Why Moscow is the destination of choice for both left and right

One of the most remarkable things about global politics in 2018 is the huge importance of Russia. Its influence goes way beyond its obvious reach.

Beijing is much more powerful than Moscow economically. Washington is still much more powerful than Moscow militarily. But Russia under Putin is a fulcrum on which the politics of North America, Western Europe and the Middle East seems to turn.

We are grappling with the idea of Russian interference in elections and referendums. Still reeling from its enormous implications.

Press conferences are held in which Putin is questioned on whether he has kompromat on the US President. While the US President is standing right beside him.

The US President reminds us that Germany is heavily dependent on Russian energy supplies.

UK security services investigate a murder on British soil linked to a Russian nerve agent.

We have reconciled ourselves to the fact that the butcher Assad will survive in Syria, because of his powerful backers in the Kremlin.

It’s Russia, Russia, Russia.

And to cap it all, we have the World Cup propaganda coup for Putin too. As if we hadn’t had quite enough of Moscow, thanks very much.

Another weird thing.

The apologists for Russia come from both the left and the right.

Former Stalinists, Trotskyists – and fellow travellers on the left of the British Labour Party – form an unholy alliance when it comes to discussions of Kremlin policy. Trump is joined by the likes of Marine Le Pen and Viktor Orbán in his seeming regard for the Russian president.

So people who always advocated socialism turn a blind eye to the ruthless and authoritarian nature of the Putin regime, while those who vociferously opposed communism in the USSR kid themselves that the totalitarian legacy has been erased in the past quarter of a century.

What is it that binds these disparate groups together?

It’s a shared acceptance of Russia’s agenda: to destabilise the EU, NATO and the post-war institutions which bind people together.

These are organisations and ideals which represent the economic and geopolitical status quo. While they rail against them, many in the alt-right and alt-left movements have scant idea of what follows once the tables in the temple have been overturned.

There’s also a shared romantic belief in the past.

For Putin, that means the recreation of the security provided by the former Soviet Union and its expanded borders. His excursions into Crimea and Ukraine rightly alarm the Baltic states and former Soviet Republics. His goals are imperialist, grandiose and sinister.

For fans of Russia on both the far left and far right, the glorification of the past involves a fantasy. It is a return to a pre-global economy in which long-extinct jobs are revived. Solidarity and community would be revived too – either around an ideological commitment to socialism or, alternatively, ideas about nation and race.

The enemies of all these populists and extremists? ‘Neo-liberals’, globalists, corrupt elites and other supposed bogey men.

Even if we accept this framing of the modern political economy – and there are any strong arguments to say that it is a complete caricature – how can anyone take seriously the idea that Russia is part of the fight against it?

In fact, it might be argued that Russia since the 1990s has been perhaps the ultimate example of capitalism in extremis, of cronyism and oligarchy.

So every time the far right and far left use Russia as a lever to undermine the status quo in North America and Europe, they are playing with fire.

They claim that an angry Alsatian is on the loose, so borrow a couple of pitbulls to tear it apart. We can be sure the result will be a bloody mess.