_shutterstock_vladj55__xlarge.jpg "Moscow’s muted memorial")
(c) shutterstock
Moscow’s muted memorial
While Europe was celebrating Europe Day last Saturday, Moscow’s annual 9 May parade was radically scaled back. What, if anything, can we read into this?
In an unexpected twist, Russia’s usually bombastic Victory Day parade this year contained no major military equipment and lasted just 45 minutes, making it one of the most understated ever. In addition, in the speech he made at the event, Vladimir Putin sent some mixed messages.
Is the tide turning?
In amongst some tough talk of an inevitable Russian victory, President Putin suggested that the war in Ukraine may be nearing its end and even alluded to the possibility of a face-to-face meeting with Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelensky… but only once a lasting peace deal has been agreed.
Putin’s changing tone is a major talking point in Europe. Is he finally on the back foot? And is this an opportunity we should be trying to seize?
Lithuania’s Žinių Radijas puts these questions to conservative MEP Rasa Juknevičienė.
Rasa Juknevičienė, Member of the European Parliament – EPP, Lithuania (in Lithuanian):
“Intelligent people understand that Putin’s Russia is losing. Or, to be more precise, that it has not gained anything in five years. I’m not saying that the war is over, but even in the European Parliament I’m increasingly hearing that Russia is losing, that Russia has won nothing – and not just from politicians in our region, but also from those working in the fields of security and defence policy. So it is time for us to realise that Ukraine needs our help now more than ever.”
Putin seems keen to see his bosom buddy Gerhard Schroeder playing the role of mediator in any forthcoming peace negotiations – something that EU ministers have dismissed out of hand given the former German chancellor’s longstanding close relationship with the Russian president. But the Lithuanian EPP member adds that even talk of such things is a sign of desperation on Putin’s part.
Rasa Juknevičienė, Member of the European Parliament – EPP, Lithuania (in Lithuanian):
“There has been mention of Schroeder, and that the negotiations should supposedly take place in Moscow. This is utter nonsense, intended solely to help him save face. The message for me is very clear: Europe now has a golden opportunity not only to help Ukraine even more, but to unite in such a way that ensures Putin’s Russia actually suffers a defeat.”
Putin's former speechwriter, political scientist Abbas Gallyamov, who is on Russia's wanted list for his criticism of Moscow’s actions towards Ukraine, is less confident that the tide is turning.
So what, ask our colleagues at Radio 24 in Milan, does he think lies behind Putin's somewhat contradictory statements and actions?
Abbas Gallyamov, Russian Political Scientist (in English):
“Putin’s tone might sound conciliatory sometimes, but it's probably just because he feels that public demand to end the war is getting stronger and stronger, and he is trying to give people what they want. He's [signalling] that he is not a dangerous extremist, which he is looking like more and more to the Russian public, including the elites. So in order to avoid this perception, he is trying to adjust his tone to public demand. But it's not enough to [be able to say] that he's ready to change his actions; to change course; to end the war. So far, this looks more like a PR stunt to me.”
Yet, given the clear loss of momentum in the Russian campaign, the vast numbers of Russian military casualties, Ukraine’s ever-increasing technological capabilities, and waning support from the US president, surely things are not looking good for the Kremlin? In the light of all of this, does Gallyamov really not believe peace could be on the horizon?
Abbas Gallyamov, Russian Political Scientist (in English):
“Well, it's not ruled out completely because he is really under stress. The situation is going from bad to worse. Economically and politically, his ratings are falling and the protest moods are growing. So in general, the situation demands an end to the war and Trump is actually suggesting conditions which are not so bad, bearing in mind the awful situation in which Putin finds himself. But I still feel that he has some strength left, and he might actually use it to make the situation even worse. For example, by attacking Europe. It can’t be ruled out. So, before de-escalating, he might want to escalate to have final negotiations, a final settlement, from a much stronger position than now.”
At a press conference on Tuesday (12 May), Kaja Kallas also gave a nod to this possibility.
When asked if the EU was ready to provide Ukraine with all the necessary security guarantees in the event of a ceasefire being negotiated, the EU high representative for foreign affairs and security policy cautioned that we should not put the cart before the horse. First and foremost, she said, we need to ensure that any ceasefire negotiated is a meaningful one.
Kaja Kallas, EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (in English):
"We need to see concessions from the Russian side because they are always the ones who are attacking their neighbours. How we can make sure that we don't only have a ceasefire or truce that would give them the possibility to regroup and get their army in a better shape than it is right now, and then go on attacking, but [instead that] it would be a sustainable and lasting peace [and] that they would refrain from attacking other countries? That is why we have the discussion with foreign ministers coming up on what kind of concessions we need to see from the Russian side."
The discussion Kallas is referring to will likely take place at an informal meeting of foreign affairs ministers scheduled for 27 and 28 May in Limassol, Cyprus. They will also be looking to identify a suitable figure to represent Europe’s interests in any upcoming talks – and in fact another former German chancellor, Angela Merkel, is one of the names in contention.
Plumbing the depths of deepfakes
So, changing the subject completely, we welcome back Linda Givetash from the Euranet Plus fact-checking team for less of a fact-check and more of a discussion about the increasing need to fact check the content to which we are all exposed. Hi Linda.
Hi, it’s great to be back!
So, specifically, we are talking deepfakes. Tell us what these are and why they matter, Linda.
The creation and distribution of deepfakes, which are images or videos generated with artificial intelligence and designed to impersonate an individual, are on the rise globally. Deepfakes have the power to sway politics and elections with engaging disinformation, yet with the years of this technology now available to us, the World Economic Forum has pointed out that the greatest damage caused thus far has been a rise in harassment and social engineering.
Indeed, deepfake images and videos can now be so realistic that mere humans often can’t tell they are fake at all. And they are put to a range of nefarious uses.
Deepfake impersonations of politicians or public figures are being widely used, for example, to trick users into sending money or sharing sensitive data. And global research firm Info-Tech Research Group reported in March that “deepfakes are rapidly emerging as a new class of cyberattack that bypasses traditional security controls by exploiting human trust, exposing organisations to fraud, data theft, regulatory risk and reputational damage”.
But a round-up of cases reported by the Euranet+ network has revealed one key area in which deepfake use is even more prominent. Can you tell us more, Linda?
A major issue across the European Union is the use of sexual deepfakes that is fuelling gender-based violence online and disproportionately targeting women and girls. This includes harassment, reputational damage and extortion. Everyone can be a target, with incidents ranging from celebrities to private individuals. There has also been a rise in cases among minors and in schools, as reported in Spain, Belgium and other countries.
So, essentially we’re talking about fake porn here? But surely this only accounts for a minority of deepfake content, doesn’t it?
The United Nations has pointed to a 2023 report by the security firm SecurityHero that found that 98 per cent of all online deepfake videos are made with non-consensual pornographic images, often referred to as deepfake nudes or fake nude images. AI tools and chatbots like X’s Grok have enabled mass creation and sharing of explicit content, sometimes affecting hundreds of millions of users.
Wow. 98 per cent. That figure is quite staggering. Obviously we hear about the high-profile cases, but I had no idea fake porn was so prolific.
And yet, according to UN Women, less than half of all countries have laws that address online abuse, let alone ones that specifically address AI-generated content. I guess this is where some of the better-publicised cases could come in handy…
High-profile cases have triggered protests and widespread media attention in the European Union, with growing concern about child safety, online abuse, and erosion of trust in digital content. One such case involved German actor Collien Fernandes, who told the press that her former husband, TV presenter and producer Christian Ulmen, had been impersonating her online and sharing sexually explicit deepfakes of her. It not only prompted Germany's Justice Minister to propose a new law to criminalise sexual deepfakes, but Austria as well. Even Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni has been victimised by deepfake porn, leading her to take legal action. According to a policy paper by think tank GlobalSec, it set a precedent that existing laws, such as copyright, personal rights and image protection, can be used to fight deepfake harassment, although it highlighted that modernised laws are needed to prevent and mitigate the harms of technology more effectively.
Many countries and jurisdictions are scrambling to update their legislation to define and curtail these crimes. While the EU has its AI Act providing some protection, the bloc is exploring further tightening laws in response to the growing number of abuse cases. And around six weeks ago, the European Parliament approved a ban on AI services that allow people to be depicted naked without their consent. That can only be a good thing.
However, the UN has noted that laws alone are not enough. Strengthened laws need to be met with sufficient enforcement to be effective, and platforms need to be held accountable.
Absolutely. This is not a problem that is likely to go away any time soon. In the meantime, I guess, vigilance is key. On this note, in your report, you cite an OECD survey that found that “respondents were able to correctly identify true and false content 60 per cent of the time”. While this is promising, it still means a significant proportion of content is being misinterpreted. And as technology continues to advance, detection of fake content will only get harder.
You also list a number of apps, platforms and websites that can help us check the veracity of the content we are seeing. But can you perhaps share a few hints and tips on basic things for listeners to look out for if they want to check if an image, for example, has been AI generated?
Certainly. Does the image look real or is it ‘too perfect’? Does the background make sense for the time, place, weather and so on? Are there any anomalies, like shadows pointing in the wrong direction? Is there anything odd about the person if there’s someone in the photo, like do they have too many fingers; does their skin look too smooth, too perfect? Is the same image available online from a different standpoint and angle that you could perhaps compare it to? Things like that...
Thanks so much for having me.