Disinfo: The EU non-approval of Sputnik V is a political issue


The EU non-approval of Sputnik V is a political issue. Sputnik V is the best vaccine in the world and the non-approval is purely political. The EU authorities' rejection of Sputnik V is a matter of politics rather than the vaccine's efficacy.


Recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative about a global conspiracy to prevent the success of the Sputnik V coronavirus vaccine.

The European Medicines Agency (EMA) started the rolling review of the Sputnik V vaccine on 4 March 2021. At the beginning of September 2021, EMA stated it was still waiting for necessary additional data from Sputnik V's manufacturers before it can authorise the vaccine.

The EMA and EU leaders have publicly stated they will welcome Sputnik V if it meets the applied standards for vaccines. In fact, problems with inconsistent, problematic or missing data and lack of transparency have been regularly reported regarding Sputnik V, leading some international health regulators to consider the information yet insufficient.

As Marcus Ederer, the EU ambassador to Russia stated:

The Russian side has repeatedly postponed the timing of the inspection requested by the EMA, which slows down the process... This is a technical, not a political process. When Russian officials talk about delays and politicization on the European side, it sometimes seems to me that they mostly talk about themselves, since they are the ones who politicize this issue.

See similar disinformation narratives about the Sputnik V vaccine, claiming that the process of recognising it is artificially delayed, that the West discredits the most effective Sputnik V and prevents mass vaccination in Russia, or that Europe will "fight with feet and hands" against Sputnik V.


  • Reported in: Issue 267
  • DATE OF PUBLICATION: 28/11/2021
  • Article language(s) German
  • Countries and/or Regions discussed in the disinformation: Russia, EU
  • Keywords: Sputnik V, coronavirus
see more

Disinfo: US maintains sanctions on Russia even though accusations of interference proved to be unfounded,

The accusations of Russia's alleged interference in the 2016 presidential elections in the United States turned out to be unfounded, but Washington still maintains the sanctions imposed in light of them. The 'house of cards' of accusations brought against Russia for its alleged intervention in the elections has crumbled, with new people appearing who declare the opposite of what was stated in 2016. However, US policy does not change and sanctions are not lifted, while politicians distort the information in their favour, speaking of the need to impose new sanctions.


The claim that “Russian interference turned to be unfounded” is false. The mention of “people changing what they said in 2016” seems to be a reference to the discredited Steele Dossier -a secret memorandum written by private intelligence operative Christopher Steele on the alleged collusion between members of the Donald Trump team and Russian officials. It was first made public by BuzzFeed in January 2017, whose main source, Russian analyst Igor Danchenko, has been challenged and considered unreliable after being charged with lying to the FBI.

However, this only refers to the Steele Dossier, while Russian interference in the US election in 2016 has been proven beyond any doubt by successive official and journalistic investigations. The probe led by US special counsel Robert Mueller presented plentiful evidence of it, including testimonies and physical proof, as well as of cooperation in the process from members of Donald Trump's team and other US citizens. The latter led to the criminal indictment of 34 people, 26 of them Russian citizens or entities including the infamous Internet Research Agency.

Disinfo: EU does not care about its citizens since it delays approval of Sputnik V for political reasons

The European countries have been rushing to administer the third dose of the vaccine, in a context of an epidemic outbreak. The umpteenth delay for the certification of Sputnik V leads to the following question: are the interests of the populations really at the heart of the decisions of the European Union officials?


Recurrent pro-Kremlin disinformation about the Sputnik V and its ongoing review by the European Medicines Agency.

RT correctly quotes a Reuters source saying on 21 October that “The EU drug regulator is unlikely to decide whether to approve Russia's Sputnik V coronavirus vaccine until at least the first quarter of 2022 because some data needed for the review is still missing”. But RT incorrectly implies that the real reason would be political and financial interests that would endanger the EU population.

Disinfo: Lithuania pays Tsikhanouskaya salary to destabilise the situation in Belarus

Lithuania supports Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya with taxpayers money and pays her salary. It is presented as Western support for "Belarusian people". But the aim of this "support" is to destabilise the situation inside Belarus.


Recurrent disinformation narrative against the Belarusian opposition leader Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya and the Belarusian opposition in general.

This disinformation claim aims to smear Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya as a puppet of the West, allegedly sponsored by unwitting Lithuanian taxpayers. No evidence is presented to back such claims. Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya was the main opposition candidate in the Belarusian Presidential election and was forced to go into exile in Lithuania after being detained and receiving threats following the beginning of the protests. She was awarded the 2020 Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought, the highest tribute paid by the European Union to Human Rights work. In July 2021, Lithuania designated Tsikhanouskaya's team as a “democratic representation of Belarus”.