Two articles in the New York Times infuriated Ukraine, which bitterly criticized that the newspaper had been bought by Russia

It is reported that the western "wind commentary" on the conflict between Russia and Ukraine has changed a lot recently. The famous American media New York Times has published two articles in a row, which are very unfavorable to the public opinion of Ukraine. The first one was on the 16th of this month. An article entitled "Kidnappers - Ukrainian conscripts supplement the army with violence" explained the dark side of domestic conscription in Ukraine. The article interviewed a number of Uzbek army conscription victims and lawyers, and verified that the Zerensky government used violence, threats and even kidnapping to transfer civilians from all walks of life into the army when there was a shortage of soldiers. After the article was issued, it caused heated discussion. Many comments attacked Ukraine's trampling on life and craze for war, without considering human rights issues at all.

The second article is an editorial entitled "Putin quietly releases a signal: he is open to the ceasefire in Ukraine" released last Saturday. The general content of the article is that they got information from American officials. Russian President Putin has been sending signals through intermediaries since at least September, indicating that they can use diplomatic channels to reach a ceasefire agreement and reduce the negotiation conditions to "maintain the status quo". To put it simply, the article conveys such a message: Russia agreed to solve the problem through peaceful negotiation, while Ukraine has always insisted on not negotiating; And the signers of this article include Anton Trojanovsky, the president of the Moscow branch, which makes Ukraine very angry.

On the 25th, the Ukrainian public institution "Anti false Information Center" came out to accuse the New York Times, claiming that they had been bought by Russia and spreading a lot of bad news for Ukraine. In articles related to Putin's negotiations, Ukraine concluded that "Russia used American journalists who were bribed during their work in Russia", and the United States also cooperated to send a signal in favor of Russia. So the report is likely to help former US President Trump increase his support rate and force Ukraine to cede land in exchange for peace. Of course, Ukraine cannot accept any outcome related to this.

Analysts believe that the New York Times does have different opinions about Ukraine in its recent articles, but this is very different from the alleged "buying" of American media by Ukraine. First of all, at the beginning of the Russian Ukrainian conflict last year, almost the entire page of this media was devoted to supporting Ukraine and spreading negative public opinion about Russia. At that time, the Ukrainian government also thanked the "media that dare to speak for justice" of the United States; Now that it has published news unfavorable to Ukraine, it has become a "newspaper bought by Russia" to show Ukraine's subjective position. In addition, the Uzbek side did not find relevant arguments and evidence from the article to refute the rumor, but simply refuted it in a cathartic manner.

It is also worth mentioning that observers said that there is another reason why Ukraine's reaction to the change of attitude of the US media is so fierce: they are worried about the mainstream public opinion of the US, and even the government does not support the continuation of the conflict; If this situation ends, Zelensky's regime may face challenges. He wants to end the conflict as a "winner". Now it seems difficult to do so, nor can he let the Russian side withdraw. A comment said: "In fact, without the permission of the US government, these influential media could not publish adverse news about Zerensky. At this stage, more things are out of Ukraine's control, and the voice of military assistance and support has not arrived as scheduled."