Douglas Murray Is Wrong on Ukraine
Neocons at the Gate: the 'Russian Hoax' Strikes Again
“How can the right be so wrong?” This refreshingly provocative pun serves as the opening salvo in British author Douglas Murray’s broadside against MAGA’s stance on Ukraine. Murray, undeniably gifted with words — if less so with ideas — initially led me to suspect that this was a lazy editor’s bait, cast to hook as many closeted neocons as possible. Sadly, the rest of his piece proved me wrong.
In it, we never learn exactly how MAGA gets it so wrong regarding Ukraine because Murray busies himself chasing fringe conspiracies instead of addressing core arguments head-on.
For starters, he conveniently sidesteps the clear point Trump made directly to Zelenskyy last week in the Oval Office: continuing this path risks World War III and nuclear annihilation, while American taxpayers pour hundreds of billions annually into a bloody stalemate that claims two thousand lives each week — all without any clear resolution.
Instead of addressing the undeniable practical concerns of the present, Murray bases his argument on a perceived MAGA shortsightedness about the past. He contends that Ukraine only entered American consciousness twice in the past decade — through Hunter Biden’s shady dealings and Trump’s impeachment over a phone call with Zelenskyy. In doing so, he implicitly accuses MAGA supporters of behaving as if the war started in 2022. Ironically, by overlooking two critical issues consistently raised by MAGA — the U.S. support for the EU-driven overthrow of Ukraine’s pro-Russia government in 2014 (the Euromaidan affair) and NATO’s relentless eastward expansion — Murray himself might be guilty of such oversight.
As is often true, the accuser unwittingly exposes more about himself. Murray belittles MAGA as “mainly online,” insinuating that by remaining outside established media narratives, they are susceptible to Russian propaganda. It’s the tired ‘Russian hoax,’ now dressed up in its latest ‘fierce and brave’ op-ed guise.
Murray wastes further paragraphs highlighting absurd fringe theories he claims are central to MAGA beliefs — such as Ukraine not being a “real country” or Ukrainians not being a “real people” — only to undermine legitimate concerns around Ukraine’s deep-seated corruption and the troubling neo-Nazi elements within its army.
He deeply regrets episodes like Hunter Biden’s Burisma scandal and the ousting of the Ukrainian prosecutor investigating him — not for their substance, but because they unfairly, in his view, cast Ukraine as corrupt.
To top it off, he suggests that the online right “became bored” with the conflict. Bored with two thousand deaths a week? Perhaps Murray enjoys watching young men shoot each other from the comfort of his couch — but appalling is hardly appealing to everyone. At least not always.
The price tag for World War II was sixty million lives. Today, the markup with a nuclear power involved would be much higher. Is Murray ready to write that check? Just so we’re clear.
Neoconite in Shining Armour
I’m not quite ready to label Douglas Murray a woke globalist, which is a worrying sign that the neocons aren’t sending us their best — even when they are. Still, he’s bold enough to voice their latest swan song.
He champions what he calls a “Republican principle,” asserting that tanks should not roll unchecked into an “allied country.” Since there’s no formal defense treaty binding the U.S. and Ukraine, he presumably refers to the “U.S.-Ukraine Charter on Strategic Partnership,” which explicitly references NATO’s 2008 declaration affirming Ukraine will join NATO.
However, Murray, perhaps blinded by his own briliance, contradicts himself: if he advocates for U.S. intervention based on NATO obligations, he cannot simultaneously deny that NATO expansion—the Holy Grail for neocons—is a fundamental factor driving the conflict, nor can he ignore its influence on MAGA criticism.
He praises the “old guard” Republicans who asserted themselves “pro-Ukraine and anti-Putin,” while decrying the MAGA Republicans “veering in a different direction.” In his eyes, anything short of full support for continued fighting in Ukraine must stem from historical ignorance, vulnerability to Russian propaganda, or — heaven forbid — a rejection of neoconservative dogma.
Here, Murray’s superficial understanding is glaring, as he mistakenly views MAGA as an offshoot of neoconservatism or believes conservatism began when history supposedly ended in the early 1990s.
What else does Murray accuse MAGA of misunderstanding? He mocks the idea that moderation or peace could be effective solutions, reducing the conflict to a beauty pageant between Putin and Zelenskyy — good versus evil, with no middle ground. You either back Ukraine wholeheartedly or you’re just a Russian dupe.
Is MAGA wrong to highlight that Zelenskyy overtly campaigned for Biden, thereby politicizing U.S. support? And what about the $61 billion Ukrainian aid package Congress passed last April, presumably as a stopgap until Trump’s anticipated return to the White House could end the war? Apparently, these are also trivial details.
To bolster his black-and-white narrative, he concedes — though fleetingly — Zelenskyy’s and Ukraine’s flaws, yet insists Russia and Putin are far worse: dictatorship, corruption, hypocrisy regarding Christianity, forced conscription, and fraudulent elections. All true, of course — but irrelevant to MAGA’s plea for peace.
His MAGA critique never transcends a simple matter of picking sides in an imaginary moral quandary. He fails to question the trajectory of the conflict, its true costs, or the potential outcomes. Murray’s fundamental mistake lies in assuming that ‘correctness’ in this conflict is determined by the ‘team’ you’re supposedly cheering for.
The Broken Clock Theory
Murray isn’t entirely wrong, though. He rightfully calls out the odd reverence some on the right have for Putin’s disingenuous defense of Christianity — as the West capitulates to woke ideologies — and highlights that Ukraine was “brutally attacked and is admirably fighting back,” a point Trump made last week in the Oval Office.
Ukraine’s inadvertent association with ‘current thing’ phenomena like BLM and endorsements from woke globalist figures such as Trudeau and Macron has unjustly undermined conservative support, as Murray points out.
Labeling Zelenskyy a ‘dictator’ may be hyperbolic, but calling him a ‘welfare queen’ is unjustifiable — even if his appearances in Vogue and at the Oscars lend some credibility to the claim. Zelenskyy’s primary duty is to defend his nation by any means necessary, including persuading foreign powers to commit substantial resources. In the harsh reality of war, this is entirely defensible. Meanwhile, Trump’s responsibility is to protect American interests. And I believe MAGA gets this in supporting the peace deal.
To summarize: Putin is the enemy, not Zelenskyy. Putin is the real dictator who must be defeated. Most MAGA people agree with that. However, this is neither the time nor the place for that.
Why Not Go For It?
Murray’s piece concludes in a manner that can only be described as confused, self-serving, petty, and condescending. But, then again, it is a Douglas Murray op-ed. He smugly suggests that MAGA conservatives view Ukraine as a “fantasy country,” about which they know little and from which they expect nothing good. Ironically, this is precisely how Murray seems to perceive the MAGA movement.
He urges MAGA readers to ditch the memes and recognize that one can indeed oppose dictators and woke culture at the same time — an advice that is both thoughtful and straightforward.
Still, despite his disdain for meme culture, Murray seems convinced that Ukraine’s effort to push Russia back is “winnable.” Given that his Prime Minister, Keir Starmer, is actively recruiting soldiers to send to Ukraine, one feels compelled to ask: has Murray signed up yet?
Putin did everything possible to be our friend. The Neocon project to dismantle Russia is driven by the desire to go back to the good old 90's when we sent our oligarchs, to work with theirs, to loot the country. There is a familial component, as most of the Neocons were from families kicked out of Russia (or Belarus) and they simply hate Russia.
What a load of codswallop, both from the person writing the original item, and from the person criticizing it.
Where to begin?
Does this person really think that the destabilization of Ukraine that occurred in 2014 was as a result of EU machinations?
Has he ever heard of Victoria Nuland, and the gentle art of cookie baking?
Who threw Germany under the bus, when the Nord Stream pipeline was destoyed?
Europe?
Why does he suppose that Russia is conscripting people to fight in Novorossiya, when tens of thousands are voluntarily signing up every month?
Why is Putin's defence of Christianity, endless building of churches, and banning of the sodomites' efforts to seduce the young, hypocritical?
Why does he consider the Russian invasion to be a "brutal attack," when it only finally occurred after endless attempts at negotiation, and a clear betrayal of the Minsk Peace process by the west, and the ongoing to this day "brutal slaughter" of the civilians living in the Donbass and elsewhere?
Does he think that Bucha was Russians slaughtering Ukrainians - days after they had left the area?
How is Zelensky not a dictator?
How many political parties has he banned, and how much of Ukrainian media now has to shut down because it was only ever a product of USAID finance?
Which Russian-leaning church had all its facilities shut down by neonazi thugs?
Please reference a single opposition figure in Ukraine who has not been arrested and imprisoned, or had to flee to Russia, as in the case of Medvedchuk.
How is Zelensky not a welfare queen?
He and his regime are totally dependent on US and EU funding.
"Zelensky's primary duty... "
Is to do what he is told by the US, and thus far, he has done that, ie by using the nation he supposedly has a responsibility for, to reduce it to a smoking charnel house at the behest of western interests.
There is no such thing as a "peace deal."
This war will end when Russia decides it will end, and not a moment before.
The blusterings of Orange Man are so much empty rhetoric.
Putin made the point recently that Russia has never been an enemy of the west, and he gave many examples to back up his assertion, which apparently went right over the head of the comically-named and probably anagrammatic writer of this present piece of nonsense.
His final point about Starmer "actively recruiting soldiers to send to Ukraine" is complete rubbish.
Nobody wants to go to Ukraine, even if it is only so as to be part of a peacekeeping force that Russia has said will never be allowed to set foot there, bar a UNSC mandate, which Russia will never permit, as it has what is called a veto prerogative over its decisions.