Russian disinformation in China: How Dugin is trying to switch Russian narratives to the Chinese

Alexander Dugin, a well-known Russian philosopher and ideologue, continues to promote ideas supporting Donald Trump among the Chinese audience, without realizing how much such rhetoric contradicts the perception of international politics in China. In his public speeches and publications, he seeks to convince Chinese citizens that their views should align with Russian narratives. However, the reaction of Chinese social media users indicates the opposite effect. Comments responding to his statements not only criticize Russia but also express sympathy for Ukraine.

This situation demonstrates the lack of a systematic and objective study of Chinese society and political culture in Russia. The analysis available to Russian politicians and experts is often based on propagandistic clichés created by journalists who lack sufficient competence in Chinese realities. While this approach may be effective for a domestic audience, it leads to significant reputational losses on the international stage.

Dugin, assuming that the Chinese audience supports Russian interpretations of global politics, actively broadcasts propagandist theses, expecting approval. In particular, he praises how Donald Trump interacted with Volodymyr Zelensky, yet his posts on Chinese social media predominantly elicit sarcastic and critical comments. Russian ideologists mistakenly believe that hostility toward Zelensky is shared by the Chinese, whereas the latter, on the contrary, are puzzled by Russia’s support for Donald Trump, whom many in China regard as one of the country’s main geopolitical opponents.

A particularly illustrative example in this context is the reaction of Chinese users to a post by the U.S. Embassy about Trump’s meeting with Zelensky. On the Chinese social network Weibo, this post sparked a strong reaction: users left thousands of comments criticizing Trump, calling the event a “day of humiliation for America,” characterizing it as “shameful,” and condemning the “scoundrel and mad leader of the United States.”

Soon, a significant portion of these comments was deleted by Chinese censors. A similar pattern was observed on the Chinese political portal Guancha, where a publication about Trump’s meeting with Zelensky gathered hundreds of critical reviews before being moderated.

Thus, Dugin remains a valuable tool for Russian domestic propaganda but lacks effectiveness in the international context. In Chinese society, his rhetoric is increasingly met with skepticism, and he is more frequently perceived as a foreign thinker who does not possess a sufficient understanding of Chinese political culture. Attempts to impose the Russian interpretation of international events do not garner support from the Chinese audience but rather provoke irritation, further underscoring the limitations and inefficacy of modern Russian information policy abroad.