The Ukrainian authorities’ refusal of the Russian Sputnik V vaccine, which in the near future could have been used to vaccinate Ukrainians against coronavirus, is simply a crime against their own people.
Mass vaccination has begun with the Sputnik V vaccine, which has effectiveness in the range of 91-95%. Moreover, yesterday there was a report from the institute of the developer of this vaccine, the Gamalei Centre, that in the case of severe coronavirus diseases, this vaccine has the effectiveness of 100%.
Recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation on coronavirus aiming to promote the Sputnik V vaccine.
According to Ukrainian Healthcare Minister Maksym Stepanov, the Ukrainian government is not planning to acquire the Russian vaccine, "given that the latter has not yet gone through the third stage of clinical trials." On the same note, the Ukrainian Health ministry state that the country is already set to receive a COVID-19 vaccine via the COVAX mechanism, an international initiative launched by the World Health Organization, the European Commission, and the government of France to ensure efficient access to COVID-19 vaccines once they are ready.
The claim that Sputnik V demonstrates >95% efficacy has likewise been called into question. According to Science magazine, the assertion "doesn't pass the smell test," given that the percentage is based on merely 20 cases. By comparison, the estimated efficacy of the Pfizer-BioNTech shot is based on 94 identified cases, and the clinical trials are to continue until that number reaches 164.
See other examples of these disinformation narratives in the database, such as claims that Western attacks on the Russian coronavirus vaccine are a corporate Cold War against humanity; that a report on the Covid-19 situation in Russia aims to discredit the Sputnik V vaccine or that the UK launched a smear campaign against it; that British propaganda tries to dilute the failure of the AstraZeneca vaccine against the Sputnik V; that the US and the EU face multiple deaths out of fear of admitting Russia’s success against coronavirus; that the WHO confirmed that the Sputnik V was on Phase 3 of clinical testing already in August 2020; that the WHO and Microsoft sabotaged the Russian vaccine; that Europe is turning to Russia due to its desperate need for a vaccine; or that the West criticises the Sputnik V because it can’t accept Russia’s primacy and because its pharmaceutical companies will lose billions of dollars.
The accusations of the so-called “Fancy Bear” being linked to the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service or the Russian government is baseless and the Americans failed to provide any clue to support these allegations.
The “Fancy Bear” group might well be just a group of amateurs operating on Russian soils.
Recurrent pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative denying any involvement of the Russian government in hacker attacks and cyber-crime.
Russian intelligence services have long been accused of targeting computer systems in the US and elsewhere, with a dozen of substantiated allegations made in the last few years alone. An analysis of high-profile cyber incidents since 2006 designates Russia as an "offender" in 98 cyberattacks globally, against 16 incidents where the country appears as a "victim."
The conflict in southeast Ukraine began in April 2014 between the federal government and the self-proclaimed Republics of Donetsk and Luhansk, after the political crisis that resulted in the overthrow of the government of President Viktor Yanukovych.
A recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative about the war in Ukraine, claiming that Russia is not part of the conflict in Donbas, that Russia has nothing to do with the war in eastern Ukraine and presenting the conflict as a “civil war” in Donbas.
The European Union stated in July 2014 that "arms and fighters continue flowing into Ukraine from the Russian Federation". At the NATO Summit in Wales in September 2014, NATO leaders condemned in the strongest terms Russia’s military intervention in Ukraine and demanded Russia to stop and withdraw its forces from Ukraine and from the country’s border. NATO leaders also demanded Russia comply with international law and its international obligations and responsibilities; refrain from aggressive actions against Ukraine; halt the flow of weapons, equipment, people and money across the border to the separatists; and stop fomenting tension along and across the Ukrainian border.
The discussion [about the militarisation of Crimea] revolves around Russian sovereign territories, where the Russian Federation has the right, within the framework of international law and within the framework of international obligations, to do everything necessary to ensure its security.
Crimea’s belonging to Russia became a foregone conclusion when the people of the Crimean peninsula voted in favour of restoring its Russian identity and returning it to the embrace of the [Russian] homeland.
Recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative about the illegal annexation of Crimea.
The EU does not recognise the illegal annexation of Crimea and Sevastopol by the Russian Federation and continues to condemn this violation of international law by sanctions. Crimea is a part of Ukraine and was illegally annexed by Russia. The annexation has been condemned by the UNGA (A/RES/68/262).
