The authors of many “patriotic” telegram channels in Russia were outraged not only by the exchange of the leadership of the Azov Regiment, which the Russian authorities promised to give to the tribunal and generally ruled out the possibility of their exchange, but also by the fact that Viktor Medvedchuk was among those who surrendered to Russia.

The military or political leadership of the Russian Federation has not yet commented on the exchange because of the indignation of the “patriots” who consider it a defeat, real and informational. But Russian propagandists and PR people are making significant efforts to distance the leadership of the Russian Federation in the information field from any defeats and shift the responsibility to someone else. Therefore, commenting on the exchange of more than 200 Ukrainian military and foreigners who fought on the side of Ukraine was instructed to Denys Pushylin, the leader of the “DNR”.

He stated that he “signed the order himself” on the exchange, which is surprising since the exchange was coordinated by the efforts of a group of negotiators, including the Turkish president, the crown prince of Saudi Arabia, representatives of President Zelenskyi’s office – and none of these countries, of course, recognized the “DNR” as “a part of the conflict”, and Pushylin as a person who can decide at least something. Still, Erdohan thanked the efforts of “Zelenskyi and Putin” for creating the possibility of an exchange.

But it is Pushylin who is spread by Russian propaganda where he explains that Medvedchuk was “liberated from Ukrainian captivity”. Although Medvedchuk was in custody and is a citizen of Ukraine, therefore he cannot be captured and thanks to his previous “merits” he cannot be involved in organizing the exchange of prisoners. And it seems that the absence of Medvedchuk in Russia “complicated the referendum and support for this referendum”. Consequently, the detained Medvedchuk complicated the process of “expression of will” in the occupied parts of Ukraine, and how come “free Medvedchuk” could help the “referendums” that would begin tomorrow, Pushylin, of course, did not explain.

All these incomprehensible statements are another proof that in any defeats, Russian propaganda is trying to shift the responsibility to the “people of Donbas”. For example, during the counteroffensive of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in the Kharkiv region, it was the Russian propaganda who blamed the defeat on those mobilized from the occupied territories of Donetsk and Luhansk regions.