Clayton Morris is a former American Fox News journalist. He and his wife, Natali Morris, have a YouTube channel, Redacted, on which they promote openly anti-Ukrainian narratives.
In one of their videos, they talk about Europe wanting to send men who illegally left Ukraine to war:
“Now we want to gather them like cattle and send them to the front line to die. We need to send them to the forefront to fight for Ukraine.”
In addition to this, other theses are voiced in the video:
- The average age of Ukrainian soldiers is 43 years old, and “they (Ukrainians) have to close universities because men of student age are dead”;
- Ukraine has been attacking ethnic Russian land since 2014;
- The annexation of Crimea was not illegal: people voted to join Russia.
Let’s further analyse all these theses in detail.
“Europe will send Ukrainian refugees to war”
According to information from Janek Mägi, the head of the Department of Border and Migration Policy of the Estonian Ministry of Internal Affairs, the Ukrainian ambassador has indeed raised the issue of returning Ukrainian men home for mobilisation.
It is important to remember that Ukraine is under martial law due to the war started in Ukraine by Russia. During martial law, all citizens aged 18 to 60 who are capable of performing military duty are subject to general mobilisation. Additionally, men of conscription age are not allowed to travel abroad under martial law.
However, Janek Mägi states: “There are no legal grounds in Ukraine to request the extradition of these citizens, just as there are no grounds for us to extradite them.”
Additionally, Mark Bushman, the Minister of Justice of Germany, assured that Ukraine’s issues with mobilising soldiers to defend against Russian invasion would not have practical consequences for Ukrainians residing in Germany:
“We will not force people against their will to mobilise or serve in the military.”
About whether Ukraine has legal grounds to return men from abroad, Oleksandr Khmelevskyi, a PhD in economic sciences and an independent expert, told us:
“Although some Ukrainian politicians and officials would like to bring Ukrainian men back from abroad and even addressed this issue to European states, Europeans refused to do so. There are no legal grounds for returning Ukrainian men from abroad.
The point is that European legislation prohibits returning migrants to countries where they are in danger. Since there is a war in Ukraine, returning men to Ukraine means exposing them to mortal danger. Europeans will never agree to this”.
“Ukraine can only demand the extradition of its citizens on an individual basis. This applies to individuals who have committed a criminal offence in Ukraine. In such a case, Ukraine must send a request for the extradition of a specific person, providing evidence of the crime they committed. Europeans carefully examine such documents, and a local court makes the decision on extradition.”
As Oleksandr Khmelevskyi notes, illegal border crossing itself is considered an administrative offence under Ukrainian law, not a criminal offence. There can be no extradition for this:
“Perhaps a Ukrainian citizen used forged documents when crossing the border. This could lead to a criminal case. However, such cases may be isolated and may not become widespread. In any case, Ukraine must provide irrefutable evidence of document forgery, which is quite difficult.”
“Ukraine is closing universities due to the lack of male students of college age”
“Some Ukrainian universities are indeed planned to be closed due to a lack of students. But not because they are dead, as propagandists claim. Simply, 17 years ago, there was an extremely low birth rate.
Firstly, the closure of universities is currently only in plans. Secondly, the reasons for this are partially related to the war but are demographic. Thirdly, mobilising a man up to 27 years old (recently up to 25), who has the status of a ‘conscript’ without his consent, is not allowed (except for those with the status of ‘military service obligation’). This concerns the ‘men of student age’ mentioned in the fake news”, – says Serhiy Odarenko, editor of the fact-checking project “Behind the News“.
Additionally, as Serhiy Odarenko explained, the proposed bill “On the Preconditions for Modernizing the Network of Higher Education Institutions” is not just about reducing the number of universities but also about improving their quality. The necessity of reducing universities can be explained simply by mathematics.
Here’s what Deputy Minister of Education and Science of Ukraine, Mykhailo Vynnytskyi, said about this in an interview:
“This year in Ukraine, there were approximately 360,000 high school graduates. 15 years ago, in 2008, this number reached 640,000. Further forecasts are also bleak. Based solely on demographics, which do not account for migration related to the war, we see a constant decrease in the number of people born on the territory of Ukraine 17 years ago. By 2033, there will be approximately 300,000 graduates in Ukraine – a figure that assumes the return of territories currently not under Ukraine’s control…
Talking about ‘dead students,’ Natali Morris displays a screenshot of an article supposedly mentioning it. Searching for keywords, we find the source of the publication, as expected, to be ‘RT’ – the Russian state-funded multilingual television network oriented towards foreign audiences”.
“Ukraine attacked ethnic Russian territories in 2014”
First and foremost, there are no ethnic Russian territories within Ukraine’s borders. There are regions where there is indeed a proportion of the Russian population. However, they are there exclusively because Russia resettles its citizens in the territories annexed in 1922:
“The Russian-Soviet authorities aggressively conducted brutal resettlements of hundreds of millions of non-Russians and other ‘undesirable’ elements from the western lands of the empire to the Far East. The voids left after famine, genocide, and mass deportations were filled by ethnic Russians sent to promote Russian culture and language in depopulated areas,” – as stated in the message on the World Congress of Ukrainians website.
“It’s worth taking Orwell and his Ministry of Truth into account here because Russia operates solely in that paradigm. Let’s start with the fact that Ukraine never attacked Crimea in 2014. It began attacking it in 2022, and only because there are military facilities there that pose a threat to peaceful Ukrainian territories. As for the Donetsk and Luhansk regions, take the population census of 1926. And see how many Ukrainians and Russians lived there. Then compare how many Ukrainians lived in Kuban, Kursk, Belgorod, Voronezh, and Rostov. And ask the question, what are ‘inherently Russian territories’?” – commented Natalia Poznyak, a researcher at the Ukrainian Institute of National Memory.
In recent days, the Russian occupying authorities plan to resettle 300,000 citizens from Russia to Mariupol. During a UN Security Council meeting, the US government stated that hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians had been interrogated, detained, and forcibly deported to Russia as part of “a series of horrific events” orchestrated by the Kremlin dictator.
Vasyl Melnychuk, a state expert at the Ministry for Reintegration of Temporarily Occupied Territories of Ukraine, also commented on the issue of “ethnic Russian territories within Ukraine”:
“The use of the term ‘Russian ethnic territories’ is manipulative because it always raises the question of which specific time these territories are considered Russian ethnic. If we talk about Crimea it was annexed by the Russian Empire in 1783, which is relatively recent in historical terms. But should we stop at the 18th century? We can delve deeper into history and see that Crimea belonged to different peoples in different periods of history.
Therefore, it is correct to reject all manipulations using the concept of ‘Russian ethnic territories’ and to rely on the norms established in interstate treaties. In particular, the Treaty between the Russian Federation and Ukraine on the Russian-Ukrainian State Border was signed on January 28, 2003, during the visit of Russian President Putin to Kyiv. Ukraine ratified the agreement on April 20, 2004, and the Russian Federation on April 22. The treaty entered into force on the date of exchange of ratification documents, namely on April 23, 2004.
Thus, there is an interstate agreement that clearly regulates the issue of ownership of certain lands to neighbouring states. Therefore, all discussions about the attack on Russian ethnic lands are meaningless and are a manipulation aimed at undermining the existence of Ukraine as a separate state, accusing Ukraine of violating the rights of national minorities, and so on; in other words, it is an enemy’s information-psychological special operation (IPSO).
The treaty is in force to this day, which can be confirmed on the website of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine and the website of the President of the Russian Federation.”
Secondly, according to Ukraine war history, Ukraine did not attack its own eastern territories. The main argument used to justify Ukraine shelling the occupied cities was Russia’s denial of its presence in the east. We provide evidence that refutes this claim.
This falsehood was debunked as early as 2014. As he admitted, the storming of the first Ukrainian city, Sloviansk, was led by Russian military officer Igor Girkin. His quotes confirm that if it weren’t for Russia, there would be no war.
Indeed, most of the militants were individuals with Ukrainian citizenship, but they were mere executors, while Russia acted as the organiser and supplier of weapons. In 2020, the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense calculated how much Russian weaponry was present in the Donbas at that time. A significant portion of this weaponry is manufactured exclusively in Russia.
“The annexation of Crimea was legal”
According to Ukraine news war, on March 16, 2014, a “referendum” took place in Crimea and Sevastopol, which was not recognised by the majority of countries worldwide, following which Russia annexed Crimea.
Neither Ukraine, nor the European Union, nor the United States recognised the voting results in the “referendum.” International organisations deemed the occupation and annexation of Crimea by Russia illegal and condemned Russia’s actions.
Russia denies the annexation of the peninsula and refers to it as “restoring historical justice”. Further details on why Crimea is not historically Russian were discussed in this article by The Ukrainian Review.
It is also important to note that in February 2014, armed individuals in uniforms without insignia appeared in Crimea, seizing the building of the Crimean Supreme Council, the Simferopol airport, the Kerch ferry crossing, and other strategic objects while also blocking the actions of Ukrainian forces. Initially, the Russian authorities denied that these armed individuals were Russian military personnel. Later, Russian President Vladimir Putin acknowledged that they were indeed Russian military personnel.
Dmytro Franchuk, a political analyst and lawyer, told us about the illegality of the annexation of Crimea:
“The referendum on the annexation of Crimea, which took place in 2014, was conducted under conditions of massive intervention by Russia, including military occupation and threats. This violated international law, including the Principles of the Hague Statute and the Principle of Non-Intervention, as Russia interfered in the internal affairs of a sovereign country. Thus, many countries and international organisations recognised the referendum and subsequent annexation as illegal actions.
The referendum questions did not allow a vote to preserve Crimea as part of Ukraine. There were also numerous reports of falsification of results”.
What were the violations of the Constitution of Ukraine:
- Article 73: The change in Ukraine’s territory is possible only through an all-Ukrainian referendum.
- Article 138: The Autonomous Republic of Crimea has no right to self-determination.
“The UN Charter prohibits the acquisition of territory by force. The Helsinki Final Act obliges states to respect each other’s territorial integrity.
Also, the International Court of Justice in 2017 recognised that Russia had occupied Crimea and bears responsibility for human rights violations on the peninsula”, – he add.
***
Clayton and Natalie Morris get news about Ukraine from Russian sources. News in Ukraine and Russia are different because Russia is trying to destroy Ukraine informationally by spreading fake news to its and the world’s audience. Clayton and Natalie Morris continue to spread disinformation and echo Russian narratives on their YouTube channel, “Redacted.” A shocking fact is that the channel’s audience is growing: they currently have 2.35 million subscribers.
Anya Ostymchuk
