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 leader of 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.
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.
Mr. Putin is rational and intelligent, which puts him ahead of a lot of US politicians. EU politicians, too.
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.
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.”
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.