The West [EU] does not need a large Ukraine with well-developed infrastructure and intelligent scientific and technical personnel. Therefore, it is looking through its fingers (ed: trying not to see/cowardly) at the loss of Crimea and Donbas, as well as the destruction of the country’s economy.
A number of Western institutions and persons tend to say dark is bright and to equalise WWII losers with winners. The end goal of such campaigns is to weaken and even destroy Russia. For Russians, their future is at stake in the struggle for historical truth about the victory over Nazism.
This message is consistent with recurring pro-Kremlin propaganda narrative about anti-Russian policies of aggressive West. It is also part of the Kremlin’s policy of historical revisionism which attempts to portray Russia's role in World War II as non-aggressive and to blame the West for the failure to create an anti-Nazi coalition with the Soviet Union. The article attempts to minimise and erode the disastrous historical role of the Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact, saying: "In these circumstances, the Soviet Union signed the Non-Aggression Pact with Germany. It was practically the last among the European countries to do so. Besides, it was done in the face of a real threat of war on two fronts – with Germany in the west and with Japan in the east, where intense fighting on the Khalkhin Gol River was already underway." In the same context, see other examples of Russian disinformation narratives on World War II, such as claims that Western countries revise history to avoid responsibility for allowing Hitler to attack the USSR or that the Soviet Union tried to create an anti-Nazi alliance but the West didn’t respond or that the USSR had no role in the outbreak of the war.