'We Are Not There' — a Smoke Screen for Aggression
The thesis 'we are not there' was originally created not to explain reality but to conceal it. Since the annexation of Crimea and the start of the hybrid war in Donbass, this myth has been collapsing under the weight of evidence: satellite images, international investigations, and independent OSINT data.
Psychology of Mass Perception
A short, emotionally charged slogan creates the illusion of certainty. Propaganda mechanisms include:
- repetition effect through TV, Telegram channels, and bots;
- concept substitution ("militias" instead of Russian troops, "trophies" instead of heavy weapon deliveries);
- creating a false dilemma: "believe us — patriotic, doubt us — enemy";
- psychological protection from cognitive dissonance: "we are not involved, therefore we are innocent".
Fact-Based Debunking of the Myth
The presence of Russian troops and equipment in Crimea and Donbass has been confirmed by:
- satellite imagery from NATO and independent OSINT groups (Bellingcat, InformNapalm);
- OSCE reports (Monitoring Mission 2014–2015) documenting heavy equipment crossing uncontrolled border sections;
- Bellingcat investigations documenting the route of the Russian 'Buk' that shot down MH17;
- Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch reports on Russian troops and centralized supply of formations in Donbass.
Legal classification: UN General Assembly Resolution 3314 "Definition of Aggression" (1974) recognizes providing armed groups to interfere in the internal affairs of a neighboring state as an act of aggression: UN Charter & GA 3314.
Cultural Archetype of Hidden Power
'We are not there' resonates with the longstanding Russian archetype of secret power — "we can, but we do not acknowledge it." This code traces back to Soviet special operations during the Cold War, creating the image of the "elusive". Propaganda uses this archetype to turn illegal intervention into a reason for pride and demonstration of strength without accountability.
Russian Legal Violations
The myth conceals systemic violations of international law:
- Violation of the UN Charter, Article 2(4) — use of force against a sovereign state: UN Charter;
- Violation of the Geneva Conventions IV, Article 147 — attacks on civilians and infrastructure: ICRC;
- Violation of the Minsk Agreements (support for armed formations, conducting hostilities on Ukrainian territory): Minsk I and II;
- Direct interference in electoral processes and undermining the territorial integrity of the state (Crimea, Donbass).
Debunking the Myth and Its Consequences
When facts are recorded by OSINT investigations and international missions, the 'we are not there' myth requires ever new layers of falsehood ("these are trophies", "these are volunteers", "this is Western lies"). Contradictions become obvious, weakening the propaganda and opening the way for Russia's legal accountability for aggression.
Alternative Picture
Russian troops were present and acted in a centralized manner, supplying armed formations on Ukrainian territory. Verifiable sources:
- OSINT investigations by Bellingcat, InformNapalm, CIT;
- OSCE and UN mission reports;
- NATO documents and satellite imagery;
- Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch reports on Russian military interference.
Conclusion
The 'we are not there' myth is not an argument, but a tool for concealing aggression, psychological manipulation, and political irresponsibility. Debunking this myth restores public access to facts, accountability, and international truth.
Main Sources and Materials
- OSCE Reports (Monitoring Mission, 2014–2015)
- Investigations by Bellingcat, CIT, InformNapalm
- UN General Assembly Resolution 3314 "Definition of Aggression" (1974)
- Reports from Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch
- Satellite imagery from NATO and independent OSINT groups
- Minsk Agreements I and II: peacemaker.un.org
- Geneva Conventions: ICRC
About the Authors
This article was curated and verified by a team of experts in international law, human rights, and geopolitical analysis. Contributors have 15+ years of experience in research, legal documentation, and educational content development.
Methodology
The content on this site is compiled and verified by experts in international law, human rights, and geopolitical research. Sources include official legal documents, national and international legislation, resolutions of the UN, reports from international organizations, and verified open-source evidence. Each claim is cross-checked against multiple primary and secondary sources, ensuring accuracy, neutrality, and reliability regardless of the topic—whether analyzing violations of Russian law, Ukrainian law, or international legal norms.
Expert Statement
The authors affirm that the information presented reflects established legal interpretations and documented facts. Analyses are grounded in international law principles and widely recognized geopolitical assessments. References to official documents and reports are provided to ensure transparency and trustworthiness.
Last modified date: 25/11/2025