…
Both Russia and China are critical of the “international rules-based order”, a framework of liberal rules and political norms that emerged after the second world war. They see this order as western-centric and want to reshape the global order in their interest.
Military and economic collaboration form part of their efforts to challenge this order, but global media and online spaces are important too. Both states, for example, frequently disseminate stories that portray western countries as neo-colonial powers.
Another theme is that democracies are hypocritical actors who preach equality and fairness but do not practice it. Stories of a lack of unity in western alliances like Nato or the EU are also consistent in Russian and Chinese narration. Conversely, Russia and China are presented as logical and sane countries, seeking to protect other, more vulnerable nations from western exploitation.
…
It’s often the way a story is told that misleads. Details are withheld or taken out of context. Speculative information is presented as fact. This creates a distorted version of the truth.
The stories are often told in emotive terms in a bid to trigger our anger, shock, fear or resentment. For example, in the context of the war in Ukraine, disinformation might suggest that our governments are betraying us by getting involved in foreign wars, or that ordinary citizens are the ones paying the price for the ambitions of a corrupt elite.
They are laden with scandal and sensationalism, skipping nuance in favour of emotional resonance. This ensures the stories are shared and promoted across social media.
The truth can be complex and, at times, boring. Yet by capitalising on our tendency to gravitate towards the sensational, Russia and China can drip-feed a specific worldview into our own – where democracy is ineffective and chaotic and where they offer a fairer, functional future.
…
Not a Westerner, but randomly saw this in my feed and read the content quoted in the text.
Your govt’s are indeed problematic in foreign affairs, right? Not saying that it is illogical, but problematic because it is inherently focused on western dominance
Trump ordering hits on boats. And Trump openly talks about annexing countries.How the US went to Iraq war, based on exaggerations of WMD’s. How even before that US was supporting apartheid South Africa and had Mandela in a terror list?
ICE kidnapping people, deporting them to secret locations. Should mention Guantanamo bay and similar things too.If it was freedom and democracy, wouldn’t western govt’s also send military and aid to Gaza to save them? So, Ukraine is indeed a strategetic choice. Or it’s part racism?
Also, don’t African countries have concerns on neocolonialism by the West? French influence on former colonies via the currency?
And might be unpopular, but Russia was indeed a victim(considering the disintegration era), right? Like, they opened up and saw significant drops in key QoL figures, like the life expectancy.
One reason why Putin gets support is because of how his time started the transition out of the drop, right?Not saying that they are saviors, but that they are potential alternatives to the West. More options
Do you realize that your comment is a testament to everything that this article is postulating?
Or quoting the article,
- Details are withheld or taken out of context.
- Speculative information is presented as fact.
- The stories are often told in emotive terms in a bid to trigger our anger, shock, fear or resentment.
Did you not realise that my comment was saying that the article was trivialising the mistakes of the west?
The content of the article applies to the Western countries too, but withholds that.
Quoting what you quoted:- Details are withheld or taken out of context.
- Speculative information is presented as fact.
- The stories are often told in emotive terms in a bid to trigger our anger, shock, fear or resentment.
Also, the artcile admits that there are kernels of truth. But are those truths being confronted?
The trivialisation is indeed a reason why China and Russia are getting more support in developing countries, which have the history of facing Western colonialisation.
The people know that it is a fight for dominance and we don’t need to take western narratives at face value.
Also, even outside foreign intervention, the democracy and freedom image gets tarnished with all that is happening in America and EU, with the RW rising and taking power.
Maybe generalising “The West”, using some pop culture failures of the West, says it all for you. Your examples and quotes fit the Ruso-Sino anti Western playbook, which describes how to undermine democracies from within. And as I have read those playbooks, I recognise these narratives, as you probably should too.
What about this and what about that, doesn’t change that China and Russia are aggressively involved in a hybrid war. That Europe has made mistakes, and probably will continue to do so, is inherently connected to politics and powerplay. Something that happens in all counties and states, throughout all ages. This isn’t unique nor really a unique trait. The rise of rightwinged politics, is likewise a global phenomena. In the case of Putin, XIjin Pin, their countries have become under an even stricter authoritarian rule.
Also, the whole article is basically explaining how information is used in way to discredit Europe. In a European context describing Trump’s action as example of " The West" isn’t very relevant. He’s disliked here. So yes, Europe isn’t perfect, the first to admit that are Europeans. But when we are being bashed for the sake of bashing, that’s not longer a dialogue.
Disinformation is an issue in India as well( diplomat; euvsdisinfo; vajiaro)
And as I have read those playbooks, I recognise these narratives, as you probably should too.
Is there a literal playbook for it? Please do link it or mention its name. And if you have access to or know the playbook by the West, please share that too.
And could the playbook rhetoric be a part of that playbook, used for trivialising things?
People in developing countries do notice both playbooks.
Regarding Trump, even before him EU haa generally followed US invasions. Trump is the most recent and most open(which obviously puts off many on their own side, who like to dress it up or self-justify their actions).
So yes, Europe isn’t perfect, the first to admit that are Europeans. But when we are being bashed for the sake of bashing, that’s not longer a dialogue.
Disinformation is an issue in India as well
Yep. And as you said, Indians are the first to admit it and talk against it.
there a literal playbook for it? Please do link it or mention its name. And if you have access to or know the playbook by the West, please share that too.
Yes, there are several playbooks the main one for me was an English translation of a leaked KGB/ FSB paper from some years ago. I did find some other links like these: ecfr; csis playbook and europarl There are many stages in the playbook its quite complex. Having some educational background and knowledge of public influence helps.
For “the West”, as you keep saying, I’m not exactly sure what you mean. There is "no West “, so to speak, as it’s actually used as a framework to be positioned against the East , or Global South. Normally the richer, (social) democratic countries. In geopolitical sense “The West” is indeed considered something like a Pact due to NATO & friends. Does NATO have a playbook? For sure, for example this To understand " the West” it’s important to understand what came after WW2 in Europe, when Russia profiled itself more and more as an enemy than a friend. It invaded and annexed many European countries during and after WW2. After Glasnost and Moscow coupe by Jeltsin, and the Putin first presidency,. Russia and Europe became like partners. That is until Putin betrayed Europe by new invasions, in Georgia, Chechia, and specially after Ukraine. That’s also part of the European playbook. Then thirdly, part of Europe was and still is under USA influence. This is no real secret, it’s just part of our geopolitical history. But also realize that in the West many countries have their own agenda. Europe is not the USA. I hope this gives some answer to your questions. Everything else can be found online, if you know where and how to look ( which nowadays is an art in itself with the ongoing enshitification).
And ofcourse, as an emerging superpower, India has it’s own playbook as well.
Add: I responded in good faith, so I do hope my efforts are not in vain.
Is there a leaked NATO playbook.
The article on NATO seems to be painting it in a positive way and does not detail nor critique it’s policies unlike the other articles you shared against the ones whom NATO targets.For “the West”, as you keep saying, I’m not exactly sure what you mean. There is "no West ", so to speak, as it’s actually used as a framework to be positioned against the East , or Global South.
USA America, western colonial nations etc.
USA + EU in general sense. As you said, NATO and its collaborators would be more accurate.To understand " the West" it’s important to understand what came after WW2 in Europe, when Russia profiled itself more and more as an enemy than a friend. It invaded and annexed many European countries during and after WW2
Wasn’t the West afraid of Soviet influence too? Or more accurately, loss of control over Easter Europe?
Operation Gladio would come under NATO playbook, right?Add: I responded in good faith, so I do hope my efforts are not in vain.
Thank you. Me too. I too commented in good faith. Hoped that you were actually responding in good faith too.
Anyway, thanks for the links. Will try to read them or get through summaries and also search for articles critiquing the NATO’s and EU’s playbook too
allright here we go;
there a leaked NATO playbook.
The article on NATO seems to be painting it in a positive wayFirst of all I want to point out that we are both reacting on an article about Russian & Chinese disinformation campaigns. In that context we have been discussing things. The term" playbook" I then used is obviously meant as a reference to a certain strategy, methodology & script if you will, of their plans concerning the hybrid war they are unleashing. To be clear, they deny 100% this is the case, regardelss of the many evidence that they in fact are orchestrating and executing this hybrid war.
So to you, there appears to be some doubt concerning this allegation. Maybe this is true for you, however I have no doubts.
So the playbooks I shared earlier, are about the sino-russian strategy and the reaction to that hybrid war…Whether Nato is then painted in a positive way is not the issue, as they play a part. If you want critique of Nato, I still am unsure as what you mean; except that like China and Russia ( and some others) don’t like Nato.
western colonial nations
The West aren’t especially the only colonial countries in the wide context of time. Many empires are colonial in a sense. But yes, the largest and most successful colonial empire was European. Momentarily, and more or less since like after the WW 2 the European colonial empires ( & mostly imperialistic mentality) ended.
This is however NOT the case for China nor Rusia. They still are imperialistic countries annexing territories and free independent countries. Isn’t this a problem India has in as well, and especially near the North-East border? So the " East" is therefore momentarily actually a real imperialistic & colonial power, the west not so much for the last like 80- 100 years.
Wasn’t the West afraid of Soviet influence too?
Afraid, as in very concerned, ofc. Russia annexed part of Eastern Europe, which was and is now central Europe between( 1917 - 1970) or so, and then more recently continued in Ukraine. They are imperialistic. So yes, Europe is very worried, and rightly so. Also West- Russia was until 1917 quite connected to Europe (or some say just European) via for example the monarchy, to complicate matters more.
[Operation Gladio] Thanks for your infon on this. Had never heard of this. But I’m not surprised. Governments do have spies and they have their operations. at times. Public knowledge of that, is only disclosed many decades after the fact.
I only know, just like OP’s article that we in Europe are in hybrid (reactive) war against Russia ( and a bit China probably, but idk). And that, Europe likes to promote or influence other counties to have humanrights, democracies and want to trade. Here too there are some bad politicians and bad oligarchs and so on. Probably a bit less corruption than other countries. And they normally face consequences for their bad actions. Which is imo, is good thing.
So, what’s your train of thought, when asking for critique about Nato? Usually Nato is a defense project ; except imo for Iraq which was imo a real bad choice, and was also widely publicly criticised.
