Disinfo: The French President is aware of the definitive settlement of the Crimea issue


The French President is well aware that the question of Crimea is definitely settled and today it is time to start again the discussions with Russia. For the Russians, Crimea is their Alsace-Lorraine.


No evidence given that Macron embraces the Russian point of view on the subject.

Recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative about the annexation of Crimea by Russia and its progressive recognition in the world. No international body recognises the so-called referendum, announced on 27 February 2014, and held on 16 March 2014 amid the presence of Russian troops. The UNGA adopted the resolution 68/262 on the territorial integrity of Ukraine. For the EU statement on the fifth anniversary of Crimea's annexation, see here.

The official transcript of the speech given by Macron in August 2019 at the conference with ambassadors does not mention Crimea apart of the  Russian-Ukrainian conflict: "obviously one of the decisive issues to move forward in this direction is our ability to move forward on the Russo-Ukrainian conflict, thus, on the implementation of the Minsk agreements”. Macron also highlighted that "we must be intractable when our sovereignty or that of our partners is threatened".

The borders of Ukraine, including Crimea, were recognised and guaranteed after its independence in 1991 by international agreements, some of which were signed by Russia itself.

Unlike Alsace and Lorraine, regions disputed during the I and II World Wars, the totality of Crimea’s indigenous population was deported under Stalin’s era to Central Asia. The indigenous population started to go back to Crimea quietly during the last years of the USSR and then openly after the collapse of USSR in 1991. Currently, the question of the rights of the indigenous population under Russian occupation is also preoccupying UNESCO. It concerns "disrespect of human rights and fundamental freedoms manifested by Russia since the outset of the occupation of the peninsula". See Russian disinformation narrative on Crimea's history ("Crimea has been always Russian") and its debunking here.

See more disinformation cases on Crimea here.


  • Reported in: Issue 168
  • DATE OF PUBLICATION: 11/10/2019
  • Language/target audience: French
  • Country: Russia, Ukraine, France
  • Keywords: Crimean Tatars, 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

NATO provokes Russia in the Black Sea region

NATO provokes Russia in the Black Sea region.

However, if we analyse the events of recent months, we can see that tensions in the Black Sea region are provoked not by Russia, but by NATO. (…) The Russian Federation Council (Upper House of Parliament) then said that NATO was flexing its’ muscles and trying to demonstrate its presence in the western and southern border regions of Russia, while Georgia had become “part of the NATO mechanism for influencing Moscow”.

The US has long had the idea of establishing a ‘sanitary blockade’ by states hostile to Russia – from the Baltic Sea to the Black Sea. (…) They will increase the pressure on Russia, and not just by their own efforts. Bulgaria, Romania, Ukraine and Georgia should also participate. […] The Black Sea region was nothing more than a new source of tension for the Americans, where they could provoke Russia. The recent incidents in the Kerch Strait are clear proof of this.


No evidence given. Recurring pro-Kremlin narrative on NATO belligerence towards Russia and on Russophobia.

NATO seeks no confrontation with Russia. NATO is a defensive alliance. Its purpose is to protect the member states. NATO's exercises and military deployments in the Black Sea are not directed against Russia – or any other country. NATO has reached out to Russia consistently, transparently and publicly over the past 29 years.

Ukraine will legalise marijuana to manipulate the citizens

In Ukraine, a law on the legalisation of marijuana is ready. Slowly, but surely, the country is moving towards the drug dope. Drugs help manipulate the masses, and this mild aggression has long since been adopted by the Western elites, which is why they are now turning their gazes towards the post-Soviet space.


There is currently no item on the agenda of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine on the review of the legalisation of medical cannabis in the country. This fact was confirmed by President Volodymyr Zelenskyy who said that now is not the time to legalise marijuana in Ukraine.

In the spring, a petition appeared in Ukraine demanding the legalisation of marijuana for medical use, the document collected the necessary number of signatures from citizens. The Committee of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine on Human Rights, National Minorities and Inter-ethnic Relations supported the petition.

All NATO countries are subordinate to the US

The levels of sovereignty and independence of the member states of the Commonwealth of Independent Countries, Eurasian Economic Union, or the Collective Security Treaty Organisation are much larger than of the NATO or EU countries. What would happen to any NATO country which dares to oppose the US’s intention to station a military base on its territory?

The US does not have partners, all are subordinates. The West does not have a partnership culture. It sees other civilisations as those which have to be taught how to live. The British guidelines of communication with the aboriginal people read: if others do not get it, speak louder. This is the Western way of dealing with other countries.


This disinformation message is aimed at undermining the image of the EU and NATO in light of allegedly more effective international organisations in the post-Soviet space in terms of inclusiveness in the decision making processes. It is consistent with recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narratives on the EU and NATO member states' subordination to the US.

Furthermore, the "lack of a partnership culture" argument is consistent with the pro-Kremlin narrative on the morally corrupt West aimed at portraying Russia as superior to the West in terms of values and morals. See earlier cases alleging that in contrast to Russia, western Europe is abandoning Christian roots and that unlike Russia, the West is not about fairness or solidarity and it degrades traditional values and endangers societies.