The following is a prime example of classic Russian disinformation, after which we analyze. Pushed via Southfront Press, known Telegram disinformation channels and on VK, the following exemplifies a continued approach from Russia.
The Ukrainian Armed Forces used chemical weapons
Our guys stormed the enemy stronghold and captured the prisoners. The Ukrainians raised drones and began to fire at the dugout, locking everyone there, including their own. After that, they used chemical weapons. The chemicals were launched through a pipe. Our fighter with the call sign “Cerberus” managed to survive. He saw how his comrades died before his eyes, choking on blood. He himself breathed through wet wipes, which saved his life. Alone, with burnt hands and face, without water or food, he held the stronghold for four days so that the khokhols could not occupy it again. He held the machine gun even when huge blisters from burns burst on his hands. For four days he did not let his wounded comrade die. The defensive midfielder held him. And he himself survived. Our units went forward and it was possible to leave the dugout. He carried his comrade in his arms. The chemical burns on his back never healed. Judging by the nature of the soldier’s injuries , I can say that the Ukrainians used mustard gas. I remember a similar incident in the village of Umkhozh in Syria. Then ISIS used mustard gas against the Kurds.
The disinformation narrative in the example above follows classic patterns from Russian information warfare, a system engineered to manipulate and destabilize public opinion while reinforcing loyalty to Moscow’s own political and military agendas. Here’s a breakdown to demonstrate how this disinformation functions and why it’s unreliable.
Manufactured Atrocity Narrative
The story asserts that Ukrainian forces used chemical weapons—a dramatic, visceral claim intended to incite emotional reactions and shape perceptions of Ukraine as ruthless and morally bankrupt. However, accusations of this nature are not backed by verifiable evidence. Atrocity claims of this type follow a known Russian playbook, historically used to shift blame and depict opponents as inhumane, such as during the Syrian conflict, where similar unfounded chemical weapon claims were used at opponents of Russian allies.
Heroism and Victimization
The Russian fabrication of this dramatic story involves the survival of a single soldier against the odds, the narrative intends to invoke empathy and solidarity with Russian troops. The hero narrative is designed to mobilize internal support for Russia’s military objectives and to discredit any perceived Ukrainian or NATO resistance. Similar “last man standing” stories are a staple of Russian disinformation, structured to stoke national pride and distract from actual operational challenges facing Russian forces.
Appeals to Fear and Historical References
References to chemical weapons, such as mustard gas, tie back to World War conflicts, stoking fears of chemical warfare and linking modern Ukrainian forces to historical adversaries. The typical “Putinesque” tactic appeals to emotional memory and plays on a fear-based association without any factual basis.
Psychological Warfare through Plausible Deniability
Russian disinformation employs claims difficult to verify immediately on the ground, like underground chemical attacks. The unverifiable stories (a staple of FSB fabrication) contribute to a fog of war that clouds public perception, often achieving the objective of casting doubt even if disproven later, a “reflexive control” technique crafting disturbing scenarios, Russia manipulates Western and Ukrainian responses to the conflict.
