This thesis was spread on social networks, in particular, on telegram channels broadcasting pro-Kremlin rhetoric. Reports say that after meeting with Volodymyr Zelenskyi, many politicians allegedly “retired or died”. The authors add photos of politicians and military personnel who previously met with Zelenskyi to the publication. The authors of the message add that, for example, Xi Jinping does not want to repeat the fate of his predecessors and meet with the head of Ukraine because of Zelenskyi's “damned handshake”.

The VoxCheck project specialists worked on the case and found that the allegation of “Zelenskyi’s damned handshake” is unfounded. At the same time, in the photo, the propagandists brought both active servicemen and former ones. That is, there is no “certain pattern” between the meeting with the President and the “further fate” of another person. For example, the photo shows the following current politicians: President of the State General Reserve Fund of the Sultanate of Oman Abdulsalam al-Murshidi, Estonian Prime Minister Kaya Kallas, etc. Others remained in office long after meeting with Volodymyr Zelenskyi.

That is, the resignation of politicians is not connected with Zelenskyi, they resigned for various reasons and at different times after the meeting with the President of Ukraine.

Propagandists spread the message in their media that Latvia sent its citizens to fight in Ukraine because the West forced it to do so. Accordingly, Latvia does not care about its people, and the “Western rulers” do not care about people in Europe as a whole.

Analysts of the EUvsDisInfo project drew attention to the message. They note that Latvia did not send its soldiers to fight in Ukraine. The Latvian Ministry of Defense claimed that the state sent several of its troops into the country, but only to secure the building of the Latvian embassy and their property. Latvia and other Western countries are not direct participants in the war, but help Ukraine defend itself against Russian aggression in accordance with Article 51 of the UN Charter.

Thus, propagandists want to present Latvia as a “toy” of the West. Like, the Latvian government actively supports Ukraine because it is supervised by the West. Such narratives, which concern not only Ukraine, could be seen in Russian propaganda before. In particular, earlier propagandists wrote that 20,000 Polish soldiers were fighting in Ukraine and that 2,500 of them had already been killed.

Propagandists spread the message in their media that Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki is an idiot because he says that Ukraine has the right to strike on Russian territory and openly underestimates Russia. They add that Poland's role in NATO is to become the first victim of a conditional large-scale war using nuclear weapons. Since, in their opinion, Poland will disappear at the first opportunity, the “underdeveloped” Morawiecki has no moral right to make such statements.

Analysts of the EU vs DisInfo project drew attention to the message. They emphasize that the Polish prime minister said that Ukraine really has the right to strike at Russian territory because it protects itself from aggression, and that, in his opinion, the Kremlin understands that Russia would lose the war with NATO. According to Poland's 2020 National Security Strategy, the greatest threat to Poland is the “neo-imperialist policy of the power elites of the Russian Federation” implemented by force. Polish officials in this case refer to Russian aggression against Georgia, Ukraine, as well as the annexation of Crimea.

Thus, propagandists want to present Poland as an aggressive anti-Russian “hermit within NATO”, which allegedly poses a threat to Russian security. In addition, the message is an example of Russian military and nuclear blackmail against NATO countries.

Propagandists spread the message in their media that the revival of militaristic Poland has become the main goal of the current Polish government. It seems that the West has long been pushing the country towards this, and in a few years Poland will receive American tactical nuclear weapons. Poland seems to be preparing to replace France and Germany in the role of “American observer” over Europe. In addition, there are already plans to increase the number of soldiers in the Polish army to 1.5 million and that in this way NATO is preparing the country to start a war against Russia and Belarus.

Analysts of the EU vs DisInfo project drew attention to the message. They note that the current modernization of the Polish army and the purchase of new weapons are Poland's response to Russian aggression against Ukraine. In addition, according to the 2020 National Security Strategy of Poland, the greatest threat to Poland is the “neo-imperialist policy of the power elites of the Russian Federation”, implemented by force. Polish officials in this case refer to Russian aggression against Georgia, Ukraine, as well as the annexation of Crimea.

Thus, the propagandists want to present Poland as an aggressive and militant “anti-Russia”, which is ready to go to war at any moment. In addition, they want not only to shift the responsibility for Russia's actions to third parties, but also to divert attention from the crimes of Russians.

Propagandists spread the message on social networks that Ukraine is killing civilians while Russia is trying to rebuild the destroyed places. Allegedly,Russia wants to return the “liberated” territories of Donbas, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson region to peaceful life, and Ukraine is trying to cause a humanitarian catastrophe on their territory. However, in reality this is not the case.

Analysts of the EU vs DisInfo project drew attention to the message. They emphasize that Ukraine does not kill civilians and defends itself against Russian aggression. In addition, Russia annexed part of the territory of Ukraine, which violated international law. Moreover, it was Russia that destroyed many Ukrainian cities, such as Mariupol. Russia continues to shell civilian infrastructure even in the Zaporizhzhia and Kherson regions.

Thus, the propagandists want to justify the aggression against Ukraine and the annexation of Ukrainian territories. In addition, by spreading the word that the Armed Forces of Ukraine allegedly use Western weapons against civilians, they also want to blow up the process of transferring international aid to Ukraine. Similar messages could be seen in Russian propaganda before, in particular, the narrative that the 2022 “referendums” on the annexation of the temporarily occupied territories to Russia were held in order to allegedly bring peace to them.

This thesis was spread on social networks and in the propaganda media. The report says that the United States is the main sponsor of the Russian-Ukrainian war, because in Washington they are afraid of the possibility of Russia rising again as a world leader. Therefore, the US is using Ukraine as a buffer for its own security. However, American officials don't give a damn about the fate of Ukraine. Therefore, they are waging an “indirect” war with Russia through Ukraine.

The fact-checkers of the EU vs Disinfo project drew attention to the case and determined that such a thesis is unfounded. The US is not at war with Russia because it has not declared anything to it. On the contrary, Russia, having carried out a large-scale offensive on the territory of Ukraine, is committing war crimes every day. Therefore, Russia attacked Ukraine, and it only defends itself with the help of internal resources and Western assistance.

The West, including the United States, supports Ukraine with military and financial assistance for the effective self-defense of the country, in accordance with Article 51 of the UN Charter, in order to stop Russia's aggressive war against Ukraine. And not because “the West is waging war against Russia”.

By spreading this message, propagandists feed the narrative of the existence of a so-called “collective West” united against Russia to destroy it.

Propagandists argue that the American media and government institutions cannot call the evacuation of children from the “war zone” a process that violates international law. Like, Russia really cares about these children, and they left voluntarily. However, this is not true, and at least some evidence supports this.

Analysts of The Insider project drew attention to the message. They argue that there are no provisions in the Convention on the Rights of the Child that allow children to be taken to the territory of the occupying country in time of war. However, Russia at least violated Articles 9, 10, 11, 14, 21, 29 of the Convention. Russia not only took children to its territory without the consent of their parents/guardians/relatives and the authorities, but also re-educated them by force, forcing them to renounce their own cultural identity and values. This is evidenced by the statements of the Commissioner for Children's Rights of Russia Maria Lvovo-Bielova and the presence of a presidential grant in the Rostov region in the amount of about 3 million rubles for the project “Help to orphans of Donbas”. According to the description of the project, it was created to help Ukrainian children go through the “process of changing the Motherland”.

Thus, propagandists want to shift the responsibility for their crimes to others and devalue the scale of the tragedy. However, the testimonies of victims of deportation by force negate their attempts - in particular, the abducted children claimed that they were threatened with a boarding school, and the Russians told them that their parents had abandoned them. In addition, children say that they were beaten with metal sticks and told that they would forever remain “children of Russia”. Such actions are a violation of international law, as confirmed by the issuance of arrest warrants by the International Criminal Court against Volodymyr Putin and Maria Lvova-Bielova.

Such a thesis appeared in the Russian propaganda media, as well as in the Turkish media spreading messages the same as the ones of Russian propaganda. The reports said about the so-called “dirty plan” of the United States to bring “Zelenskyi” to power in Turkey. That is, an allegedly puppet president will carry out all the orders of his curators, as allegedly the Ukrainian president is doing it. The authors of the messages argue that in this way Washington will resolve conflicts with Moscow on all possible fronts.

Analysts of the EU vs Disinfo project drew attention to the case. They emphasize that this is a recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation message that calls into question Ukrainian statehood and sovereignty. In such reports, the authors do not provide any evidence to support the allegations made in the context of the unprovoked Russian invasion of Ukraine.

This disinformation statement attempts to denigrate the President of Ukraine as a puppet of the United States and the West.

However, Ukraine is a sovereign and independent state with a democratically elected president and parliament. Ukraine has a functioning government and economy, it is a member of many international organizations (for example, the UN, the Council of Europe and a party to international agreements). Ukraine has bilateral diplomatic relations with most countries.

This thesis is spread by the Russian propaganda media. They say that there is no freedom of speech in Europe, because Russian media are blocked there and “they do not allow the public to hear an alternative thought”. The reports also cited as an example the situation when EU High Representative Josep Borrell reacted to the arrest of Evan Gershkovich in Russia, saying that “journalists should have freedom of work and the right to be protected”. Propagandists are asking in their posts if Borrell is going to call for the release of journalist Julian Assange, who has been imprisoned in Britain for exposing US and NATO war crimes.

In fact, the message that there is no freedom of speech in EU countries, or in the US, is not new. Russian propaganda promotes it from time to time to establish the opinion that the local media should not be trusted, since they are all allegedly puppet, and promote the unified position of the governments of the countries. In such messages, propaganda uses the tactics of reflection: in fact, the lack of freedom of speech is precisely in Russia, where most media disseminate the position of the country's government and are of propaganda direction.

Analysts of the EU vs Disinfo project drew attention to the case in the network. In fact, comparing American journalist Evan Gershkovich, who was arrested in Russia on March 29 and charged with espionage, with Julian Assange is a typical Whataboutism technique, a rhetorical distraction. Evan Gershkovich is a WSJ journalist illegally detained in Russia. The EU condemned his detention, and the Secretary General of “Reporters without borders” called Gershkovich's detention an “institutional hostage-taking”. Julian Assange is the founder of Wikileaks, who has released numerous classified documents and is now being held in the UK.

According to “Reporters without borders”, Western countries have the most freedom of press and speech, with European countries predominating, as well as Canada and the United States. Russia, where authoritarian tendencies are on the rise, ranks 150 out of 180 in the press freedom ranking.

This thesis was spread in social networks, in particular on telegram channels broadcasting pro-Kremlin rhetoric. Reports say that the awakening of the volcano in Kamchatka in Russia is the work of the United States, creating a climate weapon against Russia, so the volcano is “just the beginning” of US dashing actions. The authors add that the White House and the US Congress have adopted a five-year “climate intervention” plan, which involves the creation of climate control technologies. One of the goals is to fight the “new dominance of Russia”.

The fact-checkers of the EU vs Disinfo project investigated the case and found that the existence of a “climate weapon” that they want to use against Russia is another Moscow conspiracy theory. The document referred to by propagandists as a “climate intervention plan” is actually a “White House request for contributions to a five-year plan for climate intervention research”, and there is no indication in the document that the US is “managing the climate” to fight Russia.

A climate weapon is a hypothetical physical weapon capable of controlling the climatic conditions of the world. In particular, in the context of this message, climate weapons are capable of awakening volcanoes and accumulating magma in order to kill people later.

On the night of April 11, a powerful eruption of the Shyveluch volcano occurred on the Kamchatka peninsula. After the volcanic eruption - the northern active volcano of Kamchatka - the strongest ash in the last 60 years was recorded on the peninsula. Then a cloud of ash rose into the sky to a height of 15 to 20 kilometers.

In anonymous telegram channels spreading pro-Russian rhetoric, including in Polish language, propagandists are outraged by the visit of Ukrainian Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal to Canada. They don't like the fact that on the plane that Shmyhal flew in, one can find stickers in the form of an emoji of an airplane and hands drawn up in prayer. According to propagandists’ conclusions, in this way the Ukrainians are approaching the aborigines. They say Ukrainians do not have enough words, because it is a shame to humiliate themselves for the sake of weapons.

Although the idea with stickers is somewhat non-standard, this is not a reason to draw such conclusions based on it. In addition, such remarks are humiliating for both Ukrainians and aborigines, who are considered a special ethnic group in a number of countries as part of their indigenous peoples.

Thus, propagandists want to ridicule Ukraine and show that no one supposedly perceives it anymore. Like, Ukraine is again begging and begging to give everything to it. However, they are deliberately silent about the fact that Ukraine would not have had to do this if Russia had not attacked it. In addition, the supply of weapons to Ukraine is not decreasing, which indicates the continued interest of foreign countries in helping Ukraine.

This thesis appeared in the Hungarian media. The authors of the messages refer to the words of Russian officials, who say that the possibility of sending peacekeepers from Western countries to Ukraine is a “very dangerous idea”.

EU vs Disinfo experts drew attention to this. They say the pro-Kremlin disinformation campaign is constantly portraying the EU as a geopolitical player facilitating the escalation of the war in Ukraine. They say that instead of using diplomatic means to resolve the conflict, the European Union provides Ukraine with more and more lethal weapons, as a result of which the hostilities become only more bloody and cruel. A new stuffing on this topic tells that now the EU allegedly wants not only to provide weapons, but also to send peacekeeping troops to Ukraine.

In fact, some EU and NATO countries allocate military and financial assistance to Ukraine to counter Russia's armed aggression, Western instructors teach the Ukrainian military how to properly use new types of weapons, but the troops of other countries do not take a direct part in the hostilities on the territory of Ukraine. In addition, there is no approved plan or public debate regarding the possibility of introducing a peacekeeping mission to Ukraine.

This thesis is spread by the Kremlin media. Like, Washington's goal is to strike at the religious sphere of Ukraine and split Orthodoxy. To achieve this goal, the United States has developed mechanisms for direct and indirect influence on the religious policy of Kyiv, aimed at oppressing the Orthodox Church.

At the same time, experts from the EU vs Disinfo team note that although Kremlin propaganda often depicts Ukraine as an enemy of Orthodoxy, this is not true. Ukrainian law enforcement agencies indeed conducted a number of searches at the facilities of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate (UOC-MP). However, the searches were carried out not in order to split Orthodoxy, but to reveal the subversive activities of the Russian special services in the religious environment of Ukraine, because the UOC-MP is considered one of Moscow’s key instruments of influence in Ukraine.

With the help of such messages, Russian propaganda seeks to discredit the Ukrainian authorities and accuse Ukraine of oppression of religion. Let us remind you that Detector Media has already written about similar misinformation stories about the situation with the Orthodox Church in Ukraine. For example, about the blackening of crosses on the church of the Kyiv-Pechersk Lavra because of “Ukrainian blasphemy” and the alleged recognition of the fact of discrimination against the Orthodox Church in Ukraine by the UN.

This thesis appeared in the Russian propaganda media. They say that the evacuation of children from the war zone in Ukraine is in full compliance with international humanitarian law and the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Reports also say that Western media deliberately use the term adoption of children, talking about their removal from Ukraine, in order to discredit Russia. Allegedly, the Russians are evacuating Ukrainian children to safe places and only allow their citizens to take them into temporary custody so that the children do not live in orphanages.

Analysts of the Eu vs Disinfo project drew attention to the case. They note that this is a recurring pro-Kremlin message denying war crimes committed by the Russian armed forces in Ukraine.

In fact, the abduction and forced transportation of Ukrainian children to Russia has been documented by the UN, Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International. Ukraine has already reported the actions of Russia’s Children’s Ombudsman Mariia Lvova-Bielova to the International Criminal Court (ICC). On March 2, ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan decided to obtain permission to open an investigation into the situation in Ukraine. It includes any past and present allegations of war crimes, crimes against humanity or genocide committed in any part of the territory of Ukraine by any person. We recall that On March 17, 2023, the ICC issued arrest warrants for two people in the context of the situation in Ukraine: Volodymyr Putin and Mariia Lvova-Bielova.

Read more about the forced deportation of children from Ukraine in the Detector Media investigation.

Russian propaganda media spread the message that the leader of the Turkish “Batkivshchyna” (Motherland) party, Doğu Perinçek, who is one of the presidential candidates in Turkey, promises to change the “rules of the game” for the United States and NATO, withdraw the country from the North Atlantic Alliance, and recognize Crimea and other occupied territories as part of Russia. Like, this will entail political upheavals in Turkey and the shaken position of the West.

Analysts of the EU vs Disinfo project investigated this case. They explained that such statements by the Kremlin media would only try to increase the popularity of the fringe Turkish politician Doğu Perinçek, who is known for his pro-Russian and anti-Western rhetoric. At the same time, Perinçek has virtually no chance of becoming President of Turkey, as his party failed to collect enough signatures for his presidential candidacy to formally submit him to the election commission.

By spreading this message, Russian propagandists are trying to demonstrate the lack of unity of the NATO states, in particular, on Russia's aggression against Ukraine. In addition, they create an opinion about the readiness of other countries to recognize Russia's annexation of Ukrainian territories as legitimate. This is not the first time such misinformation has been circulated. Detector Media has already covered the Kremlin's theses about the inconsistency of the NATO member states on sending weapons to Ukraine, the recognition of the fallacy of supporting Ukraine, the inevitability of the collapse of NATO if the anti-Russian course is maintained, the recognition by Western countries of the so-called “LDNR”, etc.

Such a message appeared in the Kremlin propaganda media. Like, Russia is fighting not against Ukraine, but against NATO. The reports said that last year the Russian army was forced to fight on its own, fought against NATO, and it seems to have succeeded, because Ukraine and its allies will lose this fight. The authors of the reports argued that the United States is to blame for the war as a whole, thinking about the deployment of NATO forces in Ukraine. It seems to be part of Washington's plan to create a unipolar world without governments it doesn't like.

Analysts of the EU vs Disinfo project drew attention to the case. In general, the thesis that Russia is at war not with Ukraine, but with NATO and the countries of the West, is a recurring disinformation message. They say that Ukraine is a puppet of Washington, which seeks war, while Russia only fights against the “pagans”.

In fact, neither the US nor NATO is involved in the war in Ukraine. Kyiv does not fight on behalf of a foreign government or organization. Ukraine is acting in self-defense against Russian invasion, as enshrined in Article 51 of the UN Charter. Ukraine is a sovereign and independent state with a democratically elected president and parliament.

Western countries only support Ukraine, providing both military and financial assistance for effective self-defense. However, Russia started the war against Ukraine and it destroys Ukrainian cities and villages, kills civilians, etc.

With the help of such messages, Russia is trying to shift the responsibility for what is happening to the countries of the West, to NATO. Read more about how Russia justifies the war in the Detector Media investigation.

This thesis was circulated on social networks, in particular on telegram channels broadcasting pro-Kremlin rhetoric. Reports say that Ukraine is allegedly violating the Geneva Conventions by sending soldiers who have returned from captivity to the front lines. Like, the leadership of Ukraine is indifferent to the military, so they do everything as they want.

The specialists of the VoxCheck project investigated the case and determined that such a thesis is unfounded. In international humanitarian law, there is indeed an option of the exchange of prisoners, according to which a former prisoner of war is obliged not to return to military service. However, this is one of the options, so there is no evidence that Russia and Ukraine agreed on just such a release from captivity, because there are other formats for the exchange of prisoners.

There is no single rule in international law that all former prisoners of war must refuse to take part in hostilities. According to Jeroen van den Boogaard, researcher, consultant on international law in the Legal Department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands, international humanitarian law provides for 4 options for the release of prisoners of war before the end of hostilities:

conditional early release of prisoners fit for service. Typically, the dismissal comes in exchange for a commitment not to use arms again in the same conflict; however, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) claims that the practice of such dismissal has been significantly reduced since 1949, and many states today prohibit their military from agreeing to parole;

the release of captives fit for service who were held captive for a particularly long period; such an exchange could be arranged using intermediaries such as a neutral state or the ICRC;

the release of wounded or sick prisoners of war who will benefit from treatment in a neutral state;

the release of prisoners of war who, for health reasons, are unlikely to be able to continue to participate in hostilities.

It is not known for certain which of these options Russia and Ukraine chose. The Ukrainian bodies involved in the exchange of prisoners of war did not report that the dismissed fighters would not be able to return to duty again, and did not disclose all the details of negotiations with Russia. Former prisoners also cannot publicly talk about all the details. At the same time, there is confirmation that in Ukraine there is no ban on the return of former prisoners to military service.

This thesis was spread in the social networks of the Ukrainian segment. The reports say that representatives of the LGBT community do not serve in the Armed Forces of Ukraine, which means that draft law No. 9103 on civil partnerships for same-sex and opposite-sex couples is “not needed”.

The case was noticed by the specialists of the VoxCheck project, who found out that the thesis that representatives of the LGBT community do not serve in the ranks of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and do not participate in hostilities is not true. In 2018, an association “Ukrainian LGBT military for equal rights” was created in Ukraine. The founder of this organization is the then volunteer of the Donbas battalion, and now a fighter of the 72nd separate mechanized brigade named after Black Cossacks Viktor Pylypenko, who made the first coming out as a veteran participant in hostilities.

In 2019, for the first time, LGBT military marched in a column at the Equality March in Kyiv. Also in March 2021, the association “Ukrainian LGBT Military for equal rights” announced the recruitment of LGBT people, military personnel, specialists, as well as people friendly to the LGBT community in the ranks of one of the motorized infantry units of the Armed Forces of Ukraine.

If the draft law on the institution of registered partnerships is adopted, the document will apply not only to homosexual, but also to heterosexual couples. However, a registered partnership is different from a marriage. For example, partners do not change their last names, cannot adopt children, and do not have to be romantically involved. As human rights activist Sviatoslav Sheremet explained, parental rights remain only with the biological father or mother, the right of custody of the child is granted to the other partner only for the duration of the partnership.

This thesis was circulated in social networks, in particular on telegram channels broadcasting pro-Kremlin rhetoric. The reports say that the EU is losing in the confrontation with Russia. “The growth of inflation and unemployment, the dysfunctional banking system - this is the result of Brussels’ policy in the EU”. Like, the Russian economy “goes into the abyss”.

The experts of the EU vs Disinfo project worked on the case and found that the thesis about the terrible economic situation in Western countries is untrue. According to the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, 2022 has been a bad year for the Russian economy. According to experts, in 2022 Russia's gross domestic product fell by at least 2.2% in the best-case scenario and by 3.9% in the worst-case scenario. The Russian economy will shrink in 2023 as well. GDP is expected to contract by 5.6% or 3.3% according to the organizations.

In addition, the Yale University study examined in detail the impact of sanctions on the Russian economy, concluding that sanctions are catastrophically destroying the Russian economy.

According to the latest figures from the European Commission, the EU economy is “resilient and ready to face the challenges, in particular those caused by Russia's war against Ukraine”.

This thesis was circulated on social networks, in particular on telegram channels broadcasting pro-Kremlin rhetoric. Reports say that Zelenskyi has launched the latest “offensive against Orthodoxy”. Like, the “attack" on the Kyiv-Pechersk Lavra and the eviction of priests testifies to the “satanist views of the Ukrainian authorities”.

The experts of the EU vs Disinfo investigated the case and explained that the topic of the Orthodox Church in Ukraine escalated after sanctions were imposed on the UOC-MP by the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine, as well as after the termination of the right to lease part of the premises of the Kyiv-Pechersk Lavra and a number of searches and criminal cases against priests. Russian propaganda considers such actions of Ukraine illegal, but does not take into account that, in general, it has no right to interfere in the affairs of another sovereign state.

Ukraine “does not capture” the Kyiv-Pechersk Lavra, because it has always been state property. In 2013, the Azarov government leased the premises of the Lavra to the UOC-MP. However, in 2022, a special commission found that the UOC-MP violated the terms of the lease agreement. For example, illegal construction and reconstruction of historical monuments was carried out on the territory of the Lavra.

Thus, propaganda is trying to convince its consumers that Ukraine's actions are contrary to religious canons, and therefore it is worth mobilizing and saving the “canonical Orthodox Church” with weapons.

On March 29, 2023, the Agreement on the lease of premises between the National Reserve “Kyiv-Pechersk Lavra” and the UOC-MP ended. The representation of the UOC-MP should leave the Lavra, but the clergy of the church refused to comply with the decision of the Ministry of Culture. On March 30, representatives of the UOC-MP held a service in the Lavra, which was broadcast live on social networks. Metropolitan of the UOC-MP Pavlo behaved aggressively and threatened to beat the journalist with a stick.

This thesis appeared in the Russian propaganda media. Like, a projectile made of depleted uranium does not emit radiation, but is very toxic, because its dust can get into the human respiratory tract. This is what, according to Russian propaganda, is a “dirty” nuclear bomb, the use of which Russian propagandists wrote about in the spring of 2022.

Analysts of the EU vs Disinfo project drew attention to the case. Analysts say this message is part of a Kremlin disinformation campaign that is bringing fear of the use of nuclear weapons. Thus, Russia seeks to expose Ukraine as a threat. Allegedly, it is precisely because of Ukraine and the use of shells with depleted uranium that it will cause irreparable consequences. This is how propaganda transfers responsibility for what it does in Ukraine. They say that Ukraine itself is an aggressor.

However, depleted uranium projectiles are not considered nuclear weapons and even so-called dirty ones.

“They are not designed to poison people. They are used because of their ability to penetrate armor”, says Dr. Maryna Miron from King's College London.

Depleted uranium has a greater density than ordinary steel: about 2.5 times and about 1.5 times denser than lead. This is what allows the tank projectile to gain more momentum and more effectively penetrate armor.

Such information appeared in the Russian propaganda media. They say that the use of shells provided to Ukraine by the UK is a crime against humanity and the planet. The reports add that the use of such projectiles is unacceptable and immoral.

Analysts of the EU vs Disinfo project drew attention to the case. According to them, such a message is part of the Kremlin's disinformation campaign against the supply of depleted uranium to Ukraine.

However, the depleted uranium shells that the UK sends to Ukraine are not prohibited by any international agreement. Also, crimes against humanity are traditionally defined and prosecuted by the International Criminal Court (murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, mass systematic rape and sexual enslavement during war, etc.). The use of depleted uranium projectiles cannot be considered one of the crimes against humanity. In 2007, the UN General Assembly began research to find out the impact of depleted uranium weapons on human health. The United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) found that the effects of depleted uranium did not cause significant poisoning.

With the help of such messages, Russian propaganda seeks to portray Ukraine as the aggressor. They say that it is Ukraine that violates the rules of war, uses prohibited weapons that can cause a catastrophe, and the countries of the West, in particular, Great Britain, only help him.

Such reports appeared in the Russian propaganda media. Their authors argue that the sanctions against Russia do not seem to be working and everything indicates that the sanctions have reached their peak or bottom. Like, the West is disappointed with the ineffectiveness of the sanctions, which is why the International Criminal Court issued an arrest warrant for Volodymyr Putin.

Analysts of the EU vs Disinfo project drew attention to the case in the network. Analysts are convinced that messages that do not work are part of Russia's strategy to avoid responsibility for its own war crimes. Messages that Western sanctions do not work appeared in the information space last spring. Then the propagandists assured the audience that sanctions harm countries that impose them more than Russia itself. Like, because of these sanctions, both Ukraine and the EU countries will freeze in winter. But the Russians will be fine.

Western experts are indeed examining the effectiveness of sanctions. However, the International Criminal Court's warrant for Volodymyr Putin's arrest is not an escalation of Western pressure on Russia because sanctions don't seem to be working. An arrest warrant was issued in the case of the deportation of Ukrainian children to Russia. That is, the European Union expressed support for the investigations of the ICC prosecutor.

This thesis was spread on social networks, in particular on telegram channels that broadcast pro-Kremlin rhetoric. Reports say that now there is a decline of international institutions, because they are incompetent in their decisions. The reporters add that the International Criminal Court has issued an arrest warrant for Putin, but the organization is “not to be trusted”.

The experts of the EU vs Disinfo project investigated the case, they found out that the International Criminal Court is a permanent world court for war crimes. It was created under the Rome Statute, an agreement that all EU states have ratified. Russia signed the Rome Statute in 2000 but withdrew the statute in 2016 after the International Criminal Court ruled that Russia's annexation of Ukraine's Crimea was an armed conflict. That is, such an organization is quite legitimate and competent within its powers. According to the decision of the court, the countries that have signed and ratified the charter are subject to the decision of the judges. As of today, 123 states are parties to the Rome Statute.

Ukraine signed the Rome Statute, but did not ratify it. However, the Rome Statute provides for the possibility that, even without ratification, a state in certain cases may recognize the jurisdiction of the ICC. That is, according to the Statute, already now and in full, the International Criminal Court has the right to prosecute for crimes against humanity and war crimes committed by the occupiers on the territory of Ukraine.

This thesis was spread on social networks, in particular on telegram channels that broadcast pro-Kremlin rhetoric. Reports say that the UN Security Council refused to allow a representative of the occupying authorities, the so-called “DNR ombudswoman” Daria Morozova to attend the meeting. Consequently, the authors began to disseminate the thesis that “the UN does not perceive the inhabitants of Donbas as people”, as well as “West does not give a damn about the suffering of the inhabitants of Donbas”. At the same time, the authors emphasize that the UN does not seem to want to hear “first-hand information about the catastrophic humanitarian situation in Donbas”.

The fact-checkers of the StopFake project drew attention to the case, they found out that the refusal of the UN Security Council to allow the so-called “DNR ombudswoman” to the meeting has nothing to do with “russophobia” or “the West’s refusal to learn about the problems” of residents in the Ukrainian territories temporarily occupied by Russia. On March 17, the UN Security Council voted against the participation in the meeting of a representative of the occupying authorities in Ukraine because of the illegitimacy of such a position. The “DNR ombudsman” is a fictitious position, as well as a fake political entity not recognized by many countries of the world. Analysts emphasize that representatives of the occupying authorities are trying to legitimize the Kremlin's “referenda” at gunpoint in the occupied Ukrainian territories.

It is Russia that is responsible for the humanitarian situation that has developed in the temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine in connection with Russian aggression. Ukraine is open to international investigative commissions and, unlike Russia, contributes in every possible way to the investigation of crimes committed during the war.