Disinfo: Previous government was sabotaging prisoner exchanges in Donbas due to anti-Russian hysteria and Russophobia


If there was a clear decision to exchange all prisoners, then it could be implemented. It will take a short period of time. This could have been done under Poroshenko, but he didn’t want it, intentionally, because he didn’t need any territory or these people, he needed a policy of anti-Russian hysteria and Russophobia.


Recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative about the War in Ukraine and the Minsk agreements.

In the last five years, numerous talks on the exchange of the prisoners have been held in the Minsk format (in the Trilateral Contact Group). As a result, hundreds of prisoners have been exchanged during 2014-2017. In general, 4 prisoner swaps have taken place: on 26-27 December 2014, 26-27 August 2015, 2 August 2017, and 27 December 2017.

Recently, on 7 September 2019, another exchange took place when both Ukraine and Russia released 35 prisoners. President Zelenskyy has also mentioned that the prisoner exchange is one of the major topics to be discussed during the meeting on 9 December 2019 in France in the Normandy Format.

See previous disinformation narrative claiming that Kyiv has no intention of exchanging prisoners with the Kremlin.


  • Reported in: Issue 176
  • DATE OF PUBLICATION: 25/11/2019
  • Language/target audience: Russian
  • Country: Russia, Ukraine
  • Keywords: Eastern Ukraine, Anti-Russian, War in Ukraine, Russophobia, Minsk agreements


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

War in Donbas is a consequence of USSR’s break-up and ban against Russian language

The war in Donbas is a consequence of the USSR’s dissolution. The war originates from the ban on speaking Russian, which was impossible in the Ukrainian Soviet Social Republic, but it happened in Ukraine. The Belarusian and Ukrainian societies have to finally realise that the Russian language is native to Belarus and Ukraine, just as it is to Russia. It belongs to all three branches of Russian people: Great Russians, Little Russians, and Belarusians, this is our common heritage.


This case misinterprets the reasons behind the war in Donbas and puts forward propagandistic narratives about the all-Russian nation and Russian World/civilization.

It presents the war in Donbas as a result of USSR's break-up and the alleged ban on the Russian language, thus disregarding the actual sequence of events and extensive factual evidence confirming ongoing Russian military presence in Donbas. The law on regional languages was repealed by the parliament of Ukraine on February 23, 2014. However, the decree was not signed then. The law officially expired only on February 28, 2018, when the Constitutional Court of Ukraine declared the law unconstitutional. The EU condemns the clear violation of Ukrainian sovereignty and territorial integrity by acts of aggression by the Russian armed forces since February 2014.

OPCW falsified and manipulated Douma evidence to blame the Assad government

An internal OPCW (Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons) e-mail message sent by an OPCW inspector reveals that the organisation’s management falsified and manipulated the evidence gathered by the organisation’s inspectors sent to Douma in order to blame the Assad government for the alleged chemical attack in Douma on 7 April 2018, and to justify the military raids on Syria launched afterwards by the US, France and the UK.

The email message confirms that the final OPCW report, issued in March 2019, was based on the manipulation of evidence gathered by the FFM, falsely accused the Assad government for the Douma attack, and provided the indispensable justification for the US, UK and French bombings and missile attacks against Syria.


Recurring pro-Kremlin narrative seeking to absolve the Assad regime of responsibility for chemical attacks perpetrated in the course of the Syrian civil war, as well as to undermine the credibility and independence of the OPCW. Recurring pro-Kremlin narrative claiming that the Douma chemical attacks were staged by Western actors in order to justify military action against the Assad regime.

The internal OPCW e-mail message published by Wikileaks, sent on June 22 2018 by an unidentified member of OPCW’s Fact Finding Mission (FFM), does not accuse the OPCW management of deliberately manipulating and suppressing evidence gathered by the FFM in order to blame the Assad government for the Douma attack and to justify Western military intervention against Syria.

Red Army entering Poland did not plan to seize this country

When the Red Army was entering Poland, there was no talk about the seizing of Poland by the USSR after the end of WWII. This situation was changed only at the conferences of the Big Three (USSR, USA, UK) at Tehran, Yalta, and Potsdam. It was Roosevelt, Stalin, and Churchill who took decisions on the post-war order – the Red Army soldiers did not decide that Poland should be in the sphere of Soviet interests. We cannot say that the soldiers fallen in the fight with Hitler died in order to establish Communism in Poland. The refusal to accept the fact that the Red Army soldiers liberated Poland from the German occupation is the denial of history, which is immoral.


This message is part of the Kremlin’s policy of historical revisionism – Russia keeps denying the fact of military and political occupation of Poland by the USSR at the end of WWII (switching the responsibility for this situation on Roosevelt and Churchill).

The claim that the Soviet authorities did not plan to occupy Poland in the moment of the Red Army’s entering into this country goes against historical facts. First of all, immediately after the entering of the Red Army on the present-day territory of Poland (July 1944), the Soviet authorities established the so-called Polish Committee of National Liberation (PKWN), which was formed of Polish communists and appeared under full control of the USSR. In December 1944, this Committee was turned into the Provisional Government of the Republic of Poland, which started to be perceived by the USSR as legitimate Polish authorities since January 1945. In this way, at the very beginning of Red Army’s entrance to Poland, the USSR established its own “puppet” authorities, which became the Government of Communist Poland.