{"id":24523,"date":"2024-04-26T18:39:07","date_gmt":"2024-04-26T15:39:07","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/factcheck.bg\/?p=24523"},"modified":"2025-02-16T00:23:32","modified_gmt":"2025-02-15T22:23:32","slug":"navalny-s-death-mobilized-the-kremlin-s-entire-propaganda-arsenal","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/factcheck.bg\/en\/navalny-s-death-mobilized-the-kremlin-s-entire-propaganda-arsenal\/","title":{"rendered":"Navalny’s death mobilized the Kremlin’s entire propaganda arsenal"},"content":{"rendered":"

The death of the Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny has triggered a process of creation of numerous versions of what happened and how it happened, and who is (not) responsible for it.<\/span><\/p>\n

All of them emphasise the absence of any link whatsoever between the politician’s death and Putin’s regime, <\/strong>while featuring plotlines often verging on conspiracy theory.<\/span><\/p>\n

These anti-narratives about Navalny bring together all the propaganda theses that the Kremlin uses to discredit not just the image of its political opposition, but the very idea of a democratic opposition in general. Like everything that comes from liberal democracy, the opposition is also morally degraded, “sexually deformed”. To be in opposition to the government means to be a traitor, an enemy of the state writes historian Timothy Snyder in his book The Road to Unfreedom: Russia, Europe, America<\/a>. And if you are a traitor and an enemy, then inevitably you are working with other enemies of Russia \u2014 the West, the USA, and the CIA. <\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"

Navalny\u2019s death as Western provocation<\/h3>\n

The news of Navalny’s death arrived during the opening of the Munich Security Conference and, according to the Kremlin, this was no mere coincidence. So, the story goes, the opposition leader died “right on time” \u2014 on the eve of the second anniversary of the attack on Ukraine (i.e., the special military operation) and a month before Russia\u2019s presidential elections. This was also after Vladimir Putin’s interview with Tucker Carlson had had a “amazing effect on the world<\/a>\u201d, according to RT’s editor-in-chief Margarita Simonyan.<\/p>\n

\"\"

Most state leaders reacted immediately, directly or indirectly pointing to Putin’s regime <\/a>as responsible for the death of the opposition leader. For Moscow, these reactions are a convenient pretext to declare that the West was “prepared for the news” and that another campaign against Russia was now underway.<\/p>\n

Kremlin press secretary Dmitry Peskov described the leaders\u2019 statements as “hysterical, absolutely inappropriate, and unacceptable\u201d.<\/p>\n

\"\"

“The immediate reaction of NATO leaders is self-explanatory\u201d, wrote Maria Zakharova, spokesperson for the Russian Foreign Ministry, on Telegram. Minutes later, in her next post, she further developed her thesis that these reactions were the result of a “premade methodology” and employing the old strategy to “just blame Russia for anything”.<\/p>\n

\"\"

“Our opposition isn\u2019t an opposition; it\u2019s a cult. The tell-tale signs of a totalitarian cult are there (…). All these cult members in Munich were prepared; they even had obituaries ready\u201d, commented on the death of Navalny Vladimir Solovyov<\/a>, one of the Kremlin’s favorite propagandists, in his show. He added that he didn\u2019t think he was violating Christian values by not speaking well of the deceased.<\/p>\n

\"\"

At the same time, there has also been a campaign to discredit the West. It is suggested that behind the “feigned interest” in Navalny, other goals such as imposing sanctions and seeking political propaganda are evident.<\/p>\n

\"\"

The West is accused of Russophobic prejudices and applying double standards against Russia. The most commonly used “counterpoint to Navalny” is Julian Assange, who is serving a sentence in the UK. <\/span><\/p>\n\r\n