Disinfo: Ukrainian Institute of National Remembrance is anti-Russian

Summary

The Ukrainian Institute of National Remembrance has a clear mission – to stigmatise the Soviet’s past and to justify the Ukrainian nationalists. It has to develop a state ideology directed against Russia and the Russian-speaking population of Ukraine.

Disproof

This is a pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative about anti-Russian sentiments in Ukraine and in the West.

The Ukrainian Institute of National Remembrance is not directed against Russia or the Soviet past. It was established on 31 May 2006, as a special governmental institution for the restoration and preservation of the national memory of the Ukrainian people. The Institute directs the decommunisation process in Ukraine and provides access to state archives concerning repression during the Soviet past in accordance with the law “On access to the archives of repressive bodies of the communist totalitarian regime from 1917-1991”.

The Institute has three main functions: first, to restore, preserve, and promote the national memory of the Ukrainian people; second, to prevent the use of symbols of totalitarian regimes; third, to promote patriotism, national consciousness, and active position among Ukrainian citizens.

publication/media

  • Reported in: Issue 156
  • DATE OF PUBLICATION: 25/06/2019
  • Language/target audience: Russian
  • Country: Ukraine
  • Keywords: Ukraine, Anti-Russian
  • Outlet: Ukraina.ru
see more

The Mueller report has never presented tangible evidence of Russian interference in the 2016 US elections

The Mueller report has never presented tangible evidence of Russian interference in the 2016 US elections.

Disproof

Recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative about the US elections.

Russian meddling in the 2016 election was established by US intelligence agencies before the publication of the Mueller report. Despite the fact that the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities, Robert Mueller’s report clearly states that Russian interference activities DID take place. For a similar case see here: Other cases about Russia's interference can be consulted here.

US authorities’ only proof of Russian hacking is a draft report from a private company

It is clear that the government relied on assumptions made by a source external to the US intelligence services. According to the source the Russian state had been involved in hacking and stealing data from various servers and that data was sent to Wikileaks.

A private cyber security company recruited by the Democratic National Committee writes a draft report and removes some elements because it is worried that the FBI might discover something. And this is the main proof of Moscow’s role in this hacking? Of course, sceptics could ask why a private cyber security company conducted the investigation. Why wasn’t it the FBI? Faith can lift mountains, transform beliefs, policies, countries. No need for a prophet or a miracle. All you need is a private company.

Disproof

There is extensive research documenting Russian interference in the 2016 US presidential elections - see under US Elections 2016 here.

Government investigators independently verified that Russian operatives hacked the Democratic National Committee in 2016 and did not rely on the findings of a private cyber firm, said the US prosecutor in a court filing.

Nathalie Loiseau’s defence resembles justifications of the terrorists’ host

“I did not know it,” said Nathalie Loiseau, explaining her participation in student elections alongside right-wing activists 35 years ago. These words are similar to those of Jawad Bendaoud, host of the terrorists of November 13, 2015.

In an interview on the day of the neutralization of Abdelhamid Abaaoud and his last accomplices, Jawad Bendaoud said he was not “aware that they were terrorists”.  The former EU affairs minister and the current LREM leader in the European elections said she agreed to be on the list “out of friendship” and did not know there were “people from the far right “.

Disproof

In 1984, 35 years ago, when she was student in fourth year at Sciences Po (French Institute of Political Science), Nathalie Loiseau (then Ducoulombier) took part in students' election to the Governing Board the Institute of Political Studies, being at the sixth position on the list of the Union of students of the right (UED). During their campaign, the UED promised to "strongly oppose all proposals which, under the guise of 'democratisation', aim to establish demagogy and Marxist terrorism" at Sciences Po. She was never elected. Being asked in 2019, Nathalie Loiseau first could not recall the episode and later explained that she accepted the participation to please a friend without a chance of being elected and is not responsible for what became other candidates afterwards.

Nothing allows to affirm the contrary so far. Long time French far rights researcher Jean-Yves Camus does not recall Ducoulombier as ever an activist of UED.  While far right parties' researchers argue what kind of rightwing movement the student's union UED was in 1984 - from clearly far right in 1978 to more moderate after 1981 (François Mitterand's election), nothing allows to compare the participation in these activities and explanations about them to ignorance of hosting terrorists.