Putin is plotting something big. So why is Burnham ignoring it?

Vladimir Putin’s victory in the Russian “election” is not exactly the biggest surprise of the year. It’s amazing how persuasive creative campaigning tactics – like armed guards in polling stations, beatings for voting the wrong way and throwing your critics out of windows – can be. Something for Liberal Democrat conference to mull as they urge Ed Davey to up his game, perhaps. While Russia’s dictator does a victory lap of the Kremlin, presumably averting his eyes from the sight of Moscow’s largest fuel refinery in flames after Ukraine’s latest missile strikes, it seems his thoughts have already moved on to military, rather than election, campaigns. In the last few days, the temperature has been rising in Eastern Europe. Spy planes have been airborne, actively monitoring Poland and the Baltics. Russia has locked down the area bordering Estonia, enforcing a curfew on all movements near the border. Poland’s prime minister, Donald Tusk, informed his country’s parliament that there is “very consistent and convincing” intelligence that Russia is planning “provocations”, including potential drone and missile strikes on Nato countries that will be presented as accidents. Their goal, he said, is to test the alliance’s resolve to stand by Article 5, the key clause which commits all members to come to the defence of one. Meanwhile, Michal Koudelka, head of Czechia’s security service, warned that Russia may undertake a “limited incursion” into a Nato country’s territory within “months, not years”. By “limited incursion”, he means invasion – either by Russian forces openly, or in the form of the flagless “little green men” who invaded Ukraine in 2014. On Friday, Emmanuel Macron invited opposition leaders and prospective presidential candidates to the Élysée Palace for an emergency briefing on the intelligence bearing out these claims. One of those present, Guillaume Lacroix, described the effect as a sense of “vertigo… at the predatory madness driving the world towards chaos”. Evidently, whatever that briefing contained was serious stuff. Serious enough to make the leaders of major European powers take active steps in public and in private to prepare their people for the very real prospect of war, and to open lines of communication across the political divide to ensure the facts are properly understood before any Russian action begins. And yet, seemingly, not every major European power. Here in Britain, we have heard no such communication from our Prime Minister or his new Government. No speech or statement warning of the dangers and difficulties that lie ahead. No emergency confidential briefing on the intelligence that has come to light and so disturbed our Nato allies. No appeal to the public for their support or stolidity in the face of a potential military escalation within our own continent. As I wrote a few weeks ago, the direct risk to our country is very real; Russia has already been waging a shadow war of sabotage and intimidation here, via various paid recruits and dupes. We also have troops stationed in Eastern Europe right now, deployed in Estonia and Poland precisely as part of Nato’s obligation to deter any Russian incursion. I appreciate that the topic may be a tricky one for the Prime Minister, particularly following his ill-advised declaration a fortnight ago that national security “can’t come at the expense of social security”. Andy Burnham is currently grappling with his Government’s first Budget, which is to be written by a Chancellor who resigned as defence secretary in June because the Treasury was “unwilling” to “commit the resources that the nation needs to defend the country at this time of rising threats”. Despite that principled stand, it seems his Budget will fail to meet the very same defence spending target. So, the Government may simply not want to get into the topic of how much danger there is to our country, what the risks of war really are and what the intelligence is that has sent our allies into a grim-faced round of crisis meetings. It may be wary of being dragged over the coals once more by opposition parties pressing for welfare cuts to fund the defence of the nation – a demand it either can’t or won’t submit to. Dodging the issue, however, doesn’t make those dangers and risks go away. Nor does it eliminate the political pain that could well arise from failing to fund our defences sufficiently to keep us safe. The Russians won’t hold back their troops for fear of embarrassing Downing Street – indeed, the best chance of preventing their threatened escalations is to be strong now, to deter them by making explicitly clear that we stand firmly by our allies. If, God forbid, the worst does happen and Russia launches a strike or sends troops across the border of a Nato ally, then the British people will be understandably angry about this inexplicably silent September. Why are we not being warned, as the people of Poland, France and Czechia have been warned? Why is our Government choosing to restrict its gaze to domestic matters when a new war in Europe is threatened? If there is intelligence to share with the other political parties, precautionary measures that the public could take and vital information to communicate that changes the picture of how we prioritise our public spending, then it seems irresponsible to choose not to do so. Andy Burnham wanted to lead his country. He worked tirelessly for years to get the chance to do so. The opportunity arose, and he took it. He got the job – now he must fulfil the responsibility that comes with it.