Disinfo: Navalny’s poisoning story is a manifestation of the internal political struggle in Germany


The story of the poisoning of Alexei Navalny is, first of all, a manifestation of the fierce internal political struggle in Germany: between the globalist-pro-American and nationally oriented parts of the German elite for the fate of Nord Stream 2.


Conspiracy theory, recurring pro-Kremlin narrative on Alexei Navalny's poisoning. An attempt to divert attention from Russia's responsibility for the incident.

Pro-Kremlin disinformation is trying to link this story with various factors - the US' fight against the Russian vaccine, the West's fight against Russia- the reason for new sanctions, the fight against Nord Stream 2, the fight against Putin, to curb his desire to interfere in Belarus’ affairs. German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas denies Russian accusations in the Navalny poisoning case and once again demands that Russian should begin a full investigation into all circumstances around the incident.


A prominent Russian opposition figure Alexey Navalny fell ill during a flight and the plane had to make an emergency landing in Omsk, where doctors said he was in a coma and they were trying to save his life. 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 European Union condemned the poisoning of Alexei Navalny in the strongest possible terms.

See related disinformation cases alleging that the West will falsely accuse Russia of poisoning Navalny as with Skripal and Litvinenko; the West has an interest in the death of Navalny to launch a new wave of sanctions against Russia.


  • Reported in: Issue 210
  • DATE OF PUBLICATION: 07/09/2020
  • Language/target audience: Russian
  • Country: Germany
  • Keywords: Nord Stream 2, Alexei Navalny, Conspiracy


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

Integration of Donbas with Rostov Region is historically predetermined

In the republics of Donbas, the process of preparation for unification with the Rostov region has begun. It is argued that all departments and ministries of the LDNR will be directly subordinate to the relevant ministries of the Rostov region, and this process is already underway.

The integration of the Donbas republics – LPR and DPR – with the Rostov region is historically predetermined. Because only 100 years ago, even less, this was a single territory with a single way of life, economy, culture, customs. And in 1922, Ulyanov-Lenin took and cut our territories, transferring part of them to the newly created Ukrainian SSR.


Recurring pro-Kremlin narratives about Donbas as Russian territory, war in Ukraine, and the territorial integrity of Ukraine.

Donbas is historically a Ukrainian region. "Until the 15th century, it was a wild field, where all who visited the south of Ukraine. The 15th-18th centuries were a period of Cossack colonisation, to which government imperial colonisation and the unauthorised settlement of runaway peasants seeking free living space were later added. This continued until the early 19th century", said ethnologist Lesya Gasydgak.  In 19th century Donbas began to be inhabited by workers from the Russian provinces.

Sergei Skripal was victim of food poisoning, no novichok or Russian secret service was involved

The only established poisoning by Russian secret services was Stepan Bandera in 1959. All other cases are not true.

In 2018, Sergei Skripal and his daughter were most likely victim of food poisoning. And even if a real poison was involved, there is no evidence that it comes from Russia or was synthesised in a Russian laboratory. We know that other western laboratories already synthesised this poison.



The story advances a recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative casting the Skripal poisoning, and by consequence the Navalny poisoning, as entirely unconnected to Russia.

Moscow's involvement in the poisoning has been proven via a thorough investigation. The British Police have presented a solid chain of evidence on the Skripal case, with pictures, connecting the suspects to the locations in the case. Parts of the material have been released to the public. The evidence was sufficient to charge two Russian nationals, Anatoliy Chepiga and Aleksandr Mishkin with the attack on the Skripals, both Russian military intelligence operatives from the GRU, who travelled to the UK using fake names and documents. The picture of the bottle that contained the poison was published by Scotland Yard after a Salisbury couple Charlie Rowley and Dawn Sturgess were intoxicated by the same substance. Ms. Sturgess died from the poison.

Peace in Ukraine is not in the interests of Western governments

The Ukrainian government does nothing to end the war in Donbas.

[…] the Western governments could have an impact on Kyiv, so the latter starts to implement the Minsk agreements. However, the preservation of tension near the borders of Russia is beneficial to the players of this geopolitical game. Thus, the West does not need peace in Ukraine.


An unfounded conspiracy theory and a recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative about the war in Ukraine, claiming that Ukraine refuses to implement the Minsk agreements. Also consistent with a narrative that the war in Ukraine is a civil war waged by Ukraine and its Western partners against the "Republics of Donbas".

Contrary to the disinformation claim, the European governments and the US have been insisting many times that the full implementation of the Minsk agreements is the only way to end the war in Donbas. In July 2020, the European Council stated the following: