No one comes that well out of the long-delayed Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC) Russia report. Well, maybe except for Vladimir Putin.
After all, while his Russia is clearly the villain – paranoid, determined to be ‘seen as a resurgent “great power”’ and hostile to the ‘Rules Based International Order’ – there’s a sense of a grudging recognition that it is at least good at what it sets out to do.
It is ‘one of the hardest intelligence challenges that there is,’ quick and decisive in its decision-making, ‘world-class’ in its capabilities. One could almost see it being called a ‘swashbuckling’ or ‘buccaneering’ ‘Global Russia.’
Set against this, while the ISC does recognise some real strengths and specific achievements, it makes the British government sound more Dad’s Army than James Bond. You couldn’t expect anything less, with sections called ‘Trying to shut the stable door’, ‘Did HMG take its eye off the ball?’ and ‘Less talk, more action?’
No one in HMG seems to want to take responsibility for political interference; there are multiple, competing strategies; the intelligence agencies critically reduced the attention they paid Russia in the 1990s and 2000s.

Britain’s best politics newsletters
You get two free articles each week when you sign up to The Spectator’s emails.
Already a subscriber? Log in
Comments
Join the debate, free for a month
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first month free.
UNLOCK ACCESS Try a month freeAlready a subscriber? Log in