Propaganda plays a key role in the Russian invasion of Ukraine. However, will those running these campaigns be held responsible? Or maybe it will go dry, because in their defense line they will rely on “freedom of speech”? When exactly the words become war crimes?
The challenge for anyone who tries to make propagandists in court has always been to connect vile words with cruel deeds.
Let's consider Nuremberg processes. One of the propagandists brought to the court Julius Streicher – editor of the venomous anti -Semitic newspaper “Der Sturmer”, a leading ally of Adola Hitler and a senior member of the National Socialist National Party – he was found guilty of incitement to the extermination of Jews.
However, Hans Fritzsche, the eloquent director of the Radio Department of the Ministry of Propaganda and Public Enlightenment and a close associate of Joseph Goebbels, was acquitted. He claimed that he only followed commands and had no idea about the Holocaust. After the trial, new evidence appeared that Fritzsche actively contributed to the murder of Jews in Poland – but it was too late.
Since Nuremberg processes, pulling propagandists has been responsible for mixed results. After the genocide in Rwanda, the heads of the media, who encouraged the militia and called to the extermination of Tutsi, were found guilty of inciting genocide. The Serbian ultranationalist Vojislav Seselj was acquitted, however, because the judges in the Hague were able to determine whether his dehumanizing speeches about Bosnians were aimed at causing specific criminal acts during the Balkan wars.
Currently, pursuit of Russian propagandists. The question is – can their disinformation campaigns be the basis for developing new ways of reaching responsibility?
Not only deeds
Some of the activities undertaken in the fight against propagandists focus on the terrifying language used by the leading Russian hatred instigators. They include even media personalities, which call Ukrainians “sub -cloaks” and call for “deworming”.
A lawyers' coalition, which includes The Nobel Prize winner Oleksandra Matwijczuk submitted an application to the International Criminal Court (MTK). “Every day Ukrainians die under Russian bombs, Ukrainian civilians in the occupied areas are stopped and tortured. These serious violations of human rights would not be possible without a dehumanizing campaign of Russian propagandists, who are as guilty as those who pull the trigger, killing Ukrainian civilians, “wrote the authors of the application.
Russian propagandists, however, intensify violence in a different way – creating disinformation about who is responsible for the war crime before it is committed. Yes, you read well. The language used in such cases is not necessarily mean because the goal is not to dehumanize victims. The idea is to preventive with the fault of someone else – often the victims themselves – for the cruelty that the Russian armed forces intend to commit.
In the joint report, the Reckoning Project and the Global Rights Compliance law firm specializing in humanitarian law mention the consistent use of the so -called information alibi. For the first time they appeared in Syria – Russian diplomats and state media accused the Syrian opposition and emergency services of the use of chemical weapons against civilians, thus creating Alibi for the later use of poisonous gas by the Syrian regime.
Continued article under video material
According to the authors of the report since the Russian invasion of Ukraine, this tactic has gained strength. For example, before Russia bombed the obstetric ward in Mariupol in 2022, the channels on the Telegram and Information Services of Russian Security Services and the Russian ambassador at the UN Wasily Nebenzia accused Ukrainian forces of the use of urban obstetrics as live shields. The subsequent investigation of the UN, as well as reports of the Associated Press and CNN agency, did not show any evidence to support these claims.
Then again the Russians reached for this practice before the attack on the theater in Mariupol in 2022. The correspondent of the Russian newspaper “Komsomolskaja” claimed that the theater in which more than a thousand civilians took refuge, was to be bombed by Ukrainian forces as part of “provocation”. A few days later, the Russian Air Force bombed the theater, dropping two bombs weighing over 500 kg.
So far, there is no evidence of such a “provocation” from Ukraine. Both Amnesty International and the High UN Commissioner for Human Rights confirmed that the theater was destroyed as a result of the raid. The exact number of fatalities is unknown, but the AP agency estimates it at 600.
Planned activities
Although “information alibi” may seem absurd, it serves Russia to apparently denied planned crimes. It is enough to press enough with the message to blur the image of the one who is really responsible for crimes. There are many countries that too willingly reach for excuses, even those doubtful to forgive Russia of its actions, if it serves their pro -Russian politics. Recently, in the leading pro -government Hungarian media, there have even been the claims that the massacre of Ukrainian civilians in Buczy was staged.
Sometimes Alibi can be created several months in advance, as in the case of Russian claims that Ukraine blew up a dam in Nowa Kachowce. Or that the Ukrainian forces used American weapons to murder prisoners of war captured by Russia, who were to accuse the President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelanski of war crimes.
Anti -western Soviet posters at a propaganda exhibition entitled “NATO. History of fraud. History of evil” during the International Youth Festival in Sochi, March 6, 2024.Contributor / Contributor / Getty Images
Sometimes, however, things can take adverse turnover for those who reach for this tactic. For example, on April 8, 2022, the Russian rocket hit the railway station in Kramator, killing 63 civilians. At 10.25, the Russian State Information Agency RIA Novosti published a post in which she found that a Ukrainian rocket was found on the spot. However, the first accounts of eyewitnesses from the scene of the incident began to appear only around 10.30. The agency was in too much rush, wanting to blame Ukraine. What's more, the information was published via Tweetdeck, which can be used to plan posts in advance.
This error shows how digital technology can both strengthen and expose the coordinated nature of “information alibi”. Russia bases its propaganda activities on the channel network on the telegram. One of them is, among others The one with a slightly ironic name “war on fakes” (war with forgery). At first glance, they may seem independent. However, as the Department of Justice of the United States has shown, they work closely with the Kremlin.
Unobvious threat
When propagandists participate in actions coordinated with the armed forces and state authorities to preventive covering up the crime, their role goes beyond typical disinformation. – Sowing doubts that make it difficult to investigate, covering crimes or hindering criminal investigations, propagandists can significantly contribute to achieving a common goal – explains Scott Martin from Global Rights Compliance. They can be compared to drivers escaping from the crime scene, who transport a bank thief or a killer to a crime scene, and then send them.
If it was possible to determine the responsibility for “information alibi” in this way, it would not only be able to carry out court trials with the participation of the accused. It would also allow you to attract, for example, through sanctions. It would also exert more pressure on the technological platforms – one thing is the presence of disinformation on the website, and a completely different enabling coordination of the crime.
In addition, the recognition of the “information alibi” would help democracies in a more pronounced demarcation of freedom of speech from a crime – Especially at a time when there is so much controversy about what statements should be subject to legal regulations. Fruit, mean and offensive political statements are usually not illegal. However, milder statements are often – and often directly contribute to committing real crimes.
The most dangerous words are not necessarily the most aggressive. Often they are rather calm, seemingly balanced, coordinated statements, which are part of the preparation for the murder. It is for them that propagandists should be responsible.
I’m Ashley Davis as an editor, I’m committed to upholding the highest standards of integrity and accuracy in every piece we publish. My work is driven by curiosity, a passion for truth, and a belief that journalism plays a crucial role in shaping public discourse. I strive to tell stories that not only inform but also inspire action and conversation.
