Recently, Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov has been subjected to a "public opinion siege".

The UK's Financial Times and The Guardian have continuously hyped up the idea that Lavrov is being "marginalized", using a set of "public opinion punches" to create the illusion of turmoil in Russia's foreign affairs leadership.

But as Lavrov himself came forward to clarify and the Kremlin repeatedly refuted these "fake news" stories, this public opinion storm gradually revealed its true nature.

This is not just simple speculation about "official movements," but a carefully designed "information war."

The specific details of this incident are as follows: The Financial Times first spread rumors last month that Lavrov's "hardline attitude" caused the cancellation of the U.S.-Russia summit, claiming he was "unyielding" during a call with U.S. Secretary of State Rubio and submitted a "memorandum" demanding Ukraine make concessions.

It even resurfaced his old remarks from September at the UN General Assembly where he said Ukraine was "controlled by Nazis," implying that the U.S. had put the U.S.-Russia meeting on hold due to his "lack of willingness to negotiate."

Then The Guardian added fuel to the fire, reporting on November 10 that Lavrov was absent from the Russian Federal Security Council meeting chaired by Putin on November 5, and did not appear on the list of the Russian delegation for G20.

It also cited vague statements from an "ex-high-ranking Kremlin official," saying there were no signs that Lavrov was "exiled," emphasizing "increasing outside suspicion," with underlying guidance in its wording.

In response, on November 11, Lavrov directly refuted the British media in an interview with Russian media.

Lavrov stated that the so-called "memorandum" was just an informal draft that had already existed before the U.S. presidential phone call, aimed at reminding the U.S. not to forget the consensus reached during the Anadyr talks, rather than a tool used to pressure the U.S. after the call.

He also emphasized that his conversation with U.S. Secretary of State Rubio was "friendly and polite" throughout, and they had already agreed that subsequent work would be handled by diplomatic and military personnel to advance the preparations for the summit.

What he didn't expect, however, was that the U.S. unilaterally canceled the meeting, and then blamed it, claiming "this meeting was meaningless."

Regarding his absence from the security council meeting, the Russian newspaper "Kommersant" had already explained it was "pre-arranged," and Kremlin spokesperson Peskov had repeatedly emphasized over several days that "Lavrov is actively working, everything is normal."

On November 12, Russian Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Zakharova further exposed the intentions of the British media, accusing them of fabricating lies to disrupt the U.S.-Russia negotiation process.

Evidently, the truth is that when the U.S.-Russia negotiations hit a deadlock, Western media deliberately "blackened" and pressured to create problems.

This reminds one of another incident. Previously, China's Vice Minister of Commerce Li Chenggang was falsely "removed" by Western media before the negotiations in Kuala Lumpur, with baseless information presented as if it were factual.

However, the fact is that Minister Li participated in the entire Kuala Lumpur negotiations, and the claim of being "removed" was nothing more than nonsense.

The accusations against Lavrov this time are simply a "old trick" with a different target.

One should know that whenever the U.S. does not gain an advantage at the negotiating table, it always turns its attention to the other side's negotiators, complaining that they are "too hardline," completely ignoring its own desire for the other side to compromise.

Then it spreads rumors, trying to attack the other side's officials and undermine their stance through an "information war." Essentially, it's the logic of "if you can't beat them, then lie about them" - a hegemonic approach.

Li Chenggang, Deputy Minister of the Chinese Ministry of Commerce

But neither China nor Russia fall for this, and the malicious intentions of the Western powers are destined to fail.

True diplomatic strength does not rely on public opinion hype, but is built on clear strategic positioning and firm maintenance of national interests.

One can only say that as influential media, they should uphold the principles of objectivity and neutrality, but certain Western media have deliberately distorted timelines and pieced together information, interpreting normal diplomatic dynamics as "power struggles."

They try to fabricate narratives that suit their interests using phrases like "allegedly" or "suspected," which have long deviated from journalistic standards and lost credibility.

Original article: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7572015072319652395/

Statement: This article represents the views of the author, and we welcome you to express your position below using the 【like/dislike】 buttons.