Disinfo: The Polish position on Belarus is exceptionally hostile

Summary

Probably, no Belarusian will argue with Poland. Another thing is that Poland will argue with Belarus. The actions realised by Poland after the Presidential elections in Belarus show that the attitude of the Polish state towards this country is exceptionally hostile.

Therefore, Poland will not achieve anything good unless it changes its Eastern foreign policy. No one in Minsk will dream about the Intermarium [geopolitical concept promoting the partnership of Central and Eastern European countries] together with Poles; no one will give up the Belarusian sovereignty in the name of Polish geopolitical ambitions. Belarus clearly supports its alliance with Russia – Poland should accept this fact and give up its attempts to drag Belarus to another geopolitical camp.

Disproof

A recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative about Western attempts to organise a colour revolution in Belarus – Poland is presented here as a country with hostile and aggressive plans towards Belarus.

The claims that Poland “occupies an exceptionally hostile position on Belarus” or it has some aggressive geopolitical plans towards this country are unfounded. Poland is a neighbour of Belarus and it continues to support the Belarusian people. Poland respects the principles of international law and does not intervene in the domestic affairs of any country.

Following the presidential elections in Belarus in August 2020, that were widely perceived as rigged by large parts of society, protests erupted in the country. On 19 August 2020, the European Council called the Belarus elections neither free nor fair and on 2 October 2020, the Council imposed restrictive measures against 40 individuals identified as responsible for repression and intimidation against peaceful demonstrators, opposition members, and journalists, as well as for misconduct of the electoral process. The Council added 15 members of the Belarusian authorities, including Alexandr Lukashenko, as well as his son and National Security Adviser Viktor Lukashenko, to the list of sanctions, on 6 November 2020.

Read more about the present-day view on the Intermarium geopolitical concept here and here.

See similar pro-Kremlin disinformation messages - Poland presented a plan of active interference in the domestic affairs of Belarus, Poland and Lithuania directly sponsor open extremist actions against Belarus, and the CIA will try to repeat a Maidan scenario in Belarus.

publication/media

  • Reported in: Issue 228
  • DATE OF PUBLICATION: 21/01/2021
  • Outlet language(s) Polish
  • Countries and/or Regions discussed in the disinformation: Poland, Belarus, Russia
  • Keywords: Union State of Belarus and Russia, Anti-Russian, Alexander Lukashenko, Colour revolutions, Sovereignty
see more

Sweden supports NATO in hope of exercising hegemony over the lands of "Greater Scandinavia"

Sweden is striving to support NATO’s anti-Russian “containment” policy in Northern Europe despite not being a formal member of the bloc, hoping that it’ll be rewarded with American approval for its own “sphere of influence” over the lands of “Greater Scandinavia” in which its “deep state” believes that they have the historical right to exercise a form of hegemony. Truth be told, they’ll likely succeed for the most part since the smaller surrounding countries (especially the Baltics) have jumped on the anti-Russian bandwagon and are eager to receive as much military support from America’s new de facto Swedish ally as possible. They seem to hope that submitting themselves to this emerging regional order will work out to their national benefit in some way or another, perhaps economically through a “deluge” of Swedish investments after having accepted that their countries are unable to survive as truly independent states. If this growing “sphere of influence” remained economic and cultural, then it wouldn’t be a threat to Russia, but the problem is its dark military dimension.

Disproof

A narrative, in line with the trope of "encircling Russia", suggesting imperialist ambitions among Russia's neighbours. Similar claims can be found on Poland and Lithuania.

Sweden is not pursuing imperialist ambitions and strives towards dialogue and cooperation with its neighbours and calling for a rule based order in international relations. More details on Sweden's foreign and security policy here.

The West continues its war against Sputnik V and Russian vaccines

The West and especially the European Union have favoured the Pfizer/BioNtech vaccine extensively despite its proven side effects in comparison to Sputnik V and other Russian vaccines such as the EpiVacCorona. This is a war against Sputnik V although the Russian vaccine has proven to be more efficient.

Disproof

Disinformation about vaccines.

There is no "war" against Sputnik V vaccine. Recently, Russian and British scientists teamed up to trial a combination of the Oxford-AstraZeneca and Sputnik V vaccines to see if protection against Covid-19 can be improved.

Western media are intensely discrediting Russian vaccines against COVID-19

Western media are intensely discrediting Russian vaccines against COVID-19, and European authorities are hindering their distribution.

Disproof

The claim advances a recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative concerning the Russian-made coronavirus vaccine casting Russia as the spearhead of the global race to develop an effective treatment for COVID-19. This is a part of a campaign aiming to promote the Russian Sputnik V vaccine. The claim that the West is trying to discredit the Sputnik V vaccine is unfounded.

The pro-Kremlin disinformation campaign on Sputnik V seems to have been launched after its announcement was met with scepticism and criticism even by Russian specialists in the country. However, experts' reports conclude that Russia has perceived the development of a coronavirus vaccine in terms of geopolitical and economic gain. Reservations and criticism of the Russian Sputnik V coronavirus vaccine stem from the fact that Russia did not complete large trials to test the vaccine’s safety and efficacy before releasing it. Rolling out an inadequately vetted vaccine could endanger people who receive it.