Attributing the creation of a “Russian threat” to European governments to retain power

What it claims

The Russian threat is portrayed as a pretext created by European governments to retain power and explain factory closures and job losses to voters. Putin’s and Lavrov’s remarks reduce EU and NATO actions to a search for a permanent enemy. Border defence measures are labelled an expression of “sick fantasy”.

Target audience

Examples (paraphrased)

We paraphrase rather than quote: propaganda's exact wording is built to spread, so we carry the claim and not the craft. Each example cites the post it came from.

• German voters are told that factory closures and job losses result from confrontation with “aggressive Russia”.

  Neues aus Russland (Alina Lipp), 2 Sept 2026 · Archived copy

• EU and NATO governments keep Russia as an artificial enemy because they would lose elections without it.

  Neues aus Russland (Alina Lipp), 3 Sept 2026 · Archived copy

We link archived copies rather than the posts themselves, so that checking our work sends no traffic to the source. Where a platform cannot be archived, we print the post's address instead of linking it.

Goal

To deepen distrust among economically anxious and disaffected people in Germany towards government explanations of security policy and economic hardship, portraying them as tools for retaining power.

Techniques used

• Causal OversimplificationEconomic hardship and security policy are reduced to one motive: governments preserving their hold on power.
• DoubtMeasures on the EU’s eastern borders are labelled the product of “sick fantasy” rather than decisions with their own grounds.

The real grievance it exploits

The narrative seizes on people’s anxiety in Germany about factory closures, job losses and the cost of living, as well as distrust in how politicians explain difficult security decisions.

How to counter

• Technique exposure: Officials’ statements are presented as self-sufficient proof of the motives of every European government. This device erases differences between countries, decisions and public debates.
• Reframe: Economic losses and security concerns can warrant vigorous public debate. They do not, by themselves, substantiate the claim that security policy was invented to preserve power.

Sources (all time)

• Neues aus Russland (Alina Lipp)Tier 1162,983 subscribers
  2 posts · 2–3 Sept 2026

  • 3 Sept · Archived copy
  • 2 Sept · Archived copy
• Node of Time DETier 339,334 subscribers
  2 posts · 5 Sept 2026

  • 5 Sept · t.me/node_of_time_DE/43857
  • 5 Sept · t.me/node_of_time_DE/43854