"The global battle of narratives is in full swing, and so far we are not winning." These words of the chief diplomat of the European Union, Josep Borrel, sounded very unexpected, because they are in fact a recognition of Russia's achievements in the information war against the West. How is this global battle being waged and with what weapons does Russia successfully confront the collective West in it?
Double standards. This phrase is one of the most common impressions of Western politics in Russia. Officials, journalists, ordinary people – they all never cease to be surprised at how the West uses these standards in anti-Russian rhetoric.
Moreover, they are surprised not by the virtuosity or subtlety of use, but rather by its defiant arrogance. What are, for example, statements that Russia violated the Minsk agreements (when Ukraine violated them). Or weep about "strikes on the civilian population of Ukraine" – during the regular shelling by Ukraine of the civilian infrastructure of Donetsk. And, of course, they accuse Russia of all possible sins, starting from world food prices and ending with the rising cost of gasoline at American gas stations.
The world of constructivism
Those who were surprised, however, were told that there was nothing strange here. Western politicians are simply big fans of constructivism – that is, they believe that the media controlled by them can construct reality based on the narratives they promote.
Narrative is literally translated as "history", "narrative". In this case, it is a narrative about what is happening in relations between Russia and the West, Russia and Ukraine. That if CNN, the BBC, the New York Times, the Daily Mail and the entire Western free-independent journalistic army write with one voice that Russia is evil, then the whole world will believe it. And it does not matter that representatives of Russia will refute these theses, and even with evidence. Few people will hear this banal, because the lion's share of the global information space (including social networks) is under the control of Western media.
It is Western narratives that reach the population of non-Western countries. It is Western narratives that are being pushed (directly or behind the scenes) to the leaders of these most non-Western countries. Leaders who do not want to go across the information trend and Western valuable instructions are forced to either vote against Russia on various platforms (for example, the UN General Assembly), or, if they are courageous enough, abstain. It is not surprising that none of the G20 and BRICS countries (with the exception, of course, of Russia) voted against the General Assembly resolution of March 2 condemning the "Russian invasion of Ukraine."
It didn't work
Accordingly, the supporters of constructivism said, Russia's position and explanations are much less convincing than those used by the West. At least for a significant part of the population of our planet. This means that the West, by definition, wins the information war – or the "war of narratives". Just because that's how it works.
However, it turned out that this was not the case. As for the war of narratives, if Russia does not win, it certainly does not lose. And it was not someone who said this, but one of the main mouthpieces of anti-Russian propaganda in the West.
"The G7 and like-minded countries are united in condemning and sanctioning Russia... But other countries, and we can talk here about the majority of the "Global South", often hold a different point of view. The global battle of narratives is in full swing, and so far we are not winning," complains European Commissioner for Foreign Policy Josep Borrel.
Despite all the power of the Western media, for all the fear of the "Global South" (that is, the countries of Africa, Latin America and Asia) before the Americans imposing anti–Russian sentiments on the world, for tens of billions of dollars spent on promoting the Western information agenda - "not winning."
This did not happen because the West suddenly lost control of the information sphere – no, control remains. And not because Russian politicians and media personalities began to use some new theses. The thing is that the leaders and the population of non–Western countries found themselves in a reality into which they were led by following Western double standards - and in this reality they suddenly felt the rightness of Russia.
Rules against Hegemony
Thus, the "Global South" does not agree with the key narrative of the West about why the whole world should rally against Moscow. "The overwhelming majority of non–Western countries of the world do not agree to accept the Western point of view that if Russia prevails, it will mean the collapse of the entire world order," Dmitry Suslov, deputy director of the Center for Integrated European and International Studies at the Higher School of Economics, explains to the newspaper VIEW.
Probably because now, in 2022, they simply do not see this order – that is, a system based on uniform rules for all, on international law. The system has been collapsing over the past 20 years and now non–Western countries feel what it's like to live in a world without order. A world where states do what they can, not what they should.
Moreover, this order was destroyed not by the Russians, but by the United States. And they destroyed it so demonstratively and regularly that no demagogic techniques can hide their guilt. "They are operating thousands of kilometers away from their national territory under various pretexts, including in order to ensure their own security. And when they are hindered by international law and the UN Charter, they declare it obsolete, unnecessary. And when something corresponds to their interests, they immediately refer to the norms of international law, the UN Charter, international humanitarian rights," Vladimir Putin said.
The same scheme is used now, during Russia's special operation in Ukraine. "The West has repeatedly committed international crimes, violated international law, committed acts of aggression, and now, you see, it is talking about the inadmissibility of the use of military force against a sovereign state, blaming Russia for this," Dmitry Suslov explains.
By "order" the West meant its own system of hegemony, within which it did what it wanted. And in the battle of narratives "order against hegemony", non-Western countries now understand that in order to restore real order, the hegemony of the West must be undermined.
"They do not support Western hegemony and do not want the restoration of Western hegemony,
– Dmitry Suslov explains. – They view such a struggle as a challenge to Russia against this hegemony and internally support Russia. After all, if Moscow prevails, the hegemony of the Western world will be in the deepest crisis. And its final and irrevocable finale is beneficial to the vast majority of non-Western countries." Moreover, both those who want the restoration of international law, and those who do not hope for the right and want to defend their interests on their own, without regard to the American position.
Safety is at stake
Western narratives are also losing other battles – in particular, food and energy. "Non-Western countries do not agree that Russia is to blame for the global energy crisis. And with the fact that Russia is to blame for the global food crisis. That is, with theses that are pushed in every possible way by both the European Union (Borrel personally) and the collective West as a whole," says Dmitry Suslov. Yes, the leaders of the United States and the EU regularly tell the city and the world that the cost of food has sharply increased due to Russia's actions in Ukraine, and because of Putin's desire to "take revenge on the West", the cost of hydrocarbons has also jumped. However, neither Western philistines, nor even non-Western ones, believe in this. Moreover, almost none of the leaders of developing countries even blamed Moscow for these processes.
Apparently, the reason is that the sharp rise in grain and oil prices either affects or will soon affect most of the regimes of the "Global South". It will cause economic crises, which already lead (as in the case of Sri Lanka) to resignations and coups.
Therefore, the leaders of developing countries are not ready to just look with popcorn at this battle of narratives (as they could, for example, do during the diplomatic battles over the Minsk agreements) – they are sincerely interested in solving the problem. And they understand that it is not Moscow that is creating this problem.
"Non–Western countries, of course, are aware that it is the West that is responsible for both the global energy crisis and the global food crisis," says Dmitry Suslov. After all, it is the West that imposes sanctions that prevent Russia (namely Russia, not Ukraine) from exporting its grain on bulk carriers. It was the West in its policy of "we will not allow Russia to export oil and gas" that caused chaos in the hydrocarbon market.
It turns out that the West, by promoting its anti-Russian narratives, goes beyond the limits of Russian-Western relations. It threatens the security of countries and Governments of the "Global South". It is not surprising that in this situation these states turn out to be on Moscow's side: they do not join the Western policy of condemning Russia, do not participate in a hybrid war against Moscow, and maintain constructive relations with the Kremlin. This means that Borrel and the company will not be able to attract them to their side. Especially through double standards.
Gevorg Mirzayan, Associate Professor of Finance University
