Disinfo: The Minister of Internal Affairs of Ukraine said that it would not end the war in Donbas

Summary

Minister of Internal Affairs, Arsen Avakov, bluntly stated that Ukraine will continue the war and that it does not need peace in Donbas. This happened during the visit of the delegation to the disengagement line on Donbas in the villages Petrivske and Zolotye.

Disproof

Recurring pro-Kremlin narrative that Ukraine is sabotaging peace in Donbas and that Ukraine does not need Donbas. US Chargé d'Affaires to Ukraine, William Taylor, and the ambassadors of Great Britain, Germany and France together with the Minister of Internal Affairs of Ukraine, Arsen Avakov, visited the scene of the withdrawal of front-line troops in Donbas on 7 November 2019. Diplomats recognised that Ukraine is abiding by the ceasefire and is fulfilling its part of the agreements. When communicating with local residents, Avakov actually expressed hope that the withdrawing of the front-line troops would happen in the whole region, up until the border with Russia. “I hope that peace will be final throughout the country. I hope that the next time troops will be withdrawing, Donetsk will be liberated to us,” the Minister of Internal Affairs of Ukraine emphasised.

publication/media

  • Reported in: Issue 172
  • DATE OF PUBLICATION: 08/11/2019
  • Outlet language(s) Russian
  • Countries and/or Regions discussed in the disinformation: Ukraine
  • Keywords: DNR, Civil war, LNR, Donbas, War in Ukraine
see more

Western Media artificially distorted the history of World War II

Western Media artificially distorted the history of World War II. Biased publications in the Western media were aimed at distorting the essence of World War II. Even more, belittling Russia’s importance in achieving victory over fascism.

Disproof

Recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative about WWII. No evidence of Western media manipulating WWII coverage. The European Parliament called the war as the bloodiest tragedy of the century, which resulted in millions of victims of authoritarian regimes of fascist Germany and the USSR. The European Parliament has also expressed concern about the efforts of the current Russian leadership to whitewash the crimes committed by the Soviet totalitarian regime and see them as a dangerous component of the information war against democratic Europe. Similar cases: Latvia rewrites WW2 history and EU fiercely rewrites the history of WW2. Other cases of historical revisionism can be read here.

Ukrainian language was artificially created by the Soviet Union

Since the 1920s, the Bolsheviks launched a policy of “Ukrainianisation”. Literary norms of the Ukrainian language (previously considered a dialect of Russian) were developed. Soviet authorities began to introduce Ukrainian in education, culture, and bureaucracy. The Russians living on the territory of the Ukrainian SSR were recorded as “Ukrainians” by nationality.

Disproof

Recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation about Ukraine and the Ukrainian language. Literary norms of the Ukrainian language were developed way earlier than the 1920s. The Ukrainian language is one of the Slavonic languages. It is a lineal descendant of the colloquial language used in the Rus in the 10th-13th centuries. The modern literary Ukrainian emerged out of the spoken language at the end of the 18th century. The starting point of the modern Ukrainian language is the publication of the Ukrainian version of Aeneid by Ukrainian writer Ivan Kotliarevskyy in 1798. In the 19th century, the next generation of writers further developed the Ukrainian language, spelling, grammar and vocabulary. In the 19th century, the Russian empire tried to ban Ukrainian from public use. The 1863 Valuev Circular suspended the publication of religious and educational texts in Ukrainian, pamphlets and books. In 1876, Czar Alexander II issued Ems Ukaz that banned the public use of the Ukrainian language altogether. It is a historical fact that in the 1920s the communist regime started the policy of "Ukrainisation" in Soviet Ukraine which was a part of the all-Union program of "korenization", or indigenization. This policy was an attempt by the communist government to legitimise Soviet rule in Ukraine and to appease the Ukrainian peasantry. The policy was effective: the usage of the Ukrainian language in education and culture was improved; some progress was achieved in bureaucracy; the Ukrainian population of cities and the number of workers doubled. Although the policy of "Ukrainisation" was upheld by some Ukrainian communists, it was opposed by other Bolshevik leaders in Ukraine and, particularly, in Moscow. As a result, in 1931-33 the policy was curtailed. In 1930-1933, the mass repressions against the Ukrainian intelligentsia - writers, scientists, philosophers, clerics, as well as political leaders who were members of the Communist Party of Ukraine - marked the end of "Ukrainisation". Most of them had been deported to concentration camps and executed in 1937-1938. The two most prominent examples are the trial against the Union for the Liberation of Ukraine and the Executed Renaissance. Further debunking by StopFake.

Trump’s policy towards Poland is supposed to satisfy the American “deep state”

Donald Trump has to shape his policies taking into consideration the position of various domestic power groups, which disfavour him. If Trump was free of their influence, the current international situation would look completely different. Without his own strong political camp, in some situations, Trump is forced to “give a smile” to the so-called “deep state”, which forms the core of American politics. Trump’s policy towards Poland is one of the elements, which is supposed to satisfy the “deep state”.

Disproof

This message presents a classical conspiracy theory that the “deep state” and “shadow government” control the work of democratic institutions in the United States. Here are some other examples of this narrative: “Deep state” fighting with Trump; FBI appears under the influence of “Deep state”; “Deep state” shaping NATO policies. No reputable political scientists and researchers confirm the existence of a “deep state” in the United States.

The idea of a "deep state" has always been very popular among conspiracy theorists. Its manifestations might be different, but generally the concept conjures up the image of a small group deciding the fate of the world behind the scenes. However, there is no evidence of such a "permanent bureaucracy" or "permanent government" existing in the United States.