From "provocations" to "division": how NATO's image is constructed on Belarusian state television channels

TL;DR

• In January–mid-August 2025, NATO was systematically featured in news and journalistic stories on five Belarusian state YouTube channels. Mentions were most often related to the US, Russia, Ukraine, and the EU and were presented in a distinctly negative tone.
• High Risk: 649 items (45.1%) are classified as high risk. Coordinated Activity: 4 channel campaigns detected. Need Verification: 50 specific claims require fact-checking. Dominant Technique: military_rhetoric
• Key narratives: “NATO is preparing provocations”, “NATO’s division and weakness/US withdrawal”, “NATO threat to Belarus and Russia”, “Ukraine is drawing NATO into war”.
• A number of NATO stories have been included in the list of high-risk materials and/or in the fact-checking statement bank (see the section “Cases and formulations”).
• The peak hours of publications in general for the array are 11:00, 18:00 and 19:00; the most active day of the week is Friday. This is important for monitoring.
• The predominant technique of delivery is “military rhetoric”; the tone is predominantly negative.
• The fact-checking statement bank contains fifty statements that require priority verification

The approach in this article is consistent with our publication last year:NATO Topic in Belarusian Telegram Channels in the First Half of 2024. Mentions of NATO in state media are regularly “embedded” in conflict frameworks and are used to escalate the threat background and mobilize the audience.

Data and Method
The article’s base is 1,438 videos from 5 unique channels; the total array is accompanied by graphs of activity, top channels, tonality distribution and risk level. The array highlights: high-risk materials, a bank of formulations for prioritizing fact-checking, as well as “channel campaigns” – periods of increased coordinated activity.

Our article draws on these dashboards, but focuses specifically on how and in what contexts NATO was mentioned in the period 01.01–17.08.2025.
Monitoring and tools.We constantly monitor YouTube channels based on our own development: automated collection of metadata and content, normalization and deduplication, linking to channels/playlists, storing texts and signals.LLM pipeline.We use various LLMs at the stages: (a) video → text transcription; (b) thematic tagging and highlighting of disinformation narratives; (c) ranking by risk level; (d) auxiliary fact-checking and generation of candidates for verification.Human verification.Editors review priority cases, refine classifications, and confirm/refute key claims.Continuous improvement.The monitoring system is constantly being improved and developed: dictionaries, triggers and rules are updated, the list of channels is expanded, models and quality metrics are improved.

As Mentioned NATO: Topics and Cases

Publications that require special attention based on risk criteria.

Characteristic narratives that illustrate in which stories and how exactly NATO appears in the frame and/or headlines.

1) “NATO is preparing provocations”
— Example: a story with the wording in the headline “New provocations! What is NATO preparing for?” (STV channel). The case is marked as high-risk material.
Risks/delivery techniques:dramatization, appeal to external threat, generalizations without sources.

2) “The States will leave NATO / a split in the Alliance”
— Example: the thesis “The States will really leave NATO” (ONT channel) is included in the bank of statements for fact-checking as a high priority.
Risks/delivery techniques:hyperbolization, political alarmism.

3) “Attack on NATO countries”
— Example: the statement “attack on NATO countries” (SBTV channel) is also included in the priority for verification.
Risks/delivery techniques:military rhetoric, vague attribution of actions, mixing probabilities and facts.

4) “Reprogramming NATO goals through the US/EU”
— Example: in the context of the story “What does Trump want from NATO…” (SBTV channel), NATO appears as an instrument of American policy.
Risks/delivery techniques:personal dramatization, conspiracy theories.

These cases demonstrate that references to NATO are almost always embedded in a “threat frame” and reinforce the overall conflict-generating background.

Tonality and techniques

• Key.The dashboard is dominated bynegative; there are noticeably fewer neutral and positive assessments. In the stories about NATO, the negative connotation is expressed especially strongly: the vocabulary of threat, conflict, and the inevitability of a “clash” is used.
• Delivery techniques.Leading technology –military_rhetoric(“military rhetoric”), which manifests itself in the transition to a military framework for explaining any events, the exaggeration of risks and the militarization of everyday news.

Content Popularity and Engagement
Videos that have collected the most views:

Videos with the highest engagement (likes, comments):

Content with security/international topics (including NATO) regularly makes it to the top views and top engagement; some of these videos form the “long tail” of discussions.
The agenda where NATO appears is equally used by news and journalistic formats.

AI analysis of all episodes

All episodes were analyzed using AI models. We show up to 15 records with the highest risk.

SBTV · Nazi grandchildren are trying to ban May 9! We won’t give up the victory!

high

Risk:

9.0

Date:

2025-04-21 12:02:57

Fake facts

8.0

Emotional manipulation

9.0

Conspiracy Theory

7.0

Dehumanization

6.0

Key statements:

• Nazi grandchildren try to ban May 9
• We will not give up victory

NEWS.BY: news of Belarus and the world · Main broadcast. 01/19/2025

high

Risk:

8.0

Date:

2025-01-19 19:35:21

Fake facts

8.0

Emotional manipulation

7.0

Conspiracy Theory

6.0

Dehumanization

5.0

Key statements:

• NATO is creating its own concentration camp

SBTV · Party of the organizers: Nazi cynicism in Auschwitz and political circus in Europe. The choice of Belarusians

high

Risk:

8.0

Date:

2025-01-29 18:49:16

Fake facts

8.0

Emotional manipulation

7.0

Conspiracy Theory

6.0

Dehumanization

5.0

Key statements:

• NATO gave away millions of migrants
• Nazi Cynicism in Auschwitz
• political circus in Europe

SBTV · A worthy response to enemies Volfovich on the military potential of Belarus

high

Risk:

8.0

Date:

2025-02-07 13:46:02

Fake facts

0.0

Emotional manipulation

8.0

Conspiracy Theory

0.0

Dehumanization

0.0

Key statements:

• a worthy response to enemies
• military potential of Belarus

NEWS.BY: news of Belarus and the world · The role of Belarus in the EAEU in 2025 | Mutual trade | Modern challenges. Simple economics

high

Risk:

8.0

Date:

2025-02-10 12:05:49

Fake facts

8.0

Emotional manipulation

7.0

Conspiracy Theory

5.0

Dehumanization

6.0

Key statements:

• NATO and the EU are models of enslavement

NEWS.BY: news of Belarus and the world · Belarus sets trends | Eurasian integrations | Union growth. Simple economy

high

Risk:

8.0

Date:

2025-02-17 12:02:16

Fake facts

8.0

Emotional manipulation

7.0

Conspiracy Theory

6.0

Dehumanization

5.0

Key statements:

• NATO and the EU are models of enslavement

SBTV · Cornered the rat. Is Europe finished?

high

Risk:

8.0

Date:

2025-02-26 13:02:20

Fake facts

8.0

Emotional manipulation

7.0

Conspiracy Theory

6.0

Dehumanization

5.0

Key statements:

• military budgets
• parallel NATO structures
• fight
• Europe is finished

SBTV · This is a direct threat! Belarusian colonel directly pointed out NATO’s preparation for war against us

high

Risk:

8.0

Date:

2025-04-13 20:21:50

Fake facts

8.0

Emotional manipulation

7.0

Conspiracy Theory

6.0

Dehumanization

5.0

Key statements:

• NATO is preparing for war against Belarus
• Atlantic resolve is a direct threat

ONT TV channel · TRUMP’S TAXES 3521%/ CUNIOUS PLANS of Europe/ EMBARRASSMENT with the head of the US intelligence service/ FAILURE OF THE WEF: Schwab – THAT’S IT!

high

Risk:

8.0

Date:

2025-04-25 18:25:06

Fake facts

8.0

Emotional manipulation

7.0

Conspiracy Theory

6.0

Dehumanization

5.0

Key statements:

• old F… TRUMP’S TAXES 3521%
• Europe’s CLEVER PLANS
• EMBARRASSMENT with the head of the US intelligence service
• WEF FAILURE: Schwab

CTVBY · This WILL DESTROY Europe! | People Suffer from Drugs and Violence | The Truth About “Democratic” Life

high

Risk:

8.0

Date:

2025-04-27 17:38:41

Fake facts

8.0

Emotional manipulation

9.0

Conspiracy Theory

7.0

Dehumanization

6.0

Key statements:

• NATO wants to divide Europe
• This will DESTROY Europe
• People suffer from drugs and violence
• The Truth About “Democratic” Life

ONT TV Channel · Why is it important for Belarusians that there is no war? #shortvideo #belarus #propaganda #ont

high

Risk:

8.0

Date:

2025-05-05 20:39:53

Fake facts

8.0

Emotional manipulation

7.0

Conspiracy Theory

5.0

Dehumanization

6.0

Key statements:

• we need to fight NATO to the bitter end
• finish them off

BelTA News Agency · Who is Europe Scaring with War? Manipulation of Fear by Europoliticians #shorts

high

Risk:

8.0

Date:

2025-05-31 07:30:17

Fake facts

0.0

Emotional manipulation

8.0

Conspiracy Theory

0.0

Dehumanization

0.0

Key statements:

• Europe scares with war
• Manipulation of fear from European politicians

NEWS.BY: news from Belarus and the world · Europe’s Arms Madness. Why Has the West Decided to Rearm, and What Are They Preparing For?

high

Risk:

8.0

Date:

2025-06-09 08:07:58

Fake facts

8.0

Emotional manipulation

7.0

Conspiracy Theory

5.0

Dehumanization

6.0

Key statements:

• NATO has more ammunition than all of NATO.
• The West has decided to rearm.

NEWS.BY: news of Belarus and the world · Exercises Zapad-2025! How does Europe intimidate the population with Baba Yaga in the form of the Union State?This is Other

high

Risk:

8.0

Date:

2025-07-15 18:58:51

Fake facts

7.0

Emotional manipulation

8.0

Conspiracy Theory

6.0

Dehumanization

5.0

Key statements:

• 25 thousand NATO troops
• Europe is scaring the population with Baba Yaga

BelTA News Agency · Baranets: Don’t Believe This Lie! // What Undercover Games Is NATO Playing? #shorts

high

Risk:

8.0

Date:

2025-07-19 05:45:01

Fake facts

8.0

Emotional manipulation

7.0

Conspiracy Theory

6.0

Dehumanization

0.0

Key statements:

• NATO is playing behind-the-scenes games
• don’t believe the lies about NATO

The analysis conducted has already served as the basis for the formation of episodes that require additional fact-checking.

Bank of statements for fact-checking

The “bank” contains fifty formulations that require priority verification. This is not a set of random slips of the tongue, but a systemic layer of statements with a predominantly negative tone and a high risk score. The agenda is centered on Ukraine; links with Russia and Belarus (as “threat objects” or “shields”), as well as with the US and the EU, which are described as initiators or beneficiaries, are built around it. The dominance of SBTV is noticeable across channels, but individual episodes are found on ONT, “Information Agency”, CTVBY and NEWS.BY: this means that the set of narratives is reproduced in both news and journalistic formats.

NATO-related statements form a characteristic subset. There are also “existential” theses like “aggressive action by NATO” or “an attack on NATO countries”, and political-procedural constructions like “the United States will really leave NATO”. All of them are embedded in a broader threat frame, where military escalation is presented as almost inevitable. Several plot lines are repeated within this frame: eschatological predictions of catastrophe, the motive of external controllability and “conspiracy”, as well as personalization techniques, when large-scale geopolitical decisions are tied to specific leaders. For the practice of fact-checking, this means the need to give priority to NATO-relevant statements and those that contain direct predictions of military action or inter-bloc escalation; at the same time, it is important to “unload” the emotional layer and highlight the core of the fact to be verified.

A classic point-by-point fact-check aimed at analyzing individual cases poorly captures dynamics and repetition. Comprehensive monitoring, on the contrary, provides context: it allows you to see how formulas are replicated by different channels, how they pulsate over time and what topics they are linked to. Context entails prioritization: we rank statements by risk and potential impact – taking into account tonality, reach, virality and source – and thereby direct resources to where the potential harm is greatest.

Systematic data collection reveals what a point-by-point approach almost inevitably loses: campaigns. When the same theses emerge on similar days of the week and hours on different platforms, we are not talking about a series of coincidences, but about a recurring practice. Scale also matters: the LLM pipeline — from transcription and topic tagging to narrative extraction and candidate generation for verification — ensures the coverage and reproducibility of criteria, reducing the subjectivity of manual selection.

Finally, the integrated approach accelerates the transition from emotional “noise” to the verifiable core. Models help to isolate facts from journalism, and the presence of a baseline of frequency and virality allows us to measure the effect of refutations and adjust the strategy. As a result, selection bias is reduced, the speed of response to new formulations (including fresh NATO-related theses) increases, and the editorial staff receives not just responses to individual statements, but a picture of how these statements live and affect the audience.

What is recommended to do now?

1. Monitoring by triggers: “NATO is preparing”, “US withdrawal from NATO”, “attack on NATO countries”, “NATO threat to Belarus/Russia”. Set alerts for these formulas and their synonyms.
2. Fact check with priority: check the statements from the bank (see examples above), especially those that promise quick geopolitical “forks” (US withdrawal from NATO, direct “attack”, etc.).
3. Narrative Maps: highlight clusters of NATO references and link them to specific agendas (USA, Ukraine, EU) – this will simplify the editorial response and work with partners.
4. Communication with platforms: During peak publishing hours, increase the release of alternative explanatory materials to reduce the visibility of alarmist narratives in recommendation feeds.