12 November 2024
Anastasiya Ringis,
European Pravda
At the end of October, Canadian parliamentarians convened a Standing Committee on Public Safety Security and Defence Committee session to discuss the impact of Russian disinformation on Canada’s information landscape.
While testimonies on disinformation are not new in the country, this session gained significant attention after former minister and prominent politician from the opposition Conservative Party, Chris Alexander, accused well-known journalist David Pugliese from the Ottawa Citizen of working for Soviet (and potentially subsequently for Russian) intelligence services. Alexander didn’t stop at accusations.
As evidence, he presented KGB documents that allegedly showed Pugliese had been on the Soviet security services’ radar since 1984 and was operating under the pseudonym “Stuart.” In this context, we explored the “architecture” of Russian propaganda in Canada and its impact on the Ukrainian community.
How Canada funds Russian propaganda
The current committee on Russian disinformation in Canada’s Parliament was triggered by the uproar over the screening of the so-called documentary Russians at War at the Toronto International Film Festival (TIFF). The film’s director, Anastasia Trofimova, is a former RT (Russia Today) producer.
The film itself promotes Russian narratives, ranging from claims that Ukrainian fighters are fighting on the Russian side to the argument that “Russian soldiers are also victims of this war.”
Interestingly, RT was available on Canadian cable networks until 2020, at which point the Canadian government banned it.
The government deemed that its programming undermines the sovereignty of numerous countries, disparages certain ethnic groups in Canada, and attacks the country’s democratic institutions. However, none of the journalists or producers who have worked for RT for years have been subject to any legal action or investigation by Canadian professional organizations.
Furthermore, Trofimova’s past work for RT did not hinder her from receiving a $340,000 grant from Canada’s Media Fund to make her so-called “documentary” film. The public outcry from the Ukrainian-Canadian community forced the Canadian government to take action, prompting hearings that delivered some truly sensational revelations.
“Agent Stuart”
According to Chris Alexander, the authenticity of eight Soviet-era documents he presented to the committee was confirmed by two independent experts and several historians. These documents reportedly reveal that David Pugliese has been under KGB surveillance since 1984 due to his potential to work in prominent media outlets in Canada and the United States.
A KGB agent, known only as Ivan, allegedly met Pugliese in 1982 during a public lecture about the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. The file on Pugliese indicates that Ivan was instructed to develop a relationship with him, assess his potential in the media field, and investigate his connections with government officials, journalists, activists, and business figures.
One document dated April 6, 1990, mentions Pugliese’s work at the Ottawa Citizen, prompting the head of the 1st Department of the KGB to request permission from Moscow to use Pugliese for the interests of the “S” Directorate (the KGB’s foreign intelligence division).
A follow-up note dated June 20, 1990, confirms that the relationship between Ivan and “Stuart” was established. Alexander believes these contacts likely continued even after the collapse of the USSR, with Russian intelligence taking over where the KGB left off.
Criticism of Ukraine and the Canadian armed forces
During his address to Parliament, Chris Alexander bluntly critiqued Russian propaganda: “Its influence has been underestimated by Canadian officials.” In light of recent scandals involving Chinese interference and the expulsion of Indian diplomats, as well as the revelation of Tenet Media’s role in spreading Russian narratives on RT’s dime, an investigation into Russian disinformation in Canada seemed to be a natural next step.
But why was David Pugliese specifically targeted?
For over 30 years, Pugliese has specialized in military and security affairs, particularly examining processes in the Canadian Armed Forces, investigating military procurement, and exposing cases of harassment and misconduct. He is one of the most vocal critics of Canada’s Ministry of Defence.
Pugliese is also known for his articles about “fascists” in the Ukrainian diaspora and the Baltic communities.
Despite the 1985 Deschene Commission, which investigated accusations of war crimes by Ukrainian and Baltic representatives during World War II and exonerated the SS “Galicia” Division, Pugliese has persistently sought to resurrect these allegations. Just last September, he published three articles on the subject.
Notably, he was one of the first to report on Yaroslav Hunka, a veteran of the SS Galicia Division, and his participation in a meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in Canada’s Parliament last year.
If we examine the themes of Pugliese’s articles, we notice that around one in every ten will address “Ukrainian Nazis” in some form. However, he has no articles on the Russian invasion of Ukraine or the Russian threat to Canada in the Arctic.
“It seems that Pugliese uses the war in Ukraine as a pretext to continue criticizing the Canadian military, the government, and NGOs for their support of Ukraine. Distorting the facts with the effect of misleading the readers has hurt a lot of good people. There is no doubt that his work has targeted the Ukrainian-Canadian community and has undermined Ukraine more broadly,” says Lesya Granger, President of Mriya Aid, a Canadian organization created by management professionals, veterans and military specialists at the start of Russia’s invasion o f Ukraine.
The “network” of academics
David Pugliese is not alone in his search for Ukrainian “fascists.” One of the academics who frequently promotes the same narratives is Ivan Katchanovski, a professor at the University of Ottawa. Since 2014, Katchanovski has regularly written about “Ukrainian Nazis” and the “state coup” in Ukraine.
Despite RT being sanctioned, Katchanovski has continued to be a regular commentator on the pro-Kremlin outlet. And Pugliese frequently references his work.
Another military researcher on “Ukrainian fascists” is Scott Taylor, who is unimpeded in his visits to Moscow and often spreads propaganda such as: “Crimea historically belongs to Russia,” “NATO must consider Russia’s interests,” and “Ukraine cannot win this war, so assistance to Ukraine should be reduced.”
Taylor and Pugliese are both seasoned Canadian journalists with exclusive rights to cover military affairs in Canada, published in influential outlets such as the Ottawa Citizen and The Hill Times.
Moreover, they not only share the same narratives, but they also support one another.
“The central narrative of these propagandists is the accusation that Ukraine and Ukrainians are Nazis, racists, and anti-Semites. This creates pressure on Western society to halt or slow down support for Ukraine, sows division between Ukrainians and Jews, and resurrects the myth of the peaceful, anti-fascist Soviet Union,” explains Canadian historian and Jewish-Ukrainian descendant Alik Gomelsky.
He is convinced that the Soviet KGB built one of the largest “networks” in Canada, which continues to push these anti-Ukrainian narratives.
“It’s a clear pattern: historians and professors create anti-Ukrainian works, using the law of academic freedom. Journalists then publish articles referencing these academic works, and propagandist activists take them to the masses,” Gomelsky explains.
Gomelsky has identified at least 20 “researchers of Ukrainian fascism” in Canada, many of whom are public figures, but others are marginal individuals who amplify anti-Ukrainian propaganda online.
Over the years, he has studied not only the narratives but also the cyclical pattern with which they are injected into Canadian society, usually tied to anniversaries of historical events (such as the start of the Soviet-German War in 1941 or Babyn Yar) and critical decisions Canada must make about supporting Ukraine, or, as last year, when President Zelenskyy visited the country.
Not just Ukrainians
The “ecosystem” of Russian disinformation in Canada is not just aimed at Ukraine but also at Western values, NATO, the US, and democracy in general.
“The pro-Kremlin activist network in Canada is quite broad. Whenever I challenge one of them publicly, a wave of hate follows. This group also includes former diplomats, and they sit on the boards of Russian or pro-Russian organizations,” says Marcus Kolga, the founder of the project Disinfowatch. Kolga has been researching Russian disinformation for 15 years.
Kolga is a researcher with Estonian roots. He studied the history of the Soviet occupation in Estonia and also testified at the parliamentary committee. He, too, has been a target of Pugliese, who accused him of “whitewashing Nazis.”
“Historically, Baltic peoples in Canada have also been accused of fascism. The narrative is that anyone who fought against the Soviet Union is an enemy of democracy and Canada,” confirms historian Gomelsky.
These claims are repeated by Western professors who, using their lifetime academic status, spread conspiracy theories unchallenged.
The real problem is that even openly biased academics such as Ivan Katchanovski, Michel Chossudovsky, and Radhika Desai – a professor at the University of Manitoba who holds ultra-left, anti-capitalist, and pro-Moscow views – continue to be regarded as “respectable researchers.”
Last year, Desai participated in Putin’s Valdai Club and asked him about the appropriateness of Yaroslav Hunka’s participation in the Canadian parliamentary meeting. These academics maintain their status as “respected researchers” rather than Kremlin lackeys.
The public revelation of David Pugliese’s ties to Soviet-era intelligence networks proved to be more than just a scandal – it underscored the far-reaching scope of Russian influence operations and the sophisticated strategies used to recruit Western journalists.
What’s particularly striking, however, is the professional community’s reflexive defense of Pugliese. Much like the case with the controversial documentary Russians at War, the argument in his favor tends to follow a troubling pattern: “We trust him because we’ve always trusted him. He’s been working here for 30 years.”
The fact that Pugliese parrots Russian narratives, as though he’s tuned in nightly to Russia Today or the likes of Olga Skabeeva, is brushed aside. After all, a journalist is entitled to their own opinions. Yet the question lingers: why, after three decades in Canadian journalism, does Pugliese consistently rely on Russian talking points regarding Ukraine? Is he a Kremlin asset or simply a “useful idiot”? Only time – and a thorough investigation – will tell.
One thing is certain: to dismantle Russia’s influence network, the Canadian government and its Western counterparts have a lot of work to do.
By Anastasiya Ringis,
Ukrainian journalist,
temporary based in Toronto
UPDATED:
One of the featured individuals, Ivan Katchanovski, reached out to the editorial team after the publication of this article. In line with our duty to present all perspectives, we have added his response to the text.
Mr. Katchanovski states: “I have no ties to Russia and am not part of any Russian networks. Ringis’s claim that I am a ‘regular commentator on Ukrainian issues’ on Russia Today is patently null and void.”
NOTE: A Google search confirms active use of Kachanovsky’s comments on the Russian state propaganda platform, for example.
“The claim that I am associated with David Pugliese, a prominent Canadian journalist, is also untrue, as is the claim that he is a Soviet or Russian agent. Declassified KGB documents do not identify him as a Soviet agent,” Katchanovski adds.
He also cites his experience collaborating with Ukrainian media as proof of his impartiality.
NOTE: We verified this information with one editorial office that indeed had such experience. It turned out, however, that the colleagues stopped collaborating over 10 years ago after the author attempted to publish an article with an unacceptable distortion of facts about the Revolution of Dignity. Indeed, Kachanovsky has consistently promoted the narrative that Maidan activists were responsible for the shooting of the Heavenly Hundred.
