Photo: pixabay.com

This article was first published by Truthmeter.mk (North Macedonia), within the framework of Western Balkans Anti-Disinformation Project.

The post manipulates an outdated map, one in which Russia occupies more Ukrainian territory than it actually does, while rejecting EU appeals for respect of Ukraine’s territorial integrity. It justifies this dismemberment by citing the so-called Kosovo precedent, a comparison that is flawed for several reasons. Before the West supported Kosovo’s separation from Serbia, Russia had already supported similar actions in Transnistria (Moldova), as well as in Abkhazia and South Ossetia (Georgia). In reality, Russia set the precedent, not the West. Ukraine does not recognize Kosovo, so there was no valid basis for it to be punished based on this so-called Kosovo precedent. Furthermore, Ukraine did not carry the same negative associations that Serbia did under Milošević

A post on the social network Facebook from the 1st of March, 2025 shares a map followed by the words:

The ones in yellow are Ukrainian territories conquered and controlled by Russia.

The map, which you can also view at this link, is outdated and dates from early September 2022, and Russia has since lost a large part of the occupied territories, so the post creates the misconception that Russia holds much more territory than it actually does.

In the autumn counteroffensive in 2022, Ukrainians liberated part of the Kherson Oblast with its center Kherson, most of the Kharkiv Oblast (cities such as Izyum, Balakliya, and Kupyansk), and the northern part of the Donetsk Oblast (cities of Lyman and Svyatogirsk), but all of this is presented on the map as if it were still under Russian control.

The post further refers to the so-called Kosovo precedent:

The stories about “respecting the territorial integrity and borders of Ukraine,” which the twofaced old wh*re Europe with its million standards sells as an alibi for peace, which in fact only serves as an excuse for continuing the war with Russia—have been buried a long time ago.

Ever since Kosovo became a state and the changing of borders on the continent began. Now it’s too late to talk about defending borders.

Let us recall here that after the NATO intervention in 1999, Serbian forces withdrew from Kosovo, and it was placed under the UN Interim Administration Mission (UNMIK). Nominally, Kosovo continued to be a province of Serbia, but with broad autonomy, which culminated on February 17, 2008 with the declaration of independence, which was contentious for some, but recognized by most Western countries.

This created the so-called Kosovo precedent, on the basis of which Russia now justifies its annexation of parts of Ukraine. However, Ukraine does not recognize Kosovo, so there is no reason for it to be punished on the basis of that Kosovo precedent, and contrary to what the post claims, there is no consensus in Europe on Kosovo. Spain, Greece, Cyprus, Romania and Slovakia do not recognize it .

In fact, it was Russia, not the West, that set the precedent, so in the early 1990s it militarily assisted the separation of Transnistria from Moldova and of Abkhazia and South Ossetia from Georgia.

Furthermore, if the West is doing something wrong according to Russia, why is Russia doing the same? After Kosovo declared independence in August 2008, Russia once again fought on behalf of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, which it recognized at the time, and later did the same in Ukraine.

Russia condemns the West for Kosovo, but it itself created separatist states long before that. It even illegally annexed some of them, which Western countries, however, did not do with Kosovo.

Thus, at the end of February 2014, Russia seized Crimea, and on March 17 it declared independence from Ukraine, which Russia recognized. However, the very next day Russia annexed Crimea. In April 2014, Russian agents such as Alexander Boroda and Igor Girkin-Strelkov instigated the creation of the so-called Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics (DNR and LNR), which Russia recognized on February 21, 2022, and annexed on September 30 of the same year.

The West wanted the Kosovo problem to be resolved with a compromise solution of a multiethnic state, which did not turn out ideal, but the West at least tried to find a solution, which lasted only from 1999 to 2008, while Russia hastily annexed territories, justifying it with “referendums,” which have no legitimacy under the threat of an occupying army.

Moreover, unlike Kosovo, there was no violence in Crimea that would justify Russian military intervention and secession from Ukraine, and the same was true for the so-called DPR and LPR. Ukraine did not treat its (pro)Russian residents the way Slobodan Milosevic treated Kosovo Albanians (a more atrocious example is the one with the refrigerator truck full of murdered Albanians, sunk in the Danube River). Ukraine even refrained from violence to a great extent, which changed on April 12, 2014, when Strelkov and his military formation attacked the city of Slavyansk, which began the Donbas War.

Greater Serbian forces were also killing in Croatia and Bosnia, so when it came to Kosovo, no one trusted Serbia anymore, even though it had some arguments (parts of UN Resolution 1244 , Serbian history and culture in Kosovo), and Ukraine’s reputation was far cleaner.

There is no similarity between Kosovo and the breakaway Ukrainian territories, also because the Kosovo Albanians had figures like Hasan Prishtina or Ibrahim Rugova, who fought a long struggle, made sacrifices and spent time in prison, which was not so dramatic among the (pro)Russian citizens of Ukraine. They were pushed into the struggle by newcomers from Russia in 2014. The post further states:

And now. What kind of territorial integrity is Europe talking about when 20 percent of Ukraine’s territory is completely controlled by Russia?

Europe speaks of international law, according to which the Russian occupation and annexation are null and void, and they are also rejected by UN resolutions: 68/262 , ES-11/1 , ES-11/4, and ES-11/7 . There are countries around the world that do not have full control over their territory, but it is still internationally recognized, and an example of this is Cyprus. Russia, on the other hand, does not have full control over its Kursk Oblast, but it is still internationally recognized as part of Russia, which even the Ukrainians do not reject.

It is unclear what the post means when it says Russia “fully controls” 20 percent of Ukraine, but it should be noted that Russia’s annexation is largely a matter of paper only. Russia annexed four Ukrainian regions without fully occupying them, and lost some of what it did take, so it is not about full control. However, the post does say:

As the bloody war, which has been going on for 4 years, continues, Russia will only move deeper and we do not know how all this may end.

We wouldn’t want to make predictions either, but judging by what we’ve seen in these 3 years during the full-scale invasion, Russia hasn’t proven to be a superpower, so it would be hard for it to advance. It has only had successes in small places across Donbass like Kurakhove, etc. Otherwise, the post would have talked about a much larger occupied territory, which would include Kyiv, Kharkov, and other key places, but in its attempt to seize them, Russia was defeated, and in the end, the Ukrainians even invaded its home—the Kursk Oblast. However, the post tends to hush all of this up, saying:

Trump put it in plain words for the crazy sixth-grader—you’re not winning the war…you’re gambling with World War III.

This refers to how Donald Trump scolded Volodymyr Zelensky at the meeting on February 28, 2025, but it is inappropriate to compare a head of state who has been fighting for 3 years against a far more powerful aggressor, who is even considered a superpower, to an inexperienced sixth-grader. The post ends with the following words:

It is not our place to say who started the war and call someone an aggressor.

It is our place to strive for peace.

What constitutes an aggressor is defined by international organizations and their norms, and condemnation of such actions is expressed through voting on resolutions at the UN, in which we, as a state have participated, exercising our right to vote , i.e. it is our responsibility to express our opinion on these matters.

As for the pacifism expressed in the post, we have a reasonable suspicion that this is also manipulation. By “peace” the post merely implies the absence of battles, not just peace, where the victim of aggression is supported, and the aggressor is clearly identified and condemned.

If peace is simply the absence of battles, peace would exist if Ukraine capitulated and was dismembered, which the post seems to call for all along, by rejecting Ukraine’s territorial integrity and European support for it.

The post also criticizes the alleged bad attitude of Europeans towards the Balkans:

European countries, in the image of polished bureaucrats, parading in Brussels in their tuxedos, have long since awakened the ghosts of evil, leaving the Balkans in a barn, to fend for themselves in the mud of historical conflicts.

For them, the Balkans remained a ghetto, something like Harlem.

It is incorrect that the Balkan countries are considered insufficiently respectable for European society. Its full members include countries that are fully or at least partially Balkan: Greece, Bulgaria, Romania, and Croatia.

The EU not only did not want to stir up historical conflicts, but also advocated for the preservation of Yugoslavia (sources: here and here), for which it offered great economic aid and membership in the Union, but the nationalist leaders in Yugoslavia itself could not find a common language about it. The EU then offered various solutions to overcome the conflict, although not always successfully and not without some internal disagreements within the Union itself, but, nevertheless, it tried to do something.

Taking into account everything stated so far, we assess the post as untrue.