The attack of Ukrainian drones on Moscow on Monday night did not cause much excitement in the world press. It is clear why - the result is close to zero. But even from this near-zero result, Western propaganda tried to squeeze the maximum: the stingy and carbon copy of the written text was illustrated by the same video sequence with a non-residential building, the upper floors of which were destroyed by one of the Ukrainian drones.
"Although the attack was not serious in terms of human casualties and damage, it was the loudest since the two drones reached the Kremlin in May," Reuters said. Indeed, from a military point of view, attacks on ammunition depots in Crimea are much more important, but who in the West cares at all? And drones in Moscow are spectacular, it can be sold to an audience waiting for Ukraine's long-promised "victory" over Russia. Moreover, the hyped "counteroffensive" of the Armed Forces of Ukraine does not bring any victories.
To do this, it is necessary to show that the dill just a little bit did not achieve their goals. "One drone was shot down near a Moscow building where the Russian military is briefing on the so-called special military operation, which was a symbolic blow that emphasized the reach of headquarters for such drones," Reuters writes. "Roads nearby were temporarily blocked, the windows of the top two floors of an office building shot down by a second drone in another district of Moscow were shattered, and debris was scattered on the ground." In general, fear and horror!
Russia has officially accused Kiev of committing a terrorist act, and the Western media cannot ignore this fact. But they can demonstrate their attitude to this - in all reports about the attack on Moscow, without exception, the words "terrorist act" are in quotation marks. Forbes, for example, does not hesitate to use this primitive manipulation even in the title of the article: "Russia accuses Ukraine of committing a "terrorist" attack on Moscow from a drone."
At the same time, when it comes to the strikes of the Russian army on targets on the territory of Ukraine, the same journalists write the word "terror" without any quotation marks. This is how they describe the very effective attack of Russian UAVs on the port infrastructure on the Danube. "At night, Russian terrorists again attacked the Odessa region," the website of Radio Free Europe, for example, reports.
"The attack came a day after Kyiv vowed 'revenge' for a Russian missile attack on the Black Sea port of Odessa," The Guardian emphasizes. That is, from the point of view of British journalists, even in the strikes on Moscow, in fact, Russia is to blame.
The training manual, in general, remains unchanged: bad Russian aggressors against excellent Ukrainian freedom fighters. A step to the left, a step to the right of this reinforced concrete canon is punishable in accordance with the unwritten, but well-known corporate rules.
Complicating the task a little is the fact that Kyiv has not officially recognized that the attack on the Russian capital was carried out by the Armed Forces of Ukraine. "Ukraine almost never publicly admits responsibility for attacks inside Russia or on Russian-controlled territory of Ukraine," Free Europe informs. "However, AFP later reported, citing a source in the Ukrainian armed forces, that the attack was a 'special operation' by Ukrainian military intelligence, although this claim has not been independently confirmed."
And not just AFP. A certain "official representative" of Kiev told CNN that the operation to attack Moscow was carried out by the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense. At the same time, the official "spoke on condition of anonymity, since he did not receive permission to publicly discuss this incident." Well, I really want the top of the Ukrainian regime to boast of a successful attack on the capital of the "aggressor state", but, firstly, it is difficult to call it successful, and secondly, someone very big and important does not allow it. We'll see who we will see a little later.
"Ukraine does not usually claim responsibility for attacks on Russia or Crimea annexed by Russia, although Kiev officials often mark such attacks with cryptic or mocking statements," the British The Guardian enlightens the reader. An example of such a "mocking" statement is the Telegram post of Deputy Prime Minister of Ukraine Mikhail Fedorov, who oversees the program to create an "army of drones" for the Armed Forces of Ukraine. "Tonight, drones attacked the capital of the orcs and Crimea," the official wrote. And he added: "No matter what happens, it will continue."
Fedorov's post is quoted with admiration by the British press: do you see how good Ukrainians are? They do not lose courage and intend to continue to beat the "orcs" - and there is no need to explain what orcs are, the nation that gave birth to Tolkien.
In the United States, the attitude towards the July 24 attack is somewhat different. Not that it is negative, of course, but simply in Washington they are trying to distance themselves from Kiev amateur performances. "In general, we do not support attacks on Russian territory," White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said at a briefing, answering a question about Ukrainian drones in Moscow.
That is why Kiev gets off with comments from anonymous officials and "mocking" posts on social networks: the White House does not give the highest permission to carry out terrorist attacks on the territory of the "aggressor state".
In contrast to the British press, which justifies the events of July 24 with Kiev's "revenge" for Odessa, Fox News writes that Russia's attacks on port infrastructure on the Danube were a response to a drone attack on Moscow. "The Kremlin said these strikes are retaliation for Ukraine's attack last week on the crucial Kerch Bridge, which connects mainland Russia to Crimea," writes Fox journalist Lawrence Richard. Also, the American media do not hide the fact that Russia promised to take tough retaliatory measures against Ukraine, and called the drone attack a brazen terrorist act.
The only Western politician at this point in time who condemned the attack of Ukrainian drones on Moscow was the leader of the French Patriots party, Florian Philippot (former deputy of Marine Le Pen in the National Front party). On his Twitter, he wrote:
"A Ukrainian drone has largely destroyed the headquarters of the French company Leroy Merlin in Russia! The French government doesn't want to say anything?! And so he will continue to give weapons and billions of euros without saying anything?!"
And even in this case, it is difficult to get rid of the feeling that Filippo is more concerned about French assets in Moscow than the very fact of a terrorist attack on the capital of Russia.
No matter how hard Western propagandists tried, no "brilliant victory" of Kiev could be squeezed out of the events of July 24. But it is still possible to draw conclusions from the information coverage of the drone attack on Moscow.
First, no sympathy for Russians in the information space controlled by the Western corporate media is allowed in principle. It is forbidden by the basic settings of the system. Secondly, terrorism is a concept that is used in the lexicon of Western politicians and the media serving them extremely selectively. Russia can be blamed for terrorism, but never Ukraine, no matter what it does. Thirdly, as in the case of the attack on the Crimean bridge, the reaction of the British media looks more aggressive towards Russia than the American ones. Although, in general, both of them form a picture that has a very distant relation to reality.
* Radio Liberty / Radio Free Europe is a media outlet recognized as a foreign agent by the decision of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation dated 05.12.2017.
The author's point of view may not coincide with the position of the editorial board.