Bratislava Doko, CC BY 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons
This article was first published by Truthmeter.mk (North Macedonia), within the framework of Western Balkans Anti-Disinformation Project.
In recent months, protests have taken place in several European countries, with citizens demanding that the authorities maintain the European direction. The propaganda links such expressions of discontent to alleged external organizers, all in order to delegitimize the protests. The narrative of “color revolutions” denies or minimizes any internal causes for civil protests. The organization is attributed exclusively to Western countries, which aims to deepen anti-Western feelings in the public in order to maintain authoritarian rule. On the other hand, no evidence is ever presented to support the claim of “taking power by force and with external assistance.”
Author: Miroslava Simonovska
In recent months, protests have taken place in various European countries, with citizens demanding the removal of authorities (governments, presidents) with ties to the Kremlin and a return to the European path.
However, whenever there is democratic resistance and a clear message from citizens about the future they want for their children and their nations, pro-Russian propaganda inevitably emerges. Any protest that criticizes a government for abandoning the European agenda is quickly labeled as “born in the West” or portrayed as the work of “mercenaries behind color revolutions.”
The narrative of “color revolutions” denies or minimizes any internal causes for citizen protests. The organization is attributed exclusively to Western countries, which aims to deepen anti-Western feelings in the public in order to maintain authoritarian rule.
What do color revolutions represent?
The most famous changes of government in the world associated with “color revolutions” are the 2003 Rose Revolution in Georgia, the 2004 Orange Revolution in Ukraine, the 2005 Tulip Revolution in Kyrgyzstan, and the 2014 Euromaidan in Ukraine. Almost every one of these waves of demonstrations replaced an autocratic government close to Russia with another government closer to the West. Each of these revolutions had some degree of support from Western countries, which varied from case to case. However, internal factors played a key role. Dominant issues raised by the protesters were corruption and autocracy, evident economic inequality, and a sense of lack of perspective.
“EuvsDisinfo” writes that framing all popular protests against Russia’s interests as a foreign-led “color revolution” is a recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative. No evidence is provided to back up the claims.
Protests in Slovakia under the slogan “Slovakia is Europe”
Last week in Slovakia, over 100,000 people took to the streets, protesting under the slogan “Slovakia is Europe.” The demonstrations were directed against the authoritarian rule of Prime Minister Robert Fico. After Fico claimed there were plans to “escalate anti-government protests in an attempt at a coup,” citizens protested in more than 20 cities against the government’s pro-Russian policies. All protests remained peaceful, with a clear message displayed on hundreds of banners–Slovakia belongs to Europe. Earlier, protests also took place in Bratislava before the New Year, following Fico’s visit to Russia. As a NATO member since 2002 and an EU member since 2004, Slovakia wants to stay within these alliances and for the government to stop undermining the country’s international standing by fostering ties with the Kremlin.
In December, when he traveled to Moscow to meet with Vladimir Putin, Fico criticized Ukraine’s decision to shut down the flow of Russian gas through its territory to Europe.
“Instead of dealing with issues at home, Fico is flying around the world, bowing to dictators and enjoying luxury,” said opposition leader Michal Šimečka, referring to the Prime Minister’s recent trips to Russia and Vietnam.
However, Fico responded to the protests and without any evidence blamed the opposition for “being prepared to occupy power in cooperation with foreign countries despite election results.”
The organizers of the protest dismissed this claim, stating that the only threat to the country is not them, but the interference of Fico’s friend, Vladimir Putin.
“It’s what all of them say,” added Marian Kulich, another of the protest’s organizers and a member of the civic group “Peace to Ukraine.” “Listen to Erdogan in Turkey, Orban in Hungary, Irakli Kobakhidze in Georgia, Serbia, they all use the same narrative. In my opinion, Slovakia is just one of the countries that are submitting to the Moscow regime–thanks to our prime minister,” he told Deutsche Welle.
Over 155 psychiatrists wrote an open letter to Fico, warning that his actions are fueling polarization in the country, causing citizens to consider moving abroad. They criticized his internal policy, which they say is primarily focused on consolidating power for himself, his party, and his coalition partners, while neglecting Slovakia’s critical issues, such as the deteriorating infrastructure, and the decline of education and health.
Fico had an ordinary reaction to this; he threatened the signatories that he will report them to international psychiatry regulatory bodies for alleged abuse of positions.
“I do not doubt for a second that you will support the opposition’s attempt at a ‘Slovak Maidan,’ on which the Slovak opposition is working diligently, with the full support of foreign-funded NGOs and anti-Slovak media,” wrote Fico on Facebook.
Contrary to his “warnings” of violence and attacks on public buildings of institutions, nothing of the like happened during the protests so far–they were all peaceful. His accusations of foreign staged protests and criticism resonate with those coming from Belarus, directly from Aleksandr Lukashenko.
Vučić also accuses the “West of wanting to incite a color revolution”
Russian state-funded media outlets have quickly spread the statement by Aleksandar Vučić, the President of Serbia, who claims that the student protests are “an attempt at a color revolution by foreign actors.” However, the reasons behind the student demonstrations in Serbia are rooted in internal political issues, specifically the tragic incident at Novi Sad train station, where 15 lives were lost. Since then, students from several Serbian universities have been protesting. Yet, for Vučić, these are “staged protests organized in Belgrade and other cities,” with “the West supposedly involved in trying to orchestrate a color revolution in Serbia by using students.”
“Everything they are doing are the color revolution attempts, I have no doubt in that. This is not a problem, we will wait until the last moment when we will have to respond, when they will start forced blocking of highways. We already know who is doing that and how. Some of them come from a number of Western countries and the others from the East, where they did the dirty job for the Western agent network,” said Vučić, adding that he “has information that foreing agents through their connections passed to certain students calls to go to major road junctions and block traffic.” He did not fail to mention that “this is done under the control of foreign instructors.
In addition to Serbian students, an increasing number of Serbian citizens have joined the protests, which have been ongoing for about three months. The protesters are calling for political and criminal accountability from the government following the tragedy at the Novi Sad train station. Alongside students and citizens, numerous companies have also joined the protests which continue to unfold across Serbia.
Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić assessed that Serbia is “attacked today from the outside and from the inside”–without providing evidence of who is attacking it. In previous addresses, he accused Western intelligence services of being behind the protests, a claim that the student protest organizers denied, writes Radio Free Europe.
“Foreign actors” are also being sought in relation to the protests in Georgia
At the end of 2024, mass protests were held in Georgia, which pro-Kremlin currents tried to link to Western foreign actors, however, unsuccessfully and without evidence. What can be observed from these events is that the citizens protesting on the streets of Tbilisi for days were Georgians, not foreign nationals or “actors.” The tensions that sparked the protests began in late October when the Georgian Dream party declared victory in the disputed elections.
Reuters video footage shows protesters waving Georgian and European flags while chanting “Russian slaves” at the police. In response, the police deploy water cannons and tear gas, but also resort to violence and beatings, with journalists not spared.
As reported by numerous global media outlets, people have said their aspirations for the country differ from those of the Georgian government. In response, the police have carried out dozens of arrests and beatings, some of which have led to hospitalizations. Amnesty International has also warned that the Georgian government has enacted draconian laws aimed at stifling the protests.
It is clear that protests in Georgia are driven by internal factors. Despite the country being granted EU candidate status in 2024, the Georgian government took a step back on November 28, 2024, signaling a move away from Europe. This decision immediately sparked massive protests and anger among the Georgian people. Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze announced that Georgia would suspend EU accession negotiations for four years, until 2028, following the European Parliament’s refusal to recognize the elections due to alleged irregularities.
Allegations of foreign actors in the Georgian demonstrations are unsubstantiated. The mass protests in Georgia began when the Georgian Dream party introduced the “Law on Foreign Agents,” which requires all NGOs and media outlets receiving more than 20 percent of their funding from abroad to register as “foreign agents” or face severe penalties.
The parallels drawn between the protests in Georgia and the 2014 Euromaidan movement in Ukraine stem from similar circumstances where both governments refused to sign pro-European agreements and appeared to lean toward Russia. However, there is no evidence to suggest that the Euromaidan protests were driven by a coup. Instead, it was a major demonstration sparked by widespread internal dissatisfaction with President Yanukovych’s government at the time. For more information on how Russia has attempted to discredit Euromaidan, you can read further at the following link.
The oldest trick in the Kremlin’s playbook–accusations of foreign agents in domestic protests
Allegations stating foreign actors–specifically the West, the United States, the EU, or individual Western states have encouraged “color revolutions” in other countries are unfounded and tendentious. According to European Security, this narrative is one of the oldest tricks in the Kremlin’s playbook for spreading disinformation. In the case of Georgia, efforts to promote the idea that “the protests were organized externally and represented a Maidan-like movement” included the creation of documentary series aimed at discrediting the protests against the Law on Foreign Agents.
These films suggested that “the protests are orchestrated externally,” and that “the opposition of Western powers against this law is to hide their funding for different groups in Georgia.” And, as a final effect it was stated that “the ultimate goal is to demolish the democratic government,” which was still referred to as a “Euromaidan scenario.”
The EU became the target of this disinformation when the High Representative Josep Borell warned that the draft law is not in line with European standards and will compromise Georgia’s European path.
In North Macedonia, Truthmeter.mk has already wrote on the topic of spreading the disinformation narrative in which the West and foreign actors are blamed for various protests, with various motives, causes, and actions, while a parallel is being drawn with Euromaidan in Ukraine in 2014. All of these protests come from different time periods and are not coordinated by an “external foreign factor,” but by domestic actors. They are a culmination of anger and citizens’ reactions towards the government policies which often stray from the European path. Citizens undoubtedly have a legitimate democratic right to gather and express their dissatisfaction when they are disappointed by the course taken by the ruling government.
