Autocracies often expand their power through two approaches: One is by using the influence of economic and combat power, the other by employing diplomacy and propaganda.
As Russia’s invasion of Ukraine entered its second month, there has been relentless bombardment and information warfare.
The foreign affairs spokespeople of two autocracies — China and Russia — have unanimously attacked the US and Ukraine via conferences and state media. They took to social media to accuse Ukraine of making biochemical weapons to rationalize Russia’s invasion.
As a result, China’s amplification of Russian propaganda has made it influential in shaping international relations.
There have been several waves of information warfare between Russia and Ukraine, and some of the propaganda has told of the escape of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, weapons of mass destruction, and Russian paratroopers and casualties, all of which are common themes in psychological warfare.
As in chess, the priority in any war is to checkmate the king. Since the first day of the invasion, from mass communication to social media, rumors that Zelenskiy had fled the country spread like wildfire.
Certain Taiwanese TV channels, having failed to verify the news beforehand, also ran the information, while commentators on political talk shows used Zelenskiy as an example to attack the US and insinuate that President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) would do the same were she in the same position.
A TV channel used the following caption on screen at 2:46pm on Feb. 24: “Ukrainian president flees as missiles bombard Ukraine, senators and millionaires among escapees.”
That was accompanied by a placard that read: “Ukraine left alone after one telephone call from US President Joe Biden.”
The guests on the show were having a field day, discussing how the example illustrated that Taiwan, just like Ukraine, would be abandoned by the US in case of conflict, while ridiculing Tsai’s possible “escape.”
Within an hour, the news had gone viral on the Internet. At 3:27pm, when there were about 1,290 users on the Professional Technology Temple (PTT) online bulletin board, an article was posted titled: “Just in! Ukrainian president allegedly escaped via plane!”
Comments were posted below the article, such as: “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow,” “The Ukrainian Tsai Ing-wen,” “Confession of Tsai the swine: Practice makes perfect,” all to imply that Tsai would run in the event of an invasion.
A piece of fake news also went viral on the Line app, saying Tsai had “rehearsed” her escape.
Using a comment written by a lawyer in August 2020, the author added Tsai’s name to the original text to imply that she had rehearsed an escape 14 times in the Han Kuang military exercises, and how she would pilfer all the gold in the central bank while escaping to Guam on a Black Hawk helicopter.
Although the story was later disproven by the Ministry of Defense and the Taiwan FactCheck Center, it shows how such schemes can reduce public morale.
Another attempt at deception involved a video showing thousands of Russian paratroopers “invading” Ukraine, but the clip was later proven to show a military drill that was recorded in 2016.
Russia’s expertise in using fake information to undermine confidence is an old trick. Fortunately, Zelenskiy’s effective use of media and his impassioned speeches have gotten through to the people.
Further, Facebook, Instagram and YouTube have suspended advertisements from Russian state-funded media. Twitter has temporarily halted advertisements in Ukraine and Russia as well.
Thanks to the collaboration of tech giants that imposed boycotts, a stop was put to Russia’s global information warfare.
Showing vulnerability is a basic strategy employed by small countries when facing larger countries. Palestine also adopted the underdog stance in its conflict with Israel and has won the sympathy of the global community.
Likewise, Zelenskiy has crafted an exceptional image by projecting vulnerability in his impassioned speeches.
A poll conducted after the invasion showed that 91 percent of Ukrainians supported their leader, and 70 percent said that their country would prevail.
Nevertheless, some Taiwanese media spoke up for Russia and attacked Zelenskiy. One pundit said that a first-rate president would not have let such an invasion happen to his people in the first place.
China and its state-funded media have been backing Russia’s claim that Ukraine has biochemical weapons, a rare occasion in which two autocratic countries coordinate on information warfare.
Chinese state media even bought social media advertisements to help Russia.
Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman Zhao Lijian (趙立堅) accused the US of operating 26 biological laboritories in Ukraine
“In these facilities, large quantities of dangerous viruses are stored. Russia has found during its military operation that the US controls these facilities for military purposes,” Zhao said.
The White House, the US Department of State and the US ambassador to the UN have denied the allegation.
Biden has warned Russia that there would be a “severe price” to pay if it used chemical weapons in Ukraine. This is an example of when someone strikes you on the cheek, you have to fight back.
Russia and China’s biochemical conspiracy theories seem to be retribution for the US accusing China of developing biochemical weapons at a Wuhan laboratory during the COVID-19 pandemic.
As nuclear and biochemical weapons can cause mass destruction, Russia has been sowing fear among people by spreading related information on social media.
For the past few years, China and Russia have been engaged in information warfare by deploying state apparatus to manipulate private and state-owned firms, and encourage social media users to block unfavorable views or harass reporters.
Meanwhile, Internet bots are on social media framing issues, boosting hit rates and demonizing objectionable ideas. Both countries are able to paralyze communications from the opposition and independent media with “denial of service” attacks.
Posts about biochemical weapons were “liked” by Web bots, and messages go viral by being reposted on various social media.
This has formed an echo chamber to sow seeds of discord in society at an alarming speed, where even some Taiwanese commentators and former legislators are showing their public support for Russia.
Taking advantage of media freedom in democratic countries, China and Russia have been spreading information about biochemical weapons as a means of psychological warfare, along with the implementation of digital authoritarianism.
Chien Yu-yen works in the media.
Translated by Rita Wang
Congratulations to China’s working class — they have officially entered the “Livestock Feed 2.0” era. While others are still researching how to achieve healthy and balanced diets, China has already evolved to the point where it does not matter whether you are actually eating food, as long as you can swallow it. There is no need for cooking, chewing or making decisions — just tear open a package, add some hot water and in a short three minutes you have something that can keep you alive for at least another six hours. This is not science fiction — it is reality.
A foreign colleague of mine asked me recently, “What is a safe distance from potential People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Rocket Force’s (PLARF) Taiwan targets?” This article will answer this question and help people living in Taiwan have a deeper understanding of the threat. Why is it important to understand PLA/PLARF targeting strategy? According to RAND analysis, the PLA’s “systems destruction warfare” focuses on crippling an adversary’s operational system by targeting its networks, especially leadership, command and control (C2) nodes, sensors, and information hubs. Admiral Samuel Paparo, commander of US Indo-Pacific Command, noted in his 15 May 2025 Sedona Forum keynote speech that, as
In a world increasingly defined by unpredictability, two actors stand out as islands of stability: Europe and Taiwan. One, a sprawling union of democracies, but under immense pressure, grappling with a geopolitical reality it was not originally designed for. The other, a vibrant, resilient democracy thriving as a technological global leader, but living under a growing existential threat. In response to rising uncertainties, they are both seeking resilience and learning to better position themselves. It is now time they recognize each other not just as partners of convenience, but as strategic and indispensable lifelines. The US, long seen as the anchor
Kinmen County’s political geography is provocative in and of itself. A pair of islets running up abreast the Chinese mainland, just 20 minutes by ferry from the Chinese city of Xiamen, Kinmen remains under the Taiwanese government’s control, after China’s failed invasion attempt in 1949. The provocative nature of Kinmen’s existence, along with the Matsu Islands off the coast of China’s Fuzhou City, has led to no shortage of outrageous takes and analyses in foreign media either fearmongering of a Chinese invasion or using these accidents of history to somehow understand Taiwan. Every few months a foreign reporter goes to
RSS