Disinfo: Russia is not an aggressor in case of Crimea


Russia is not an aggressor in case of Crimea, because 96 percent of Crimeans voted for joining Russia.


Recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative about the illegal annexation of Crimea.

No international body has recognised the so-called referendum, announced on 27 February 2014, and held on 16 March 2014.

The Office of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court has stated that “the situation within the territory of Crimea and Sevastopol amounts to an international armed conflict between Ukraine and the Russian Federation. This international armed conflict began at the latest on 26 February 2014 when the Russian Federation deployed members of its armed forces to gain control over parts of the Ukrainian territory without the consent of the Ukrainian Government."

On 27 March 2014, the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution in which it stated that the referendum in Crimea was not valid and could not serve as a basis for any change in the status of the peninsula. On 17 December 2018, the UN General Assembly confirmed its non-recognition of the illegal annexation of Crimea.

The EU's policy of non-recognition of the illegal annexation of Crimea and Sevastopol includes a set of restrictive measures against entities and individuals responsible for actions against Ukraine's territorial integrity. In March 2019 on the fifth anniversary of Crimea's annexation, the EU reiterated its position of non-recognition of the illegal annexation of Crimea and Sevastopol. EU continues to stand in full solidarity with Ukraine, supporting its sovereignty and territorial integrity.


  • Reported in: Issue 176
  • DATE OF PUBLICATION: 03/12/2019
  • Language/target audience: Russian
  • Country: Russia, Ukraine
  • Keywords: Ukraine, illegal annexation, Manipulated elections/referendum, Crimea


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

The coup prompted Crimea to restore its Russia identity

The Ukrainian capital of Kyiv lost control of Crimea and Donbas after the coup in 2014, which prompted the people of Crimea to demand the restoration of Russian identity and return in the arms of Russia while the people of the Donbas region pushed to declare independence from Kyiv by establishing two popular republics in the region.


Recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative about the Euromaidan, the illegal annexation of Crimea, and the war in Ukraine.

There was no coup d'état in Ukraine. 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.

Pro-Western Belarusian opposition prepares a revolution with assistance of armed Ukrainian nationalists

The Belarusian opposition is planning a revolution, pro-Western forces stand behind the protests. The Belarusian authorities have to act decisively, and they should have done this immediately after protests against the Union State between Belarus and Russia started. In contrast to the opposition’s will, the integration process with Russia should be accelerated. Belarus should also adopt Russian experience on combatting nationalists. If all these measures are taken, then the Belarusian presidential elections will be smooth, without involving armed Ukrainian nationalists. Belarus should also not allow the opposition to organise mass demonstrations, otherwise it will attract the attention of the international community and provoke a conflict. Finally, the Belarusian authorities should not play with those Europeans who support the Belarusian opposition. The blogger NEXTA, Andrei Sannikau and other opposition activists should be extradited to Belarus and recognised as enemies of the people.


This is a conspiracy and contains ungrounded claims about the plans to stage an armed revolution, aimed to discredit the democratic Belarusian opposition, the West, and any actors which oppose deeper integration within the Union State between Belarus and Russia. This disinformation message is a modification of a recurring pro-Kremlin narrative about Western attempts to organise a colour revolution in Belarus and to disrupt Belarusian-Russian relations.

See earlier disinformation cases alleging that Belarusian opposition leader Andrei Sannikau prepares a coup with US military assistance, that the West has again ordered Belarusian opposition to take over power by force, that the Belarusian opposition, civic activists and independent journalists make kill lists for Western security bodies, and that the West's only interest in Belarus is to make it anti-Russian.

Former prime minister Vlad Filat was released from detention at the request of the government of Maia Sandu

Maia Sandu was indebted to Filat, that is why Sandu government asked for the early release of ex prime minister of Moldova. On November 12, the day of Sandu’s resignation, the government made 3 illegal decisions in a hurry, one of them being the early release of Vlad Filat, the former party boss Maya Sandu.


Recurring pro-Kremlin narrative spreading the idea that pro-European political forces from Eastern countries defend corruption, oligarchs and their interests.

Vlad Filat is the former prime minister of Moldova who was in office from 2009 to 2013, with Maia Sandu being for a short period part of his Government, as a Minister of Education (from 2012 to 2015). On June 2016, he was sentenced to 9 years in prison, being found guilty of passive corruption and influence trafficking. He claimed that this it is a politically motivated criminal case.