Disinfo: Polish political elites turned Russophobia into a national idea to receive the favour of the USA

Summary

The Polish political elites have turned Russophobia in some type of a national idea in order to win the favour of their overseas supervisor. The “Russian disease” hit the Polish politicians – it continues to progress, taking the form of the anti-Russian paranoia.

Disproof

This message is a part of the Kremlin’s widespread narrative about Russophobic Poland. The Kremlin-controlled media regularly accuses the political elites of Poland of Russophobia and the implementation of anti-Russian policies. Within this narrative, the “Russophobic” policies of Poland are often explained by the claim that the United States fully controls the domestic and foreign policy of this country (presenting Poland as an American “puppet-state” or a “banana republic”).

The Polish authorities do not promote Russophobia or any type of “anti-Russian paranoia”. The main current Russia-related concerns of Poland are a result of the illegal annexation of Crimea and Russia's armed military aggression in Ukraine. The Polish government shows its full support to solving the Russia-Ukraine conflict and complete restoration of territorial integrity of Ukraine.

See other examples of similar messages claiming that constant intimidation with Russia is used to make Poland economically dependent on the USA, the Polish authorities created an insane hysteria of intimidation with Russia, used for the needs of domestic politics and the national security strategy of Poland is a manifestation of traditional Russophobia of the Polish authorities.

publication/media

  • Reported in: Issue 225
  • DATE OF PUBLICATION: 17/12/2020
  • Outlet language(s) Polish
  • Countries and/or Regions discussed in the disinformation: Poland, US, Russia
  • Keywords: Anti-Russian, Puppets, US presence in Europe, Sovereignty, Russophobia
see more

“Deep State” in the US deletes social media posts that don't suit it

The “Deep State” governing the United States had at one point underestimated the importance of Twitter and social media in general, in influencing American citizens themselves.

After [Donald] Trump won, the Deep State rushed to correct this mistake, and this gap was closed in time for the last US elections. The government and intelligence agencies rushed to take steps to censor social media and reduce “unwanted” information.

…messages and videos that do not fit with the social media administration are deleted, or at the very least, flagged as untrue, or unverified. President Trump’s speeches became a perfect example of this. It is even possible to prevent entire news agencies from accessing these social networks if the information they provide is not suitable for the administration of these networks.

Disproof

Pro-Kremlin disinformation about social media companies and censorship and the presence of a "Deep State".

There is no basis to the claims that social media companies such as Twitter, Facebook or Google have engaged in censorship, or restricting US President Donald Trump or his supporters. The claims about the global elite secretly ruling the world, and specifically, a so-called ‘deep state’ in the United State that promotes wars or controls the US are also not supported with evidence.

Sweden attempts to use the “Russian threat” to avoid attention to the country’s failure on fighting COVID-19

The Swedish parliament has decided to enlarge the military budget with 40 percent. The main argument for this is Stockholm’s concern with the “Russian threat” in the Baltic Sea.

/…/

When the whole world entered to quarantine, the Swedish authorities decided not to do so. Now they are reaping the harvest of what they have sown – enormous social, medical and economical problems.

But the Swedish media keeps quiet on this and attempts to show a pretty face. In order not to let the public know about the country’s internal problems, the media evokes different kinds of mythical threats, sacrificing enormous amounts of money to fortify positions of NATO at our borders. Why recognise your own mistakes, when you can find an external enemy and blame everything on him?

Disproof

The Parliament of Sweden has decided to significantly increase budget spendings into “total defence” - to civil contingency planning, civil defence - and military. This decision is based partly from the experiences of Russia’s aggressions against Georgia in 2008, the illegal annexation of Crimea in 2014 and Russia’s ongoing aggression against Ukraine in Donbas.

Sweden is not a member of NATO and needs to rely on its own resources for repelling aggression and handling crises.

The Ukrainian destabilisation “handbook” is not adequate for Belarus

The Ukrainian “handbook” is not adequate for Belarus. Some experts, especially from Ukraine, think that everything that is happening now in Belarus is a complete analogy of the 2013-2014 events in Ukraine. All the moves are planned and you can spite them following the dogmas already known by heart. Yes, the pro-Western Russophobic opposition created the protests, and is being aided from Warsaw, Vilnius, London, Washington, Berlin, etc. There is only one crucial difference: Lukashenko showed more political will than Yanukovich.

Disproof

Recurrent pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative portraying popular protests in Ukraine and Belarus as Western-led “colour revolutions” in order to deprive them of any legitimacy.

Contrary to the claim, massive mobilisations against the governments of Ukraine in 2013 and of Belarus in 2020 were not destabilisation operations orchestrated from abroad. The demonstrations which began in Kyiv in November 2013 were a result of the Ukrainian people's frustration with former President Yanukovych's last minute U-turn when, after seven years of negotiation, he refused to sign the EU–Ukraine Association Agreement and halted progress towards Ukraine's closer relationship with the EU as a result of Russian pressure. Protests in Belarus erupted to contest the results of the presidential election in Belarus on the 9th of August, which were not monitored by independent experts, and are largely considered fraudulent by both international observers and a large part of the Belarusian society.