Is the war in Ukraine good or bad? The far-right hasn't a clue
Cutting edge geopolitical analysis from British white nationalists
Dear subscribers — welcome to Scout. Today we’ve got an article explaining how the Russian invasion of Ukraine fits into British far-right beliefs.
We’re proud of the stories we’ve published this month, so if you’ve missed any you catch up here — we’d be grateful if you could send your favourite story onto a few friends.
💉 How the far-right infiltrated the anti-vaxx movement: An in-depth profile of how an anti-vaxx activist tried to keep white nationalists out of his group.
🏋️♂️ Taking the iron pill: An analysis of how the far-right uses fitness as an entry point into antisemitic beliefs.
🚛 Inside the UK's very own freedom convoy: An investigation into the failure of the UK’s trucker protest.
Who’s better, Ukraine or Russia?
Since the war in Europe began, there’s been a lot of confusion among the far-right about what to make of it. I had thought, a bit naively perhaps, that far-right activists would largely support Vladimir Putin in part due to his strongman image and record on LGBT rights. Instead, the British far-right are squabbling over which country to back.
On Telegram, the social media messaging app where influencers command audiences in the tens of thousands, there are all kinds of breathless conspiracy theories about Ukrainian satanists harvesting the organs of children and American biolabs that are going to be blown up to unleash lethal new pandemics.
Organs and pandemics aside, I’ve noticed a spread of opinions reacting to the war as far-right influencers struggle to fit into their beliefs. Some of them think the war is bad because it involves white people fighting each other. Others think the war is good because it has macho Russians fighting the liberal West. Another group is trying to make up its minds depending on which side has more Muslims on it. The discord of opinion suggests the British far-right is unsure how, if it even can, exploit the war as a propaganda tool.
I thought it would be interesting to identify some of the far-right’s talking points, and see how these change as the war continues. Here goes.
“The invasion isn't great, but it’s basically the West’s fault”
This line sounds pretty similar to the one pushed by Jeremy Corbyn and the Stop The War Coalition, who have accused Britain and NATO of “aggressive posturing” and hawkishly scuppering a diplomatic resolution. Fighting in the same corner is Mark Collett, the self-styled “Nazi sympathiser” who runs Patriotic Alternative, a white nationalist group.
Collett, who incidentally has found a lot of common ground with Piers Corbyn, Jeremy’s conspiracist brother, says NATO is responsible for the war. “I completely understand Russia’s position on this matter; as Russia is simply attempting to secure their security and national interests by preventing NATO expanding ever-closer to their borders,” Collett said in a statement.
Like other far-right activists, he has sought to downplay the invasion, claiming that American race relations, the Syrian war and the Canadian freedom convoy are all bigger deals. Minor point, but Collett has been calling it “the Ukraine”, which is a sign that the speaker believes it is a territory, not a nation.
Some, like Tommy Robinson, have equivocated. Robinson has posted sympathetic videos of Ukrainians being attacked by the Russian military, but has also criticised the tyranny of “western dictators” who are apparently in cahoots with the World Economic Forum, and has said “Russians need to sort out Russian issues”. This might suggest activists like Robinson are trying to have their cake and eat it by having a pop at the liberal establishment of NATO while capitalising on interest in viral videos filmed by Ukrainians under siege to grow their online following.
“The invasion is good, actually”
Nick Griffin, ex-head of the BNP, has form when it comes to supporting authoritarians. He’s been close to the Assad regime in Syria, and is now delivering a full-throated defence of the Russian invasion. Perhaps his regular appearances on Russian media outlet Sputnik News (does he claim a fee from them?) explain his enthusiasm for Putin’s war.
Griffin has criticised the more muted responses of far-right news sites and activists like Tommy Robinson, accusing him of shilling for the “neo-con & LGBTQ lobby propaganda on behalf of the criminal/Zionist regime in Kiev”. Volodymyr Zelenskyy is the country’s first Jewish ruler, which is presumably why Griffin has it in for him.
Griffin has furthermore said that Ukraine is worth targeting because of “its Nazi militias”. How principled of Griffin, who has spent his career complaining about “organised Jewry” controlling British media, to now find the far-right troubling!
“The invasion is bad because Putin is pro-Islam”
Nick Griffin is pro-Russia because, as he claims, Ukraine’s army is filled with “Islamist cut-throat volunteers”. Here’s an interesting point of contention. Other far-right influencers have sided against Russia because they think Putin is using Muslim soldiers to invade Ukraine, indicating the British far-right will support whichever side doesn’t have Muslims on it.
There’s a claim going round far-right Telegram channels — particularly those managed by Britain First — that 10,000 “Islamist soldiers” from Chechnya are fighting for Russia. I’m sorry to report that my geopolitical sources in the eastern European military theatre are not robust enough to verify this claim, although it’s worth pointing there are some Chechens in the Russian army, but there are also reports of Muslims from the Caucasus fighting with the Ukrainians.
In any case, this video depicting Muslim soldiers at prayer, apparently about to invade Ukraine, has been going viral in far-right channels. “Putin sends Muslims in to fight Christian Europeans,” says the accompanying text. “If anyone is still sitting and considering whether Putin is based, then this should dispel any doubt.” If you’re based — in this context at least — it means you support the far-right. Part of the far-right’s disillusion with Putin might stem from a speech he gave late last year, in which he said that insulting the Prophet Muhammad was incompatible with freedom of expression.
“The war is bad, because it’s two white nations fighting each other”
One reaction is that this war is bad because it sees two “white nations” killing each other. “No more brother wars” is a meme that crops up in far-right circles — there are a few white power albums that use it as a title — and it’s reappeared at the start of the Ukraine conflict. It is a white nationalist tagline that laments the first and second world wars for pitting “white brothers” against each other.
This explains why Marcus Follin, the iron pill influencer we wrote about this month, blames the war on “globalist powers” who are “profiting from us killing each other”. Other groups, like White Lives Matter UK, have been making the same point, that “anti-white globalists” are trying to bring about “white genocide”. You don’t need an Enigma machine to crack that code. “Globalists” is often shorthand for a certain Abrahamic faith that far-right conspiracy theories believe cause wars to profit from them. Whenever terrible world events happen, you can always be sure that someone, somewhere, is blaming the Jews for it.