"Tonton complotiste est invité à dîner" explore la mécanique du complotisme à l’ère des réseaux, et comment y répondre sans perdre le lien humain.
On y parle de doute, de peur, de colère - et de ce que nous faisons de tout ça.
amazon.fr/dp/B0FXVVFR7V
Ludmila Sterone Officiel🇫🇷🇺🇦🇪🇺 retweeted
The President of Finland & PM of Norway demonstrated their Russophobia by failing to agree that Jaroslav the Wise's protection of the Pechenegs in the 11th century is the root of why Ukraine attacked itself.
Très intéressant,pour comprendre la mentalité russe et leur perception du monde
Very interesting focus groups with Russians on their view of the war.
“A striking feature across all groups is a lack of compassion for others, be it towards Ukrainians or fellow Russians sent to fight. And, although some express worries about family members getting conscripted, this does not translate into sympathy for those at the front now. In fact, people dread the return of veterans, fearing new violence at home. (…)
When asked if Ukraine is a sovereign country, very few reply with a firm “Yes”. Most say it is not sovereign, or not fully so—if Ukraine is mentioned among the adversaries, it is usually the “Ukrainian regime”, not the country. There is a recognition that Ukraine became a full-fledged, independent state in 1991; but, after that, people believe something happened that caused it to lose sovereignty. They struggle to explain what precisely this was.
(….)
If the list of Russia’s allies is quite short, the list of unfriendly states is long. “Well—everyone else”, is often the first reply. The bigger European countries—Britain, France and Germany—are usually named first, followed by the Baltic states, Finland and Poland; sometimes also countries like India and Turkey. NATO is an enemy too, for most respondents—one explains that it is because “NATO keeps encroaching on other countries to bring about so-called democracy with bombs.” Ukraine is mentioned, but not as a first choice and somewhat hesitantly—not because it is not seen as an enemy, but because, as explored above, Russians might not regard it as a proper country. And even where it is mentioned, few participants connect its “enemy” status to Russia’s own invasion of Ukraine.
(…)
Europe’s image seems in many ways in sync with the Kremlin’s own rhetoric. People criticise it for “gay parades”, for “women at the helm”, for didactic lecturing. In some groups, people get into exchanges about Europe’s decline: some maintain Europe is withering away, pointing to pride marches and migrants as proof. Others point out that many states want to join the EU just to benefit from Germany’s or France’s economic might, or because they would otherwise be weaker on their own.
(…)
Almost no one connects the perceived European “antagonism” to Russia with Europe’s reaction to Putin’s invasion of Ukraine or any other actions by Russia. “I don’t know why the Finns are so antagonistic to us. Maybe they never got over the fact that we took over Karelia in 1940”, opines one respondent. Others complain about their positive attitude towards the Baltic states and these states’ negative attitude towards Russia: “I don’t know why they [the Baltic states] are so adversarial, most probably they were ordered to be like that”, concludes another participant. Confusion, propaganda, wilful ignorance and lack of curiosity probably all play their role in shaping Russians’ perceptions of their country and its external relations. And it also helps explain why the war in Ukraine still seems distant to many in Russia—and why Europe’s own reaction to the war is overwhelmingly seen as negative, almost unfair.
This brings to mind a conversation held by one of the authors with a Moscow sociologist long before the war. Explaining how the Russian people form opinions about the West, the scholar noted that Russia’s own role tends to get forgotten. “For instance, Russia invades Georgia—there is some outcry, then the West imposes sanctions, and soon the population will have decided that the hostile West has attacked Russia with sanctions. That something happened that led to it, that Russia did something—that is soon overlooked. People settle on the opinion that these small countries do not really matter, no one very much needs them, this is all about the West’s competition with Russia.” Some participants in the focus groups echo this: “On what basis is the US even imposing sanctions on us?!” asks one puzzled respondent.”
ecfr.eu/publication/bewitche… via @ecfr
Ludmila Sterone Officiel🇫🇷🇺🇦🇪🇺 retweeted
If Russia didn’t meddle in Ukrainian politics Yanukovych would have signed the Association Agreement with the EU in 2013, if Yanukovych had signed the agreement Maidan wouldn’t have taken place.
Meaning that none of the things that happened would have happened if Russia just didn’t meddle in Ukraine.
L'Otan ne s'est pas étendu vers l'Est, ce sont les pays d'Europe centrale qui ont décidé de se rapprocher vers l'Ouest.
Ludmila Sterone Officiel🇫🇷🇺🇦🇪🇺 retweeted
In today’s Vatnik Soup, our 400th (!), we introduce the Vatnik Archetype: the recurring character who claims to oppose war while defending invasions, claims to fight imperialism while serving Moscow, and claims to seek truth while repeating the vilest propaganda.
1/21
Ludmila Sterone Officiel🇫🇷🇺🇦🇪🇺 retweeted
In case you thought this was ever about NATO or the Nazis.
Russian President Vladimir Putin cited genetics to declare that Russians and Ukrainians are “one people” and reiterated his claim to Ukrainian territory, saying: “I think that it is not their territory but the historical territory of Russia.” wapo.st/48aZaZF
Ludmila Sterone Officiel🇫🇷🇺🇦🇪🇺 retweeted
Die Behauptung, Russland sei mit Minsk II betrogen worden, gehört zu den beliebtesten prorussischen Propagandamärchen.
1. Russland hat das Abkommen selbst unterzeichnet, wurde darin aber nicht als Kriegspartei benannt, obwohl es genau das war. So hat der Westen Moskaus erlaubt, lediglich als Vermittler aufzutreten.
2. Russland und die von ihm unterstützten Kräfte haben den Waffenstillstand bereits am ersten Tag seines Inkrafttretens gebrochen, indem sie die Offensive auf Debalzewe fortsetzten.
3. Minsk II verlangte ausdrücklich den Abzug aller ausländischen bewaffneten Truppen und ihrer Ausrüstung. Russland hat das aktiv unterlaufen.
4. Die Behauptung, Minsk II habe lediglich dazu gedient, die Ukraine „aufzurüsten“, ist geradezu grotesk angesichts der deutschen Weigerung, dem Land Waffen zu liefern. Man setzte auf Diplomatie und wollte eine weitere Eskalation mit Russland vermeiden. Auch andere westliche Staaten leisteten nur sehr geringe militärische Unterstützung.
5. Russland hat Minsk II am Ende selbst torpediert: Mit der Anerkennung der sogenannten Volksrepubliken im Februar 2022 zerstörte Putin das zentrale Ziel des Abkommens, diese Gebiete als Teil der Ukraine zu erhalten. Ausgerechnet Moskau inszeniert sich als betrogene Vertragspartei.
Dass die Ukraine die gewonnene Zeit nutzte, um stärker zu werden, ist kein Beleg für einen „Betrug“. Minsk II verpflichtete sie weder zur Wehrlosigkeit noch zum Verzicht auf westliche Waffen.
Ludmila Sterone Officiel🇫🇷🇺🇦🇪🇺 retweeted
I don’t think Europeans fully appreciate what is happening to the European Union right now.
The EU is under an extraordinary, multi-front assault, both from outside and from within. And I struggle to think of another period in its history when so many powerful actors had an interest in weakening it simultaneously.
Russia has spent years waging hybrid warfare against Europe. Weaponised migration, sabotage, cyberattacks, coordinated disinformation campaigns, bot networks and political interference. The objective is clear: undermine trust in democratic institutions, deepen social divisions and weaken European unity.
China has different motivations, primarily economic and geopolitical. A fragmented Europe is easier to pressure, easier to negotiate with individually and less capable of defending its economic interests.
And then there is the United States. Perhaps the most disturbing development of all.
Under Trump and MAGA, a country that helped rebuild the old continent and then spent decades supporting European integration now has an administration openly hostile to much of what the EU represents. Its own National Security Strategy even calls for cultivating resistance to Europe’s current political direction.
Think about that for a moment.
Meanwhile, within Europe, parts of the far right and far left amplify these divisions, whether through ideological alignment, political opportunism or outright sympathy for authoritarian regimes.
This doesn’t mean Russia, China and MAGA are all following some jointly coordinated master plan. They don’t have to. Their interests increasingly overlap, and Europe’s internal divisions make their work considerably easier.
What makes this particularly alarming is what is actually at stake.
For all its flaws, the EU remains one of the world’s most consequential projects built around liberal democracy, the rule of law, individual freedoms and cooperation between nations.
At a time when authoritarianism is gaining ground and even longstanding democracies are showing disturbing tendencies, that matters enormously.
Europe is far from perfect. Its bureaucracy, indecision and inability to act decisively are real problems. But the answer cannot be to retreat into 27 competing nation-states, each too small to meaningfully influence a world increasingly dominated by continental powers.
Quite the opposite.
Europe needs deeper integration, stronger common institutions, genuine strategic autonomy and the political courage to defend its interests and values.
Because fragmentation is precisely what so many external actors want.
And perhaps that’s the central irony of our time: people are being deliberately manipulated into believing that the reverse is true — that national identity and sovereignty can only be protected by weakening European cooperation. In reality, a divided Europe is less sovereign, less secure and far easier for outside powers to pressure. Therefore the very thing that will make Europe stronger is the thing its adversaries are working hardest to prevent.
A united Europe is a geopolitical power. A divided Europe is a collection of countries waiting to be played against one another.
Ludmila Sterone Officiel🇫🇷🇺🇦🇪🇺 retweeted
Дві ядерні держави, які за Будапештським меморандумом зобов’язувалися поважати територіальну цілісність України, тепер спільними зусиллями намагаються примусити її до капітуляції. Одна завдає ударів, інша – позбавляє можливості захиститися.
Nos souverainistes sont convaincus que 🇺🇦 est un proxy US pour affaiblir la russie, et que la guerre a été provoquée pour les intérêts américains. Ils voient que les US poussent a la capitulation de l'Ukraine, font des projets de business avec la russie et coupent toute aide?
Ludmila Sterone Officiel🇫🇷🇺🇦🇪🇺 retweeted
Keep in mind that Musk cutting off Starlink to Ukrainian Forces doesn't affect Ukraine's strikes on Russian territory, as it's already blocked there.
This is Musk purely attempting to limit Ukraine's strikes on Russians INSIDE Ukraine.
Any European governments using Starlink need to understand that the pro-Russian owner of Starlink will cut your defenses at any time if the price is right.
Starlink is a security threat to Europe. Nothing coming from the US can be trusted anymore. Wake up, Europe! (And while you at it, get rid of F35s that can be bricked, too)
Ludmila Sterone Officiel🇫🇷🇺🇦🇪🇺 retweeted
Feelings in Kyiv running very high following latest. “If Trump had been running United States back in 1939, I think he would have been Hitler’s ally,” says an intelligence source. “And on the site of the Warsaw Ghetto, Witkoff and Kushner would have built a posh hotel complex.”
Si je comprend bien les patriotes en carton poutinistes: "la russie voulait prendre l'Ukraine car ne voulait pas de l'Otan a ses portes". Dommage, l'Ukraine borde 4 pays dans l'Otan. Donc 4 fois plus de problèmes in fine, non? ( sans parler de la Suède et de la Finlande)



















