In 2016 the Conservative Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond said, "The only country that would like us to leave the EU is Russia" In 2026 the former Head of MI6 Sir John Sawers said, "Russia was very keen that the Leave campaign should succeed and that Britain should leave the European Union. Because that would marginalise Britain as a global player and weaken Europe in general" "That's the strategic opportunity the Russians spotted, and the leaders of the Leave campaign fell into it" My view: The warning was there before the referendum: Moscow had a clear interest in Britain breaking with Europe. A decade later, a former head of MI6 has explained why — a divided Europe and a Britain pushed to the margins would serve Russia’s strategic interests. It does show that the Kremlin saw Brexit as an opportunity to weaken both Britain and the European Union, and was keen for Leave to win. The damage was predictable: less British influence in Europe, more friction between allies and a weaker collective response to Russian aggression. Brexit handed Moscow the kind of division it wanted. The leaders of Leave may have believed they were restoring Britain’s power. In reality, they pursued a course that played directly into Russia’s hands, and the country is still living with the consequences: weaker, worse off, with escalated societal tensions.

Ian Hislop, "Andy Burnham says the Russians swayed the Brexit vote.. And the head of MI5 said the Russians attempted to sway the vote" "The British people had voted that way themselves" "The argument was not over whether they had tried because obviously the Russians had tried" "But we have our own bots, Bottist Johnson" Janet Street-Porter, "Now Andy Burnham says renegotiating the terms of Brexit is a jolly good thing" Ian Hislop, "And I think the climate has changed because now nearly everyone in Europe is far right" "It could be time for Reform UK to go full on and have us joining it" My view: The key distinction is that Russia’s attempts to influence the Brexit debate and whether they changed the result are separate questions. The ISC’s 2020 report said the government had not properly investigated those attempts; the committee did not assess their impact, and said it had not been given a post-referendum assessment. So we cannot confidently say Russia swayed the vote—or confidently say it did not. That uncertainty is the consequence of failing to investigate. The Guardian And the same applies to the rise of the far right across Europe. It doesn’t mean whole countries have suddenly become far right; it means political forces are gaining ground by exploiting real anger and insecurity. The UK should be a warning about where that leads. Brexit was sold as a cure for people’s frustrations. It has not fixed years of underfunding, weak public services or economic neglect. When people feel abandoned, their grievances become fuel for division. The far right points that anger at migrants, minorities and political opponents, while wealth keeps concentrating in fewer hands. Even when energy companies make extraordinary profits, governments too often fail to use temporary windfall taxes to return a fair share to the public and rebuild the services people rely on. A broken system gives the far right an audience—and leaves anger and hatred to shape the debate. If we want a different politics, we need to address the conditions that feed it: invest in public services, tackle inequality and give people a reason to believe cooperation can improve their lives.