Disinfo: EU loses 450 billion euros yearly because of the sanctions against Russia adopted under the US diktat


France like other European countries is waging an economic war against Russia because of the problems of Ukraine. But sooner or later the majority will see that it does nothing, neither for the European Union nor for entrepreneurs. The European Union loses 450 billion euros every year because of anti-Russian measures that have been brought by the Americans in European politics.


Recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative about economic difficulties in EU countries resulting from the sanctions policy against Russia. There is a cost associated with sanctions and counter-sanctions that is often overestimated as it can include protectionist measures Russia took even before the war in Ukraine. In this case, the figure is totally unrealistic. For example, a study by Matthieu Crozet (Lingnan University) and Julian Hinz (Kiel Institute for the World Economy) published in Economic Policy in 2018 estimated the total loss of earnings of 1.5 billion euro a month so 18 billion a year: 25 times less. Another study commissioned by the Bank of Finland shows that the "sanctions regime proved effective in restricting access of Russian banks to capital", and that the "macroeconomic effects of Russia’s counter-sanctions on the EU have been marginal, [although] the food sector in some EU countries has been affected." The narrative that the US imposed those sanctions to the EU is another unfounded claim that the US controls the policies of the European Union. All EU countries are independent states whose policies are not regulated externally by any other country.


  • Reported in: Issue 190
  • DATE OF PUBLICATION: 06/03/2020
  • Language/target audience: French
  • Country: Russia, US, France
  • Keywords: Russia Today (RT), Anti-Russian, Sanctions


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 West tries to dismiss Putin and destroy Russia

Now the West is under a shock. It is investing substantial money in the change of power in Russia, in the change of policy. And they were sure that it happens amid the fact that in 2024, Putin would certainly not be in the presidential chair anymore. Now, this means that they are forced to start the war earlier. With all the insects [Russian opposition] that they have, with the options of imposing sanctions, with twitching of neighbours along the borders. We are wrestling for life or death for many years, they want to destroy us.


Recurrent conspiracy narrative on the absence of grass-roots protests in Russian and any reasons for such protest, when the civic activists are labelled «foreign agents», and the West is blamed for any domestic problems. No evidence is given to prove that Western countries together or any of them alone are plotting to dismiss Vladimir Putin, planning the "war". See more disinformation cases on how the West is encircling Russia.

Russiagate never had any real basis

The Trump administration has had a troubled life since its earliest beginnings and “The Donald” did not have time to settle in the White House before he was already being charged with grave and explicit accusations of being a Russian agent, a traitor in the hands of Vladimir Putin who was blackmailed by the Kremlin. A few days before his term of office expired, Barack Obama ordered the CIA and FBI to investigate so-called “Russian interference” in the American elections: it was the beginning of Russiagate. Russiagate never had any real basis. It originated in Washington’s labyrinthine power struggles.


Recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation denying Russian interference in the 2016 US presidential election and seeking to discredit the Mueller report. The article also contains a recurrent pro-Kremlin conspiracy theory about the key role allegedly played in the investigations of Russian interference by the deep state in the US .

Robert Mueller's investigation concluded that Russia did interfere in the 2016 election. Robert Mueller’s report maintains that “the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities”. Nevertheless, it states that Russian interference activities did take place.

The 448-page Mueller report issued in March 2019 (see here) contains copious detail about how Russia interfered in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, both by using social media to influence American voters with disinformation and by hacking into the Clinton campaign’s computers.

A previous (2017) report prepared by the US Intelligence Community analysed the motivation and scope of the Kremlin's intentions for the US election and the Kremlin's use of cyber tools and media campaigns to influence US public opinion.

As concluded earlier by the US intelligence community and by Mueller’s own inquiry “the investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the Campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts”.

Read here previous cases claiming the Russiagate was a hoax invented by the American deep state and that the Mueller Report never presented tangible evidence of Russian interference in the US elections.

Stalin did not get his hands dirty while signing a document with Hitler while European leaders did

Stalin did not directly negotiate with Hitler but only through subalterns, therefore there is no document bearing the signature of both Hitler and Stalin whereas western leaders did have direct contact in Munich. Therefore the Soviet Union doesn’t bear any responsibility for the beginning of WWII.


Recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation claiming that the European Union is trying to rewrite the history of World War II. This narrative attempts to erode the disastrous historical role of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact by stating that other European countries signed various international agreements with Germany after Adolf Hitler came into power. The European Parliament resolution on the importance of European remembrance for the future of Europe stressed the fact that WWII was an immediate result of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. The resolution is aimed at the promotion of historical remembrance about WWII and condemnation of totalitarian ideologies. See related disinformation cases here. The fact that Stalin did not directly sign documents but only through his subalterns doesn't minimise the responsibility of the Soviet Union. The non-aggression pact and the secret protocol between the Soviet Union and the Third Reich had to be negotiated, safely, quickly and secretly that explains why Hitler didn't come in person in Moscow and why the signatures are not by the hands of the leaders but their full representatives. The document has the same value as if it was personally signed by Hitler and Stalin.