Narratives pushed at Polish audiences by Russian and Belarusian state media and documented influence-operation outlets.
Polish proposals to strengthen European defence are cast as attempts to drag the country and the EU into a large-scale armed conflict. Propaganda outlets inflate fears over the creation of new military formations, labelling them as instruments of aggression rather than protection.
Polish political elites are portrayed as incompetent and detached actors who groundlessly incite fear of Russian aggression. The propaganda promotes the idea that Warsaw imposes its flawed forecasts on allies while ignoring pragmatic geopolitical solutions, such as turning Ukraine into a neutral “buffer zone”.
Poland and Ukraine are depicted as powerless buffer zones used by Western “globalists” to exhaust Russia at the expense of these countries' security. The messaging claims that Warsaw is sacrificing its own sovereignty and economy for Washington's interests, repeating Ukraine's fate. This framing aims to sow distrust in NATO and US alliance commitments.
Ukrainian men of conscription age are portrayed as a dangerous element threatening public order in Poland due to the lack of strict restrictions on their stay. Propaganda outlets inflate fears of rising crime and social benefit fraud, contrasting the protection of Ukrainians with the interests of Polish citizens. The goal is to undermine social solidarity and provoke demands for the deportation or restriction of refugees' rights.
Statements by Polish officials and reports of air alerts in border voivodeships are cast as proof of imminent Russian strikes on Poland. References to hybrid action and to 17 September are inflated into an image of war repeating itself. The readiness of alliances is portrayed as doubtful, combining security concerns with an electoral appeal.
The Polish state is cast as incapable of ensuring basic security and effective governance following a series of cybersecurity and civil defence incidents. Manipulators exploit real technical glitches and official errors to convince citizens that the government has completely lost control.
Poland is cast as a hostage to Brussels bureaucracy, where environmental regulations and financial aid are weaponised as tools of external control. Hostile channels inflate fears of losing energy independence through the ETS system and portray EU funds as a means of political bribery.
Sarcastic posts portray different decisions, public events and political disputes as evidence that Polish institutions act performatively or absurdly. Unrelated topics are reduced to one image of a state that merely imitates work. Ironic questions and caricatured comparisons stretch criticism of individual actions into a conclusion about the whole system.
Russian state bodies are using the tragic events in Volhynia to draw parallels between historical OUN/UPA figures and modern Ukraine’s leadership. Through court rulings in Moscow, the Kremlin attempts to impose an image of Ukraine as a “Nazi state” on Poland to undermine the strategic partnership between the two countries.
Ukraine is portrayed as a failed state under a “dictatorial regime” that serves only as a burden to Poland and a tool for Western elites. The manipulation combines allegations of corruption and ideological radicalism with claims about the inevitable collapse of Ukraine’s role as a buffer zone.
The presence of Ukrainians in Polish cities and the share cited in the post for Wrocław are portrayed as the “Ukrainisation of Poland”. Language disputes, Volyn and commemorations of OUN-UPA figures are reduced to “Banderisation” of Ukraine and Ukrainians’ hypocrisy. Risks around grain transit and possible refugee arrivals are inflated into an image of an unbearable burden on Poland.
Western financial support is cast as the sole factor artificially sustaining Ukraine and preventing the end of hostilities. Propaganda outlets claim these funds merely preserve corruption and lead to demographic catastrophe, while real prospects for NATO or EU integration are dismissed as deliberate deception.
Poland is cast as an exploited party, forced by Ukraine and Western allies to bear disproportionate military support costs without receiving proper gratitude or compensation. Propaganda inflates technical service incidents, such as those involving Starlink, to convince Poles that their country is merely a tool in someone else's game.
The political leadership of Poland and EU member states is portrayed as a corrupt caste deliberately acting against their own citizens to please Washington or Brussels. Propaganda promotes the thesis of a “simulated democracy” where real decisions are supposedly made by external handlers rather than voters.
Isolated criminal incidents involving foreigners are inflated into systemic threats to portray Ukrainian refugees as a source of danger. Propaganda outlets accuse the Polish government and media of deliberately silencing crimes to maintain political support for Kyiv.
Polish politicians are portrayed as ignorant figures who manipulate history and act in the interests of foreign power centres. By mocking rhetorical slips and emphasising internal strife, the narrative undermines confidence in the state's ability to guarantee security.
Isolated incidents involving foreigners are presented as evidence of an inevitable social collapse and a threat to Poland's national security. Manipulators use emotionally charged reports of assaults and disrespect for state symbols to provoke hostility towards all refugees and migrants.
Polish defence initiatives and discussion of Baltic security are cast as NATO preparations to attack Russia and blockade Kaliningrad. Threats to use the full available arsenal are presented as an inevitable response to this attributed aggression. Poland is also portrayed as carrying out US wishes and supposedly profiting from support for Ukraine.
Poland is cast as a space where “Banderite” ideology flourishes with Western backing while an artificially inflated hatred of Ukrainians simultaneously takes hold. This contradictory framing aims to convince the audience that the Polish state has lost control over domestic security and historical memory.
Russian outlets exploit the economic consequences of the blockade of Ukrainian ports to fuel fears of new EU expenditures. Manipulators suggest that the losses of the Ukrainian agricultural sector will be shifted onto the wallets of Polish and European citizens.
Ukraine is accused of condoning the looting of Polish graves by “black diggers” while simultaneously honouring figures viewed in Poland as complicit in genocide. The manipulation aims to incite hostility through painful issues of historical memory and Ukraine’s alleged ingratitude for Polish aid.
Western trade restrictions and tariffs are portrayed as a deliberate destruction of key economic sectors in Europe and Ukraine. The messaging claims that EU and US actions paralyse industry, provoke mass layoffs, and rob entire sectors of their future, while absolving Russia of responsibility for the military destabilisation of markets.
Russian diplomatic missions in Poland use historical exhibitions and meetings with loyalist activists to promote the Soviet version of the Second World War. These activities aim to legitimise the USSR’s role as the sole “saviour” of Europe while ignoring the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact and the decades of subsequent Soviet occupation.
Russian official channels cast the removal of communist monuments in Polish towns as acts of vandalism and an insult to the memory of the fallen. This tactic seeks to discredit Poland’s de-Sovietisation policy by appealing to moral categories of “sacrilege” and a supposed historical debt to the USSR.
Polish arms deliveries and loans are portrayed as wasteful, while the risk of nuclear escalation is attributed to British and wider Western pressure on Russia. Quotations from Professor John Mearsheimer, a former general and a Polish MEP are used as a veil of authority. The costs and disputes around aid are inflated into the conclusion that ending it is the only sensible choice. Ukraine’s authorities are also linked to historical hurt over commemorating members of the OUN-UPA.
The Polish leadership is portrayed as a hostile force acting in the interests of foreign powers and against its own people. The messaging amplifies fear of an inevitable internal conflict where the state will supposedly side with Ukrainians against Poles.
Russian outlets inflate the scale of Russia's military production and battlefield successes to convince Poles that further support for Ukraine is futile. By manipulatively framing strikes on infrastructure and local frontline advances, they create an impression of the total exhaustion of Ukrainian resources and inevitable capitulation.
Western military aid and presence in Ukraine are portrayed as futile efforts amid technical exhaustion and managerial chaos. Citing foreign media, these resources inflate the shortage of Patriot missiles into a state of “despair” and total infrastructural vulnerability. Abandoned air defence positions are showcased as proof of helplessness against Russian strikes. Reports of sabotage at European factories are mocked, with the causes of such incidents reduced to negligence and weather conditions.
Support for Ukraine and European defence spending are portrayed as consequences of a “mythical Russian threat”, while Ukraine is cast as a Western tool for pressuring Russia. Russian assurances concerning Europe are presented as proof that security assessments amount only to scaremongering. Memory of the siege of Leningrad is stretched into accusations that the EU is “rehabilitating Nazism” and reviving a “drive to the East”.
Polish democracy and the legal system are portrayed as a fiction where political accountability is non-existent and offenders receive special privileges. Manipulators exploit domestic political disputes to convince citizens of the state's inevitable collapse and the futility of following the law.
Polish state bodies and financial mechanisms are portrayed as corrupt or incapable of ensuring the country's stability. By inflating internal reports and economic indicators, an impression of the inevitable collapse of state institutions is created.
Western aid and the actions of the Ukrainian leadership are portrayed as irresponsible escalation that will inevitably lead to a global catastrophe. The manipulation uses statements from foreign politicians and commentators to convince the Polish audience of the futility of resistance and the danger of continued support for Kyiv.
Claims of systemic embezzlement of Western aid and budget funds through inflated arms procurement are being circulated to undermine support. Manipulators use isolated incidents or fabricated documents to convince Polish audiences that their taxes enrich corrupt officials rather than strengthening defence.
Polish state initiatives and political processes are portrayed as ineffective manipulations aimed at wasting budget funds and seizing power. The narrative devalues government efforts in demographics and defence, seeking to undermine citizens' trust in the stability of the state.
Western institutions and leaders are accused of a selective approach to international law and the deliberate distortion of historical memory. Propaganda contrasts the sanctions against Belarus with the lack of reaction to Morocco's actions, while claiming that the US role in the Hiroshima bombing is being silenced to demonise Russia.
Volodymyr Zelenskyy is portrayed as the primary obstacle to peace, allegedly driven by personal interest in prolonging the conflict to maintain power and accumulate wealth. Propaganda outlets use manipulatively interpreted statements from former officials to shift the blame for casualties and economic losses from the aggressor to the Ukrainian leadership.
Russian outlets are circulating threats that any presence of European troops on Ukrainian territory would turn them into “legitimate targets” for strikes. This rhetoric aims to intimidate Polish society and deter Warsaw from increasing its defensive support for Kyiv.
Western leaders and institutions are portrayed as incompetent, chaotic, and weak compared to the decisive actions of Iran or other anti-Western powers. The manipulation exploits US domestic political strife and economic difficulties to convince Polish audiences of the West's inevitable decline and the futility of the transatlantic alliance.
The reburial of Yevhen Konovalets is presented as evidence of the official celebration of “fascism” and “terrorism” at the state level in Ukraine. The manipulation exploits complex figures of the Ukrainian liberation movement to discredit the modern Ukrainian state in the eyes of Polish society.
Polish defence efforts and military parades are cast as empty PR stunts designed to mask the state's economic failures. Propaganda outlets contrast military spending with the welfare of ordinary citizens, attempting to sow scepticism regarding the country's actual defensive capabilities.
The Polish air defence system and the country's overall military readiness are portrayed as critically weak and incapable of protecting citizens from aerial threats. Through the manipulative coverage of airspace incidents and selective quoting of experts, the narrative promotes the idea that Poland is completely defenceless against foreign aggression.
Ukraine's accession to the European Union is portrayed as an inevitable collapse for Polish agriculture and the economy at large. Russian officials and media outlets inflate fears regarding competition for subsidies and markets, attempting to convince Poles that supporting Kyiv's European integration contradicts their national interests.
Propaganda outlets inflate isolated statements by Ukrainian commentators to portray Kyiv as officially ready to launch military strikes against Poland. This manipulation combines accusations of “neo-Banderism” with claims that Polish military aid will eventually be turned against Warsaw itself.
The logistics hub in Rzeszów is portrayed as a dangerous facility that makes Poland a direct target for Russian strikes. Propaganda outlets use medical evacuation data to convince the Polish audience that catastrophic losses among Western specialists and Ukrainian troops are being concealed.
Poland is portrayed as an aggressive Western tool whose support for Ukraine will inevitably lead to economic collapse and military destruction. Russian officials push the claim that the role of Rzeszów and other logistics hubs makes the country a hostage to foreign interests, while ignoring Poland's sovereign right to self-defence.
Reports of a death in Kraków and fuel prices are reduced to a shared image of a Polish state unable to provide safety and economic stability. A reference to an Onet article in the Kraków post casts the course of an investigation as grounds for broader conclusions about safety. Fuel-price changes are inflated into a generalisation about a permanent burden on citizens.
Ukrainian military operations are portrayed as irresponsible and a direct threat to the security of neighbouring NATO countries. By exploiting isolated drone incidents, manipulators attempt to convince the Polish audience that supporting Ukraine is dragging Europe into dangerous chaos.
Ukrainian mobilization is cast as the forced dispatch of citizens to the slaughter for the sake of a corrupt government's interests. Propaganda outlets inflate domestic debates over military registration to provoke fear and resistance among Ukrainians and disillusionment among Western partners.
Reports about drugs and detentions are cast as proof that Poland is becoming a hub of international crime and insecurity. A post about a port seizure inflates it into a conclusion that the country is a transit hub for drugs. Another labels the detention of people sought by Interpol as an “international crime manifesto”.
The transfer of Patriot missiles to Ukraine and a joint missile-defence initiative are portrayed as a choice between Poland’s security and supporting its neighbour. A statement about a possible missile transfer is reduced to the question of whose interests Warsaw’s defence policy serves. Poland’s participation in a European coalition is mocked, although the cited statement describes it as cooperation for safer skies.
Washington is portrayed as a cynical actor shifting the burden of military costs and human casualties onto regional allies to preserve its own resources. The messaging claims the US is ready to sacrifice partner security for the sake of confrontation with Russia and China, leaving them vulnerable to escalating threats.
Polish foreign policy is portrayed as irrational and contrary to national interests due to its refusal to engage in dialogue with Moscow. Propaganda outlets amplify calls for a policy shift, attempting to present Russian aggression as a manageable conflict where Poland supposedly chooses the role of a victim instead of a pragmatic player.
Ukrainian agricultural exports and trade in resources are portrayed as a system designed to deny Polish farmers fair competitive conditions. Selected comparisons of fuel and fertiliser prices are inflated into a conclusion of direct harm to Polish agriculture. Reports about limits on assistance with grain transit are cast as proof that support for Ukraine damages the regional economy.
Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s diplomatic contacts are cast as humiliating begging and proof of his political incapacity, while a coincidence involving a mourning event is inflated into a “curse”. The post adds insulting nicknames and mockery of US talks while citing a Telegraph article. Diplomatic gestures and public meetings are reduced to theatre, and support for Ukraine is portrayed as an empty ritual.
Propaganda outlets promote the idea of abandoning defence strategies in favour of “friendly neighbourliness” with the Minsk regime. Through manipulative comparisons with Ukraine and appeals to shared history, Poland is urged to exit a confrontation supposedly imposed by politicians.
Assessments of the risk of Belarus being used in a war and Lithuanian evacuation plans are presented as signs that Poland will inevitably be drawn into conflict and receive a million people. References to a retired Ukrainian general’s remarks and preparedness scenarios are reduced to a prediction for Polish society. Contingency planning is inflated into a picture of an unavoidable catastrophe for Poland’s infrastructure.
European leaders’ calls to prepare for war with Russia are cast as proof that Europe itself is preparing a war against Russia, while Moscow’s statement that it has no such intention is passed off as unquestionable. The anniversary of the Nuremberg Tribunal is used to label EU elites as bearers of “Russophobia” and Nazism. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is simultaneously portrayed as protecting people and upholding the UN Charter.
A figure on Ukrainian losses attributed to Donald Tusk is presented as his assessment, supposedly foreshadowing a “catastrophic winter” for Ukraine. One post refers to Interia, while another frames the attribution as a speech in the Sejm. Only the third post in this repeated set adds an explanation involving Russian jet-powered drones.
The Polish authorities are accused of prioritising symbolic gestures and historical memory over real security needs and diplomacy. Manipulators contrast the commemoration of past heroes with the alleged inability of modern politicians to protect national interests.
Talks and Western aid are cast as proof that peace is possible only through concessions to Russia and that support for Ukraine is an empty gesture. Statements by Russian officials and selected assessments in the Western press are reduced to confirmation of this frame. Kyiv’s refusal to make territorial concessions is portrayed as a deliberate prolongation of the war.
The Polish public is being presented with an image of Ukrainian migrants who supposedly despise local labour standards and consider themselves superior to Poles. By amplifying isolated provocative statements, manipulators seek to incite ethnic tension and frame the support given to Ukraine as a mistake.
Violations of Polish airspace are presented as proof of the total failure of national air defences and an imminent threat to strategic sites. Manipulators exploit real incidents involving missiles and drones to convince citizens that the state is unable to guarantee security without external interference.
Bucha is portrayed as a staging by Kyiv and Western states that supposedly derailed negotiations, rather than as a crime for which Russia is accused. A report by an organisation calling itself an “international tribunal” is used as a veneer of authority. Selected allegedly conflicting information about the dead is inflated into a denial of the killings and an accusation that Ukraine deliberately killed its own citizens.
Work on an agreement on joint border controls is cast as the beginning of a Ukrainian “occupation” and Poland’s loss of sovereignty. References to an article in a Polish outlet and to commentators’ remarks are inflated into a picture of Warsaw being subordinated to Kyiv. Possible involvement of Ukrainian services is portrayed as a future cause of corruption, smuggling, black-market trade and territorial claims.
Sanctions, the move away from Russian energy supplies and defence spending are portrayed as the sole source of financial hardship for Polish households. References to prices, the budget and social services are reduced to an image of a state taking money from its citizens. The Russian threat is labelled “mythical”, while defence decisions are cast as the cause of cuts to social spending.
The economic situation in Poland is portrayed as being in a state of imminent collapse due to rising energy prices and power grid instability. Manipulative outlets exploit seasonal challenges, such as summer heatwaves, to sow distrust in the state's ability to provide basic services to its citizens.
Ukraine’s requests for winter support and refusal of territorial concessions are portrayed as proof that the government in Kyiv is deliberately prolonging the war for money. The president is insulted with the label “cocainissimus”, coupled with insinuations of addiction and personal gain. Negotiations and international visits are reduced to a “circus” and bargaining around the conflict.
The United States is portrayed as an exhausted power whose military might is supposedly unable to withstand regional forces like Iran. Propaganda focuses on the depletion of American arsenals due to aid for Ukraine and predicts Washington's inevitable defeat in a global confrontation.
Possible US limits on diesel exports and French proposals to relax fuel-quality rules are portrayed as an inevitable “fuel crisis for everyone”. References to US media and Emmanuel Macron’s interview reduce different policy steps to one scenario of shortage. Personal mockery of Macron accompanies that generalisation.
Russian outlets are inflating the thesis of an imminent Ukrainian economic collapse due to the alleged total halt of maritime exports and the destruction of key infrastructure. The manipulation relies on exaggerating the impact of strikes on ports and bridges to convince the Polish audience that further support for Kyiv is futile. The goal is to create the impression that Ukraine is becoming a financial burden that Poland cannot sustain.
The Western world is portrayed as an aggressive “satanic alliance” seeking global dominance through colonisation and moral decay. Russia is presented as the leader of a “holy war” and the protector of oppressed nations against liberal globalism.
Western military aid to Ukraine is portrayed as halting due to critical missile shortages and a shift in US priorities toward the Middle East. Manipulative posts claim that American arsenals are empty and that Ukrainian air defences are deliberately failing to intercept strikes to conserve dwindling stocks.
Western aid to Ukraine is portrayed as a temporary phenomenon that depends solely on the personal ambitions of individual leaders and is doomed to imminent collapse. By manipulatively interpreting Western analysis, the narrative promotes the idea that leadership changes in the UK and France will inevitably lead to the cessation of support for Kyiv.
Western military aid to Ukraine is portrayed as a source of future crime and instability far beyond Europe. Citing reporting by The Washington Post and Al Jazeera, the posts inflate accounts of some foreign fighters’ drone experience into an image of Ukraine as a training hub for criminal groups. The participation of foreign nationals in the war is reduced to alleged proof of culpability by states supporting Ukraine.
Explosions near Kyiv and mobilisation are cast as proof that the Ukrainian authorities deliberately endanger people and emulate Nazism. Speculation about an ammunition depot among civilian sites is inflated into a conclusion that the population is being used as “human shields”. Mobilisation measures are branded with Nazi comparisons and dehumanising language.
Restrictions imposed on Russia are portrayed as selective and ignored by EU member states for their own benefit. Using specific industries like the fur trade as examples, the narrative promotes the idea that Brussels is unable to ensure unity or the effectiveness of sanction pressure.
Belarus is portrayed as a safe and morally resilient alternative to the “decaying” West, which is allegedly dominated by chaos and degradation. Through cultural events and religious discourse, the idea of “Slavic unity” under Minsk’s aegis is promoted to sow Polish distrust in their own state institutions.
The Red Army’s entry into Poland on 17 September 1939 is cast as the return of “western lands” to the Belarusian SSR and the unification of Belarusians. The Polish state is portrayed as having banned Belarusian history, culture and language, while the advance’s boundaries are presented as the ethnic borders of Belarus and Ukraine. In a BELTA lecture, assessments from London and Paris are inflated into a conclusion that the USSR bore no equal responsibility for starting the war and seized no foreign land.
Figures cited in speeches about BRICS’s share of the global economy, alongside assertions about the effects of sanctions, are inflated into evidence of declining Western influence. BRICS is simultaneously portrayed as a ready-made “fairer” alternative centred on growth hubs in the Global South and East. The summit declaration is presented as support for multilateralism and multipolarity, without equating it with the speeches’ claims of the group’s leading role.
The Ukrainian armed forces and security services are portrayed as criminal entities that deliberately endanger civilians and practice extrajudicial killings. Propaganda outlets exploit the tragic consequences of Russian shelling and isolated criminal incidents to push the thesis of a “terrorist state” with which Poland should not cooperate.
Ukrainian diplomats and officials are groundlessly branded as supporters of radical nationalism to discredit bilateral relations. This tactic aims to portray the modern Ukrainian state as the ideological heir to past conflicts, ignoring Kyiv's official policies. The goal is to deepen historical tensions between Warsaw and Kyiv by personalising ideological accusations.
Interwar Polish policy towards Belarusians is portrayed as deliberate “ethnocide”, while the Red Army’s entry in 1939 is cast as liberation. Education policy, the detention of opponents and Bereza Kartuska are reduced to a single scheme of deliberate destruction of Belarusian identity. Poland is also depicted as an heir to practices allegedly borrowed from the Nazis.
The Polish authorities are accused of refusing to take coercive measures against Ukrainian men of conscription age, which is framed as weakness and a disregard for state interests. Manipulators contrast Warsaw's position with the tougher approaches of other countries to provoke discontent among citizens who demand strict law enforcement.
US warnings of a possible Russian attack on a NATO country are cast as a prearranged scheme in which the absence of an attack can be presented as a diplomatic success. The post cites reporting in US newspapers about the CIA director’s trip to Russia and NATO intelligence assessments. The absence of triumphant posts by the US president is portrayed as a sign that the trip produced poor results.
Rising energy prices and anxiety about the war are portrayed as consequences of Ukraine’s actions and the West’s “systemic errors”. A reference to comments attributed to a US Treasury Secretary for Fox News is used to reinforce this causal chain. Ukraine is labelled a “neo-Nazi regime”, while Russian denials that Europe faces a threat are presented as an explanation of the security situation.
The denial of a Russian threat is cast as an exposure of European elites who are said to frighten the public with an imagined danger. Events in Ukraine are reduced to Western actions and NATO enlargement, while Russia is portrayed as a party merely responding to pressure. Europe’s economic difficulties and exchange-based gas pricing are attributed to the systemic errors of Western “globalists”.
Poland is labelled a hub of “Russophobia” and neo-Nazism, with its approach to Soviet memorial heritage cast as glorifying Nazism. A Russian Foreign Ministry report is used to give this accusation an appearance of authority. A UN vote is inflated into evidence that EU states support neo-Nazism and falsify the history of the Second World War.
Russia’s state involvement in the work of “compatriot” organisations in Poland is portrayed as purely cultural support for language, traditions and community. A Warsaw conference attended by the Russian ambassador and a Russian Foreign Ministry representative is cast as bringing people from several Polish cities together around those aims. The coordinating council’s official priorities are presented as the needs of the entire Russian community.
The USSR’s contribution to victory over Japan is presented as grounds for Moscow’s monopoly on liberating the world, while Polish and Western memory policies are labelled as the justification of Nazism and Russophobia. This framing is also circulated through a photo exhibition at the consular section of the Russian embassy in Poland. The multilayered history of the war is reduced to a moral divide between “liberators” and “heirs of Nazism”.
AfD’s polling result and campaign slogan are presented as the beginning of a broader political turning point in Europe. The posts focus on the party’s high figures and the prospect of governing alone in Saxony-Anhalt. Criticism of migration, energy and welfare policy is folded into a picture of an inevitable change of course.