«The Magnificent Five» Adepts in France

In the current investigation, we will try to highlight the key pieces on the chessboard of Moscow in France, and pay attention to the basis of the Kremlin’s political lobbyism in France, including those related to supporting the criminal occupation of Crimea directly.

We will start with MARINE LE PEN, who is rightly in the first line of the modern political lobbyism of Moscow in Paris.

The paths of her “ascent” as one of the odious personalities, as well as the role of Jean-Marie Le Pen in connection with the Kremlin, were covered in the investigation by the Association expert Boris Babin, reconstructing in detail the history of the National Front’s interaction with the russian secret services.

Marine Le Pen was often “glowing” in рutin’s entourage back in the ’00s. There is plenty of public evidence of Le Pen’s contacts with russian functionaries, and not only with the dictator of the aggressor country, but also with Sergey Naryshkin, head of russian foreign intelligence.

Since 2011, Ms Le Pen has stepped out of her father’s shadow and led the National Front party, which was later found to have also received funding from the Kremlin. The scheme was uncovered by the French «Mediapart». The journalists found out that in 2014 and 2015, the European Academy Foundation (with which the “National Front” is cooperating in order to “strengthen contacts with russia”) received a total of 250,000 euros. The money came from Spencerdale Ltd, through the West East Communication Group. It should be emphasized that the owners of these companies are Yevgeny and Vadim Giner, the business partners of former State Duma deputy (senator and adviser to the Russian president) Alexander Babakov. The president of the European Academy Foundation itself is Jean-Luc Schaffhauser, a MEP close to Le Pen. He has confirmed receiving money from the West East Communication Group, without saying the exact amount or the purpose of such “generosity”. On 29 June 2014, Jean-Luc Schaffhauser convened the administrative board of the foundation in Strasbourg. That evening, the issue of the European Academy’s allocation of 10 million euros as a loan to the National Front was being decided. A loan of this amount, however, came through a different channel – through the First Czech-russian Bank.

Prior to 2011, Le Pen had more than once been in contact with putin. Indicative was the joint opening in 2007 of the “St. Basil the Great Charitable Foundation”, financed by Konstantin Malofeev (founder of the propaganda resource «Tsargrad»). After that, Le Pen’s far-right views and pointless criticism of the EU and NATO intensified.

At the head of the «National Front», she bet on the active promotion of a policy of “distance from the EU,” campaigning for France’s withdrawal from NATO. It does not take a genius to understand Moscow’s interest in such a scenario. Here are just some elements of the demands of Ms. Le Pen’s political agenda:

• France’s withdrawal from the European Union (EU) and a referendum, which she first announced in an interview with the кussian resource «Izvestia» in June 2013.
• system of a united Europe “created on the knowingly pernicious ideology of globalization” and “it must be destroyed and a free Europe created, whose members are truly sovereign states.

In 2013, in an interview with the Russian newspaper «Izvestia», Le Pen openly “admired” putin and suggested building “good relations” between France and russia and making the EU a bargaining chip.

Ms. Marine Le Pen has expressed her political vision in three books that have subsequently become available on russian online services that sell books in russia and deliver them to the occupied Crimea. For example, the website “livelib”.          

One of the books on “livelib” stated in the abstract:

“Marine Le Pen fully supports putin’s decisions on the occupation of Crimea and the military actions in Ukraine, while condemning the imposition of sanctions on russia”.

The first book is «Through the Hostile Waves». In it Le Pen details her family and childhood, the beginning of her career as a lawyer, and the formation of her role in the National Front. The second book, «In the Name of France», focuses on the political and social problems of France as “interpreted” by Le Pen. She argues about the supposedly “disastrous” consequences of the Maastricht and Lisbon treaties, questioning France’s economic benefit from the EU and calling the “treaty deal” a “loss of national identity”. The third book leaves no doubt, even by its title, about the bias of Le Pen’s political course. It is titled «To Look up to рutin!». In this book Le Pen literally confesses “in love” to putin and calls herself «the French putin». Moreover, according to Le Pen, the «russian model» is supposedly «a kind of alternative» to the American one. Le Pen explicitly pointed out that «…together we [russia and France] could better defend our strategic interests and fight against a global financial system that is based on the exorbitant privileges of the dollar».

In 2014, the Kremlin’s bet on Le Pen worked and she criminally supported the occupation of Crimea, holding clearly pro-russian views, trying to convince the French that supposedly “Ukraine does not belong in the EU”. Le Pen has devoted the rest of her time to drifting towards the French presidency and in 2022 she has the opportunity to run again.

As part of her campaign, Le Pen is remembered for an outrageous scandal when her “guards” dragged a journalist across the floor, silently showing a photo of Le Pen and putin together. The scandal was “talked about” all over France, including «Le Monde».

2022. Marine Le Pen runs for President of France. The EU’s existence is threatened. European fears were so strong that EU politicians took unprecedented measures. The prime ministers of Spain and Portugal, Pedro Sanchez and Antonio Costa, and German Chancellor Olaf Scholz published an appeal to the French on the eve of the decisive second ballot on April 24, 2022 in leading European newspapers.

They declared threats to Le Pen’s victory, explicitly calling the French choice «…a choice between democracy and those who attack freedom, values based on French enlightenment ideas…».

Today, however, Le Pen, having lost the election, actively participates in Kremlin actions, supporting rallies and advocating the collapse of the Republic’s economy in favour of Moscow, we will detail about it later. For example, on French radio «France Inter», she criminally stated that international support for Ukraine allegedly «threatens a world war», so, in her opinion, only some “agreement” with putin “can stop the war”. Understanding how russia “abides by the agreements” – it is hard to believe in this. So, Le Pen continues to broadcast pro-Kremlin narratives to French audiences, though not as radically as she did before.

JEAN-LUC MELANCHON. A «silver medallist» harbouring sympathy for the Kremlin. At a fairly young age, he joined a left-wing youth movement and was also a member of the so-called “National Union of French Students”, which was created on the wave of socialist anti-government campaigns and called for the overthrow of the current leader of France, Charles de Gaulle (not without the involvement of the USSR, of course). The action was officially supported by the International Communist Party, which was then led by Pierre Lambert.

Before launching his political career, Melanchon made his mark during the 1968 “Red May Day” protests. It was this “event” that can be considered an active “tug of the Soviets” to discredit the legitimate French government before the Kremlin-supervised “elites” in France, seeing the actions of the USSR in Algeria, began to refuse to cooperate with them. We discussed this in the first part of the investigation.

A member of the Socialist Party at first, he created his own political nomenclature in the form of the “Party of the Left” in the 00s. It is not known who exactly influenced Melanchon’s views and with whom he met during his two visits to the USSR in the 1980s, but something could certainly have happened during these ‘visits’… After the collapse of the USSR in 1991 his anti-European rhetoric only increased, despite the favourable economic developments both within France and across Europe. There were more jobs and the standard of French people`s life was improving. During the adoption of the EU constitution, he actively opposed its ratification in France, despite the desire of the French to live on equal terms with other EU countries, which would be based on neoliberal ideas, the rule of law and the value of human life.

After leaving the ranks of the Socialist Party, as already noted, he formed his own “Left Party” and was later able to head the so-called “Left Front” coalition, consisting of: The French Communist Party, the Communist Party of Reunion, the Unitarian Left (part of the Revolutionary Communist League, which refused to be part of the New Anti-capitalist Party), the Alternative (the party formed by the merger of the OSP with the New Left for Socialism, Ecology and Self Government movement of Juquin) and so on.

It is worth to mention that almost all of the above associations have at some point crossed paths with the Soviet or russian security services in forming their “political programme”. Here is one of probably the most famous examples of the influence of the USSR on the French Communists and Socialists.

The French Communist Party was created under the influence of what was happening in the USSR. The Second World War made its own changes. Remarkably, by the time France was liberated, the FCP had reached the pinnacle of its influence, controlling vast areas of the country through the Resistance units under its command. Some communists wanted to exploit the situation to bring about a socialist revolution, but the leadership, acting on instructions from Stalin, ordered the partisans to disarm and support a new national government with Christian democrats, socialists and communists (the 10th Congress of the FCP in 1945 called for “limiting the economic and political power of monopoly capital” instead of a revolution). Such a move was made by Stalin for the “soft strategy” of revolution, which, in his plans, was bound to come. However, the US made it clear that there was no place for socialist and communist functionaries in European governments. This was as insecure as possible and could provoke a new war.

The French Communist Party, which was removed from the government, condemned the government’s policies as “an instrument of American imperialism”. However, when the Cold War started, its members organised mass campaigns against the French involvement in the Vietnam War (1947-1954) and the Algerian War (1954-1962). The philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre, a member of the FCP, for example, actively supported the Algerian National Liberation Front and the Cuban Revolution, which were funded by the Kremlin.

But let’s go back to the ’00s. In 2009, the so-called Left Front managed to win two mandates in the ranks of the European Parliament. Thus, representatives of the coalition systematically occupied seats in the national parliament, thus increasing their popularity within the French society, and also entered the institutions of the European Union, gaining new connections there. Already in 2012 Melanchon had given his votes to a no less ‘odious’ figure in French politics, François Hollande, despite the fact that he was the reason for Melanchon’s departure from the Socialist Party. Using his influence in the coalition, he gained the support of the Left Front and François Hollande’s candidacy for the French presidential election was endorsed.

Melanchon, having established himself in the political arena, began to actively promote a pro-russian stance. In particular, he supported the criminal occupation of Crimea in 2014, stating in an interview with «Le Point»: «…the Crimean ports [were] vital for Russia’s security». Melanchon also added that the Kremlin was allegedly taking «…protective measures against the adventurous putschist government», while criminally claiming that Ukraine was «under the influence of neo-Nazis». In 2015, he spoke in an interview with «Le Monde» about the «disintegration of a country that is trying to be united», referring to Ukraine.

Mеlanchon, like Le Pen, called for the rejection of European sanctions against the aggressor (adopted as part of the «Crimea package») and, as a member of the European Parliament, voted against any cooperation with Ukraine, even in the field of science. On 7 – 11 May 2018 he even visited russia. During his “visit” he met with Sergei Udaltsov, with many officials from the “State Duma”, the Federation Council, the russian Foreign Ministry, and participated in the “Immortal Regiment” march in Moscow, which promotes the war against Ukraine, including in occupied Crimea. The meeting with Udaltsov was certainly not accidental, as he is the leader of the Red Youth Vanguard movement and has radical leftist views. This character, not surprisingly, supported the criminal occupation of Crimea, and the russian military “campaign” in Donetsk and Luhansk regions, as well as blaming Ukraine in the MH-17 case.

Melanchon describes himself as a socialist republican and his ambition is to achieve a unification of the whole left and right on an anti-liberal political line or even anti-capitalist. He calls his ideas a “civil revolution”. Jean-Luc Mеlanchon is interested in the Bolivian and Venezuelan South American experiences, led respectively by Evo Morales and Hugo Chavez. He gravitates towards authoritarianism. In his programme for the 2017 presidential election, he proposed that France, as well as the West Indies and French Guiana, join the ‘Bolivarian Alliance for the Americas (ALBA)’. That’s why he got the nickname “the French Chavez”.

In Jean-Luc Melanchon’s understanding, “European treaties are destroying Europe”. The basis of his “opinion” is a critique of the method of elementary competition. A typical anti-capitalist who sympathises with functionaries like Chavez, Morales or Putin…Mеlanchon seems to be attracted to regimes with record levels of annual inflation, so he would like to “borrow” the economic methods of these countries into the French economic system.

Melanchon advocates France’s withdrawal from NATO, which he qualified in 2021 as allegedly «a symbol of submission to American imperialism», which is sometimes interpreted as hostility to the US, or a change in the alliance in favour of russia. Interpretations he disputes. Thus, his statements in favour of russia, as part of his intervention in the Syrian civil war, are contradictory.

In 2019 under Macron’s presidency, he opposes NATO membership for Ukraine and Georgia, and speaks of a kind of “anti-russian hysteria” in Europe for «Le Figaro». After russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine on 24 February 2022, he echoes Kremlin propaganda by opposing military aid to Ukraine. In an interview with «France 24», he accuses NATO of allegedly «advancing towards Russia’s borders», stating that “this is a danger that russians will never accept”. Mеlenchon’s attempts to personally influence some French media, including the content of some of «Le Monde’s» editorial articles, have been documented.

In book «Russian France, Investigating putin’s Networks», journalist Nicolas Henin accuses both Nicolas Sarkozy, François Fillon and Marine Le Pen and Melenchon of being seduced by “putinism”. He considers «certainly that Jean-Luc Melanchon is the most outrageous advocate of the Kremlin master [putin]». Nicolas Henin believes this tropism was exposed in a blog about the murder of russian oppositionist Boris Nemtsov, in which Jean-Luc Melanchon presents vladimir putin as supposedly «the number one political victim in this story». Academician Cécile Weissier, author of «The Kremlin Networks in France», finds Jean-Luc Melanchon among «those who most approve of putin». 

On Melanchon and Le Pen’s struggle with Macron and Moscow’s influence on the processes, we will focus on the next part of the investigation.

The third on our list of “medallists”, ERIC ZEMMUR.

An influential political journalist in right-wing and far-right circles, he is closely familiar with both russian functionaries and Ms Le Pen. He even has court cases to his credit, for example on the promotion of religious hatred and racial intolerance. It is difficult to list all his “exploits” to discredit democracy, the EU, NATO and the US, but let us dwell on the main ones.

In 1990, he sharply advocated leaving NATO because the Alliance, he believed, had “become a machine to serve countries that are allies of the United States”.

Zemmur publishes his pro-Moscow views and enmity towards NATO in CDansl’air. One aspect is the need to “veto” Ukraine’s membership. During the last presidential election in 2022, having come in fourth place after a full-scale invasion of Ukraine, he intensified his criticism of Ukraine, laying the blame on the EU.

Already during the full-scale invasion, one can recall several egregious statements by Erik Zemmur. Amid support for the rf military invasion of Ukraine in 2014 and the occupation of Crimea, he told RTL in February 2015 that Ukraine is supposedly “dead, but it is forbidden to talk about it. France, Germany and russia have gathered around this coffin, but they pretend to confuse it with the cradle, its body still twitching, but not for long”. Zemmur criminally compared russia’s military aggression against Ukraine and the occupation of its regions for some reason to the partitions of Poland at the end of the 18th century.

The historian Laurent Joly had this to say about Zemmour in 2015, «no other ‘intellectual’, journalist or writer has had such a status as a smuggler of extreme right-wing ideas with a very large audience».

Zemmour is caught up in curiosities and uncomfortable situations. For example, «Le Monde» journalists point out that he had lunch in January 2020 with Jean-Marie Le Pen and Ursula Peinvin, the daughter of Joachim von Ribbentrop, the Third Reich foreign minister who was hanged in 1946 after the Nuremberg trials. «La regle du jeu» noted that Ursula Peinwyn encourages Erik Zemmur with her «most admiring and friendly thoughts». Recall that Zemmur, despite his Jewish origins, is an ardent and quite public anti-Semite. Historian Tal Brutmann once commented on Zemmur’s 2019 speeches: «These are no longer the words of a defiant polemicist with the extreme right, but speech openly in the spirit of fascism». The scholar also observed that Zemmur’s political programme was reduced to a racial struggle. According to the Spanish newspaper «El Confidencial», Eric Zemmour «has built his media career on a racist speech inspired by Renaud Camus’ ‘Big Change’ conspiracy theory…»

In April 2021, in the run-up to the French presidential election of 2022, six women accused Eric Zemmour of sexual assault, they were journalists. In May, «Mediapart» reported the testimony of two more female media workers, who claimed they had not filed a complaint for personal reasons. One to save her career, the other to allegedly “not hurt the essayist”. «Mediapart» checks the testimony of these women against that of six others, publishing evidence, including an SMS noted by the bailiff, in which Zemmur writes to a member of the press «…I will wait until you invite me to your house to rape you!»

During questioning in December 2021, Zemmour did not deny the facts against him. On 8 March 2022, «Mediapart» published an article and video already showing eight women, some with exposed faces, testifying to sexual abuse or inappropriate behaviour with them, which took place between 1999 and 2019.

Since 2014, Erik Zemmur has actively promoted the idea that Western sanctions imposed on the rf for the occupation of Crimea, the military invasion of Ukraine from the Donetsk and Luhansk regions, and the creation of illegal terrorist structures in russia are “unfair and counterproductive”. Repeatedly stating that Russia should be a “privileged ally” for France.

In 2016, Zemmour declares to «Le Figaro» (with whom he was linked by a very “ambiguous” line of cooperation until 2021): «Putin is not our adversary, he is our conscience… He is the only European who says no to America, as de Gaulle once did. He is the only democratically elected leader who takes on the vertical of power, while everyone else leans towards the egalitarianism of a horizontal society». In 2018, for «RTL», he stated that supposedly «Putin is like a time machine in himself. Like the return of the Tsar. Like a shadow of Stalin. When he takes possession of Crimea, it’s like Catherine II returning his property. When he launches his planes into the skies of Syria, he is applying principles that all states observed in the nineteenth century: war is the normal method of politics, the legitimate way to defend the interests of a great state». In May 2021, for «CNews», he said that «Anglo-Saxon countries have always tried to make the aggressor out of those they attack, and here they are doing it again with Putin’s russia». In June 2021, in a debate with Bernard-Henri Levy, he said that under Boris Yeltsin’s presidency, russia was allegedly «auctioned off to mafia oligarchs and the Americans», «Yeltsin was a puppet of the Americans» and «рutin has restored the authority of the state».

The fourth to take the stage is FLORIAN PHILIPPO.

Little is known about him. Enough, however, to imagine the nature of his lobbying in France for Moscow. He quickly became an influential adviser to Marine Le Pen, who appointed him strategic director for the 2012 presidential campaign. Having established himself as a veritable frontier personality in the media, Philippeau contributed to the exclusion of the party’s founder, Jean-Marie Le Pen. Until 2012, he often used pseudonyms, publishing articles and running various blogs where he also spoke positively about Marine Le Pen: Arnaud Mandrin, Adrienne. Here is an article by Philippo for «Le Parisien».

Since 2014, part of the Frontist apparatus has expressed its discontent with Florian Filippo, in particular because of his influence on the economic component of the National Front’s budget. Afterwards, Nicholas Lebourg, a former member of the National Front, said of Filippo:

«…he humiliated people for years. There are many stories between him and elected officials, he was really disliked…He always practised politics – with me or against me».

Florian Filippo has stated that he will leave the party if it does not stand for exit from the eurozone. Despite this, his relationship with Marine Le Pen has soured. She accused him of a lack of investment during the legislative campaign. As a result, he founded his own party, the Patriots, in 2017.

Political scientist Jean-Yves Camus said of Filippo that «his central belief is Europhobia». Florian Philippо is indeed very critical of the European Union and the eurozone. His father used to say that his son believed that the alleged «loss of (French) national sovereignty was linked to the European Union», noting that he was “obsessed” with the issue. After creating his party, Florian Philippaud claimed that its main aim was to promote “Frexit”.

On 30 October 2022, Florian Filippo accused NATO countries of committing “sabotage” on the Nord Stream pipeline:

«…we know it was not russia, and we also know it was organised by NATO state(s)! The truth will soon be found out! » – he wrote on Twitter.

In October 2021, he joined Erik Zemmur’s provisional campaign for the 2022 presidential election, as a consultant for strategic analysis, without formally integrating the campaign team. The two seem to have found much in common, including in their methods of personal representation. Little is known about how he helped Zemmur, but it was through his influence that Filippo abruptly began publicly expressing rather pro-russian positions.

In the context of possible participation of russian and Belarusian athletes in the 2024 Olympic Games to be held in Paris, Florian Filippo stated:

«Zelenski threatens that Ukraine will boycott the Olympics if the Russian athletes are not banned from taking part? Fine! Let him boycott it! World sport will survive this! »

He also managed to “show up” at rallies against pension reform, in particular next to representatives of the radicals “Black Blocs.

The fifth, but unfortunately not the last in the list of pro-Russian functionaries in French politics, is SEGOLEN ROYAL in our investigation.

She is seen as the spokeswoman of a new vein of “socialism”. Objectively speaking, during the Mitterrand presidency, she established herself as a politician concerned with France’s social sector. Personally, she has compared herself to Joan of Arc. Despite losing the presidential election to Nicolas Sarkozy, she has remained involved in politics. There is, however, one weighty BUT: no matter what good ideas she promoted, talking about gender equality and worrying about the social problems of French society, Royale fell under a pro-russian influence.         In 2007, russian journalist Svetlana Dolgopolova (namesake of Nikolai Dobropolov, a publicist close to the russian Foreign Intelligence Service) wrote a rather “nice” article about her in «Politicheskiy Zhurnal» titled «The Favourite». She literally justified her loss to Nicolas Sarkozy:

«The main political gain from the revolt of French students, high school students and their parents was the rising star of the socialist party, Segolene Royal, who the French would elect as their president at any moment… What is happening in France today is what the French themselves call segomania…»

Officially, she can be called a fighter against the influence of the National Front. Before russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, she avoided any comment on russian politics at all. Even when she was in common-law marriage with François Hollande, Royale did not “show up” at his meetings with putin.

She is a rather secretive character, who obviously cared more about her political image, not allowing herself to make Hollande-style statements about “encouraging the occupation of Crimea”. In that sense, Royale remained much more thoughtful, but that all changed last year.

The year 2022 and the French presidential election finally opened up her perceptions of what was happening on the world stage. The image of the “icon” of the third wave of feminism and, on the whole, a woman politician who was quite popular with French society became heavily tarnished by an influx of statements by Royale, in which she complained now and then about the United States, then about the EU, then about Emmanuel Macron in the context of russia’s ongoing war in Ukraine. Not once did she make any comment to the party that actually started the conflict, namely russia.

The Kremlin’s propaganda played quite a telling role on Royale’s persona. The last thing one would expect from her would be any pro-russian statements. Prior to her resignation from the Socialist Party, she had always advocated globalization, while being aware of every phrase she spoke. Moreover, if her statements contradicted conventional leftist views, as in the case of her negative attitude toward the legalization of same-sex marriage, she could clearly explain her position without copying any of the opinions of other politicians. In the case of the full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the situation specifically changed.

In September 2022, on «BFMTV», she made a series of completely illogical and blatantly pro-russian statements. She criminally “questioned” the crimes of the russian military against Ukrainian civilians. Royale allowed herself to question the crimes of the russians in Bucha and other cities, despite tons of evidence from both Ukrainian monitoring groups and prosecutors and international ones. Recall that French investigative teams also came to the same Bucha to help identify the bodies of the dead and establish the cause of their painful deaths from the violence of russian soldiers. The arrival of the mission was reported by former Prosecutor General of Ukraine Irina Venediktova. Also, French experts assisted in collecting evidence of war crimes by the Russian army on the territory of the de-occupied Chernihiv region, which was reported separately by the Office of the Prosecutor General of Ukraine. However, all of this does not seem to have embarrassed Royal and did not stop the flow of her criminal statements.

Russian propagandists were happy to watch part of a French TV broadcast with Royale. In addition to her unfounded “suspicions” toward the russian army’s allegedly “imperfect” war crimes, she also said that “war propaganda is being conducted through fear. Here Royale meant that Ukraine, through President Vladimir Zelensky, allegedly «deliberately propagandizes war» because it «benefits from it, as does the United States». This pro-russian narrative was also disseminated by the russian media.

Segolene Royal also publicly “questioned” the crimes in russian-occupied Mariupol. She literally retold the broadcast of any russian TV channel, saying that the tragic world-famous bombing of the Mariupol maternity hospital allegedly “did not happen”, despite the testimony of eyewitnesses and satellite images.

At the same time, French politicians and society criticized Royale, which was an absolutely logical consequence of everything she had said. For example, the first secretary of the “Socialist Party”, Olivier Faure, as well as Raphaël Glucksmann (head of the “Social Place” party) and Nathalie Loiseau (former minister responsible for European affairs at the French Minister of Foreign Affairs) publicly criticized Royale’s criminal statements.

The next day, the international movement «Stand With Ukraine» announced a complaint against Segolene Royale following her statements. On September 5, 2022, Vadim Omelchenko, Ukraine’s ambassador to France, invited Segolene Royal to come to the de-occupied Ukrainian cities and «see everything for herself».

In response, she stated: «I am not retracting what I said because I am right. We have lost our freedom of speech in relation to our allies, especially the U.S., which is the main beneficiary of the conflict in Ukraine». She also made a little criminal “remark,” stating that supposedly «in this way there is an obstruction of the peace settlement». Again, Royale did not say anything about russia, which began its military aggression during Hollande’s presidency started with the occupation of the Crimean Peninsula.

Already in October 2022, in an interview with the Israeli TV channel «i24news», she again criminally spoke about the alleged «main beneficiary of the conflict in Ukraine is the United States». Russian propaganda immediately reacted to her statement by showering her with “compliments” again, as the «Gazeta» did.

After the scandal in the autumn of 2022, Royal prefers to remain silent for now, but the Rrssian media still continues to carefully “savor” every phrase she said, presenting her criminal statements as “French society’s view of the war”.

You can read about the increased financing of France’s pro-russian political functionaries, Le Pen and Melanchon’s struggle with the new French president, the creation of Kremlin-controlled “civil movements,” “organizations” and “foundations,” the attempt to “placate” Emmanuel Macron and events after russia began its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in the following parts of the investigation.

Nina Yelanskaya, ARC correspondent.