Pro-Russian media wrote about strengthening the ceasefire in Donbas agreed on by the Trilateral Contact Group (TCG). Yet they commented on it in such a way as to make it look as if Ukraine had broken the ceasefire and was now going back to it. In addition, fake news stories were being spread about Ukraine’s unwillingness to open checkpoints in Donbas on its side. At the same time, they depicted the so-called “republics” as actively proposing “humanitarian initiatives.”
VoxCheck analyzes how Russian narratives get into Ukraine’s information space as part of a joint project with the Center for Strategic Communications. Read the previous publications here.
Ceasefire in Donbas
On December 22, the TCG agreed on returning to an enhanced ceasefire regime to resolve the situation in Donbas. This goes back to the agreement of July 22, 2020, on a “complete and comprehensive ceasefire,” technically still in force despite the many violations by the occupiers.
The topic traditionally provoked a lot of manipulation from pro-Russian media outlets actively promoting the message that Ukraine violated the ceasefire. And that official Kyiv deliberately arranged shelling and provocations.
“However, the ceasefire is more of a question of how Ukraine will stick to the ceasefire deal. Because according to the UN, shelling mainly affects civilians from the “republics.” Last summer showed that if Kyiv has the political will, the shelling stops quickly. It decreased substantially during the local elections: another win Zelensky and his party chalked up for themselves during the voting,” Strana wrote.
Notably, Strana selects context about the ceasefire in its articles in such a way as to create the effect of mass violations by Ukraine: “It should be reminded that the Ukrainian military recently used Javelins in Donbas. The “DPR” reports that Americans brought chemical weapons to Donbas that cause paralysis.”
“Apparently, the Ukrainian authorities have been strictly ordered by the West to minimize any ceasefire violations. This explains the statements made by Yermak and the defense ministry today,” the Telegram channel “Country’s Policy” comments on the situation. “
Source: Strana. The Telegram channel “Country’s Policy” referred to in the article belongs to Strana
Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu was the first to speak about “chemical weapons in Donbas.” Later, the ball was picked up and carried by the so-called “DPR’s” head, Denis Pushylin. Ukraine’s defense and foreign ministries called it disinformation. The US State Department also denied it. It is not the first time that allegations about Ukraine allegedly intending to use chemical weapons have been heard in Russia. Russia’s Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said it for the purpose of intimidation back in 2018.
Another narrative is that de-escalation cannot occur until Ukraine is “ordered” to do so by Western countries.
Source: Ukraine 112, reprint of the text by pro-Medvedchuk blogger Kirill Kikvidze
Fake news: Ukraine does not open checkpoints in Donbas and refuses to exchange prisoners
Pro-Russian media are spreading a similar narrative: Ukraine rejects all humanitarian initiatives from the pseudo republics, including its refusal to open checkpoints. “For instance, the Donbas representatives came up with a proposal for Ukraine to agree on uniform sanitary and epidemiological requirements and the regime of crossing the line of contact to have free passage… Ukraine’s representatives rejected the proposals of Donetsk and Luhansk, insisting on opening all checkpoints regardless of the danger of spreading COVID-19,” Vesti wrote.
In reality, though, the pseudo republics’ intentions are far from good and unconditional. The so-called “LPR” demands that Ukraine recognize Russian coronavirus vaccines and medical documents bearing the groups’ seals in exchange for opening their checkpoints. However, the Russian Sputnik V vaccine is not recognized by Ukraine only but also by the WHO, the US, and EU regulators. Sputnik’s efficiency and safety remain unproven.
Ukraine opened all of its checkpoints in November 2020. By the way, this was envisioned in the Normandy and Minsk agreements. The Russian-controlled occupation administrations failed to comply with them. Yet Ukraine continues to be accused of violating all agreements.
In addition, the Cabinet of Ministers simplified the rules for crossing the checkpoints from the temporarily occupied territories at the end of December 2021, abolishing the “At Home” app, self-isolation, and testing.
“No exchanges, no free passage through the line of contact: At the TCG meeting, Ukraine rejected Donbas’s humanitarian initiatives.”
Source: Vesti
Earlier, Strana wrote about the “DPR” proposing to allow free passage through all checkpoints in Donbas during the New Year holidays
We also wrote about the Ukrainian military using Javelins in Donbas for the first time.
Source: Strana
Last week, there were more articles about Ukrainian officials stalling prisoner exchanges between Ukraine and ORDLO. They mostly appeared on the websites regularly publishing paid-for texts about Viktor Medvedchuk (112, Zik, NewsOne, from.ua, Mignews, First Business). These articles, too, contained signs of paid-for material: they directly accused President Zelensky and Commissioner for Human Rights Liudmyla Denysova, saying that Medvedchuk should be released to conduct the exchanges.
Fake news: US Embassy in the fight for SAPO
On December 24, members of the commission to choose the leadership of the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO) failed to get enough votes to elect the agency’s head. Former SAPO head, Nazar Kholodnytskyi, resigned in August 2020, and the prosecutor’s office has not had an official in charge since then. The US Embassy called on the SAPO selection commission to get back to work.
“This position is crucial for Ukrainian political constructs. SAPO is the only element of the anti-corruption framework, not yet controlled by the West (unlike NABU and HACC),” Strana wrote.
Stalling the process of appointing the SAPO head undermines the work of anti-corruption bodies in Ukraine. And it is not detrimental to Western embassies but to us, because even if one link of the NABU-SAPO-HACC framework does not work, high-ranking officials may not worry about being prosecuted for corruption. The Anti-Corruption Action Center believes that the President’s Office has been delaying the competition to prevent the victory of Oleksandr Klymenko that led the investigation into OPU deputy head O.Tatarov.
Indeed, Ukraine’s international partners, including the United States and the European Union, have repeatedly called on Ukraine to finally complete the competition and select the SAPO head. That is what Zelensky promised Biden during their meeting in late August. A similar promise was part of a memorandum that Ukrainian officials signed with the IMF. We failed to fulfill our obligations, even though we received USD 700 million from the Fund. Anyway, it was up to Ukraine to decide whether to take an IMF loan and agree to the Fund’s terms. There was no “Western Embassies’ governance” in this. 
“News of our independence: US Embassy calls on SAPO selection committee members to get back to work.”
Source: Klymenko Time (a media outlet controlled by Oleksandr Klymenko, former Minister of Revenue and Duties of Ukraine from “the Yanukovych family”).
However, anti-corruption bodies are a frequent target for Russian propaganda and pro-Russian politicians and media in Ukraine. Ukraine’s international partners are helping Ukraine create anti-corruption structures, and this provokes a lot of manipulation about Ukraine’s lack of independence or dependence on the West. For example, in this monitoring report, we debunked the fake news that Ukrainian courts, particularly the HACC we mentioned earlier, will be run by foreigners.
Ukraine votes against the resolution on combating Nazism
On December 16, the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution against the glorification of Nazism, initiated by Russia. One hundred thirty countries voted in favor, and 49 abstained. The United States and Ukraine voted against it.
This triggered numerous manipulations from pro-Russian media, writing about the “immoral policy of the official Kyiv.” For example, NewsOne, Ukraine 112, and ZIK published Medvedchuk’s statement revisiting the “external governance” myth and saying that Ukraine showed its dependence again. “A government that has long been eager to serve the interests of Washington shows a complete dependence on the United States on such a sensitive and fundamental issue for Ukrainian society, dealing another devastating blow to our country’s image,” the statement said.
The pro-Russian Vesti wrote about Ukraine’s “incomprehensible claims” regarding the document: “Ukraine has somewhat incomprehensible claims regarding the document, saying it hushes up the fact that the end of World War II was not the end of totalitarian ideologies, failing to show that the communist regime became stronger after the fall of the Nazi regime. If you so wish, you can probably grasp some indirect links between the totalitarian regimes of the Communist Party and the National Socialists. However, especially in the aspects regarding the glorification of Nazism and neo-Nazism, any such connection is farfetched, to put it mildly.”
The thing is that Russia was the main initiator of this resolution, submitting it to the UN General Assembly each year. The document propagates Russia’s interpretation of the events of World War II, namely:
- hushing up the crimes of the Soviet regime that also resulted from intolerance and xenophobia;
- expressing “serious concern” about the ban on symbols associated with the victory over Nazism (i.e., the Soviet symbols banned in Ukraine);
- condemning the demolition of monuments to Nazi fighters (these figures represented the occupiers in many Eastern European countries and could not be considered national heroes).
In a comment to Ukrinform, Permanent Representative of Ukraine to the United Nations Serhiy Kyslytsia explained that the fight against Nazism and other manifestations of intolerance “won’t be truly effective without Moscow recognizing Stalin’s role in igniting World War II.”
Ukraine condemns both the Nazi and Soviet totalitarian regimes, banning their symbols at the legislative level. In 2015, Ukraine passed a law on the condemnation of the communist and national socialist (Nazi) totalitarian regimes in Ukraine and prohibited propaganda of their symbols.
The United States has repeatedly said it disagrees with the resolution as it seeks to “legitimize Russian disinformation campaigns, denigrating neighboring nations and promoting the distorted Soviet narrative of much of contemporary European history, using the cynical guise of halting Nazi glorification.”
Our methodology
VoxCheck analysts monitor the websites and social networks of the Ukrainian pro-Russian media every day to identify the main news or topics of the week that get the most airtime and attention in the news feed. We identify the key narratives of the past week and analyze their origins.
We monitor media outlets such as Strana, Klymenko Time, Vesti, Ukrainian News, Podrobnosti, Apostrof, From.ua, Golos.ua, KP in Ukraine, Znaj.ua, Telegraf, 112.ua, Zik, NewsOne, TV channels Nash, First Independent, Inter, etc. We do not claim that these outlets deliberately spread Russian propaganda. Their content, however, contains elements of Russian disinformation.
VoxCheck searches for fake news stories and manipulations to debunk them. The “click and check” method lies at the core of our fact-checking. Anyone can check our argumentation and sources. Fact-checking can only be based on open data with relevant links. A fact-checked article can only be published if signed by two editorial board members.
Attention
The author doesn`t work for, consult to, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have no relevant affiliations
