Brexiters can’t cope with the fact that Putin was cheering them on, a reality that exposes uncomfortable truths about the intersection of Russian aggression and Western populism. The Brexit referendum campaign largely ignored Russian territorial aggression against Ukraine, but recent revelations highlight a troubling alignment.
The Overlooked Connection Between Brexit and Putin
During the 2016 Brexit campaign, Russian territorial aggression against Ukraine barely featured. Boris Johnson, a key Vote Leave figure, briefly made headlines by blaming Moscow’s 2014 annexation of Crimea on the European Union. He argued that Putin’s land grab resulted from Brussels making foreign policy “on the hoof” and having “pretensions to running a defence policy.” This logic suggested that Kyiv had no right to choose its own allies and that European democracies should never have supported Ukrainian aspirations to escape Moscow’s influence.
This is the appeasement fallacy: the belief that if the West acquiesced to Putin’s conviction that Kyiv is a Russian city and Ukraine is not a proper country, he would not seek to suffocate his neighbour’s independence. However, evidence from numerous campaigns to coerce countries deemed by the Kremlin as errant possessions since the Soviet Union’s collapse refutes this notion.
Farage, Johnson, and the EU-Provocation Theory
When Nigel Farage repeated the EU-provocation theory of the Ukraine war during the 2024 general election campaign, one prominent defender of Ukrainian sovereignty described the Reform UK leader’s assertions as “ahistorical drivel” and “Kremlin propaganda.” That stalwart friend of Kyiv was none other than Boris Johnson. Johnson’s ability to contradict himself is well-documented, but this instance underscores a broader issue: many Brexit supporters are unwilling to confront the fact that Putin favoured their cause.
The Kremlin’s support for Brexit is not merely speculative. Intelligence reports and statements from Russian officials indicate a clear preference for the UK’s departure from the EU, as it weakened the bloc and sowed division among Western allies. This alignment should give Brexiters pause, yet many dismiss it as coincidence or propaganda.
Data Comparison: Brexit vs. Ukraine Support
To understand the divergence in attitudes, consider the following comparison between Brexit supporters and their stance on Ukraine:
| Stance | Brexit Supporters | Ukraine Supporters |
|---|---|---|
| View on EU | Critical, seek withdrawal | Supportive, seek unity |
| View on Putin | Often dismissive of threat | Recognise threat, advocate resistance |
| Ukraine policy | More likely to suggest concessions | Support military and economic aid |
Key Takeaways
- Putin has openly supported Brexit, viewing it as a way to weaken the EU.
- Prominent Brexiters like Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage have downplayed Russian aggression.
- The appeasement fallacy persists, ignoring repeated Russian coercion.
- Brexiters struggle to reconcile their stance with Putin’s endorsement.
FAQ
Did Putin actually support Brexit?
Did Putin actually support Brexit?
Yes, multiple reports and statements from Russian officials indicate that Putin favoured Brexit as it weakened the EU and created divisions among Western allies.
Why do Brexiters downplay Russian aggression?
Why do Brexiters downplay Russian aggression?
Many Brexiters adhere to the appeasement fallacy, believing that concessions to Putin will prevent further aggression, despite evidence to the contrary.
What is the EU-provocation theory?
What is the EU-provocation theory?
The EU-provocation theory suggests that the EU’s expansion and support for Ukraine provoked Russia’s aggression, a claim widely dismissed as Kremlin propaganda.