Disinfo: The West showed double standards with its treatment of Kosovo and Crimea

Summary

Crimea returned to Russia by the will of its people, and the West treats the case of Crimea and Kosovo differently.

Disproof

Recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative drawing parallels between the Kosovo independence movement and Russia's illegal annexation of Crimea. The claim was neither critically challenged nor counterbalanced in the article.

International recognition of Kosovar statehood came only after the region had been ravaged by a bloody civil war, which Western countries stopped. This was followed by a decade of international administration and status negotiations. In 2008, the EU Council stressed that, given the 1990s civil conflict and protracted international administration under Security Council Resolution 1244, Kosovo constituted a sui generis case. By contrast, there was no war in Ukraine until Russian military aggression (see ICC report here).

Negotiations on Kosovo's status lasted 10 years. The time period between Russia's military operation and annexation of Crimea was 20 days.

Unlike Kosovo, Crimea was annexed by a third state (Russia), following an illegitimate referendum which was held at gunpoint and featured no recognised election observers. Russian authorities actively advanced the narrative of Ukrainian far-right activists terrorising ethnic Russians, while Russia proactively saved Crimeans from "terrorists and extremists", the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Russia said.

Human rights missions visiting Ukraine in 2014 did not find evidence of discrimination against or danger to the Russian minority.

According to international law, Crimea is a part of Ukraine. Russia violated the international law as well as key principles of the European security framework by illegally annexing the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the City of Sevastopol. The European Union does not recognise and continues to strongly condemn this violation of international law, which remains a challenge to the international security order. This position is based on the UN Charter, which clearly states that the territory of a State cannot be acquired by another State resulting from the threat or use of force, as well as on the Helsinki Final Act in which the signatories declared their intention to respect the inviolability of frontiers and territorial integrity.

See similar cases of double standards in Western attituded on status of Kosovo and Crimes, that Kosovo and Crimea's status recognition by the West shows double standards, and that Crimean referendum was the will of the Crimeans while Kosovo was an outside intervention.

publication/media

  • Reported in: Issue 225
  • DATE OF PUBLICATION: 17/12/2020
  • Outlet language(s) Arabic
  • Countries and/or Regions discussed in the disinformation: Kosovo, Ukraine, Russia
  • Keywords: West, Kosovo, Manipulated elections/referendum, Crimea, Referendum
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.