False Ukraine Narratives: Sleepwalking Us Toward a Great Power War?

Professor Glenn Diesen speaking at Massachusetts Peace Action

I was invited by Massachusetts Peace Action to discuss the narratives used by the US and NATO to pursue a long war in Ukraine. I am very grateful to Massachusetts Peace Action for their initiatives to end the war, as the call for diplomacy has sadly been demonised as “controversial” or even treasonous over the past years.

A key false narrative has been that Russia’s invasion was unprovoked, a lie that largely went unchallenged as any dissent could be portrayed as an effort to “legitimise” or even support the invasion. Once the premise of an unprovoked invasion was established, any diplomacy and negotiations could be presented as “rewarding Putin” and the only solution was a military victory. The obligatory Hitler analogy also meant that negotiations are appeasement and peace requires victory on the battlefield. The injustice and suffering of Ukrainians was weaponised as “helping Ukraine” is consistently translated into further fuelling the war and rejecting diplomacy. Much like in Afghanistan, the war enthusiasm was maintained by the media which presented NATO’s motivations as altruistic and reassured the public that Ukraine was winning. The narratives required for a long war became immune to facts, and the NATO Secretary General announced that weapons are the path to peace.

The war started with the NATO-backed coup in 2014. When Western governments toppled the government in Kiev in 2014 to pull the country into NATO’s orbit, it was known that only 20% of Ukrainians desired NATO membership and NATO knew it would likely trigger a war. CIA Director William Burns had warned already in 2008 that attempting to pull Ukraine into NATO would trigger a civil war and a Russian invasion, while also recognising this is something the Russians would not want to do.

The Minsk Peace Agreement of 2015 was supposed to end the war, yet the Germans, French and Ukrainians later admitted it was merely intended to buy time to arm Ukraine. Zelensky was elected with a landslide victory in 2019 based on a peace platform, yet he was pressured by American-financed “NGOs” and US-backed fascist groups to reverse his position. The peace platform was abandoned, while diplomacy with Donbas and implementing the Minsk agreement were portrayed as “capitulation”. When Russia demanded security guarantees in 2021 as Ukraine was becoming a de facto NATO member, the US and NATO refused to offer anything of value. Kurt Volker, the former US ambassador to NATO and US Special Representative for Ukraine Negotiations, even argued in favour of no agreements as he wrote that “success is confrontation”.

Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022 to impose a political settlement, and contacted Zelensky on the first day to start the negotiations. The US responded by sabotaging the peace negotiations in Istanbul, and Zelensky also confirmed the US preferred a long war to weaken Russia even if this meant the destruction of Ukraine. As recognised by the Israeli and Turkish mediators, and other leading officials from NATO countries – the US saw an opportunity to weaken its strategic rival by fighting with Ukrainians.

If propaganda fuels wars, then the truth can end wars. The media that lied about every important aspect of the war and the politicians who refused to even sit down with Russia as hundreds of thousands died have no moral credibility or right to lecture those who call for diplomacy.