[notafraudster]

This is a tiresome distraction; okay, so by your definition of war, this kind of proxy war doesn't count. Fair enough, your definition of war is reasonable. We'll call the state between Europe and Russia "war prime" or whatever, since apparently no one disagrees with the actual state of affairs, just what to call it. Now we're back to the initial exchange, which was:

Person A: Why ban Russian state media? Europe and Russia are not at war. Person B: No, but they are at "war prime", which has some properties of war, including banning enemy propaganda.

Did creating the extra word to split the hair help resolve that conversation? It doesn't really feel like it to me. It seems like what most people would prefer the conversation be about is whether or not it makes sense to ban enemy propaganda in a state of "war prime" (or war, for that matter).