Publications /
Opinion

Back
A Shadow Over the Generous Spending
Authors
August 11, 2020

Possibly Roger Federer would have been ready to play the match against the socialite, who was willing to pay (in 2014) £160,000 for a celebrity match of tennis. But Russian tennis fan Lubov Chernukhin, 48, chose two different partners to be her opponents: David Cameron, then British prime minister, and Boris Johnson, then mayor of London. Chernukhin, who settled in Britain in 2003 and is a British passport holder, like her husband Vladimir, 50, a former Russian deputy finance minister and former chairman of the Russian state bank Vnesekonom, played her British opponents after an auction to benefit the Conservative Party. Mrs Chernukhin never really made a secret out of her interest in really getting to know the power players of Her Majesty’s government: in 2019, the Russian dished out £135,000 for a dinner with prime minister Theresa May and six of her female cabinet ministers at the Goring Hotel in plush Belgravia. The year before, she paid £35,000 at a Conservative Party fund-raising auction to have a private dinner with the then secretary of state for defense, Gavin Williamson. Since 2012, the Russian-born lady has given the Conservative Party £1,765,804, the highest female donor in the party’s history.

‘Welcoming Oligarchs With Open Arms’

The Conservatives have benefited from the generosity of other donors with connections to Moscow, such as Ukraine-born businessman Alexander Temerko, a UK citizen since 2011 and a member of the Tory party, who has given at least £1.3 million to date. However, on July 21, 2020, the publication of a report on Russia by U.K. parliament’s Intelligence and Security Committee cast a shadow over the spending of the exiled Russian elite in the U.K. One chapter of the report deals with Russian expatriates under the title Welcoming Oligarchs with Open Arms, observing that “the U.K. has been viewed as a particularly favorable destination for Russian oligarchs and their money … few questions—if any—were asked about the provenance of this considerable wealth”. The Intelligence and Security Committee worked on the report for a total of eight months, but the Conservative government, was reluctant to publish the findings prior to the General Election in December 2019. The report noted that “The arrival of Russian money resulted in a growth industry of enablers, individuals and organizations who manage and lobby for the Russian elite in the U.K.—lawyers, accountants, estate agents and PR professionals have played a role, wittingly or unwittingly, in the extension of Russian influence, which is often linked to promoting the nefarious interests of the Russian state … The links of the Russian elite to the UK—especially where this involves business and investment—provide access to UK companies and political figures, and thereby a means for broad Russian influence in the U.K.”. The authors wrote that it is “widely recognized that Russian intelligence and business are completely intertwined. The government must take the necessary measures to counter the threat and challenge the impunity of Putin-linked elites”. The next paragraph in the critical report dealt with several members of the Russian elite “who are closely linked to Putin” and “involved with charitable and/or political organizations in the U.K., having donated to political parties, with a public profile which positions them to assist Russian influence operations”. It is notable that a number of members of the House of Lords, the U.K.’s upper house, have business interests linked to Russia.

 “It is clear that Russia poses a significant threat to the U.K. on a number of fronts”, noted the Intelligence and Security Committee, “from espionage to interference in democratic processes, and to serious crime”. Furthermore, “the U.K. is clearly a target for Russia’s disinformation campaigns and political influence operations and must therefore equip itself to counter such efforts”.

‘New Normal’

Russia seems to have sought to influence a referendum on Scottish independence in 2014, and might have sought to influence the U.K.’s Brexit referendum, according to the report. Rachel Ellehuus, Deputy Director Europe at the Center for Strategic and International Studies wrote on July 21“The report is damning. It says that the government, along with the intelligence and security services, underestimated the response required to the Russian threat and are still playing catch up”. The study confirms that the British government and intelligence agencies failed to conduct any proper assessment of Kremlin attempts to interfere with the 2016 Brexit referendum. According to Ms Ellehuus, “Crucially, the U.K. government is accused of making a deliberate effort not to find out how Russian influence may have affected the June 2016 vote. This is all the more incredulous because the government admits there was Russian interference in the 2014 Scottish referendum … the government also admits that Russia interfered in the December 2019 general election. This information makes the lack of preparedness for 2016 (and 2019) and the lack of response all the more stunning. The report rightly calls for a thorough inquiry; the UK government has so far rejected the call”.

“Although its long-delayed version is heavily redacted”, observed The Guardian (July 21) “the thrust of its conclusion—that insufficient attention has been paid to Russian infiltration in British politics and public life—was clear”. Stewart Hosie, a Scottish National Party MP, who was member of the Committee, insisted that the U.K. government actively avoided looking for evidence that Russia interfered: “We were told they hadn’t seen any evidence, and that is meaningless if they hadn’t looked for it”. The truth, as the member of parliament saw it, is that “Nobody wanted to touch the issue with a ten foot pole”.

Frank Langfitt, London correspondent for U.S. National Public Radio offered a reason for the reluctance: “I think the answer is this: It would’ve undermined the Brexit referendum. Remember, it’s the biggest decision of the British people in decades. It has already changed the course of British history, and the person who was front and center—that was a guy named Boris Johnson, who is now prime minister. So, if you say Russia interfered, then it could undermine this thing that has changed the course of history”. Russian influence in the U.K., the Intelligence and Security Committee concluded, is “the new normal”.

The opinions expressed in this artcile belong to the author.

RELATED CONTENT

  • Authors
    Eugène Berg
    Christophe Chabert
    Thierry Garcin
    Rodolphe Monnet
    Amiral Alain Oudot de Dainville
    Olivier Tramond
    Hind Zaamoun
    May 11, 2023
    Les Dialogues Stratégiques, une collaboration entre HEC Center for Geopolitics et Policy Center for the New South, représentent une plateforme d'analyse et d'échange biannuelle réunissant des experts, des praticiens, des décideurs politiques, ainsi que le monde universitaire et les médias au service d'une réflexion critique et approfondie sur les tendances politiques mondiales et sur une problématique d'intérêt régional, d'importance commune à la fois pour l'Europe et l'Afrique. C ...
  • May 8, 2023
    In March 2023, the brutal demise of the Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) was the first to happen as a result of the hiking of interest rates that central banks started implementing from late 2021 onwards. Although the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), a US government corporation pr...
  • May 4, 2023
    La première bipolarisation a appartenu au XX° siècle et opposé États-Unis et URSS. Avec la guerre froide, elle était l'expression de la rivalité entre deux systèmes antagonistes. La seconde est née de la montée de la Chine populaire qui est entrée en compétition avec les États-Unis. Une compétition au départ économique et technologique, devenue aussi, au fil du temps, culturelle et stratégique, dans un monde interdépendant et digitalisé, mais également segmenté, complexe et incertai ...
  • April 14, 2023
    Geographical proximity, historical ties, and cultural and social exchanges largely account for Italy’s enduring engagement with the Maghreb. Abdessalam Jaldi, International Relations Spec ...
  • April 10, 2023
    This policy paper examines India’s growing engagement in North Africa, focusing on five countries: Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, and Egypt. Despite lacking a distinct regional policy for North Africa, India has amplified its bilateral engagement with these countries, underpinned by a steadfast commitment to the principle of South-South cooperation. Through its strategic moves in North Africa, India has established a powerful southern-west axis for its foreign policy that stretch ...
  • March 24, 2023
    Dans ce nouvel épisode, Imane Lahrich accueille Abdelhak Bassou pour discuter des dessous de la présence militaire russe en Afrique. D’un côté, la Russie ambitionne de contrer les ambitio ...
  • March 10, 2023
    The roots of decoloniality go deep into modern African history. Debates have circulated across the continent and beyond to define an African epistemè freed from colonialism. Production of ...
  • Authors
    March 6, 2023
    En partenariat avec le Policy Center for the New South (PCNS), Africa Center est fier de présenter un rapport conjoint sur l’influence de la Russie en Afrique, une perspective sécuritaire, à l’occasion du premier anniversaire de la guerre en Ukraine. L’Afrique est apparue comme un acteur majeur de ce conflit lorsque le 3 mars 2022 , dix-sept Etats africains se sont abstenus lors du vote de la résolution de l’Assemblée générale des Nations Unies condamnant l’invasion russe en Ukrain ...
  • March 4, 2023
    In this video recorded during the Atlantic Dialogues, our Columnist Mr. Helmut Sorge interviews Ms. Ana Palacio, Spain's Former Minister of Foreign Affairs on the position of Spain and Europe towardsthe War in Ukraine, the interview also tackles different questions regarding Energy, sec...