U.K. – Russo relations : a pragmatic approach

  • Rusia
  • 1
  • 21 March 2017


The title of this piece actually causes head-scratching for the very reason that this relationship has been anything but pragmatic over the years. Not because as a British person living in Moscow this relationship has been felt up close and personal and is hard to detach some emotional sentiments to this topic. The lack of pragmatism, in fact, stems from both countries’ statehood and sovereignty obsessions.

To step down from the British and Russian podiums and view this relationship from afar, what becomes apparent is the gap between the state and populations of both nations. When the British state viewed its Russian counterpart in a positive light, the population had negative assumptions about what the Russians were like. This can be applied to the court of Ivan IV (or terrible), Anglo-Russian relations up to 1914 and even the chaotic 1990s. On the eve of the First World War, British propaganda posters urging the population to support their Russian allies were plastered up in the underground behind the factory worker reading a copy of the Daily Mail depicting an unflattering cartoon of a Russian.

Many more examples could be listed, but the reason U.K. – Russo relations are so interesting is for the simple fact it is like looking at international relations naked. That is to say, there is no international relationship based on friendship; there are only national interests. When the UK government welcomed Boris Yeltsin and the oligarchs’ money to London, this was never based on Russia’s positive democratic development; there was none. Yet at the same time, the image among the common man of what one of our most notable authors dubbed ‘the puzzling east’, changed from vodka drinking communists walking next to bears on the street into a mafia state. The point was that Russia was a weak state and had lost the Cold War – now it was the West’s turn to become the norm maker.

The Soviet experience and experiment rattled the British state. The ideas of the Bolsheviks had the potential to spread inside Britain and its Parliament (which it did; the Communist Party of Great Britain had two MPs in its heyday). From ally to enemy, to ally in the Second World War, to an enemy once more as the battle for norm makers commenced. The post-war Labour government who disapproved of Stalinism as a model for socialism, combined with Harry Truman’s assertion that ‘Russia can go to hell’, began forty plus years of a Cold War. The breakdown of great powers into superpowers saw one emerge and the other decline.

The gap between state and populous and the ways in which both have approached Russia, and this is purely from a British perspective, it shows why British efforts to understand the Russian case and experience have been so futile. The Cold War experience made any praise of Russia unacceptable; in discussion of the USSR, there was no in between possible: you supported or opposed Soviet ideology.

The Putin turn point in this relationship further highlights this. The UK and Russia could have become ideal partners in fighting terrorism, curbing back Chinese influence and even strengthening European cooperation. Yet ever since the Iraq War, Britain went from being an idealised homestead for the Russian middle class to a flag bearer of US foreign policy. One scandal after another hampered the political relations. What’s more, the reset of Russo – U.S. relations received a barely an eyebrow raise in the UK.

Nowadays, few British / Russian exchanges take place at university level or otherwise. Concerning this relationship from below, British students do not learn Russian, the population does not access Russian media, let alone do they know many / any Russians. Moreover, the school system has its pupils study Nicholas II up to Stalin, if they cover Russian history at all. This allows for the state and media outlets a blank cheque to have its say prevail. There is a lack of information, knowledge and information warfare provided up front, so there should be little surprise that Russia is still not well understood. Often, and this is particularly true of university students, when myself or colleagues have outlined Russia’s geopolitical positions and policy justifications to students, even at the highest levels of study, it is often met with a blunt refusal to acknowledge such an argument can even exist.

The end of the Cold War also saw Russian studies at universities decline in popularity as well as the Civil Service drain resources from this department. However, this should be no excuse for a lack of knowledge, as people practically carry a library around in their bags and pockets every day. Russia is the world’s largest country that is a permanent member of the U.N. Security Council, not one of the world’s many problems can be solved without their involvement or co-operation. This alone should be enough of a reason for it to feature more prominently in British foreign policy discourse, particularly as it exits the EU on uncertain terms. Plenty of government ministers claim to want a global Britain, yet Russia seems to be largely off the radar.

In sum, there is a lack of patience, desire and perceived need for a UK now to understand or work with Russia in any productive or pragmatic way. On opposite sides of the continent, both could provide a balance and unique path for international relations to develop. Instead, as has been the case for centuries, Russia remains a nation to be suspected and cautiously interacted with. This looks unlikely to change is quite unfortunate.

One Response to U.K. – Russo relations : a pragmatic approach

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Russian Leadership Changes: How it was, is and how it might be

  • 0
  • 3 January 2022

Now that 2022 is finally here, it means Russia’s next presidential election is just two years away. The way has been paved for Vladimir Putin to run again if he chooses. The will he/won’t he? question is a favourite of pundits as is speculation of a potential or likely successor. Russia’s next leader will be immensely consequential, as will the time when he or she takes over.

It’s certainly possible that by the end of t

citește mai mult

Researchers from Six Countries Discussed the Challenges for International Psychological Security in the Context of the Use of Artificial Intelligence

  • 0
  • 23 November 2020

On 12 November 2020, a panel discussion "Artificial Intelligence and International Psychological Security: Theoretical and Practical Implications" was held at St. Petersburg State University as part of the international conference "Strategic Communications in Business and Politics" (STRATCOM-2020).

The discussion was moderated by Konstantin Pantserev – DSc in Political Sciences, Professor of the St. Petersburg State University,

citește mai mult


  • 0
  • 2 July 2020


This book  , edited by Evgeny Pashentsev, brings together a series of chapters written by Russian and non-Russian scholars

citește mai mult

Azebaijan, cheia geostrategică a Asiei Centrale

  • 0
  • 13 February 2018

După destrămarea URSS, Azerbaijanul a fost statul ex-sovietic care alături de    republicile Baltice a avut o dezvoltare constantă și durabilă. Desigur, aici pot fi adresate unele critici regimului de la Baku cu privire la democrație, care în opinia multor analiști este doar mimată la Baku. Însă faptul adevărat este că acest stat a reușit să își gestioneze eficient resursele de care dispune pentru a deveni o societate prosperă. I se atribuie Azerbaijanului etichet

citește mai mult

What Can Democrats Learn From Alabama’s Doug Jones?

  • 0
  • 30 November 2017

In ordinary circumstances, Doug Jones would already be preparing to move to Washington DC. The former prosecutor famous for convicting KKK members for a church bombing is up against gay bashing, God and gun lovin’, twice kicked out of elected office, Judge Roy Moore. A man who has eight accusers of sexual assault, all of whom were underage at the time of the allegations.

Yet, if one looks at all the recent polls, they show a ti

citește mai mult

Azerbaidjanul, petrolul și românii

  • 0
  • 7 October 2016

Întotdeauna, statele sunt nevoite să își apere poziția pe marea tablă a geopoliticii, uitându-se cu grijă la vecini, dar și la puterile regionale. Această regulă presupune nu doar poziția ofensivă, ci și valorificare atuurilor, astfel încât să devină piese care contează pe „câmpul de analiză”, iar nu elemente neglijabile, care sunt măturate dintr-o dată de cei ce au suficientă putere să mânuiască piesele.

Caucazul, ca regiune geopolitică, nu face nici ea excepție

citește mai mult

The US Strategic Provocations before and during the Olympic Games: The Stakes Are Growing

  • 0
  • 16 January 2022

Introduction. To make your foe act in a definite way through the planned escalation of events, thereby making him lose his position and his tangible and intangible assets – that is the essence of any international provocation. In history, one can find many examples of strategic provocations with long term goals and, very often, grave and long-term international consequences. The Gulf of Tonkin incident in August 1964 – where a North Vietnamese to

citește mai mult

Experts on the Malicious Use of Artificial Intelligence and Challenges to International Psychological Security (part III)

  • 0
  • 28 December 2021

The Questionnaire for Experts “Malicious Use of Artificial Intelligence and Challenges to Psychological Security”

 This questionnaire is a part of the research project “Malicious Use of Artificial Intelligence and Challenges to Psychological Security in Northeast Asia” funded by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research and the Vietnam Academy of Social Sciences, project number 21-514-92001. citește mai mult

Experts on the Malicious Use of Artificial Intelligence and Challenges to International Psychological Security (part II)

  • 0
  • 17 December 2021

  1. Which of the threats to international psychological security caused by the malicious use of artificial intelligence do you consider the most relevant for your country?

  Vian Bakir and Andrew McStay Surreptitious influencing via psychological manipulation on social media is a real threat in the UK. In the 2016 “Brexit” referendum on whether or not to leave the European Union, Cambridge Analytica offe

citește mai mult