Craig Murray's Portrait of Russia

https://consortiumnews.com/2026/09/27/craig-murray-four-days-in-ekaterinburg/     

Craig Murray is certainly a controversial figure that raises hackles in some quarters. He's perceived as being pro-Russian and he upset many by standing close to Julian Assange through his many struggles. Murray is also tied in with the Scottish Independence movement and has clashed with the Crown judiciary over leaked information resulting in a short jail sentence. In other words, he's a polarizing figure.

Some will simply dismiss out of hand an article concerning his recent trip to Russia - all the more as the trip was sponsored by Moscow. But I think it's worth perusing as some of his observations are telling and counter the perception given by outlets like the BBC, Guardian, and mainstream American networks.

His comments on Dubai and its airport are also worthy of some consideration and (I think) are a harbinger of what we're likely to see in the near future in Western cities. I think one already has a sense of the tiered-structure in places like London, Washington DC, and certainly New York. There's the world for the people with money and then the world for the rest. It's true everywhere, but in certain settings the contrast is pronounced and immediate and cannot be glossed over.

Likewise his commentary regarding electronic devices and British customs was also revealing - though not unknown to people who have been paying attention over the past decade or so. The UK's claim to uphold liberal values and the like seems increasingly dubious. Murray's reliance on Russian electronics will strike readers (including me) as strange but his explanation makes sense - he's already being surveilled by his own government. Why should he worry about Putin or the FSB?

I appreciated his comments about international law and his interactions with Russian academics. There is a kind of self-fulfilling prophecy-aspect to the West's relationship with Russia. As Murray states, the West has fretted about Russia moving away from Western norms and values for the past twenty-five years and yet their actions vis-à-vis Moscow have effectively made it a guaranteed reality.

Of course this assumes Russia was on the road to Western norms in the 1990's which it was not. And it should also be said that American interference in Russian elections wasn't helping that fact. But it wasn't going to happen anyway. You can't build that kind of cultural foundation in a decade or even a single generation - that is assuming the Russian people even want such a thing, or that it's always without exception a good model.

If they don't want liberalism, it creates a dilemma for those who would absolutize the values and assumptions of democracy. What if the people vote to table democracy? What if they vote in Putin? What if they hated voted in Zhirinovsky (who frequently received 5-10% of the vote). What if the communist Zyuganov had won (he received 32% of the vote in 1996 and by some accounts would have won apart from US meddling). He also polled at 30% against Putin in 2000 and over 17% in 2012. What if the people vote in the AfD? What if the people vote in Adolf Hitler?

The kerfuffle over Murray's Palestine comments is noteworthy and touches on the interesting dynamics that take place between Moscow and Tel Aviv. But that's another topic altogether. It's complicated, but given the fact that Russia supplies most of Israel's oil - that may have something to do with the arrangement as well as the complex exchange of intelligence and military hardware.

Much of the article reads as a travelogue and is of lesser value. The point is Murray is showing how Russian society is quite removed from the desperate picture painted by Western media. Some will find the staged meetings and talks and the kind of cryptic behaviour of the ministers to be a suspicious thing but it's all pretty familiar to those who have encountered their counterparts in the West. I think these paragraphs near the end of the piece provide a good summation:

"I have given an honest account of what I saw and what I did. Yes, I was on an official programme, but I encountered scores of people, many of whom were not following an official narrative. I acknowledge that I did not have a chance to look at issues like conscription, or the ability of opposition political parties to contest the elections.

But then you do not need me to do that. The BBC, The Guardian, Reuters, CNN are all present and travel and report across Russia, and regularly bring you the propaganda picture. You can read it any time. But consider this. Russia Today and Sputnik Radio were closed down in the U.K., totally. There are no Russian journalists free to operate in the U.K. unless they write the British government line, while British journalists, including the totally hostile, still operate in Russia.

I could read the super-Russophobic Guardian in Russia anytime, with no VPN. Those facts in themselves are sufficient to destroy the simplistic narrative of “free West vs authoritarian Russia”, and should at least make you realise that there is more to see and hear than the Western narrative.

As Western elites struggle to hold the consent of their populations during a period of declining standards of living for ordinary people and a massively expanding wealth gap to the billionaire class, they need an enemy to focus hatred and resentment away from themselves."

Well said - and while I realize the Christian Right is less caught up in the Anti-Russia campaign, I firmly believe this is only because of Trump's lack of interest and the fact that the Democrats champion the issue. It is well known that figures like Marco Rubio and the late Lindsey Graham were (and are) anti-Russia hawks and they remain influential and respected with the circles of the Christian Right. In the 1990's there were constant fears expressed concerning Russia and the return of communism. Many (both Left and Right) were upset by George Bush's initially cordial relationship with Putin. And in 2008 at the end of the Bush presidency, there were some who were upset that Bush had not been more confrontational over the issue of Georgia where a GOP ally (Mikheil Saakashvilli) provoked a Russian incursion into South Ossetia and a 16 day war.

This could all change again in the next few years depending on the role Trump continues to play and whoever succeeds him. Vance is not interested in anti-Russia campaigning but it is not at all clear if Vance will be able to take over the leadership role within the GOP.

As a Christian, I don't care who captures which party, my concern is for the state of the Church and the way these things are allowed to influence it - again because of corrupt Church leaders who fail to teach the difference between the holy and profane and open the doors of the Church (so to speak) to outside influence and distraction. I think it very unfortunate what has happened in Russia with regard to Putin's pursuit of Western-style (and often connected) Evangelicals, as well as groups like the Watchtower Society. The Eastern Orthodox-Sacralist order that undergirds Russian society and Putin's domestic policy is unbiblical, but no less so than the same models that dominated Western societies (in some cases) up to the dawn of the 20th century - the kinds of orders that many Western Christians are lobbying to reinstate. The kind of harassment Russian Christians face is similar to what was happening in places like Austria and parts of Scandinavia throughout the 1890's and in Italy, Spain, and elsewhere right into the 20th century. While America's record is exemplary by comparison, it's not quite as pristine as some think and is increasingly fragile as faithful Christians face pressure and threats from both sides of the political spectrum and will (I think in time) face these same pressures from co-religionists who have sold out to this or that regime.

I'm glad Murray wrote this. I've never been quite on board with him in terms of his overall views but he's usually interesting, informative, and thought-provoking. This was no exception.