The art of propaganda is subtly at work in Ukraine. Of course there have been angry speeches from politicians, diatribes from talking heads, and the usual written invectives from journalists. But all this is quite obvious, and none of it truly propaganda. More insidiously, political agendas have become embedded in the vocabulary of Ukraine’s chaos.

Choice of words alters the truth, making the abuse of language an invaluable technique for politicians and journalists. The near anarchy of Ukraine’s east has stimulated this kind of linguistic propaganda–where facts are confusing, any interpretation can be made superficially plausible. Through the shifting language of crisis, great political forces have manipulated public opinion about Ukraine by choosing how that opinion can be expressed.

One example is eastern Ukraine’s separatists, a motley group likely of local Russian nationalists, citizens’ groups, Russian special forces, Chechen militants, and possibly organized crime. How to make sense of this rebellious medley? In Moscow, the insurgents are labeled “pro-federalist peoples’ militias,” in Washington, “Russian-backed separatists,” and in Kyiv, simply “terrorists.” National biases simplify and obscure the facts of the conflict in eastern Ukraine, even at a linguistic level.

Russia’s sudden acquisition of the Crimea earlier this year followed a similar logic: To Americans and Europeans, Crimea was annexed. To Ukrainians, Crimea was invaded. To Russians, Crimea was reunited. No one is truly wrong, nor is anyone right—that’s the perverted beauty of it.

Instead, the secrecy and complexity of Russia’s actions actually promote divergent interpretations. Russian commandos covertly, then overtly, invaded Crimea. With largely supportive locals, Russian forces booted out Ukrainian troops, holding a referendum on joining Russia while still occupying it. Annexation, invasion, and reunification do not describe this series of events because no single word can. Rather, these words burnish the facts, accentuating the desired meaning while rubbing out anything contradictory. Whether in Crimea or the rest of eastern Ukraine, confusion helps officials and experts sell political fiction.

Russians also argue about their language and imperial history, and the neo-imperialists are winning. When talking about countries or regions, Russian has two prepositions to describe action within them: “in” or “on.” The rules for using them are varied, often contextual, but sovereign nations usually take the preposition “in,” while Russia’s former and current territories take “on,” so actions take place “on Alaska,” “on the Caucasus,” or “on Ukraine.”

After the breakup of the Soviet Union, many Russians argued that Ukraine deserved the preposition “in,” it was after all, a newly sovereign country. Russian politicians and journalists of the 1990s largely agreed, replacing “on Ukraine” with “in Ukraine” in official statements and newspapers. However, since Putin’s ascendency to the Russian presidency in 2000, the use of “on Ukraine” has come back in vogue. Often, even the liberal critics of Putin’s Ukraine policy use “on Ukraine,” allowing into their writing the very neo-imperialism they argue against.

Such biases can even be implied through spelling. While seemingly innocuous, the spelling of Ukraine’s capital has caused friction between Ukrainian, Russian, and Western reporters. The capital is most often written as “Kiev” in Western papers, yet that spelling is taken from Russian, not Ukrainian. Ukraine’s journalists have lobbied Western papers to write instead “Kyiv,” the transliteration from Ukrainian, to show respect for Ukrainian sovereignty after centuries of Russian dominance. Despite the pro-Ukrainian stance of most European and American papers, most still use the Russian spelling.

And this propaganda hidden in language is not just abstract, but woven into international politics. How people interpret the truth will determine their response to it. For instance, Ukraine’s military strike against eastern separatists is officially called an “anti-terrorist operation,” a title tailored to attract Western support that has so far been scant.

Russians have their own labeling problems thanks to the pro-Russian Chechen fighters entering eastern Ukraine from Russia. They are causing a lexical nightmare for Russian state media since Russia does not support terrorists, it has declared that Ukraine’s eastern separatists are not terrorists, and yet many of the Chechens entering Ukraine are by most definitions, terrorists.

Confronted by unhelpful facts, Russia’s media have resorted to using vague terms like “Chechen volunteers,” “foreign fighters,” or simply “Chechens.” Putin ally and leader of Chechnya Ramzan Kadyrov (also a suspect in crimes that would make ISIS blush) argued that anything sinister would be impossible. “Chechens have never been terrorists or extremists!” End of story.

Without critical thought, all language is propaganda. Ugly, biased language has a deadening effect on the mind, suffocating new ideas. Ukraine, and relations between the West and Russia generally, need radical new strategies, yet ideologues are making these strategies harder to create or describe. As the language of the West and Russia drifts farther apart, so too does their understanding of reality, making the chances of cooperation, or even negotiation, slimmer with each passing week.

Addendum

Most of the ideas here are ruthlessly stolen from George Orwell’s genius essay, “Politics and the English Language,” and writing this piece was like having him sit on my shoulder, yelling about the dangers of authoritarianism and my own slovenly writing. For anyone interested in language, politics, or what genius essay-writing looks like, definitely read it (it’s relatively short too). Here’s a link.

After writing this essay, I was convinced that I too should start spelling Ukraine’s capital as Kyiv, not Kiev. Neither is truly right nor wrong, but while reading a freakishly comprehensive guide to the debate over Russian prepositions and Ukraine I found a nice argument. The rules of language are based more on tradition than consistency, so when choosing a word to use, you are also choosing a tradition to align yourself with. Given the hundreds dead in eastern Ukraine and Russia’s seizure of Crimea, Ukrainians have a right to demand that their sovereignty is respected. Spelling their capital as the preferred “Kyiv” is a small effort toward that end.