logo
Kremlin's ‘cocaine' chaos: How Macron's tissue was twisted into a propaganda attack

Kremlin's ‘cocaine' chaos: How Macron's tissue was twisted into a propaganda attack

The Age13-05-2025
This would all be laughable – if it weren't part of a very real and deliberate strategy to discredit European leadership and fracture the public's trust in Ukraine's allies. In this information war, the Kremlin isn't chasing truth, but traction.
Paris's new posture reflects an overdue recognition: the old playbook – ignore and rise above – no longer works when lies travel faster than truth. Macron's team is done letting ridiculous rumours metastasise unchecked.
What may have once been dismissed as beneath response – claims about Macron's sexuality, his wife's gender, George Soros-fuelled puppet strings, or Zelensky's imaginary yachts – has had measurable consequences.
French intelligence says Russia's GRU military agency has ramped up cyber warfare, targeting Europe's information landscape, not just to surveil, but to seed chaos.
These fabrications often find their way across the Atlantic, where they mutate into tools of US domestic sabotage. A Russian-originated rumour that Zelensky used US aid to buy yachts was repeated by elected members of Congress during critical debates over Ukraine's military funding. That delay cost Ukraine battlefield advantage. The lie became policy.
So while a tissue on a table might seem innocuous – or even funny – it fits squarely into the Kremlin's broader strategy: ridicule, delegitimise, destabilise.
Zakharova's Telegram post – long, unhinged and characteristic of her social media screeds – recycled old tropes about Zelensky being a drug addict. Now she claims a 'Western diplomat' told her that cocaine is standard fare among European elites.
It is classic Russian propaganda: sexually charged, drug-laced and always heavy with innuendo. Less intelligence brief, more high school rumour mill. But it works because it is relentless.
The French, after years of restraint, are now leaning into a counter-disinformation strategy that calls lies what they are – and shows receipts. It's not about arguing on the Kremlin's terms, but undercutting their theatre of absurdity with surgical clarity.
This is more than a public relations pivot. It's a recognition that digital warfare is no longer a future threat – it's happening in real time and it shapes perceptions faster than traditional diplomacy can catch up.
Zakharova didn't pull this claim from nowhere. She built on posts by anonymous pro-Russia bloggers on Telegram, many of whom specialise in doctoring footage and crafting narratives that appeal to anti-elite sentiments across the West.
These stories spread in fringe corners first – but like so many before, they can be legitimised with a single quote from a Russian official, and then laundered into mainstream discourse by bad-faith actors and conspiracy-curious commentators.
Loading
One French-language pro-Kremlin account quipped, 'Coke is going to take decisions on the third world war.' As satire, it's dull. As strategy, it's effective.
The diplomatic train trip that sparked the controversy – bringing Macron, Starmer, Merz, and others to Kyiv to meet Zelensky – was in fact a powerful symbol of European unity.
The leaders stood shoulder to shoulder, pledging fresh sanctions and urging a ceasefire. Russia's answer was to reduce it to a farce, hoping that distraction would win out over diplomacy.
But Paris is no longer playing along. The new doctrine is call it early, call it clearly, and don't dignify it with a delay.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Judgment day for Brittany Higgins
Judgment day for Brittany Higgins

Perth Now

time17 minutes ago

  • Perth Now

Judgment day for Brittany Higgins

A judgment in the long running defamation suit launched by former senator Linda Reynolds against her former junior staffer Brittany Higgins will be handed down next week. Justice Paul Tottle will deliver his verdict in the defamation case against Ms Higgins and her husband David Sharaz in the WA Supreme Court next Wednesday. Ms Reynolds sued the pair over a series of social media posts they made in 2022 and 2023, claiming they damaged her reputation. Ms Higgins relied on the truth defence claiming the social media posts were substantially true during the defamation proceedings. A verdict in former senator Linda Reynolds' defamation case against Brittany Higgins and David Sharaz will be handed down in the WA Supreme Court on August 27. NewsWire / Sharon Smith Credit: News Corp Australia Former senator Linda Reynolds brought the defamation proceedings after social media posts made by Ms Higgins and Mr Sharaz. NewsWire / Sharon Smith Credit: News Corp Australia The posts were critical of Ms Reynolds' handling of Ms Higgins' allegation she was raped in the senator's office at Parliament House in 2019 by her then-colleague Bruce Lehrmann. He was charged with rape and faced trial in 2022, but the trial was aborted due to juror misconduct. The charge was dropped and Mr Lehrmann continues to maintain his innocence. Mr Lehrmann lost a subsequent civil defamation case in April last year when the Federal Court determined, on the balance of probabilities, that Mr Lehrmann had raped Ms Higgins at Parliament House. He is appealing the decision. Private text messages and emails between federal ministers, senators, staffers, press gallery journalists and lawyers were laid bare during the five-week blockbuster trial last year. Ms Higgins' defence team called for the action to be dismissed entirely at the end of the high-stakes legal battle. Brittany Higgins and David Sharaz sold the French chateau they called home to pay for legal fees. Credit: Supplied Ms Reynolds, who has retired from politics, mortgaged her home in a bid to clear her name. Ms Higgins and Mr Sharaz sold their French home to pay for legal fees, as she maintained her version of events about what happened to her at Parliament House. It was revealed Ms Reynolds was seeking more than half a million dollars in damages. Her lawyer Martin Bennett asked the court to 'nail the lies' Ms Higgins allegedly perpetuated after making her rape allegation public in 2021. The court was told Ms Higgins 'grossly defamed' her former boss in social media posts shared years later. Ms Higgins' defence lawyer Rachael Young said it was a series of events in 2021 that led to the then-Senator Reynolds' distress and reputational damage, not social media posts created by her client two years later. Ms Young argued Ms Reynolds' decline was caused by backlash from her referring to Ms Higgins as a 'lying cow', a senate grilling over the allegations, her hospitalisation, losing the defence ministry and missing out on a shadow ministry under Peter Dutton. Ms Higgins' defence lawyer Rachael Young argued it was a series of events in 2021 that led to Ms Reynolds distress and reputational damage, not social media posts created by her client two years later. NewsWire / Sharon Smith Credit: News Corp Australia She said the former senator tried to besmirch the people she blamed for her political demise, namely Ms Higgins, who continued to face the heaviest burden in all this. Two dozen witnesses were called to give evidence including former prime minister Scott Morrison. A who's who of the nation's parliament, media and legal circles were dragged into the proceedings as diary entries, minutes and communications between senators, staffers, journalists, police officers and lawyers were exposed in court. The trial centred around what happened in the aftermath of Ms Higgins speaking out about her alleged rape in a article and The Project interview that were published on February 15, 2021, two years after the alleged incident. Ms Reynolds' lawyer Martin Bennett argued in court statements that Ms Higgins made in those media interviews and in her personal injury claim were wrong and that she had lied. Former senator Linda Reynolds lawyer Martin Bennett argued every fairytale needs a villain. NewsWire / Sharon Smith Credit: News Corp Australia He said his client had been cast as a villain in Ms Higgins and Mr Sharaz's fictional story that alleged Ms Reynolds had tried to cover-up a rape. 'Every fairytale needs a villain, and in 2020 or 2021, Ms Higgins and her then-partner and now-husband, Mr Sharaz, cast Ms Reynolds in that role for their fictional story of a cover-up of the rape,' Mr Bennett told the WA Supreme Court. 'The fact she had been raped was traumatic and terrible but it needed something more to attract the attention, to attract media interest, to attract the promotion of Ms Higgins, so she made it a political sex scandal.' Ms Young argued the matter was not, and never had been, a 'fairytale' for her client saying the comments were misplaced, harassing and retraumitising. Ms Young told the court Ms Reynolds had picked the 'wrong target' for the hurt and distress and that her reputation was already 'baked in' when her client posted to social media in the years that followed.

Nobody should ‘underestimate' Melania's influence on Trump's decision-making
Nobody should ‘underestimate' Melania's influence on Trump's decision-making

Sky News AU

timean hour ago

  • Sky News AU

Nobody should ‘underestimate' Melania's influence on Trump's decision-making

Former White House Press secretary Sean Spicer discusses the 'power' the First Lady has on President Trump's thinking. This comes as US President Donald Trump hand-delivered to Russian leader Vladimir Putin a private letter from his wife, Melania Trump, about the plight of children in Ukraine and Russia during their peace summit in Alaska. 'No-one should underestimate the power that she has on his decision-making,' Mr Spicer told Sky News host Andrew Bolt. 'President Trump's display of that letter should speak volumes to what he was trying to convey to Vladimir Putin.'

The territory at the heart of Russia's war in Ukraine
The territory at the heart of Russia's war in Ukraine

Sydney Morning Herald

time2 hours ago

  • Sydney Morning Herald

The territory at the heart of Russia's war in Ukraine

For years, Russian President Vladimir Putin has been trying to change Ukraine's borders, even before Russia's full-scale invasion of the country in February 2022. But one piece of land is the centre of his ambition: Ukraine's Donbas, the industrial region in eastern Ukraine that was seen by some as 'the heart of Russia' during the Soviet era. Here, the land rises to 300 metres above sea level in places, and its ridges and rivers have provided a natural defensive line for beleaguered Ukraine over the past 3½ years, allowing its army to hold back Russian troops from the rest of the country. Putin has managed to capture 88 per cent of Donbas, and now he is reportedly demanding that Ukraine hand over the remainder as his price for peace. US President Donald Trump has said both Ukraine and Russia will have to make concessions under any final peace settlement, saying there could be 'some swapping of territories to the betterment of both'. But based on the reported terms of Putin, the trade of territory would be one-sided, heavily favouring Russia, and come with other terms and conditions attached. How much of Ukraine does Russia control? Putin illegally annexed the Black Sea peninsula of Crimea in 2014 after the downfall of Ukraine's pro-Russian former president, Victor Yanukovych, and then fomented an insurgency in the eastern Donbas region, comprising Donetsk and Luhansk provinces, that resulted in them largely coming under the control of pro-Russian separatists. In February 2022, Russian troops rolled into Donetsk and Luhansk and captured about 74 per cent of the southern Kherson and Zaporizhzhia provinces as well. After failing to capture Kyiv early in the war, Russia withdrew from northern Ukraine in April 2022 to concentrate on the Donbas. Later that year, Ukraine launched a major counter-offensive, recapturing most of Kharkiv and the city of Kherson, and pushing Russian forces south of the Dnipro River. But after almost four years of fighting, the only Ukrainian region Russia has near-complete control over is Luhansk, and despite making slow progress elsewhere, it hasn't yet gained a decisive advantage. As of mid-August this year, Russia occupied nearly a fifth of Ukraine, with its offensive stretching across a front line of more than 1000 kilometres. Including Crimea, it amounts to some 114,500 square kilometres (19 per cent) of the country, according to open-source conflict maps, including some 46,570 square kilometres of the Donbas – but a large chunk of the region, in Donetsk, remains under Ukrainian control. What does Putin want in return for ending the war? Putin's reported peace terms involve Ukraine giving up the 25 per cent of Donetsk that it still holds, which amounts to some 6500 square kilometres. The battle lines in the southern regions of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia would also be frozen and turned into a new border, with Russia keeping the territory it occupies in both. In exchange, Putin has reportedly offered to withdraw his troops from the small pockets of Sumy, Kharkiv and Mykolaiv regions in north-east Ukraine. The Russian leader has also demanded that the 'root causes' of the war should be tackled; essentially, that Ukraine must become a demilitarised, neutral state and that NATO stop expanding closer to Russia's borders. Why does Putin want the Donbas? The appeal of Donbas to Putin probably lies in his nostalgic desire to redraw Russia's borders and enshrine the legacy of the Soviet Union. Named after the Donets coal basin, it remains Ukraine's coal mining and steelmaking centre, though it has suffered greatly from years of conflict, and many facilities have been destroyed or badly damaged. Despite that, the Donbas still has significant reserves of coal and shale gas, as well as other desirable resources such as lithium, titanium and graphite – although it's unclear how much could be commercially extracted. The fertile farmlands of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia, meanwhile, account for some 10 per cent of the wheat, barley, rapeseed and sunflower seed produced in Ukraine from 2016 to 2020, according to the US Department of Agriculture. Controlling Donetsk offers Russia a strategic advantage by providing a land corridor along the coast of the Sea of Azov to Crimea, reducing reliance on the Kerch Bridge. If Ukraine were to surrender all of Donetsk, it would lose its main fortified defensive line against Russian advances deeper into the country, according to the Washington think tank, the Institute for the Study of War. Loading And Luhansk and Donetsk may be broadly Russian-speaking, there are major questions as to what would happen to those inhabitants who did not necessarily want to become actual Russian citizens. A Ukrainian opinion poll in May 2022 suggested that 82 per cent of people in territories seized by Russia had a negative attitude to Moscow. With almost 200,000 Ukrainians living in the cities of Kramatorsk and Slovyansk alone, thousands might need to be relocated. What about Crimea? Putin's 2014 seizure of Crimea – which had been transferred from Russia to Ukraine in 1954 – enabled him to use it as a launchpad for the 2022 invasion of Ukraine. The peninsula also offers access to the Black Sea, a critical corridor for transporting grain and other goods. The Kerch Bridge, which opened in 2018 to connect Crimea to the Russian mainland, is a vital logistics route for Russia to supply its frontlines. Ukrainian forces have attacked it several times to try to sever this link. After his meetings with Putin, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and the European leaders, Trump told Fox News that it would be 'impossible' for control of the Crimean Peninsula to be returned to Ukraine. The Trump administration previously floated the idea of the US recognising Russian sovereignty of Crimea as part of a peace agreement. What is Ukraine's stance on its Russian-occupied territory? Zelensky has repeatedly said that Ukraine's 1996 constitution states that the country's territory is 'indivisible and inviolable'. It also specifically defines Crimea as an autonomous republic that's an 'inseparable constituent part of Ukraine'. The May 2022 opinion poll found 82 per cent of Ukrainians did not believe Ukraine should give up any of its territory, even if it made the war last longer and threatened the country's independence, according to a poll conducted by the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology. But by early June of this year, that share had fallen to 52 per cent.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store