Why are the SNP so relaxed about dancing to the Kremlin’s tune?

Why are senior SNP politicians so relaxed about appearing on RT (Russia Today)?

It isn’t hard to imagine how Russian President Vladimir Putin is feeling right now. His ally in Ukraine has been kicked out and as a consequence the country is expected to gravitate away from the Russian orbit and into the arms of the EU.

Until now Putin has been using Russian money to anchor Armenia, Kazakhstan, Belarus and Ukraine in a Russian-led bloc. However the jewel in the crown, Ukraine, now appears on the verge of breaking away from the Moscow line.

To say that Putin is displeased would be the understatement of the year. He is most likely indignant.

But Putin has been taking a two-pronged approach to the advancement of Russian interests. On the one hand this has involved the projection of power in places like Eastern Europe and Syria; but it has also meant undermining the West’s resolve in the face of unscrupulous Russian advancement.

Anyone who has ever tuned in to RT (Russia Today), the Kremlin’s propaganda channel, will understand perfectly well what I am talking about. RT is engaged in a wholesale misinformation campaign aimed at bolstering the prestige of the Russian Federation and discrediting enemies of the Russian state at home and abroad.

As I have previously written, Western commentators who appear on RT are unwittingly giving succour to a homophobic autocracy which behaves in a far more undemocratic and demagogic manner than our own government could ever dream.

That being so, one can understand RT’s enthusiasm for Scottish independence: the break-up of the United Kingdom would undeniably be in the Russian national interest. Russia fears the projection of Western power; and Britain is far greater than the sum of its parts when it comes to an international presence. Divide and conquer is not simply a worn-out cliché.

What is surprising is that the Scottish Nationalists are so keen to dance to the former KGB man’s tune. Why else would senior SNP figures choose so repeatedly appear on RT?

Here, for example, is Scottish first minister and SNP leader Alex Salmond doing a set piece interview with RT just last year (at a time when Putin was ramping up his government’s anti-gay rhetoric):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MJ4zFqIvq5s

As well as Salmond, Scottish health secretary Alex Neil, justice secretary Kenny MacAskill, external affairs minister Humza Yousaf, and Pete Wishart MP have all appeared on RT.

In a stunning piece of irony, Humza Yousaf likes to make a lot of noise about the UK’s human rights record. According to Yousaf, Scotland needs independence in order to expunge itself from the abuses perpetrated by the UK government. And yet he is happy to appear on RT!

Pete Wishart MP appears to think along similar lines. “With Independence, Scotland can make its own mark on the world, including the upholding of human rights,” he said in a recent interview.

What he did not disclose is that he has appeared on RT and – even worse – Press TV, the media wing of the Iranian theocracy.

The hypocrisy is breath-taking.

As Eric Lee recently noted, when RT describes itself as ‘news with an edge’ it literally means the edge of a Russian bayonet. The stories RT focuses on are “invariably ones in which the West, and in particular the USA, comes out looking bad”. When RT turns its attention closer to home the progressive mask drops, and is replaced by “the strident tone of late-Stalinist Soviet propaganda”.

In appearing on RT, the SNP are unwittingly endorsing the loathsome regime propaganda which appears alongside agreeable anti-coalition programming. They are also bolstering the foreign policy agenda of a government that is whipping up a tidal wave of prejudice against gay people and propping up Syrian dictator Bashar al Assad.

Russia is quite clearly lobbying for Scottish independence. The question is, why are the SNP so relaxed about dancing to the Kremlin’s tune?

Cyber natj

A Yes Scotland staffer watching RT at their HQ

81 Responses to “Why are the SNP so relaxed about dancing to the Kremlin’s tune?”

  1. Bill Cruickshank

    Your link doesn’t work but no matter. You say my information is wrong – it was lifted straight from the Scottish Government’s White Paper, it is not wrong. However let us use your stats, you say democracy in Scotland is delivered 66% of the time. Hopefully you will understand me if I say that is a pretty strange idea of democracy. Countries which govern themselves get the government they vote for 100% of the time.
    I am also intrigued by your comment that my language is “laced”. “Laced” with what I am not quite sure. Is it the term self determination that grates? Please elaborate.

  2. Kryten2k35

    Here’s the link again:

    http://www.aforceforgood.org.uk/debunk/vote1

    And, yes, of course the White Paper hasn’t been wrong about anything, and neither have the SNP? Rubbish. The figures are in the above link.

    You have a jaded view of democracy if you think Scotland should get it’s way on UK elections, despite having 1/10th of the population, overriding England and Wales. Where would their chance at a democratic vote? Democracy is delivered at each election. Scottish votes count in the UK elections. That is democracy. Because the vote doesn’t always go in the way the majority of Scotland votes on, that doesn’t mean there is a flaw in democracy in the UK. I didn’t get the government I wanted, does that mean democracy has failed?

    Looking at this: http://www.labourhame.com/archives/3905

    There have been times where the Scottish vote has swayed the result in it’s favour, against “England’s” choice:

    “3 elections when more people voted Tory in England but got the Labour government Scotland voted for ( 1964, Feb 1974, 2005);”

    Which, as a person from the north of England, and an avid Tory hater, is music to my ears and just shows that Democracy in the UK works very well.

    And I think you know full well what I mean by laced. If you don’t, you are thick. And, no, the term “self determination” doesn’t bother me at all. What bothers me is you lace your language with the emotive, and try to play the strawman card.

    I don’t expect a logical, or decent response, just more strawman distractions.

  3. Bill Cruickshank

    The link worked this time thank you. Hardly an objective source all the same. Allow me to produce one of my own: http://newsnetscotland.com/index.php/scottish-opinion/7664-only-a-yes-vote-can-end-this-democratic-deficit-as-yes-scotland-takes-off-kid-gloves I do not claim it as 100% objective, but it explains Scotland’s democratic deficit from a Scottish perspective.
    The crux of your argument disappoints because it is invalid from a Scottish point of view. You obviously see the UK as one country. It is not, it is a union of two countries formed by the international treaty known as The Treaty of Union in 1707. A treaty which the ordinary people of Scotland had no say in, (there was no referendum). It was arranged by Scottish Lords who basically sold Scotland for English gold. Robert Burns described them as “sic a parcel o’ rogues in a nation”.
    It is obvious that we will never reach agreement on this because you see the UK as one country and I see it as a union of two distinct nations.
    I am disappointed that you resort to name calling. Unfortunately it seems to be a trait of some posters on here. It demeans your argument, is unpleasant and unnecessary. Nevertheless I wish you and England all the best, after Scotland votes YES.

  4. Kryten2k35

    Erm, The United Kingdom is a union of four countries, not two. Why do you continue to exhibit these strawman arguments?

    This has nothing to do with the fact that Scotland has a democratic vote in the UK government, or that a no vote from a Scottish citizen is that citizen exacting their self determination.

    I didn’t call you names. I gave an alternative, either you’re being coy, or you’re thick. It’s an observation. Just for the record, I think you’re being coy (I.E. thick on purpose to attempt to annoy).

    Also, The borders of England and Scotland only exist in Scottish nationalist minds. They’re imaginary. My friends and family in Scotland, and my frequent trips there give me a nice insight into Scottish heritage and culture. It’s not really that different from Northern England. To me, and my kin, we’re all northerners.

  5. Bill Cruickshank

    No, historically the UK was formed by the Treaty of Union between England and Scotland in 1707. Wales as Ireland played no part in the Treaty as both had been subjugated by England.
    To accuse someone of being thick, coy and a straw man is rude, plain and simple.
    I am afraid you are also wrong to accuse Scottish nationalists of wanting to erect borders. Nothing could be further from the truth. The Scottish Government have made it quite clear that they wish border arrangements to stay exactly the way they are at the moment. They point to the no border situation between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland as an example of good practice.
    I am glad that you enjoy your trips to Scotland and I hope you will have many more happy holidays in a self governing Scotland. You will always be made most welcome.

Comments are closed.