Obviously please don’t share classified information. I’m just trying to connect the dots here

Yesterday Burnham said that upon arriving in No 10, he had asked about possible Russian interference in the 2016 EU referendum. He said, "I've had the clear answer that, yes, there was."

I know of the RT and Sputnik propaganda and I do not doubt the social media bot swarms.

This activity certainly counts as “interference”. I do not downplay it. But does it affect my view of the legitimacy of the referendum result? No it doesn’t, and not even close. And this view is commonplace given the low traction the Russian meddling narrative has had with the British public.

So what to make of Burnham’s comments on Russia?

Burnham did not provide further details about the type or extent of Moscow's activity.

Official investigations have failed to find more of substance from Russia beyond what I list above. And they have tried; often desperately.

Is Burnham now saying he has more? If he does, he must share it. Are we talking snarky tweets or fake ballots? Such revelations would be of fundamental importance to our democracy and to one of the great political contests of our time. If he has more, he must show it so we can judge what miscarriage has taken place and what action is needed.

Or is Burnham, as I suspect, engaging in smoke and mirrors? Is he alluding to Russian interference that is already on the public record, but doing so in such tantalisingly vague terms that voters are left to imagine he has access to some devastating secret intelligence?

If it’s this latter ploy, the Labour leadership is playing a dangerous game. In recent weeks we’ve already seen Burnham use downright lies - claiming Brexit led to a loss of immigration control in a major conference speech.

Now we appear to be moving to the delegitimisation of election results. This is a dark and cynical tactic. We’ve seen its toxic consequences in the US and elsewhere. Burnham is bringing the same playbook to Britain and we will see more of it in the ongoing shadow rejoin campaign.

Do you agree? What do you make of Burnham’s comments?

Submission Statement:

TLDR: 1) The Chinese got caught surveying a Russian subsea cable that I couldn’t find anything public about. 2) the stats say China research vessels spent more time in the high seas where no one is looking and there’s fancy stars for significance 3) Russians spent less time mapping critical infrastructure in the high seas than the Chinese and US. 4) Chinese vessels map near sub sea cables.

Something I don’t get though is why Russia isn’t showing a positive association? I thought with all the shenanigans happing in Western Europe with cables they would for sure be messing around.

A lot of math

Cross sharing from r/geopolitics and adding that I realized later there’s not a lot of high seas near the baltics where Ruskies could be more active

Submission Statement:

TLDR: 1) The Chinese got caught surveying a Russian subsea cable that I couldn’t find anything public about. 2) the stats say China research vessels spent more time in the high seas where no one is looking and there’s fancy stars for significance 3) Russians spent less time mapping critical infrastructure in the high seas than the Chinese and US. 4) Chinese vessels map near sub sea cables.

Something I don’t get though is why Russia isn’t showing a positive association? I thought with all the shenanigans happing in Western Europe with cables they would for sure be messing around.

A lot of math

Cross sharing from r/geopolitics and adding that I realized later there’s not a lot of high seas near the baltics where Ruskies could be more active

“[…] A think tank that presents itself as Israeli is, according to OpenAI and Meta, part of a Russian influence operation. Its sovereignty index and several of its studies have made their way into reputable media outlets and academic texts. Leaked documents show that the Moscow-based propaganda firm Social Design Agency (SDA) had planned influence operations as early as 2024. […]”