The economies of Western Europe are being realigned onto a war footing, led by the utterly transformed European Union, whose leaders are now channelling an atavistic hereditary hatred of Russia.
Russian President Vladimir Putin at the BRICS summit in Kazan, Russia, in October 2024; Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov on left. (Grigoriy Sysoyev / ru Host Photo Agency/ Kremlin)
By Craig Murray
CraigMurray.org.uk
There is a logical fallacy that dominates European neoliberal “thinking” at the moment. It goes like this:
“Hitler had unlimited territorial ambition and proceeded to attempt conquest of all Europe after annexing the Sudetenland. Therefore Putin has unlimited territorial ambition and will proceed to attempt conquest of all Europe after annexing Eastern Ukraine.”
This fallacious argument gives no evidence of President Vladimir Putin’s further territorial ambition. For evidence of Putin’s threat to the U.K., Prime Minister Keir Starmer risibly refers to the Salisbury “novichok” affair, perhaps the most pathetic propaganda confection in history.
But even if you were to be so complacent as to accept the official version of events in Salisbury, does an assassination attempt on a double agent credibly indicate a desire by Putin to launch World War 3 or invade the U.K.?
Hitler’s territorial ambitions were not hidden. His desire for lebensraum and, crucially, his view that the Germans were a superior race who should rule over the inferior races, was plain in print and in speeches.
There is simply no such evidence for wide territorial ambition by Putin. He is not pursuing a crazed Nazi ideology that drives to conquest — or for that matter a Marxist ideology that seeks to overthrow the established order around the world.
The economic alignment project of BRICS is not designed to promote an entirely different economic system, just to rebalance power and flows within the system, or at most to create a parallel system not skewed to the advantage of the United States.
Neither the end of capitalism nor territorial expansion is part of the BRICS project.
There is simply no evidence of Putin having territorial goals beyond Ukraine and the tiny enclaves of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. It is perfectly fair to characterise Putin’s territorial expansion over two decades as limited to the reincorporation of threatened Russian-speaking minority districts in ex-Soviet states.
[See: Russian Imperialism?]
That it is worth a world war and unlimited dead over who should be mayor of the ethnic Russian and Russian-speaking city of Lugansk is not entirely plain to me.
Secessionists barricade in Luhansk in June 2014. (Qypchak / Wikimedia Commons / CC BY-SA 3.0)
The notion that Putin is about to attack Poland or Finland is utter nonsense. The idea that the Russian army, which has struggled to subdue small and corrupt, if Western-backed, Ukraine, has the ability to attack Western Europe itself is plainly impractical.
The internal human rights record of Putin’s Russia is poor, but at this point it is marginally better than that of President Volodymyr Zelensky’s Ukraine. For example the opposition parties in Russia are at least allowed to contest elections, albeit on a heavily sloped playing field, whereas in Ukraine they are banned outright.
Still less convincing are the arguments that Russia’s overseas political activities in third countries require massive Western increases in armaments to prepare for war with Russia.
Western Meddling & Destruction
EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen on Jan. 22 in European Parliament addressing Ukraine, EU-U.S. relations and the EU’s global role. (European Parliament, Flickr, CC-BY-4.0)
The plain truth is that the Western powers interfere far more in other countries than Russia does, through massive sponsorship of NGOs, journalists and politicians, much of which is open and some of which is covert.
I used to do this myself as a British diplomat. Revelations from USAID or the Integrity Initiative leaks give the public a glimpse into this world.
Yes, Russia does it too, but on a much smaller scale. That this kind of Russian activity indicates a desire for conquest or is a cause for war, is such a shallow argument it is hard to believe in the good faith of those promoting it.
I have also seen Russian military intervention in Syria put forward as evidence that Putin has plans of world conquest.
Russian intervention in Syria prevented for a time its destruction by the West in the same way that Iraq and Libya were destroyed by the West. Russia held back the coming to power of crazed Islamist terrorists, and the massacre of Syria’s minority communities. Those horrors are now unfolding, in part because of the weakening of Russia through the Ukraine war.
For #Putin to recreate the Soviet Union, as some Westerners charge, he would have to conquer Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Estonia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova,Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan. Does anyone really think that is…
— Joe Lauria (@unjoe) March 14, 2025
For those nations that destroyed Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya to argue that Russia’s intervention in Syria shows Putin to be evil, is dishonesty of the highest degree. The United States has had a quarter of Syria under military occupation for over a decade and has been stealing almost all of Syria’s oil.
Pointing at Russia here is devoid of reason.
Strangely, the same “logic” is not applied to Benjamin Netanyahu. It is not argued by neoliberals [neocons] that his annexations of Gaza, the West Bank and Southern Lebanon mean he must have further territorial ambitions. In fact, they even fail to note Netanyahu’s aggressions at all, or portray them as “defensive” — the same argument advanced much more credibly by Putin in Ukraine, but which neoliberals [neocons] there outright reject.
[Related: Israel’s Threatening Colonialism]
A Transformed EU
The economies of Western Europe are being realigned onto a war footing, led by the utterly transformed European Union. The enthusiastic proponents of genocide in Gaza, who head the EU, are now channelling an atavistic hereditary hatred of Russia.
The foreign policy of the EU is propelled by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen [Germany] and Vice President Kaja Kallas (Estonia). The fanatical Russophobia these two are spreading, and their undisguised desire to escalate the war in Ukraine, cannot help but remind Russians that they come from nations which were fanatically Nazi.
To Russians this feels a lot like 1941. With Europe in the grip of full-on anti-Russian propaganda, the background to Trump’s attempt to broker a peace deal is troubled and Russia is understandably wary.
The U.K. continues to play the most unhelpful of roles. They have despatched Morgan Stanley’s Jonathan Powell to advise Zelensky on peace talks. As former Prime Minister Tony Blair’s chief of staff, Powell played a crucial role in the illegal invasion of Iraq.
Wherever there is war and money to be made from war, you will find the same ghouls gathering. Those involved in launching the invasion of Iraq should be excluded from public life. Instead Powell is now the U.K.’s national security adviser.
I am not a follower of Putin. The amount of force used to crush Chechnya’s legitimate desire for self-determination was disproportionate, for example. It is naive to believe that you get to be a lieutenant colonel in the KGB by being a gentle person.
But Putin is not Hitler. It is only through the blinkers of patriotism that Putin appears to be a worse person than the Western leaders behind massive invasion and death all around the globe, who now seek to extend war with Russia.
Here in the U.K., the Starmer government is seeking actively to prolong the war, and is looking for a huge increase in spending on weapons, which always brings kickbacks and future company directorships and consultancies for politicians.
To fund this warmongering, New Labour are cutting spending on the U.K.’s sick, disabled and pensioners and cutting aid to the starving overseas.
Labour Friends of Israel has published a picture of Starmer meeting with Israeli President Herzog, six months after the International Court of Justice’s interim ruling quoted a statement by Herzog as evidence of genocidal intent.
The Starmer government was voted for by 31 percent of those who bothered to cast a vote, or 17 percent of the adult population. It is engaged in wholesale legal persecution of leading British supporters of Palestine, and is actively complicit in the genocide in Gaza.
I see no moral superiority here.
Craig Murray is an author, broadcaster and human rights activist. He was British ambassador to Uzbekistan from August 2002 to October 2004 and rector of the University of Dundee from 2007 to 2010.
The author’s coverage is entirely dependent on reader support. Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received. Because some people wish an alternative to PayPal, he has set up new methods of payment including a GoFundMe appeal and a Patreon account. He has also started a Substack account if you wish to subscribe that way. The content will be the same as you get on this blog. Substack has the advantage of overcoming social media suppression by emailing you directly every time he posts. You can, if you wish, subscribe free to Substack and use the email notifications as a trigger to come for this blog and read the articles for free. The author is determined to maintain free access for those who cannot afford a subscription.
This article is from CraigMurray.org.uk
The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of Consortium News.
Good analysis. Scotland needs to get out from under Washington and Westminster. Obviously. However, the question is, should an independent Scotland also stay out of the EU and drop NATO membership? There’s every reason to suggest that the safest course would be to stay clear of both. The notion that Moscow or even Beijing has evil intent towards Scotland is ludicrous.
See hxxps://radiobill.ca/Content/CBCNewsMisrepresentsPresidentPutin.html for an egregious example of how President Putin’s words are misleadingly quoted out of context, especially by Yale professor Timothy Snyder, to make it appear that he has written precisely the opposite of what he actually did write.
Or was Hitler channeling the western desire to destroy communism that was an unintended consequence of WWI. When Senator Truman said if Russia is winning we are for Gerany and if Germany is winning we are for Russia .It turned out Russia was winning and everyone had to hurry to protect Germany from Russia as it was another atavistic Napoleon disaster. Putin is not a weaponized puppet like Ukraine has become the new weaponized Afghanistan used but unconquered by NATO.
Americans call political opponents Hitler so often it is meaningless. Remember when Hugo Chavez and Condi Rice were calling each other “Hitler”?
Thank You Craig
It is easy to overlook nowadays just how much hostility Reagan got for agreeing the INF treaty with the USSR back in 1987.
Howard Phillips of Conservative Caucus is quoted as denouncing Reagan as:
‘a useful idiot for Kremlin propaganda,’ and ran newspaper ads with the headline:
“Appeasement Is as Unwise In 1988 As In 1938”
The Orange County Register ran an editorial in September 1988 in which it stated:
“Ronald Reagan has become the Neville Chamberlain of the 1980s. The apparent peace of 1988 may be followed by the new wars of 1989 or 1990.”
Conservative activist Richard Viguerie also weighed in against his former hero:
“One thing is unanimous among the President’s longtime supporters: that he has quit the fight and left the field of battle in many important matters. In other important matters he has changed sides and he is now allied with his former adversaries, the liberals, the Democrats and the Soviets,”
So, this sort of nonsense is nothing new. We have seen it before.
Sources:
Glenn Greenwald: “Ronald Reagan … Chamberlainian appeaser of the 1980s”
“Conservatives Hit Reagan on Treaty: One Calls President ‘a Useful Idiot’ of Soviets; Criticism of Accord Mounts” L.A. Times, 5 December 1987.
The piece is well-written, though it contains some inaccuracies that could raise questions. For instance, the author states, *“It is naive to believe that you get to be leader of the KGB by being a gentle person.”* This implies that Putin was the head of the KGB, which is factually incorrect. If the author meant that, as the head of the Russian state, Putin oversees its modern successor, that would be a different argument—but not the one presented.
Regarding the claim of a disproportionate response to “crush Chechnya’s legitimate desire for self-determination,” the analysis appears to reflect a limited understanding of the conflict’s complexity. That said, the author provides a clear, pragmatic, and easy-to-follow argument on why modern Russia—and not just Putin—can not be equated with Hitler’s Germany.
Furthermore, it has become increasingly evident to many that the so-called *“free”* press in the West is beginning to resemble the Soviet propaganda machine of the 1950s.
Yes Basil, the Chechnya conflict came out of a historical context and was a complex situation.Hard to make a Moral judgement on who was to blame .
l suppose like most Wars there is always plenty of blame to go around for all parties.lt legacy still lingers as Chechnya fighters bob up in many conflicts , and the region itself is still delicately poised.
As for judging Pres V.Putin because he was once a KGB officer is like judging former US Pres George Bush Srn, a suspect person with a brutal history because he was once the Boss of the CIA.
As for claiming Russia wants more territory, they should get aboard the Trans Siberian (either end) and after a few days of going through multiple time changes without reaching your destination , would cure anyone of any fanciful notions of Russians wanting more territory.
Finally l must own up to be one of the few that used to read Pravda , mainly for amusement purposes , as most Russians used only for wrapping up garbage. I cant help reflecting how similar the once dynamic free western press and its Media has degenerated into a Pravda clone.
Here in California, all my “liberal” dyed in the wool Demcratics have TDS. Their FB posts are filled with hatred to Trump, and praise of Zelensky . Think they are enlighted as they continue swallowing the Cold War narrative. As a widow age 83 the emotional isolation of this experiene is harming my health, as it likely is for those who are hiding out . .. Only Consorstium News and Judge Napolitano help me. May I ask we pray for those like me longing for peace and diplomacy with Russia. Thank you so much!
Carolyn I share your concerns. Politically I consider myself a Cross between a JFK/FDR Democrat and a Ron Paul Republican. I oppose many of Trump’s policy directions but not his desire to end the war in Ukraine and reestablish normal diplomatic relations with Russia and possibly China as well. I am 69-yrs old and it seems that the majority in my age group buy the mainstream media cold war propaganda lock stock and barrel and will not consider the more wise and sensible realities from former US diplomats, retired intelligence and military officers who speak the truth. Hopefully 2025 will be the year of change in direction.
I remember the 2014 coup d’etat. The rulers we installed were waving swastika flags, praising Stepan Bandera (major killer of Jews in the ’40s) and generally revealing themselves to be Nazis. Putin haters have been trying to whitewash the Uki Nazis ever since, but I see no need for the US to support Nazis. The CIA has often disgraced itself by installing proto-fascists, but genuine Nazis is a step too far.
For 80 years imaginary bad guy USSR/Russia has been used by US and Europe to silence and bleed US taxpayers. This is “post WWII architecture.” In 1946 Truman fired one of his cabinet officials for suggesting detente with USSR. This single imaginary bad guy has forced US taxpayers into the role of global “protectors” which since WWII has included 57+ attempts to overthrow other governments. If US and Russia were friendly, Europe and especially UK would become less relevant. What about the Russian people? They view Mr. Putin very favorably as is consistently shown in Levada polls which were at one time funded by the US to show the opposite. In 1990s US fat cats plundered newly independent Russia and left it for dead-laughing all the way. Mr. Putin came in and saved his country from starvation and death. 25 million USSR citizens died in the process of defeating Hitler including being occupied and starved by his forces for over a year. After Truman dropped 2 atom bombs on Japanese civilians he decided USSR was Enemy #1 for US.
Like a voice in the wilderness ,but could not be said loud enough .Thank you Craig Murray for saying it .
Seems the sun still never sets on the British empire. It lives on through its Anglophoney descendants; a neocon elite proudly bearing its standards.
Excellent, albeit depressing, article. Thank you. I’ve, of course, shared it.
It is a pleasure to read the succinct accessible prose in this essay by Craig Murray.
I can share this link with friends and relatives who have limited access to reputable news sources.
It’s amusing to compare Craig Murrays commentary to the banality of the BBC News which is displayed
on public broadcasting stations in the U.S. – – – I suggest that viewers Email this link to their friends.
My response to someone who once stated that “those who say that Ukraine is not our problem are like those in Britain, France, and the USA in the 1930s who said that the Rhineland, then Austria, then the Sudetenland…were not our problem”:
What about all of the US citizens in preceding decades who did not say that the Chagos Archipelago; Palestinian Territories, Golan Heights, and Sinai Peninsula; South-West Africa (Namibia); Tibet, Inner Mongolia, Manchuria, and East Turkestan (Xinjiang); Western Sahara (SADR); Nagorno-Karabakh (Artsakh); West Papua, East Timor, and Aceh; Cyprus; Bougainville Island; etc. were our problem, but instead allowed foreign states to forcibly annex those areas, often armed the invading country to the teeth, and sometimes even connived to establish a US military presence in support of the occupying state because those victims were not “worthy” enough?
Bottom-line, if we treated everything as a Munich 1938 analogy as rabid neoconservatives; irrational, warmongering maximalists; and “liberal” or “humanitarian” interventionists wanted us to, the post-1945 era would probably be even messier and bloodier than it already was, and we or our immediate ancestors likely would have already died in a nuclear conflagration sixty or seventy years ago.
Absolutely right! But even on the merits of their own arguments, the conventional wisdom is nonsense. What were France and UK supposed to do when faced with Germany’s legitimate claims re the egregious Treaty of Versailles? Would the publics of France and UK (not to mention strongly antiwar USA) have actually been supportive of a redo of WW1 to keep Germany from taking control of its own German territory? Ludicrous. As for Austria and Sudetenland … these were German peopled areas. They joined Germany with very little drama.
Put it this way, if the Allies HAD attempted to prevent Germany from these steps, it would have been THEY who would have been tarred with the “supreme crime” (per Judge Jackson in Nuremberg) of starting the world war. Not a good place to be for weakening empires needing allies …
Looking for a prominent leader intent on territorial expansion? Trump has openly declared his intent to annex or obtain Canada, Gaza, Greenland and the Panama Canal zone. He also says Ukraine’s mineral wealth belongs to the USA. There are many more parallels with Hitler, but how about Nazi salutes from Bannon and Musk, two of his more notorious acolytes?
Mr. Putin is rational and intelligent, which puts him ahead of a lot of US politicians. EU politicians, too.
YES!
It puts him ahead of ALL western politicians, in my view. He also knows his history, in great detail, too. And, as a lawyer, he knows the law, both domestic and international. In addition, he takes the time to understand the detail, something that is almost unheard of in western politics. Finally, he actually talks to the people and answers their questions (even if carefully vetted and staged). He makes the effort to relate, and does not stand aloof and distant like most western leaders.
All of this puts him streets ahead of the current batch of low-grade western politicians, who rely almost exclusively on emotion, rhetoric and propaganda rather than real facts and figures.
You don’t have to like him, but it is important to acknowledge the reality of how he operates and leads his country.
I don’t think it is clearly understood : a moderate nuclear “exchange” will kill most life above ground in 72 minutes (according to Annie Jacobsen) and nuclear Winter will starve the rest few years later. Weapons of this magnitude have never been in the hands of humanity before and we are acting the same as if wars were/are still just regional dustups. They are extinctions, now.
War is a racket, a con, a trick. War and preparation for war (“defense” spending) is the best way found to transfer lower and middle class taxes into upper class profit.
But war requires fear … normal people (the marks, or the suckers) wouldn’t normally volunteer or tolerate large amounts of their monies being given away to their “betters.” They need motivation. It can be a “red scare”, It can be a “mad man”, it can be a “dastardly attack out of nowhere”, it can be “defense of our allies”, there are many ways to scare hell out of a people and motivate them to even volunteer and cheer their servitude. The modern state is expert at it.
They are not fools, they are not idiots, they are just serving the masters as told. They do it well.
Thank you for this very intelligent and logical response to UK and USA response to Putin. I as an 80 yo seem to know more about Ukraine and Russia than all of our politicians and leaders. The Ukraine war was never about acquiring Ukraine but about self-defense …not joining NATO and protecting eastern Ukrainians from getting killed.
“To fund this warmongering, New Labour are cutting spending on the U.K.’s sick, disabled and pensioners and cutting aid to the starving overseas.”
We must understand, we are not dealing with rational people here.
At the same time as, to use Starmer’s phrase, ‘incentivising [sick and disabled] people to work’ which he describes as a ‘moral imperative’, New New Blue Labour have also announced ‘reform’ of the NHS, which digging deeper looks as though it will be well nigh abolished, with job cuts of 30,000!
They have denied as late as 31 January this year that they intended to do so at this stage in their term, but allegedly a predicted shortfall of £6billion in the 2025/2026 budget “frightened the wits out of them”. This is against £12.8billion aid already committed to Ukraine. I suppose war mongering takes precedence over the nation’s health….
I guess it needs hatred to justify all the monies being spent on military items. The brain dead EUropeans! How sad.
How many know that the Prussian ‘von’ is a sign of upper-class status?
It appears to be similar to the ‘of’ in English as in “Earl of Lockley”. In Spanish, it similar to the “de la” in the middle of the name. The Prussian upper class could similarly be recognized by the ‘von’ in the name. All are signs of the names of powerful families that owned the land and used to hold the power of life and death over the peasants who made them wealthy and powerful with their forced labor. In America, we would call them as “slave-owners.”
A Europe led by a Prussian Von is not a signal of democracy and freedom. Just the opposite.
Because of that many Germans have dropped “von” from their names, but not Ursula.
Family names are inherited from father to children generation after generation. If today’s Germans/Prussians have a von in their name, what that means is that a forebear, perhaps a great great grandfather hundreds. of years ago, may have been a baron or a count. Whatever wealth or land that great great grandfather may have possessed, is probably no longer in the family, although it could be theoretically. It is very simpleminded to be prejudiced against a person because they happen to have a von in their name. Besides, “von” means from. There are many vons who have never been aristocrats. If two men who happen to have the same family name happen to move to the same village, but one came from one town and the other from another town, they may be referred to Mr Miller von Berlin vs. Mr. Miller von Bamberg etc. Besides family names are inherited. Nobody has ever claimed that the ancient ancestors of today’s human’s lived in times of “democracy and freedom.”
Just a note that von der Leyen is her husband’s name. Her maiden name was Albrecht, which is also a minor noble family. But she does have an American ancestor and descends from some of the wealthiest slave owners in the colonies.
She does not have to use her husband’s name.
Every time one sees the name Sir Stormer, one should ask “why did he get the Sir?” Sir Stormer was quite unusual to someone across the pond. It is not often to see the leader of the opposition party named with the Royal Sir that shows favor from the Queen. (it was old Queen Lizzy who gave him that Royal Sir, not King Chucky).
As a loyal and patriotic American, I am rather unfamiliar with all the royal customs and the protocols of bending of the knee and the kissing of the royal butt, but it seems from across the pond that politicians usually don’t get that Sir until after they’ve had the success of at least being a government minister or more likely Prime Minister in the King’s, then the Queen’s government?
Sir Stormer had obviously performed valued service to the crown long before he became Prime Minister.
If you know the history of this royal family and their need to review and purge old family photos so nobody sees the ones where they dress up in World War 2 era German uniforms, then it becomes an interesting question of what exactly did Sir Stormer do to get Royal Favor from such a Royal Family?
And yes, I am anti-American in modern America because I do not fall to my knees when Hollywood Princesses walk by, and I still believe in my unalienable right to give the King the finger.
Starmer was knighted in 2014 for his work as head of the Crown Prosecution Service and director of Public Prosecutions.
…and for persecuting Julian Assange. As the head of the CPS, he made the decisions that prolonged Julian Assange’s extradition case. And he was also responsible for the later (illegal but, of course, unpunished) destruction of critical evidence in this case.
He well earned one of the knighthoods that are distributed annually to those useful to the establishment.
There is a famous quote from Herrman Goering in his cell at Nuremberg.
“[Gilbert] “There is one difference,” I pointed out. “In a democracy the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars.”
[Goering] “Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.””
What Goering could not foresee from his cell before he committed suicide was that in the future, there would be an addition to this formula …. “All you have to do is to name your enemy as the next Hitler.”
Will people please turn off their corporate channels!
The only way this headline makes any sense is if you are the sort of person that allows corporate media unlimited access to their mind. Only if you listen to way too much corporate media would you have any notion of thinking that Putin is anything like Hitler.
If you turn off the corporate media, and if you simply read history, it is the leaders of America, Germany and the UK that bring back various “that was just like Hitler” thoughts. But, on my own, I’ve never thought that about Putin. Putin is right-wing with a back-ground of a successful career in the ‘security services’ (which alone makes Putin different from the corporal discharged after the war), but Putin is no way any resemblance of Hitler. I can not say the same about Biden or Trump. I can not say this about the European leaders who are calling for the return of forced conscription (aka, the draft) and the need to spend all the money on the military and the need to prepare for an immediate war of world domination.