There was little doubt as to who would win the Russian presidential election. If there is one thing Russian politics is marked by, at least from the outside, it is continuity. Nonetheless, the recent hysteria that has engulfed both Europe and the United States has arguably been out of proportion. Dangerous sabre-rattling from our side should not done as carelessly as it has been.

Across the Atlantic, allegations of Russian interference in the American presidential elections has resulted in reckless rhetoric. Both Republican and Democratic senators, such as John McCain and Jeanne Shaheen, have compared the alleged actions to an ’act of war.’ Representative Jerry Nadler went so far as to compare the supposed conduct to that of the Japanese surprise attack on Pearl Harbor, which resulted in the United States being dragged into the Second World War. Perhaps most disturbing was when Thomas Friedman of the New York Times claimed that possible Russian hacking ’was a 9/11-scale event.’ Despite the palpably absurd nature of these claims – after all, where are the dead bodies? – the effects are very real. What is the natural conclusion of such loose lips? Is one not putting oneself in a position from which it is difficult to step back from? Continued comparisons between President Putin and Adolf Hitler, not an uncommon trope, leaves very little room for negotiations, de-escalation, cooperation. If standing silent in the face of Pearl Harbor and 9/11 is considered unacceptable, are we not asking for a showdown with the world’s most preeminent nuclear state?

“Western concerns and the electoral viability of parties and individuals should not be attributed to the dubious efficacy of Twitter bots or fake Facebook accounts”

The farcical nature of these claims, regardless of the veracity of these allegations, is further reinforced by the blatant hypocrisy of those who claim to be ‘tough on Russia’. Just a few weeks ago, former CIA Director R. James Woolsey was asked on Fox News if the United States had ever intervened in foreign elections, to which he responded ‘[o]nly for a good cause.’ The laughable nature of it all was so great that even he could not maintain a straight face, at the same time leaving out American meddling in Russia itself. When Boris Yeltsin, the first president of Russia, helped plunge Russia into the depths of abject poverty and devastation, while simultaneously shelling his own parliament with tanks, the United States failed to speak out and in fact were aiding and abetting in the subversion of Russian democracy.

Last year, Swedish politicians were quick to denounce the hostile conduct of Russia when it decided to conduct joint exercises with Belarus, all while Sweden was simultaneously hosting seven foreign countries, including one thousand American troops, in order to carry out its largest military exercise in 23 years. The same holds true whether it is the US deploying its fleet to the Black Sea, or France threatening to attack Russia’s ally Syria in the case of future chemical attacks while not saying a word on Turkey’s alleged gas attacks in Northern Syria.

The discussion surrounding Putin’s inevitable win often times carries an undertone of dismissiveness towards the Russian people. Regardless of the integrity of the vote itself, it is clear, even according to Western pollsters, that Putin is massively popular. According to Gallup, the Russian president had an approval rating of 79% last year. It is not difficult to see why. By virtually every objective standard, the life of the average Russian has improved since he first ascended to the presidency in 2000. GDP per capita has doubled, poverty cut in half, and the middle class is now several times larger than when he came to power. Similarly, life expectancy has increased by seven years in that same time period, thereby reversing the decline (especially among men) seen during the turbulent nineties.

The spread of this paranoia of Russian omnipresence extends far beyond simply the US. Years after the vote, Russia is now being accused of influencing the outcome of the Brexit referendum in the UK. Furthermore, with the rise of the German nationalist AfD, who is to blame? You guessed it, Russia. Is there anything Putin has not been accused of? All the while, one is omitting the fact that Putin is a man holding together a nation filled with contradictions. On the one hand are the ultranationalists and on the other are the western-oriented businessmen; you have the social conservatives and the Russian Orthodox Church while simultaneously balancing the delicate situation in the predominantly Muslim Caucasus; all the while walking, Putin is walking carefully across a tightrope as he seeks to keep the Old Guard of the Soviet military-intelligence establishment happy while not alienating the new, post-Soviet youth.

Western concerns and the electoral viability of parties and individuals should not be attributed to the dubious efficacy of Twitter bots or fake Facebook accounts. Rather than scapegoating their own failures, perhaps retrospective warmongering should be replaced with campaign pledges that mobilise voters