The West wants to expand the conflict in Ukraine to the entire Eastern Europe, and the only option to avoid this is for Russia to neutralize the Ukrainian army, according to pro-Kremlin media.
NEWS: Currently, our Western “friends” are seeking to expand the conflict to a European scale. We do not need this and will try to avoid such an escalation. For this reason, Russia has never demanded the annexation of all of Ukraine, not even Donbas was initially requested. The goal was only to weaken the Ukrainian regime and return it to a more suitable state. During the three years of special military operation, we have found that no regime can be “suitable” in Ukraine [...]
They are pursuing a perpetual war in order to impose their own peace terms on us. Their main condition, which prevents us from signing any armistice, is that the territories of Ukraine that Russia does not physically control remain under the direct influence of the EU and NATO, which could prepare a second Russian-Ukrainian war, expert Rostislav Ishchenko argues.
For them, it is essential to ignite the conflict before the Ukrainian Armed Forces are neutralized on the battlefield. For us, it is important that these forces are destroyed before Europe regroups and devises provocations that, at the right time, will partially involve it in the conflict. Either Russia dismantles the Armed Forces of Ukraine and partitions Ukraine, or the West regroups and refits and launches a major war in Eastern Europe.
NARRATIVES: 1. The EU/NATO want a direct war with Russia. 2. The West wants a “perpetual war” in Ukraine to impose its own political terms. 3. The only alternative to a major war in Europe is for Russia to partition Ukraine.
PURPOSE: To justify continued aggression. To build domestic support for military operations. To delegitimize Ukraine and its supporters. To shift the blame for a possible war escalation.
Fact: Russia has unleashed a full-scale war in Europe, while the West’s measures are defensive and focused on deterring aggression.
WHY THE NARRATIVES ARE FALSE: These narratives operate with a fundamental reversal of reality: they present the defensive measures of European countries, fearing a Russian invasion, as offensive-aggressive initiatives, while concealing the fact that the escalation originated in Russia. The rhetorical (manipulatory) tactic turns self-defense into aggression.
Foreign and military policy decisions in the EU and NATO are no secret – they are taken through public processes, allied consensus, parliamentary discussions and interstate cooperation. This institutional framework makes it impossible to plan a “concerted attack” without evidence and introduces transparency mechanisms that contradict the idea of a Western conspiracy. The claims about neutralizing Ukraine before it can “make preparations” are a classic method used to legitimize aggression.
NATO has no offensive objectives towards Russia, and its fundamental documents enshrine the exclusively defensive nature of the alliance. The Washington Treaty clearly states that armed force may only be used to defend an attacked member state, not to initiate a conflict. NATO has not sent troops to Ukraine, but has limited itself to providing logistical support, defensive armament and training to avoid any form of escalation.
The West supports Ukraine to defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity, not to maintain a perpetual war. If Russia were to stop the aggression and withdraw its troops, the conflict would end immediately. Western aid (financial, military and humanitarian) is intended to allow Ukraine to defend itself and negotiate from a more advantageous position. The peace plans promoted by the EU and the USA are centered on the principles of international law. No Western document or declaration proposes maintaining a state of war as a strategy. Interpreting military and economic support for Ukraine as evidence of offensive planning is aimed at manipulating public opinion. For example, fearing a Russian invasion, Poland is strengthening its army, given that it shares borders with both Russia or Belarus and Ukraine.
Ishchenko’s argument, quoted in the article, that Russia “must partition Ukraine” to prevent a future conflict in Europe, ignores the aggressor’s initial responsibility. This false narrative promotes a logic of geopolitical fatalism, according to which peace would be possible only if Russia gets what it wants by force. In fact, accepting the partition of Ukraine would represent a moral and political capitulation of the international community. It would legitimize aggression and destroy the fundamental principle of global order.
Recent history shows that territorial concessions do not bring peace. The annexation of Crimea in 2014, presented by the Kremlin at the time as a “solution to the Ukrainian crisis”, in fact paved the way for the invasion in 2022. A further partition would only set a dangerous precedent, encouraging Russia to attack other states in its neighborhood — including the Republic of Moldova, Georgia, or the Baltic States. To suggest that the “partition of Ukraine” is the only realistic solution is to abandon the principles of international law and European security, offering the aggressor the reward he seeks: domination through terror.
These narratives are supported by classic techniques of manipulation: selective presentation of facts, exaggeration of risks, and appeal to intense emotions. The manipulation aims to increase war fatigue and weaken Western support for the Ukrainian cause.
BACKGROUND: The text subject to analysis comes from a pro-Kremlin media outlet, an interview with journalist Rostislav Ishchenko, a Russian media analyst featured extensively in Russian media. The interview was published at a time when the Kremlin is seeking an excuse for maintaining and expanding its operations. The article appears on Ukraina.ru, which is a Russian-language media platform launched in 2014, part of the Russian state-controlled RT media group. The website operates as a pro-Kremlin propaganda tool, specializing in spreading disinformation about Ukraine, NATO, and the EU. The page consistently publishes materials that justify Russia’s military aggression, challenge the legitimacy of Ukrainian authorities and promote narratives aimed at undermining Western support for Kyiv.
Check sources:
