NATO, EU/NATO enlargement, Anti-Russian, Military
see more

Disinfo: The US is funding a colour revolution in Mexico

The government of Mexico sent a diplomatic note to the United States after US agencies funded a civil organisation whose leader is the leading figure behind the electoral coalition of the opposition block. From 2018 to 2020, the organisation Mexicans against Corruption and Impunity (MCCI), founded by Mexican businessman Claudio X. González, received a total of 2.34 million dollars from US agencies such as USAID and NED, according to info available in their own database, through which the US government funds projects of development and the promotion of “democracy” abroad.

Claudio X. González is also the main orchestrator of the opposition coalition conformed by parties PRI, PAN and PRD for the midterm election of 2021 through the initiative Sí por México. The businessman has acknowledged that the main goal of this opposition alliance is to take the majority away from ruling party MORENA in the Chamber of Deputies, in order to control the budget prior to the presidential election of 2024.


The narrative about a US-funded colour revolution in Mexico, explicitly stated through the use of the OTPOR fist symbol in minute 01:30 of the video, is misleading. In early June 2021, the government of Mexican president Andrés Manuel López Obrador officially protested the funding by US agencies of Mexicans against Corruption and Impunity - one of the organisations that it has described as “opposition groups”, and called it “an act of interventionism that violates [Mexico’s] sovereignty”. This disinformation video goes a step forward by deliberately mixing some facts in order to portray the US as being involved in an attempt to influence Mexican politics.

Although it is true that MCCI received funds from USAID and the NED, this funding started in January 2018, while Andrés Manuel López Obrador didn’t win the presidential election until July of that year. This disinformation narrative omits the fact that MCCI was also very critical of corruption during the tenure of López Obrador’s predecessor Enrique Peña Nieto, and even before: while the organisation wasn’t funded until 2015, it also addressed high-profile corruption cases that took place in earlier years, such as the tenure of Felipe Calderón.

Disinfo: The coup d'état of Maidan caused a referendum that united Crimea with Russia

Crimea was attached to Russia in 2014, following a referendum. The self-proclaimed republics of Donetsk and Lugansk are controlled by rebels from eastern Ukraine who refuse to recognise the authorities resulting from the coup d'état of Maidan.


Recurrent narrative about 2014 events in Ukraine, the Euromaidan protests and the illegal annexation of Crimea.

No international body recognises the so-called referendum in Crimea, not the UN, nor the EU.

Disinfo: Western big pharma is waging a disinformation campaign against Sputnik V

A disinformation campaign against the Sputnik V vaccine was ordered by the Western pharmaceutical transnational big pharma, which include 30 of the world's leading pharmaceutical manufacturers, whose headquarters are primarily in the United States and Western European countries: Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca, Johnson & Johnson, all of which have released their own COVID-19 vaccines.

From the beginning, there was a campaign to undermine confidence in the great achievement of Russian scientists, in the efficacy of the vaccine. There are attacks against Sputnik V mainly in the Anglo-Saxon press; it is a kind of octopus that combines the interests of the big pharma and various political actors who are opposed to Russia. The campaign aims to reduce the vaccination rate in Russia itself.

Since the end of last year, Russian authorities have repeatedly announced attempts by Western countries to discredit Sputnik V. In December, the official representative of the Russian Defence Ministry, Igor Konashenkov, said that Moscow knows in detail what funds and what resources have been launched from abroad to discredit the national vaccine in the world and in Russia. In March, a Sputnik source in the Kremlin reported that the United States and its allies, through controlled non-governmental organizations, were preparing for a large-scale disinformation campaign.


Recurring disinformation narrative about an ongoing campaign of the West to discredit the Russian Sputnik V vaccine and the promotion of the Russian Sputnik V vaccine. In this case, this disinformation message aims to cover for the exceptionally low rates of immunisation in Russia (where on early June 2021 only 9 percent of its adult population had received the vaccine despite it being free and available for all age ranges) and for lagging behind the West in its vaccination drive.

Claims about Western smear campaigns against the Russian Sputnik V vaccine are a regular occurrence in pro-Kremlin media, but they are not supported by factual evidence. Early remarks about Sputnik V was motivated by widespread concerns that the approval was premature, since, at the time, the vaccine had not even started phase III trials, nor had any results on the earlier stage trials been published. The WHO expressed concerns about the preternatural registration of vaccine. After the results of phase I and II trials were published in The Lancet in September 2020, a group of international experts analysed them and expressed concerns about statistical anomalies. The same happened after the publication of the results of phase III, whose data discrepancies were again publicly highlighted by scientists.