Disinfo: Poland did not invite Russia to the anniversary of the WWII outbreak because of the will of the US

Summary

The Russian delegation was not invited to take part in the Ceremony of the 80th Anniversary of WWII outbreak because of the United States’ will. The current interpretation of the WWII events is imposed on Poland by the “overseas ideologist” – Polish authorities are completely subordinated to the position of the USA.

Disproof

Recurring pro-Kremlin narrative claiming that the United States fully control the foreign policy of Poland. See other examples of this message here, here and here. Poland's decision not to invite the Russian delegation to WWII commemoration ceremony has to do with Russian aggression against Ukraine. Krzysztof Szczerski, Chief adviser to the Polish president, stated in March 2019 that the anniversary ceremony will be held “in the company of countries with whom Poland now cooperates closely for peace, based on the respect for international law, for the sovereignty of nations and of their territories”. This point was reiterated by Jacek Sasin, Polish Deputy Prime Minister in July, who said: "I think it would be inappropriate to mark the anniversary of the beginning of the armed aggression against Poland with the participation of a leader who today treats his neighbours using the same methods." The statement that the United States controls the European and Polish elites is a conspiracy theory. Poland is a sovereign state, which shapes its own foreign and domestic policies - moreover, being a member of NATO and the EU, Poland is able to impact the formation of common foreign policies of these unions. See other examples of disinformation about Polish-American relations here.

publication/media

  • Reported in: Issue 164
  • DATE OF PUBLICATION: 01/09/2019
  • Outlet language(s) Polish
  • Country: Poland, US, Russia
  • Keywords: WWII, US presence in Europe, Russophobia
see more

Ukraine lost 10 million citizens after the social genocide in 2014-2019

During another “five-year madness” after the coup d’état, in 2014-2019 Ukraine lost almost 10 million citizens who were victims of the social genocide resulting from “100 successful reforms”. The people died or left the country searching for jobs.

Disproof

The recurring pro-Kremlin narrative about Ukraine, its economy, and how it was ruined after 2014. It also repeats a disinformation narrative about the Euromaidan events in 2013-2014, portraying them as a coup d’état. The spontaneous onset of the Euromaidan protests was an organic reaction by numerous parts of the Ukrainian population to former President Yanukovych’s sudden departure from the promised Association Agreement with the European Union in November 2013. See the full debunk of this disinformation claim here. In the 2014-2019, the population of Ukraine has decreased from 45,2 million to 44,6 million people. According to the State Statistical Service of Ukraine, during 2015-2017 more than 1,3 million workers left Ukraine. According to the UN, in 2017 there were 5.9 million migrants from Ukraine in the world. The United Nations includes all immigrants who are born in but do not live in a country. According to the International Monetary Fund, the reforms after 2014 increased the growth rate of Ukraine's gross domestic product to 3 percent a year. The IMF predicts a similar rate for the long term. The EU also acknowledges substantial progress in reforms, especially in such sectors as healthcare, decentralisation, public administration, public procurement and the environment.

In Beslan, no negotiations with the terrorists was possible

Negotiations in Beslan would have been futile. The terrorists never formulated their demands clearly, only mentioned the withdrawal of Russian troops from Chechnya and the independence of the region. At 13h, 3rd of September 2004, an explosion was heard, and terrorists opened fire. The origin of the explosion remains obscure until today. It forced Spetsnaz to instantly make the decision to attack. Among the terrorists were many Ingush trained in the separatist republic. There were also identified British nationals of Algerian origin, as well as funding from Saudi and Kuwaiti nationals, de facto internationalising the cell. In December 2006, the State Duma Commission noted that the terrorists were responsible for the initial explosion.

Disproof

No evidence was given for the claim that there were British nationals of Algerian origin amongst terrorists or that any foreign funding was identified. There are no official investigations related to this topic in Russia. According to the numerous testimonies of the surviving hostages, the terrorists repeatedly tried to initiate negotiations. One of them, Nurpashi Kulaev, promised to release 150 children in exchange for each person who would arrive as a negotiator at the school. One of the leaders of the Chechen separatists, Aslan Maskhadov was also ready to conduct negotiations with the terrorists. Andrei Illarionov, former Vladimir Putin's aide (2000-2005), revealed in 2016 that in 2004 Putin did not allow to save hostages and the storming began in reaction to Maskhadov's proposal. No comments from the Russian officials were made following this statement.

24 crew members of Ukrainian ships violated Russian maritime borders in the Kerch Strait

24 crew members of Ukrainian ships were arrested by the Russian Coast Guard in November 2018 for violating Russian maritime borders in the Kerch Strait.

Disproof

Recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation about the Kerch incident. On the 25th of November 2018, border patrol boats belonging to Russia’s FSB security service seized two small Ukrainian armoured artillery vessels and a tug boat and their crews after shooting at them, wounding several Ukrainian servicemen and arresting 24 members. Russia stated they were in Russian waters. However, according to the bilateral agreement between Ukraine and Russia, the Kerch Strait and the Sea of Azov are the internal waters of both Russia and Ukraine. The agreement gives both parties the power to inspect suspicious vessels. Furthermore, both the 2003 bilateral agreement and UN Convention on the Law of the Sea provide for freedom of navigation. See here for a similar case.