top of page

Propaganda and the Ukraine War

Propaganda and the Ukraine War

October 16, 2022 Father Jerry J. Pokorsky

https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2022/10/16/propaganda-and-the-ukraine-war/

The meaning of propaganda has evolved from simple advertising to promoting biased and misleading information. The art of gleaning facts from various propaganda outlets has become increasingly difficult. Indeed, the mainstream media have mostly become organs of institutional (primarily liberal) propaganda.


Catholic priests, especially in their official capacities, must not distort the Gospel message by repeating propaganda and stay in their lane when enunciating Christian principles. But as Americans, the clergy also have a right to political views, provided they make clear distinctions separating their religious office from their secular opinions. This article is written by an American (call me “Jerry”) and concludes with a brief priestly exhortation (call me “Father”).


There is truth to the Goebbels “Big Lie” maxim often attributed to him: If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it long enough, people will eventually come to believe it. Increasingly, outright lies comprise portions of modern propaganda. But the most effective propaganda is the critical falsehood couched in a comfortable cushion of truth. A few examples: the Russia election interference hoax; the Hunter Biden laptop computer obfuscation by former intelligence officials; BLM violence reported as “largely peaceful”; COVID dissembling; the refusal to investigate attacks on pro-life centers as worthy news; and the failure to analyze FBI police state tactics.


The propaganda and policies have become liberal conventional wisdom, and even the tech giants will not permit dissent. So most people in mid to large government and corporate organizations know their place and remain compliant with silence.


Many of the same propaganda organs are reporting on the war in Ukraine. We are much less likely to believe the general course proposed by a media that happily parrots falsehoods. So perhaps this bundle of various positions (gleaned, for better or worse, from many sources) provokes a desire for facts to prove, disprove, or clarify the respective “propaganda” narratives with integrity.


Let’s begin with pro-Ukraine propaganda


Since the beginning, the same government and media outlets generally indicate that a properly supported Ukraine will successfully repel the Russian invasion. The media have reported Russian aggression, Putin’s dictatorial madness, the incompetence of the Russian military, and the oppression of Russians under Putin’s thumb. Putin poses a threat to the integrity of nations in the new world order. LGBTQ minority groups also suffer under Putin. Who knows how the Russian occupation will affect the Western progressive culture? The Russians deliberately attack civilian targets, including nuclear power plants, electrical grids, and infrastructure targets.


The propaganda warns that a Russian victory in the Russian sectors of Ukraine will also threaten all of Ukraine, the Baltics, the Balkans, Poland, and even other Western countries. Putin is an expansionist and wants to restore the old Soviet Union. So America must do all in its power to defend its European allies regardless of NATO membership. Some conservative U.S. politicians and officials even hope for Russian regime change and the assassination of Putin.


The Russians will soon deplete their stock of munitions. Russia illegally annexed occupied Russian-speaking Ukrainian territories (Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson, and Zaporizhzhia). Economic sanctions will destroy the Russian economy. Ukraine will win in a glorious counteroffensive, provided the West supplies the country with sufficient military and financial assistance.


Western propaganda dismisses the Russian explanation for the invasion as “Russian propaganda.” Putin need not fear Ukrainian membership in NATO. On the eve of the war’s outbreak in February, Ukraine expressed readiness for talks with Russia on neutral status. The Ukrainian position has hardened. President Zelensky said there would be no negotiations with Putin. “We are ready for a dialogue with Russia, but … with another president of Russia.” The Ukraine ambassador to Germany greeted Elon Musk’s proposal for negotiations with “F— off is my very diplomatic reply to you @elonmusk.”


No negotiations. No compromise. Total victory.


Then there’s pro-Russian propaganda

Western propaganda organs quickly dismiss assertions justifying the Russian invasion as unreasonable. But all propaganda is worth considering in light of the facts, however elusive they may be.


The NATO threat justified the aggressive Russian response. Since 2008 (the Bucharest Summit) and well before, Putin vehemently objected to the expansion of NATO into Ukraine, threatening Russian security. Ukraine was never a unified country in history, with swaths of territory belonging to Russia, including Crimea. Even today, these swaths are generally Russian-speaking with generally Russian allegiances. Western Ukrainians often oppress Ukrainian Russians. Nazi influence in Ukraine remains an open sore, a holdover from WWII and Ukraine’s cooperation with the German invaders.


Putin does not intend to seize greater Ukraine despite his feint attack on Kiev early in the war. His interest is restricted to the eastern Russian-speaking portion of the country and extends to Crimea, effectively annexed by Russia in 2014. U.S., NATO, and Ukrainian propaganda distort Russian intentions. Western pressure effectively neutered Zelensky’s openness to negotiations at the war’s beginning.


Had Putin not invaded the eastern region of Ukraine — and if a fragmented Ukraine joins NATO — the West would permanently control Russian-speaking sectors. Russian subjugation by the West is intolerable. Annexing Russian-speaking sectors is necessary before it becomes impossible without violating Article 5 of the NATO charter. Article 5 states that an attack on one member of NATO is an attack on all its members.


Video of Ukrainian torture of Russian prisoners has unified Russian public opinion. The attack on the new Russian bridge in Crimea was an act of Western terrorism calling for a lethal response.


In 2014, the CIA succeeded in aiding a coup in Ukraine that replaced a pro-Russian Ukraine President with an anti-Russian President. NATO’s goals are aggressively anti-Russian. The intolerable meddling reveals the existential threat to Russia by the U.S. and NATO. Trump was unpredictable and not beholden to the military establishment. Biden’s weakness – especially following the fall of Afghanistan – is demonstrable. It was time to make a bold strike to protect long-term Russian interests.


Don’t forget anti-Interventionist propaganda


A small but growing number of conservatives are propagating their opposition to American foreign interventions, with a minority of conservatives (and libertarians) opposing involvement in the Ukraine war. Some defend the Russian action for the reasons indicated above. Others are agnostic due to the shortage of reliably meaningful facts. They argue that the NATO alliance has outlived its usefulness and that Americans have no business taking sides – once again – in an area that is too complicated even for the Europeans. The details of the failed Minsk agreements in 2014 and 2015 reveal entanglements that the U.S. will never understand, much less resolve. Slavic history is too complicated for most Americans and most foreign policy professionals. America has no significant strategic interest in the fight.


Ukraine is historically fragmented and corrupt, run by oligarchs. (There is a saying among Europeans: “Ukrainian oligarchs choose their leaders; Russian leaders choose their oligarchs.” In America, the oligarchs run the military-industrial complex. I added the last to be inclusive.) The Russians are unlikely to have designs in the rest of Europe because their military strength is limited.


Anti-interventionists are suspicious of mainstream pro-Ukraine propaganda. Expansionism is a tall order for an army that the West identifies as incompetent, crumbling, and bumbling. The West tacitly admits this by prolonging the war with immense financial and military assistance to Ukraine. Anti-interventionists believe that nuclear escalation is not in the interest of the Russians despite Putin’s saber-rattling in response to Western threats. Running long-term covert counter-insurgency operations is doomed to failure.


The anti-interventionists hold that the U.S. and the West are wasting the lives of Ukrainian soldiers, but all parties are misreporting casualty figures. The upcoming winter will be a terrible blow to Ukraine and Western Europe. There is an urgency to negotiate a settlement to save lives and to prevent a massive attack by the Russians in the Ukraine winter. Putin is willing to expand the war. He is also ready to negotiate without surrendering occupied territories.


While we’re at it, anti-anti-interventionist propaganda


Mostly in agreement with pro-Ukraine propaganda and the chances for eventual Ukraine victory, many conservatives are appalled by Republican and libertarian anti-interventionists. The U.S. must retain its military might, defend its allies, and defeat the Russian Bear before it gobbles up Europe. The intricacies of Russian and European history are inconsequential to victory. The anti-interventionists are “radical libertarians,” liberals, heretics to the Reagan legacy, and Putin stooges.


Prominent American foreign policy professionals call for draconian measures to defeat the Russians. Former White House national security adviser John Bolton calls for regime change and even the assassination of Putin because Putin is threatening to use nuclear weapons. “I think we should make it clear publicly so that not just Putin but that all the top Russian leadership… that if Putin authorizes the use of a nuclear weapon he’s signing his own suicide note.” He adds, “He’s a legitimate military target… he needs to know that he’s on our target list at this point.”


The anti-anti-interventionists are in league with the Democrats, voting – by wide margins in Congress – for immense financial and military assistance to Ukraine. They are more militant than the Democrats and criticize Democrats for not going far enough in resisting Russian aggression. They fear Russian use of tactical nukes and promise a swift and lethal nuclear response.


Former secretary of state and CIA director Mike Pompeo criticizes the half-measures of the Biden Administration. He contends that the Administration and NATO must confront Russia more directly and use America’s economic leverage over China to force Chinese leaders to “constrain” Vladimir Putin. Otherwise, Putin will likely use nuclear weapons in Ukraine, China will invade Taiwan, and Iran will strike Israel. America’s goal, Pompeo writes, must be a “rapid, comprehensive victory by Ukraine.”


Not to be outdone, here’s propaganda of my own


The scenario provided here is mere guesswork based on the preceding competing propaganda models in search of supporting facts. Take it or leave it. The U.S., the West, and Ukraine will not likely bring an end to the war. The Republican hawks are out of power until at least 2024. Traditional Democrat half-measures and the reluctance to commit troops and air cover will, paradoxically, prevent a nuclear escalation as it prolongs the conflict. The Democrats can also expect a political bonus. Their continuing but comparatively tepid support of Ukraine will effectively divide the Republicans.


During the winter months, while Ukraine and the Western Europe populations freeze with gas shortages, Russia will pound parts of western Ukraine into submission. Many Ukraine officials and oligarchs will flee (if they haven’t already) and blame the West for insufficient aid. Russia will consolidate its gains in the Russian-speaking eastern sectors of Ukraine, secure its progress with troops, and eventually gain the support of the Russian-speaking population. Putin will demand that the rest of Ukraine remain a buffer state, but the West will resist negotiations and lodge repeated official protests. An uneasy unofficial ceasefire will prevail for many years. Russia, China, India, North Korea (and others) will form a new international political and economic bloc. Most Americans will lose interest as financial woes preoccupy America.


Ukraine will squander the vast quantities of American weaponry, leaving the U.S. with a dangerously depleted inventory. China will take advantage of the weakness and threaten to annex Taiwan. Another diplomatic and military drama will unfold.

Republicans will blame Republicans for the failure of the policy of American interventionism. Like the collapse of Afghanistan, the war in Ukraine will badly wound — but not break — the now-traditional interventionist American posture.


Maybe.


Conclusion


As usual, except for the foreign policy elites, we are mere spectators to the continuing crisis in Ukraine. In addition to the inability to receive reliable information on the war, we (de facto) no longer have the right to require our chosen representatives to declare war according to the terms of the U.S. Constitution.


Exercising priestly authority, the clerics must dutifully decry the carnage and encourage a just solution. The laity has the responsibility to address the mess. As Americans – distinctly and consciously apart from their official religious duties – priests have a right to express political views, careful to avoid violating the consciences of those with opposing views.


The Dominican chaplain of the Knights of Columbus recently wrote that the Knights of Columbus Ukraine Solidarity Fund financially supports Ukraine war refugees. As long as the funds do not line the pockets of Ukraine politicians and oligarchs, the fund sounds like a noble enterprise.


However, the priest violated the boundaries separating the religious from the secular spheres when he writes — as the appointed chaplain of the Knight of Columbus: “In the face of the ongoing tragedy of war, injustice and humanitarian disaster inflicted by Russia on Ukraine, no one can remain indifferent. As the world continues to witness the steadfast struggle for freedom that the people of Ukraine endure….” (October 2022 | VOLUME 14 NUMBER 9 | KOFC.ORG/CHAPLAINS)


Sorry, Father. You are writing on behalf of the Church under the auspices of the Knights of Columbus. You are entitled to express your political opinion as an American with truth in labeling. Argue well, but provide the necessary caveats. Do not invoke your priestly authority where it doesn’t belong. Just as it is doubtful that Russia is without sin, it is also improbable that Ukraine, NATO, Western Europe, and the United States are without sin.


A priestly prayer: Pray for an end to the bloodshed and all injustice. Pray for the propagation of the facts that form the basis of truth. May God give us the grace to respond with Christian virtue.

Featured Posts
Check back soon
Once posts are published, you’ll see them here.
Recent Posts
Archive
Search By Tags
Follow Us
  • Facebook Basic Square
  • Twitter Basic Square
  • Google+ Basic Square
bottom of page