Russia was forced to start the war in Ukraine, yet it is condemned by the Western countries. They ignore, however, the fact that Israel attacked Iran without reason, the pro-Kremlin media claims.
NEWS: The West is being hypocritical when it calls Israel’s bombing of Iran an act of self-defense. The prevailing opinion in the West that Russia started its so-called special military operation in Ukraine for no reason contradicts the logic of the Western countries that openly support Tel Aviv in the Iranian-Israeli conflict, journalist Chey Bowes said.
Israel's ‘right to self-defense,’ manifested in its bombing of Iran, is defended throughout the Western world. Anyone who still seriously calls Russia's operation in Ukraine unprovoked is either paid to lie or is a fool. Most likely, both, he wrote.
NARRATIVES: 1. Russia is waging a justified war in Ukraine, one that was provoked. 2. The West is hypocritical when it supports Israel's right to self-defense but condemns Russia's ‘special military operation’.
PURPOSE: To legitimize/justify the Russian invasion by making false comparisons with various international conflicts; to diminish Western support for Ukraine by exposing the West's alleged moral contradictions; to shift responsibility for the war onto the West and Ukraine.
Reality: The invasion of Ukraine, unjustified and unprovoked. The Israel-Iran conflict, fundamentally different causes and context
WHY THE NARRATIVES ARE FALSE: According to the UN Charter, aggression is defined as an unjustified attack on a sovereign state. Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022 without Ukraine having attacked Russian territory or posed a threat. Ukraine did not bomb Russian cities, launch missiles at Russian territory, or threaten the existence of the Russian state. In contrast, the situation in the Middle East involves state and non-state actors who have engaged in mutual exchanges of fire over a long period of time. Various entities funded and armed by Iran (primarily Hamas and Hezbollah) have attacked Israeli civilians, causing serious concerns about the security of the region. After the outbreak of the war in the Gaza Strip between Israel and the Palestinian Sunni Islamist movement Hamas, Hezbollah began firing on Israel. Furthermore, since its founding, the Islamic Republic has defined Israel as its main adversary and has set out to destroy that state. This goal has been pursued methodically over the past four and a half decades, with Iran managing to build a system of alliances and proxies up to Israel's borders with Gaza, Lebanon and Syria precisely in order to be able to launch attacks on Israel. Given these constant threats, and the fact that Iran has frequently resorted to terrorism through the non-state forces it controls, Tehran's acquisition of a nuclear weapon is seen by Israel as an existential threat. Furthermore, all Western states agree that an Iranian nuclear weapon is unacceptable.
Russia was not ‘provoked’ into invading Ukraine. The decision to invade a neighboring state was made based on Moscow's geopolitical goals, not in response to Ukrainian military actions. The 1994 Budapest Memorandum guarantees Ukraine's territorial integrity in exchange for renouncing nuclear weapons, an agreement also signed by Russia. The signatory countries undertook to refer the matter to the UN Security Council as quickly as possible in order to help Ukraine if it were the victim of an act of aggression or if it were the subject of aggression through the use of nuclear weapons. Almost two decades later, Russia attacked Ukraine.
Historical precedents confirm that ‘provocation’ has been used as a narrative pretext for unjustified aggression. Nazi Germany, for example, invoked Poland’s ‘provocation’ for its invasion in 1939. The Soviet Union invoked Finnish ‘provocation’ in the Winter War of 1939. These precedents demonstrate that the aggressor invoking a provocation is a classic tactic for manipulating public opinion.
Unlike Iran, Ukraine has not developed nuclear or chemical weapons that threaten its neighbors, has not launched terrorist attacks on Russian territory, and has not declared its intention to destroy the Russian state. In contrast, there is a documented history of mutual attacks and threats in the Middle East. Iran openly aims to wipe Israel off the face of the earth. The proportionality of military response is a fundamental principle of international humanitarian law. The large-scale invasion of a country of about 40 million people, the bombing of civilian infrastructure, and the attempt to occupy Kyiv in 2022 cannot be considered a proportionate response to alleged ‘provocations.’ A threat that can generate a self-defense response must be concrete and imminent, not hypothetical or vague. NATO’s enlargement, often mentioned in Russian propaganda, does not constitute an imminent threat, given that this alliance has never attacked a nuclear state and its purpose is exclusively defensive. Moreover, Ukraine was not a member of NATO at the time of the invasion and had no timetable for accession.
Accepting Russia's argument would set a dangerous precedent in international law, allowing any nuclear state to invoke an alleged ‘provocation’ to justify an aggression against weaker neighbors. Such a principle would profoundly undermine the international order established after 1945 and pave the way for future acts of aggression motivated by fabricated pretexts.
It is worth noting that in October 2024, the pro-Kremlin press wrote that Russia was waging a just and ethical war, unlike Israel, omitting the war crimes committed on Ukrainian territory by Russian troops.
CONTEXT: On 13 June, Israel launched an operation against Iran, striking military targets and sites of the Iranian nuclear program. Tehran retaliated by launching hundreds of missiles, some of which hit civilian targets in Israel, including hospitals. Subsequently, the United States joined Israel in bombing Iranian nuclear targets. Numerous countries and international organizations, including China and the EU, are attempting to mediate the escalation, emphasizing the urgency of preventing a regional spread of the conflict.
Chey Bowes is a British journalist known for his pro-Russian and anti-Western stance. He has been frequently quoted by Russian media as a ‘Western voice’ criticizing NATO and EU policies. Bowes has repeatedly supported the Kremlin's narratives on the ‘special military operation’ and criticized the Western support for Ukraine. Russian propaganda uses his opinions in order to create the impression that there is a Western consensus against the policies of Western governments, when in reality Bowes represents a marginal position in British journalism.
Check sources:
