What has changed is the use of computers and, more recently, the rise of social media and paid 'influencers' or what Stalin more accurately referred to as 'useful idiots.' It's always a surprise to me how some naive Western politicians seem completely oblivious to history.
Russia has been trying to destabilise the West almost since the 1917 Revolution. Putin is only carrying on what Lenin and Stalin began. We had a brief respite in the early 1990s under Gorbachev and after the fall of the Berlin Wall, but once ensconced in the Kremlin, Putin reverted to type.
In September last year, the FBI published a lengthy affidavit outlining Russian efforts to get Donald Trump elected, which clearly succeeded. The cost of this campaign was minuscule compared to the daily cost of the war in Ukraine, so the return on investment for the Kremlin is exceptional, worth several fully equipped divisions at least.
But it's one small part of an entire industry in Russia, created with the express intention of weakening democratic institutions and aiding the rise of the far right and would-be dictators like Trump.
The Politico piece is mainly about Romania:
"Back in 2024, Putin spent millions to elect a pro-Russian president in Romania. His method: infiltrate elections, support authoritarian-leaning candidates and manipulate digital platforms to bend public perception. So, the Russian leader boosted candidate Călin Georgescu from obscurity, and in just two weeks, Georgescu had captured 21 percent of the vote, leaving a divided field of 15 candidates stunned."
Whenever elections produce a shock result that most independent observers see as being antithetical to the interests of the electors involved, you always tend to suspect Russia. They have, after all, become masters at these political campaigns using middlemen and proxies to hide their involvement and maintain deniability.
Kent and Surrey Bylines carry a similar report: From troll farms to politicians: Russia’s ‘conquest’ of European minds, by a Ukrainian lady who lives in the UK.
I wonder if anyone has ever considered an alternative European history with a peaceful, law-abiding Russia instead one constantly threatening conflict? Perhaps Hitler may not have started the Second World War if Stalin and the Communist Party hadn’t presented themselves as a serious threat. Who knows? Russia was already fomenting trouble in the 1930s and the CP in Germany was on the rise. One of Hitler’s great fears was of a Communist coup, one that many industrialists and President Hindenburg shared. It was one of the reasons Hindenburg appointed him Chancellor.
Here’s a thought experiment: How much has it cost the West to defend itself against the perceived and actual threat that Russia has posed since 1945? We and Moscow were allies in the beginning, albeit uneasy ones and the relationship was always characterised by mutual suspicion. Russia has had an inferiority complex for decades and seems convinced the West is determined to destroy it, something that was amplified and spread, initially by Marxist ideologues, and now by the current gang of oligarch criminals in charge.
The amount of money and resources spent needlessly over the decades must be unimaginably colossal. The Americans are spending $800 billion a year on defence at the moment, a little more than half of the NATO total of $1.5 trillion. Most of the kit ends up as scrap metal.
NATO has now expanded to formally include Sweden and Finland in the alliance, all due to Putin’s westward expansionism. There is now talk of NATO members raising defence spending to 5% of GDP by 2035, up from the 2% target now. This is a massive increase.
You can easily calculate that collectively, at constant 2025 prices, we have been coughing up the best part of a trillion dollars a year for 75 years or so. I'm not suggesting all of it has been wasted, but an awful lot has. That may mean $500 billion every year in unnecessary defence expenditure alone. Think what that sum could have accomplished in relieving global suffering, improving the environment, public infrastructure, research into more effective medicines and better healthcare and so on.
Now add the cost in both human and monetary terms of the multiple conflicts that Russia has funded, encouraged and supported over the years plus the cost of guarding against the constant cyber attacks. There are plenty of commentators who believe the immigration crisis that Europe is struggling to cope with secretly has the Kremlin behind it. Wherever there is trouble, you can find Russian fingerprints. Anything to cheaply encourage unrest.
Russia is essentially a small country. It has a GDP less than Italy's and not much more than half of California’s, although it has three times the population. It’s only nuclear weapons which make Russia a threat, which is why Putin keeps raising the awful spectre of it.
The trouble and the diversion of investment from a much-needed drive to preserve the planet and relieve human suffering is way out of proportion to Russia's significance. No other nation on earth has had such a disproportionate impact, and yet we continue to allow it.
