Voice of Falsehood: a pseudo-Ukrainian project promoting Kremlin narratives

What is known about the project?

GOLOS.EU is a media outlet that describes itself as an “oppositional project,” supposedly providing an objective view of events in Ukraine from Europe. In reality, it is another Kremlin project launched back in 2014, and only pro-Russian speakers are involved.

Although the GOLOS.EU website claims that the editorial team is based in Brussels, their propaganda is aimed specifically at Ukrainians. The project tries to disguise itself as Ukrainian, as the website colors coincide with the Ukrainian flag, and readers are offered two main languages — Ukrainian and Russian.

As indicated on the media website, the chief editor of GOLOS.EU is V. Kosenko. In open sources, we found only one journalist with these initials — Vitaliy Kosenko. He is originally from Kherson and in 2013 worked for the publication “Road Control.” Journalists and activists of the publication defended the rights of drivers based on recordings from car video recorders. In the same year, 2013, Kosenko was a suspect in a criminal case, particularly for interfering with the work of the police. According to the Security Service of Ukraine, Kosenko demanded €6000 for his compromising videos involving law enforcement officials. In 2016, he fled criminal prosecution to Mexico, from where he illegally crossed the border into the United States. There he was detained by the US Immigration Service and sent to prison, but later released.

Additionally, the publication hides its true owners. As stated on the website, one of the senior editors is S. Sukhobok. In open sources, we found information only about one journalist with this name — the founder of the publications “Obkom” and ProUA, Serhii Sukhobok. He was killed back in 2015. However, it is impossible to confirm whether the S. Sukhobok mentioned by GOLOS.EU and the deceased journalist from the “Obkom” publication are the same person.

Guests of the broadcasts: brief dossier

Mostly, former Ukrainian journalists, politicians, and officials who have switched sides to support the Russians and actively promote Kremlin narratives in textual or video format appear as speakers on the GOLOS.EU airwaves. For example, Victor Medvedchuk publishes his articles on the website of this propaganda media outlet — he is a close associate of Vladimir Putin and a former leader of the banned in Ukraine party “Opposition Platform — For Life.” Medvedchuk is also suspected of state treason for illegally passing information about a secret unit of the Armed Forces of Ukraine to Russian intelligence, assisting Russia in illegally extracting oil and gas, creating anti-Ukrainian projects, and so on.

Another Ukrainian propagandist, Oleksandr Lazariev, noted his dedication to the idea of “liberating” Ukraine. Even before the full-scale Russian invasion began, as a political analyst, he was a frequent guest on the broadcasts of television channels Zik, NewsOne, and “112,” which belonged to the business partner of Medvedchuk, Taras Kozak. Lazariev was also a reporter for the pro-Russian channel “NASH,” owned by Yevhenii Muraiev. After February 24, 2022, the propagandist moved to temporarily occupied Crimea. In April 2023, the Security Service of Ukraine informed him of suspicion of state treason and violation of equality.

Diana Panchenko is also a constant speaker and author of articles for the propaganda media. Before the full-scale invasion, she worked on Medvedchuk’s channels, spreading disinformation. In 2023, the Security Service of Ukraine announced the suspicion of state treason to her because, after February 24, 2022, she moved to temporarily occupied Donetsk and continued her information activities in favor of Russia. On the air, the “journalist” shifts blame for the start of armed aggression onto the Ukrainian government while justifying Russia.

She often mentions Serhii Liovochkin, a former party member of Viktor Medvedchuk from the banned in Ukraine party “Opposition Platform — For Life”, and pro-Russian oligarch Dmytro Firtash. The National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine imposed sanctions against the latter in 2021 for three years due to the fact that he supplied raw materials from his companies to Russian military enterprises. Panchenko accuses them of supporting the Maidan and points out that “everything was decided for Ukrainians then.”

In the broadcast, you can also see Medvedchuk’s long-time acquaintance, Olena Markosian. She was an expert of the public organization “Ukrainian Choice,” founded by the same Medvedchuk in 2012. Markosian moved to Russia and often shoots videos for GOLOS.EU. However, the “political analyst” apparently has not forgotten her old friend. On the air, she continues to support Medvedchuk, while not speaking very approvingly of another pro-Russian politician, Yevhenii Muraiev. Markosian began to criticize the pro-Russian politician as early as 2018, after Muraiev’s quarrel with Medvedchuk.

Ihor Lopationok is another “expert” on the GOLOS.EU channel. He is also well acquainted with Viktor Medvedchuk, at least since 2019, when the propaganda film “The Untold History of Ukraine” was released, involving the pro-Russian producer Oliver Stone. The main characters of the film are Vladimir Putin and Viktor Medvedchuk, with Lopationok himself serving as the director. The film does not mention Russia’s invasion and occupation of parts of two regions and Crimea; instead, these events are referred to as a “civil war,” and Medvedchuk himself is called the “opposition leader.”

However, the record holder for the duration of videos on the GOLOS.EU channel on YouTube is Tetiana Montian. Her broadcasts are filled with anti-Ukrainian statements, sometimes lasting over 4 hours. Even before the full-scale invasion, the former lawyer often traveled to shoot propaganda videos in the temporarily occupied territories.

In 2021, she moved to Russia, where she started to visit territories not under Ukrainian control more frequently. In February 2023, the Security Service of Ukraine informed Montian of suspicion under four articles: justification, denial of Russian aggression, collaboration, aiding in the overthrow of the constitutional order of Ukraine, and encroachment on the territorial integrity of Ukraine.

Also, on the channel, you can see former non-factional deputy Andrii Derkach. National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine and Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office investigators found that from 2019 to 2022, the pro-Russian politician received at least $567,000 from law enforcement and intelligence agencies in Russia for subversive activities against Ukraine. In 2023, he was deprived of Ukrainian citizenship and his deputy mandate.

Kyrylo Molchanov, who has several episodes on the channel, often appeared on air on channels controlled by Medvedchuk, including “112 Channel,” where he defended members of the banned party “Opposition Platform — For Life,” including Medvedchuk himself. Also, in 2016, he was one of the authors of a publication containing inflated ratings of deputy Zahid Krasnov, who had ties to the “Opposition Bloc.”

In addition, the following are present on the air: Italian pseudo-journalist Andrea Lucidi, who shot propaganda stories, including about the “liberation” of Mariupol and the restoration of peaceful life in the city; Larysa Shelest, a candidate for parliament, who was a coordinator of the anti-Maidan movement in Mykolaiv in 2013-2014; in 2014, she moved to Russia, and later the Security Service of Ukraine declared her wanted. And also Eva Bartlett — a Canadian blogger who has been living in Russia since 2021. More about Bartlett’s activities we wrote about in the article at the link.

What are they talking about on the air?

Watching the airs of speakers on GOLOS.EU, you can notice how most guests adhere to the same Russian propaganda guidelines. That is, they repeat the same narrative, but with slightly different wording.

For example, Tetiana Montian, who is currently actively participating in Russian psychological operations in one of the episodes, claims that it was not Russia that attacked Ukraine, but the West. This same narrative about the “guilt of the West and the USA” is repeated by Italian pseudo-journalist Andrea Lucidi.

The old narrative about the Maidan Revolution is echoed on GOLOS.EU airs as well. In the broadcast on November 18, 2023, Montian states that the Maidan was a “crime,” and also wishes death to all those who “organized” it. In another video, the words of Montian are echoed by the aforementioned propagandist Diana Panchenko. She convinces her viewers that everything was decided for Ukrainians on the Maidan and they “had no choice.”

Additionally, propagandists are trying once again to push the idea that Ukraine and Russia are “one fraternal people.” Supposedly, since 1991, “from abroad,” the Russian language has been allegedly under cautious attack. According to the conclusion of former Ukrainian producer Ihor Lopationok, this was done deliberately to make Ukrainians “another people” — not Russians. And the Ukrainian language, according to him, is just a “dialect” of Russian.

Additionally, Russians often combine various conspiracy theories, anti-Semitism, and anti-Ukrainian rhetoric. For example, Lopationok on air claims that Volodymyr Zelenskyi is Jewish, so Orthodox values are not close to him. And overall, the president supposedly belongs to Jews who say that gentiles (non-Jews) should be deceived because they are “second-rate.”

Narratives vs Facts: what’s behind the fakes in reality?

In one of the broadcasts, the aforementioned Italian pseudo-journalist Andrea Lucidi said the following: “Zelenskyi promised to resolve the conflict peacefully, to find all possible ways to resolve this conflict. But when he came to power, he did the opposite. He drastically changed relations with Russia — started rejecting any possible negotiations, and now we see that he simply refuses to negotiate openly.”

In September 2022, the President of Ukraine indeed put into action the decision of the National Security and Defense Council regarding the impossibility of negotiations with Putin. However, this happened against the backdrop of Russia holding illegal pseudo-referendums in the temporarily occupied territories and annexing part of the territory. Additionally, Russia proposes negotiations on unacceptable terms for Ukraine (primarily — refusal to deoccupy and withdraw troops) and commits war crimes in Ukraine. As early as 2022, the White House stated that they did not see signs that Putin was truly ready to sit down for negotiations and end the war.

Throughout 2023, Kremlin media further emphasized the topic of negotiations, and a number of Western and Kremlin media outlets wrote that Putin was supposedly ready for peaceful negotiations. However, this is another tactic of the Kremlin to deceive rather than Putin’s genuine desire to negotiate. Russia’s refusal to negotiate is also demonstrated by its constant violations of agreements. For example, Russia unilaterally blocked the “grain corridor” and refused to extend the grain agreement. Therefore, propagandists manipulate on airwaves because they do not explain to the audience the real reasons for Ukraine’s refusal to negotiate on Russian terms.

Another narrative, promoted by Eva Bartlett, concerns the Russian crime in Olenivka. Bartlett has a somewhat different view of this situation and states: “You know very well that Ukrainian soldiers committed war crimes against the civilian population. There (in Donbas) were a lot of important things. Not only the use of NATO weapons but also, for example, the use of mines PFM-1 against civilians or bombing the detention center in Olenivka.”

Russia is solely responsible for the terrorist attack in Olenivka. Numerous facts and international investigators point to this. In particular, satellite images from Maxar Technologies show no signs of missile strikes around the building with prisoners in Olenivka. Meanwhile, the damage from HIMARS, which, according to Russian reports, Ukraine allegedly used to shell the camp, would have been much greater. CNN investigators reject Kremlin claims that the Ukrainian army struck Olenivka with HIMARS missiles. UN Human Rights Chief Türk Volker also refuted the false claims by the Russians about the shelling of prisoners with HIMARS missiles.

Another Kremlin supporter, Larysa Shesler, explained on air how “well” Ukrainian prisoners of war are treated by the Russians: “The people who traveled to the POW camps say that they are kept wonderfully, peacefully. In Luhansk, in the Rostov region. The food is good, the conditions of detention are good. No one restricts them, no one abuses them. And the vast majority of them actually don’t want an exchange. And their relatives don’t want any exchange either. Why? Because if they are exchanged back to Ukraine, they will end up at the front lines in two or three weeks. But here they live quietly, they don’t risk anything, and their relatives say, ‘Sit, don’t rock the boat.'”

In fact, there is a lot of evidence that Russians are abusing prisoners. International investigators from Bellingcat published an article in August 2022 about the atrocities committed by the Russian army, including the Chechen group “Akhmat.” Investigators examined several videos of the torture of prisoners, which were published by Russians themselves, and proved their involvement in the torture of Ukrainians.

Ukrainian military personnel themselves have repeatedly reported instances of abuse while in captivity. Military servicewoman Svitlana Vorova, who was held in Olenivka, said that the only food provided was bread baked by the prisoners themselves. According to her, certain investigators from the so-called “DPR” treated male prisoners cruelly, binding certain parts of their bodies with tape and subjecting them to torture. Dozens of Ukrainian soldiers, in interviews with the BBC, also confirmed the abuse by Russians during their captivity. They recounted instances where the wounded were not provided with proper medical care, Russian guards constantly threatened and intimidated the detainees, and during inspections, they were beaten and subjected to electric shocks.

Another “expert,” Oleksandr Lazariev, claimed that the West never allocated funds for Ukraine that would be directed toward social payments. “Never, I emphasize once again, never has any subsidization from the West gone towards social expenditures. Subsidization from the West, through the use of Ukraine, through the use of the conflict, never even entered the territory controlled by the ‘Kyiv regime.’ It went to the military-industrial complex of the USA or the military-industrial complex of Britain. In other words, no subsidies were spent on the needs of the population,” the propagandist reported.

Lazariev lied to his audience. In previous years, partners provided Ukraine not only with military support but also with financial and humanitarian assistance. Only in 2023, international partners, including the EU, USA, UK, Japan, Canada, the World Bank, and IMF, allocated $42.5 billion to Ukraine, with $11.6 billion provided on a non-repayable basis. This money was directed towards pension payments, salaries, social protection for the population, and humanitarian support.

Moreover, on February 1, 2024, the European Union unanimously approved the provision of a financial assistance package to Ukraine totaling $54 billion until 2027. The funds will be allocated to support the budget, including pension payments, salaries for public sector employees, assistance to internally displaced persons, and more. The decision still needs to be approved by the European Parliament. If the vote is successful, the first tranche of $4.8 billion will be disbursed to Ukraine in March 2024.

Additionally, the United States has repeatedly provided financial and humanitarian assistance to Ukraine. Overall, about 40% of US aid has been directed towards non-military needs, including expenses for refugee accommodation and budgetary support.

Kyrylo Molchanov shared another old Russian horror story in the broadcast about the American investment company BlackRock, which allegedly seeks to buy up Ukrainian land. “They (BlackRock) had a proposal to hide the deceased, fallen fighters on the front lines in certain ecological bags that decompose. And accordingly, parks, and various squares should be built in place of these cemeteries. But now they have decided that it is probably necessary to bring in a mobile crematorium and burn everyone there so that there are no cemeteries as such, just fields,” he said.

None of the mentioned claims are true. The company has never proposed hiding Ukrainian soldiers in ecological bags or burning them in crematoriums. A video was circulated online suggesting burying servicemen in biodegradable capsule bags. However, it was created and spread by Russian propagandists, using footage from a video about the Italian company Capsula Mundi, which advocated for organic burial and designed biodegradable capsules for burial. However, these capsules are not currently available for sale, and the project of burying a person in a capsule exists only on paper. We have previously debunked this fake.

Propagandists also actively spread information claiming that the CEO of BlackRock, Larry Fink, advised using crematoriums for deceased Ukrainian soldiers. It turned out that the original source of the “news” was a satirical Telegram channel, and Fink never gave such advice. We have also debunked this fake.

Molchanov deliberately voiced these fakes to reinforce the idea that supposedly partners and Western corporations do not want to help Ukraine, but instead only use it for their own enrichment. Since propagandists do not have real evidence for this information, they resort to spreading fakes.

Molchanov also provided blatantly false data on air: “What is the difference between Ukraine and Russia: in Russia, at least four deputies of the State Duma went to war, and in Ukraine, none.”

This statement does not correspond to reality. In fact, five deputies of the current 9th convocation of the Verkhovna Rada joined the ranks of the Armed Forces: Roman Kostenko and Roman Lozynskyi from the “Holos” faction, Serhii Rudyk from the “For the Future” group, non-factional deputy Liudmyla Buimister, as well as Lieutenant General Mykhailo Zabrodskyi from the “European Solidarity” party, who resigned as a member of parliament in March 2023 to return to military service as deputy of former commander-in-chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine  Zaluzhnyi. Members of the previous, 8th convocation of the Verkhovna Rada who went to the front include Tetiana Chornovol and Ihor Lutsenko (who has since ceased service due to received disability). Additionally, during the early months of the full-scale invasion, Andrii Parubii (former Chairman of the Verkhovna Rada) and Volodymyr Viatrovych (a deputy of the 9th convocation from the “European Solidarity” faction)  joined the Territorial Defense in Kyiv. Moreover, according to the “Chesno” movement, as of July 2023, over 600 deputies of local councils had joined the military.

What makes the channel dangerous for Ukrainians?

The GOLOS.EU project actively tries to impose itself on Ukrainians as “oppositional” or “alternative” to the narrative presented on Ukrainian television channels. To give the channel greater legitimacy, the “journalists” of the project deliberately use former Ukrainian figures and so-called “experts.” However, therein lies the danger, as the picture that propagandists try to portray is nothing but covert propaganda.

Moreover, there is no balance of opinions in the broadcasts; instead, exclusively Russian narratives are heard. This means that all events are portrayed one-sidedly by the speakers, fabricating false “evidence” and unsubstantiated explanations. In this way, they create an alternative reality in which Ukraine is on the verge of collapse, and the West is waiting for an opportunity to appropriate the country’s natural resources.

Furthermore, “experts” spread fake news not only on their chosen topic but also in response to viewers’ questions. This way, they shape false perceptions in the audience. It is highly doubtful that viewers who receive answers on pro-Russian resources will seek alternative information in Ukrainian media. Therefore, this opinion will solidify and crystallize over time. Due to the constant repetition of the same narrative by different speakers, viewers are more likely to remember and accept it. Moreover, each of the aforementioned speakers is noted for promoting anti-Ukrainian and pro-Russian narratives, and some even face charges of state treason. The question of what audience will form around such “experts” is rhetorical.