Putin Asserts Russia Fueled US Founding, Claims Historic Support
Putin's declaration places the spotlight on historical narratives amid intensifying geopolitical narratives. Analysts are swiftly assessing the veracity of the claim and its broader implications, while US historians emphasise that formal ties between Russia and the American colonies did not exist prior to the Revolution. No documented material support or diplomatic recognition of that era substantiate relationships between the two nations at that point.
The Kremlin's narrative asserts that Russia aligned itself with the revolutionary cause by offering weapons shipments and financial support. Putin's phrasing suggested a structured engagement, though detractors argue that he misreads chronology—Russia, as an empire led by Catherine the Great, entered diplomatic relations with the United States only after the Treaty of Paris in 1783. That timing places any official Russian involvement after formal independence was already declared, challenging his claim.
ADVERTISEMENT
Western historians note that military aid from European powers—most notably France and Spain—was instrumental in the American victory, while Russia's role has remained nominal or symbolic at most. 'There is no credible evidence that Russia supported the revolution with arms or money during the conflict,' says one academic familiar with 18th‑century European diplomacy.
Putin's remarks come amid a broader tendency to recast historical events to underpin modern foreign policy, a strategy that has been applied in other contexts such as Ukraine. Earlier statements by the Kremlin have portrayed Ukraine as historically inseparable from Russia—a narrative used to justify recent territorial actions. The present claim similarly elevates Russia's historical role in world affairs.
American experts caution that shifting the origin story of US independence to include Russian intervention may serve as an effort to recalibrate the ideological balance between Moscow and Washington. 'It's propaganda aimed at repositioning Russia as an essential player in the birth of the West's oldest democracy,' says one US diplomatic historian.
Fact‑checkers underline that during the American Revolution Russia maintained neutrality, engaged in diplomatic management through the League of Armed Neutrality, and did not provide weapons to the colonists. France's material and military contributions remain well‑documented, alongside loans extended by Spain, but no comparable evidence exists for Russian support at that time.
In Moscow, state‑controlled media echoed Putin's framing as validation of Russia's longstanding, though subtle, influence in shaping Western institutions. Kremlin spokespeople emphasised that the president's comments were meant to underscore Russian diplomacy's historical roots.
Western capitals, however, have responded with measured scepticism. The State Department declined to address the specific claims, noting that America's founding documents were produced with French assistance, whereas Russian engagement began officially only after independence.
The telephonic exchange with Trump also revisited themes from Putin's televised 2024 interview, where he alleged CIA control over US elites and denounced NATO expansion. The latest narrative underscores persistent themes in Putin's foreign policy discourse: challenging Western historical narratives and asserting Russia's central role on the global stage.
Observers now turn to whether this claim will surface in educational materials or diplomatic exchanges, particularly as relations between Russia and the West remain strained. Critics argue that historical distortion can inflame nationalistic sentiment and reshape political memory, while advocates for Russia's narrative maintain it is correcting incomplete historical accounts.
With US political discourse increasingly sensitive to disinformation, the assertion stands to prompt fact‑based counter‑narratives. Historians focused on transatlantic studies anticipate a renewed analysis of archival records that could definitively confirm or reject any undocumented Russian involvement.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ARN News Center
22 minutes ago
- ARN News Center
Trump announces 50% tariff on copper effective August 1
US President Donald Trump announced on Wednesday a 50 per cent tariff on copper to start on August 1 in a bid to promote domestic development of an industry critical to defence, electronics and automobiles. The move marks the latest in a series of sector-specific tariffs Trump has imposed on industries such as steel and aluminium, which economists warn will increase costs for American consumers. Trump indicated on Tuesday that he was introducing new tariffs on copper, sending US Comex copper futures to record highs. The announcement came just hours after he also informed Brazil that its "reciprocal" tariff would rise from 10 per cent to 50 per cent on August 1, following a diplomatic spat earlier in the week with his Brazilian counterpart, who had described him as an unwelcome "emperor." Brazil's President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva responded on Wednesday, stating that any new tariffs would be met with reciprocal measures. The White House launched a Section 232 investigation into copper imports in February, citing legislation that allows the president to impose higher tariffs on national security grounds. Trump said on Wednesday that he had received a "robust" national security assessment which concluded that tariffs were necessary to protect domestic production of a material critical to a wide range of industries. 'Copper is essential for semiconductors, aircraft, ships, ammunition, data centres, lithium-ion batteries, radar systems, missile defence systems and even hypersonic weapons, of which we are building many,' Trump stated in a post on his platform, Truth Social. The US relies on imports for nearly half of its refined copper supply and imported 810,000 metric tonnes in 2024, according to the US Geological Survey. Countries likely to be most affected by the new tariff include Chile, Canada and Mexico - the top suppliers of refined copper, copper alloys and related products to the US in 2024, according to US Census Bureau data. Chile, Canada and Peru have informed the US administration that their exports pose no threat to American interests and should be exempt from the tariffs. All three nations have free trade agreements with the US. The steep tariff is intended to encourage greater domestic production. More than two-thirds of US copper is mined in Arizona, where the development of a major new mine proposed by Rio Tinto Group and BHP Group Limited has been stalled for over a decade.
Gulf Today
12 hours ago
- Gulf Today
France has become less attractive to foreign investors
Yoruk Bahceli and Leigh Thomas, Reuters France is missing out on the investor optimism that has defined Europe's markets this year, hamstrung by its strained public finances and political volatility that threatens to paralyse policy until at least 2027. Global investors and French executives cite the risk that budget negotiations could trigger another government collapse in the autumn, while pessimism among French households is dragging on consumer spending and economic growth. Centrist Prime Minister Francois Bayrou has faced eight no-confidence motions in parliament since taking office in December and his minority government is now struggling to find 40 billion euros ($47 billion) in spending cuts for the 2026 budget. The contrast with neighbouring Germany, whose new government is preparing to loosen historically tight purse strings and pump billions into the economy through defence and infrastructure spending, could hardly be starker. "While all the other highly indebted European countries — Greece, Portugal, Spain and Italy — have taken advantage of years of inflation to reduce their public debt ratio, France — whose deficit is now the highest in the euro zone — is increasingly diverging," said Pierre Moscovici, head of the Cour des Comptes public audit office and a former finance minister. To narrow the budget gap, Bayrou will have to convince opposition parties to stomach spending cuts only slightly smaller than those proposed in the 2025 budget that brought down his predecessor. Germany's historic embrace of looser fiscal policy and the impact of President Donald Trump's sometimes erratic policymaking on confidence in US assets have given a boost to European financial markets and other investments this year. A key beneficiary has been Italy, which has seen the risk premium paid on its 10-year debt compared to that of safe-haven Germany drop towards where it traded in 2010, before the euro zone debt crisis escalated. But the 10-year risk premium paid by French debt over German is still at 70 basis points, well above levels of around 50 bps seen before French President Emmanuel Macron called a shock snap election last summer. The French-Italian yield gap is meanwhile near all-time lows, even though Italy has a bigger debt pile. Candriam's chief investment officer Nicolas Forest said he favoured German, Italian and Spanish bonds and was underweight France, a situation he called "completely unusual". French stocks are missing out, too. The blue-chip CAC 40 index trades below where it was before the election was called and is lagging Europe's STOXX 600 aggregate. The Paris index has returned just 5% this year, four times less than Germany's DAX. Simon Blundell, co-head of fundamental European fixed income at BlackRock, the world's biggest investor, said he had no big positions in French debt and favoured Italian bonds, encouraged by political stability in Rome and declining volatility. Even if France's government survives the autumn, investors expect the budget squeeze to underwhelm as a fix for fiscal strains and so fail to increase the appeal of French assets. "Any compromise political parties find will be really temporary in terms of measures, and not great for debt reduction and deficit improvement," said Candriam's Forest. And even presidential and parliamentary elections in 2027 may not fully dispel the political uncertainty, if no party emerges dominant. To prod opposition parties to back Bayrou's budget, Public Finances Minister Amélie de Montchalin has suggested France could turn to an IMF bailout if it does not decisively grip its finances. Carrefour CEO Alexandre Bompard said such doomy talk only caused the French to save more, jeopardising a consumer spending recovery that he said was more fragile than in the supermarket giant's other European markets. "If we have 5 percentage points more savings than other European countries, it's because we have an extraordinarily high level of political and fiscal uncertainty," Bompard told an economics conference in Aix-en-Provence on Friday. With consumers hesitant to spend, French business activity has consistently lagged European peers this year, even though the private sector is less exposed to US trade tensions than Germany or Italy's more export-focused economies. Brushing aside any prospect of IMF intervention to prop up France's public finances, the Fund's French chief economist Pierre-Olivier Gourinchas insisted Paris could no longer put off getting its fiscal house in order. "France is not exempt from the laws of gravity, so we're going to have to adapt," Gourinchas said in Aix-en-Provence. "We can't fly, we're going to have to plan our landing and make spending cuts."
Arabian Post
15 hours ago
- Arabian Post
US Ivy League University Hit With Russian Blacklisting
Moscow has formally placed Yale University on its 'undesirable organisations' list, citing the institution's alleged role in orchestrating anti-Russian activities and training opposition figures. Russian authorities accuse Yale's Jackson School of Global Affairs, particularly its International Leadership Center, of educating individuals who later joined the Anti‑Corruption Foundation founded by the late Alexei Navalny, using their acquired skills to fuel protest movements. The Prosecutor General's Office claims this threatens Russia's territorial integrity, supports an international blockade, and destabilises its socio‑economic and political systems. The designation prohibits Yale from any activities within Russia. Under federal law, association with a blacklisted group carries prison penalties—up to four years for Russian collaborators and six years for organisational leaders. Individuals linked to Yale face criminal charges; the measure forms part of a broader Kremlin strategy against foreign entities deemed threatening. ADVERTISEMENT This move adds Yale to a growing roster of Western organisations singled out since the 2015 'undesirable organisations' law. Prior additions include Amnesty International, Bard College, the British Council, and most recently Razom, a Ukrainian aid group. The law enables authorities to shut down foreign NGOs and media, often seen as a response to perceived threats to state sovereignty. Kremlin critics say the blacklist is politically motivated, aimed at curbing academic exchange and dissent. Yale's international stature and involvement in global affairs likely amplified its visibility during heightened Kremlin-West tensions over Ukraine. Moscow has previously targeted American academics such as Larry Samuelson and Jeffrey Sonnenfeld—both barred after vocally criticising the Russian government and advocating for redirected use of frozen Russian assets. Professor Sonnenfeld welcomed the ban as a 'badge of honour,' asserting that national interests aligned with academic freedom. The Russian Prosecutor General also accused Yale of aiding in justifying the seizure of frozen Russian assets to support Ukraine's military—a claim echoed by Xinhua news. Critics argue the blacklist damages intellectual cooperation and undermines global debate. Diplomatic observers note the move could isolate Russian scholars and block access to Western-minded discourse. Past blacklisted organisations include the National Democratic Institute, Open Society Foundations, and German Marshall Fund. Yale has not issued an official statement. Moscow officials emphasised that the action is legal and rooted in national security concerns, accusing the university of eroding Russia's constitutional foundations. Analysts suggest the designation is both a symbolic rebuke and a signal of Russian inflexibility toward institutional criticism. The intensification of the Kremlin's crackdown follows sustained geopolitical strain. Western nations have responded with further sanctions, freezing Russian assets abroad and limiting academic collaboration. The Kremlin's narrative frames foreign academic institutions as instruments of Western influence, legitimising domestic censorship. Experts highlight the broader implications. The country's academic environment faces growing isolation as more foreign universities are blacklisted. Graduate students, researchers, and educators involved with affected institutions risk surveillance, interrogation, and criminal charges. The chilling effect extends to independent thought and scholarly freedom. International academic bodies are reportedly reviewing the impact. Some warn Russian professionals risk professional ostracism if tied to forbidden organisations. The long-term prospect is a narrowing of Russian engagement with global research networks. European and North American universities have yet to comment officially. Some scholarly consortia may warn members about collaborative risks in Russia. For Yale, the designation represents a striking escalation in Russia's confrontation with Western academia.
