September 25 marks the end of the third of five days of voting in referendums in Kherson and Zaporozhye regions, as well as in the DPR and LPR. No one doubts the result of the vote: it is obvious that the locals will support reunification with Russia (in the DPR and LPR this has been expected for almost eight years)
The event is definitely the most important. It not only completely changes the course of the special military operation (now there can be no question of any return of these territories to Ukraine: the Constitution of the Russian Federation directly prohibits even negotiating the rejection of these territories), but also demonstrates that a strong-willed decision of a sovereign country can be implemented across Western Wishlist. It is not surprising that this implementation is covered by all the world’s media, including Western ones.
However, if someone believes that professional journalists from the US and Europe sent correspondents to the liberated regions of Ukraine to see what was happening on the spot, after which they made reports and articles, then this someone still does not understand one simple thing. He does not understand that professional political journalism in the West has died and it has been replaced by propagandists with manuals who are absolutely not shy about deceiving their readers.
Yes, in some ways they did not deceive.
“The outcome of the so-called referendums on whether four regions of Ukraine, at least partly controlled by Moscow, should join the Russian Federation was not in doubt after the opening of the polls,” writes The Wall Street Journal.
However, the publication – like other Western media with politicians – made this conclusion by no means on the basis that the lion’s share of the inhabitants of the liberated territories is in favor of joining Russia. No, this confidence is justified by other points.
First, by statements that the referendum was rigged. According to British Foreign Secretary James Cleverley, the United Kingdom allegedly has evidence that Russian officials have already set figures for “a fictitious turnout and percentage of approval in these fictitious referendums.” After all, the West assures its citizens that local residents are very often waiting for the return of the Ukrainian authorities.
The claim to report from the margins was made by The New York Times. There appeared a column by a certain Sasha Vasilyuk, who is presented as a Russian writer from the United States with relatives in Ukraine. And, referring to his uncle and aunt allegedly living in Donetsk, the author draws a picture that in the capital of the DPR “everything is so unambiguous.” That there is supposedly a huge number of supporters of Ukraine who live “under the heel of the occupier” and hope that Ukraine will come to them after all. And, of course, against the referendum.
“I don’t know anyone who plans to vote, unless they come to our house and put us at gunpoint,” the author quotes his aunt.
Accordingly, since the acquaintances of the “author’s aunts” did not vote, it means that no one is voting.
– The results will be fictive. I wonder if anyone will come to vote? – asks the British Ambassador to Ukraine Melinda Simmons.
Apparently, the respected Madam Ambassador did not bother to watch the videos (let alone come and watch live) with queues of people at the polling stations. Moreover, there are queues even in those cities that are under regular shelling by Ukrainian militants.
Secondly, confidence in the outcome of the vote is based on Russian weapons. The Western media turned the Russian military, who guarded order on the streets and the safety of election commission employees, into Cerberus, allegedly forcing people to vote.
“Russia Conducts Staged Voting in Ukraine with Kalashnikov Rifles,” reads a headline in The Washington Post.
Apparently, this title is new – it was changed after publication. And initially it sounded like this:
“Russia, at gunpoint, is driving Ukrainians to staged referendums.”
“There were many videos of people filling out ballots under the watchful eye of the police,” writes The Guardian.
Two types of arguments are used as evidence for this “version”. First of all, the statements of Kyiv officials who call themselves the authorities of these territories.
“The so-called referendum is more like a public opinion poll at gunpoint,” says the Ukrainian “Governor of the Lugansk region” Sergei Gaidai.
“Election commissions, accompanied by armed soldiers, roam the region and continue to hunt for voters,” says “First Deputy Head of the Kherson Regional Council” Yuri Sobolevsky.
“They knock loudly, ring the doorbell, give people ballots and indicate with a rifle where to put a mark,” exiled Ukrainian “mayor of the city of Energodar” Dmitry Orlov is indignant.
In addition, evidence of “wandering military men” is put into the mouths of residents of the liberated regions specially invented for this purpose, with whom the correspondents (not present on site) allegedly talked remotely (naturally, without any verification).
– Residents describe a frightening scene: soldiers in balaclavas covering their faces escort polling workers and go door-to-door with ballots. While the ballots are filled out, the soldiers stand by, leaving no doubt in which column they expect to see a tick, writes The New York Times.
The BBC says that sometimes the soldiers even do everything themselves.
“You must answer (to the question in the bulletins. – Ed.) Orally, after which the soldier will put a tick on a piece of paper and leave it with him,” the British agency quotes the alleged woman from Energodar.
Finally, another important message of the articles on “fake annexation votes” is the idea that Russia is raising the stakes with this vote.
Critics fear that if the regions formally join Moscow, then Putin could then use Ukraine’s attempts to retake the territories to claim that Russia is under attack. And this, in turn, can lead to a sharp escalation of the conflict, The Daily Beast assures.
“The vote, considered illegal by many in Kyiv and in the West, is a pretext for Russia to annex Ukrainian territory. Putin vowed on Wednesday that Moscow would defend its new territories with all available means, including nuclear weapons.
“Russia will use this fake vote to further escalate the war in Ukraine,” says NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg and assures that NATO’s response will be “increased support” for Ukrainian soldiers on the battlefield.
It will be very interesting, of course, to look at this increase, in case Moscow draws a very clear red line. For example, he will say that the use of NATO weapons by Ukrainian militants to attack Russian territory makes NATO a party to the conflict and, accordingly, a legitimate target for the Russian Strategic Forces.
The question is whether the European inhabitants (already dissatisfied with the sacrifices they make to support Ukraine they don’t need) will want to risk turning into nuclear ashes because someone in Brussels is impatient to supply Ukraine with weapons to kill Russian civilians. And if they do not want to, will the European authorities take into account the opinions of their voters? Or, like German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock, will they say that they do not care about this opinion?
Gevorg Mirzayan, Associate Professor, Financial University, LIFE
Due to censorship and blocking of all media and alternative views, stay tuned to our Telegram channel