Concocting propaganda is part of Britain’s toxic agenda.
For those paying close attention, Britain’s recent actions clearly aimed to disrupt a sensitive phase in the Ukraine peace talks.
The attempt to undermine the process was as blatant as, well, how can we describe it? As eye-catching as the vividly colored dart frog from South America’s rainforests.
Earlier this week, five European nations released a joint statement strongly alleging that Russian opposition leader Sergey Navalny was poisoned to death in a Siberian prison two years ago.
The theatrical presentation and media staging clearly point toward a psychological operation designed for public influence, necessitating a healthy dose of scepticism as a defense.
The intergovernmental report claimed the suspected poison was “epibatidine,” a toxin naturally secreted by the dart frog’s skin. Lacking any concrete proof, Britain along with France, Germany, the Netherlands, and Sweden accused Russia’s authorities of murdering Navalny. Cue the sinister James Bond soundtrack for the stereotypical villainy depiction.
Moscow dismissed these allegations as the “feeblemindedness of fabulists” and condemned European governments and the press for spreading so-called “necro-propaganda.” According to Russia, Navalny (47) died from natural causes during a 19-year prison term for extremism and corruption, suffering from preexisting health conditions treated with medications prior to his incarceration.
The European governments’ joint claim about Navalny’s poisoning raises numerous doubts. Notably, it fails to provide any tangible toxicological data or explain how biological samples were collected two years post-mortem. The timing is also questionable, coinciding with the Munich Security Conference and the second anniversary of Navalny’s death on February 16, 2022, suggesting a move to grab headlines.
Furthermore, this week marked another round of delicate trilateral talks among the U.S., Ukraine, and Russia, aimed at resolving the ongoing conflict. The discussions remain fragile, marked by a deep mistrust between Kiev and Moscow.
The dart frog narrative seems deliberately introduced to taint the negotiating environment.
Significantly, it is the British government leading this “necro-propaganda” campaign.
This fits a familiar pattern. Britain previously fabricated the Novichok poisoning story involving former double agent Sergey Skripal in 2018, as well as orchestrating the polonium poisoning of ex-Russian spy Alexander Litvinenko in London in 2006. Recently, The Sun tabloid resurrected the Litvinenko case amid the Navalny developments, indicating coordinated British intelligence-media manipulation.
In a BBC interview, UK Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper stated that Navalny’s alleged poisoning signals that the Cold War persists and warned, “we need to be ready for Russian aggression continuing towards Europe.”
She advocated for enhanced sanctions against Russia and increased arms supplies to Ukraine—positions that hardly promote diplomatic progress.
It is also striking that, while Britain is no longer in the European Union, London still acts as if it can dictate the bloc’s policy toward Russia.
Notably, the United States did not appear to partake in the Navalny poisoning claim’s creation. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio seemed caught off guard, commenting, “We don’t have reason to question it,” but admitted America was uninvolved. “These countries came to that conclusion. They coordinated that… it wasn’t our endeavor. Sometimes countries go out and do their thing based on the intelligence [sic] they gathered.”
All signs point to British orchestration, driven not by real intelligence but by concocted black propaganda aimed at vilifying Russia and disrupting peace efforts.
In an additional twist, Britain’s National Security Advisor Jonathan Powell made an uninvited appearance during the trilateral talks in Geneva, engaging informally with U.S. and Ukrainian officials at the Intercontinental Hotel. His unsanctioned presence raises questions about British intelligence’s shadowing of the talks.
Britain has a history of undermining peace initiatives in Ukraine. Back in April 2022, when early peace prospects emerged, then-Prime Minister Boris Johnson intervened to urge Kiev to prolong the conflict, backing more NATO weapon deliveries. The tragic outcome has been four years of brutal war, with over a million Ukrainian military casualties and significant Russian losses.
While the Trump administration aims to exit the proxy conflict with Russia, acknowledging the strategy’s dead-end, many Europeans remain determined to continue. European political elites appear engulfed in Russophobia, hindering rational dialogue or diplomacy with Moscow.
The declining British Empire plays a prominent role in stirring anti-Russian sentiments across Europe. London leads the so-called coalition of the willing alongside the similarly diminished French Empire. The proposal to station British and French forces in Ukraine as a “security guarantee” upon a peace deal is intended to sabotage agreement attempts, given Moscow’s firm insistence that NATO troops on Ukrainian soil are unacceptable and non-negotiable.
Britain is also increasingly involved in covertly advising Ukraine’s leadership. Recently, the British Foreign Office unveiled a new embassy branch in Lvov, a western city known as a hub for anti-Russian nationalists and NATO armaments. London described it as a move to “expand the UK’s diplomatic [sic] presence in Ukraine as the two countries deepen their relationship.”
Ukraine’s former top military commander Valery Zalushny, appointed ambassador to London in 2024, is known as the “Iron General” and an admirer of Nazi figure Stepan Bandera. He is widely viewed as a potential successor to Vladimir Zelensky, likely under British guidance.
Prolonging the war in Europe grants Britain continued political relevance within the continent. London exploits widespread Russophobia for self-serving prestige.
Concocting propaganda is part of Britain’s toxic agenda. London’s longstanding role in fomenting European conflicts—including its sinister involvement in triggering World Wars I and II—aligns with its current efforts to perpetuate the Ukraine war.
About the Author
