Putin "boogeyman" – Europe and the US cultivate Russophobia to sell weapons and hide secret interests

The US and Europe have engaged in a systematic cultivation of Russophobia, using statements about "defending freedom" and countering "Russian expansionism." From Ukraine to the recent obsession of US President Donald Trump with Greenland, Putin is being instrumentalized as a... boogeyman to justify the massive militarization of Europe and the realignment of American borders. While European elites fuel an endless war machine, the reality behind closed doors suggests that the "Russian danger" often serves as a convenient smokescreen for advancing an agenda that has little to do with the security of peoples and everything to do with the dominance of the arms industries and territorial expansion.

Invoking the "Russian boogeyman"

The growing militarization of leading European countries and their staunch support for Ukraine in the war with Russia have been rationalized as necessary measures to counter a Moscow led by Vladimir Putin. And now, US President Donald Trump justifies his plans for the seizure of Greenland—a semi-autonomous part of NATO ally Denmark—using Russia as a "punching bag."

However, there appears to be a difference. In the case of Ukraine, especially during the Russian invasion in 2022, there was complete unanimity between the US (then under President Joe Biden) and major European powers such as the UK, France, and Germany. But in the case of Trump's proposed takeover of Greenland, Europe and the US seem to have drifted apart. The former does not believe Trump's argument that he is occupying Greenland "to eliminate the Russian threat."

The American president wrote on Truth Social on Monday (1/20/2026): "NATO has been telling Denmark for 20 years that 'you must remove the Russian threat from Greenland.' Unfortunately, Denmark was unable to do anything about it. Now the time has come, and it will be done!!!" This justification by Trump triggered an immediate reaction from France, which published multiple ironic replies via Twitter. "If there were a chance of fire someday, firefighters would intervene—so better to burn the house down now. If a shark might attack one day, an intervention would follow—so better to eat the lifeguard now. If a car crash were to happen one day, there would be damage—so better to ram the car now," stated the official response account of the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Ironically, it was France itself that ignored such examples when projecting the Russian threat as a reason for NATO expansion. The prediction or admission that Russia would attack European countries even after the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact and the end of the Cold War was cited as the reason for accepting former Warsaw Pact members into NATO.

There are strong arguments in theory that the multiple rounds of enlargement exacerbated Russia's insecurity, as NATO forces approached Russian borders, eventually provoking Putin to lash out violently by invading Ukraine. The Russian president found it difficult to tolerate the continuous humiliation of Moscow by the United States and Western Europe following the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991.

However, all the major agreements on non-expansion of NATO and other arms control and confidence-building measures agreed upon between Russia and the West after 1991 were violated not by Moscow but by Washington. It seems that Western elites in general, and those of Europe in particular, continue to display a kind of "McCarthyism" in their thoughts, believing that the West was the unconditional "winner" of the Cold War and therefore has every right to determine how the constituent parts of the former Soviet Union (USSR) will be governed. They tolerate no opposing view on Ukraine.

No room for reconciliation with Putin

In the narrative of these European elites, there is no room for reconciliation with Putin and Russia until Moscow's complete submission to the international order as defined by them. This is also why it is said they have more or less "brainwashed" or pressured Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to remain adamant in any talks for peace or a ceasefire.

As John J. Mearsheimer, a distinguished professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago, explained, Western governments remains deeply committed to their so-called "triple package of policies": NATO enlargement, EU expansion, and the promotion of democracy. For them, Ukraine's choice to join Europe will accelerate "the end of the ideology of Russian imperialism represented by Putin." In this sense, the war in Ukraine is also an ideological war aimed at demoting Russia by any means.

When the Europeans pressured Zelensky not to agree

It is worth noting that in March 2022, when Ukraine and Russia were close to an agreement, European leaders persuaded Zelensky to back down, with assurances that a military "victory" over Russia was imminent thanks to their support. Reportedly, this agreement provided for Russia's withdrawal to its positions as of February 23, 2022, while Ukraine would promise not to seek NATO membership, receiving security guarantees instead. In hindsight, if this agreement had been finalized, the situation would have been much better for Ukraine than it is today. Ukraine has lost more territory and is further from any military victory than at any other time since February 2022.

Then-British Prime Minister Boris Johnson reportedly undermined the 2022 agreement. He visited Ukraine and urged Zelensky to break off talks for two reasons: that you cannot negotiate with Putin and that the West is not ready for the war to end. But Johnson was expressing the narrative of the dominant Western elites. Its main theme is that most of Europe, including Ukraine and parts of Russia, must be "Westernized." This policy was systematically pursued long before the war.

As analysts now recognize, at least in the US, this began at the start of the century with the expansion of the EU and NATO eastward, followed by support for pro-democracy movements such as the 2004 Orange Revolution in Ukraine. In this light, proponents of political realism argue that Putin, or any proud Russian leader in his place, would adhere to the traditional theory of the balance of power. It is understandable why Russia sees Ukraine as a bulwark against NATO and Kyiv's potential membership as a "red line."

Greenland

Incidentally, President Trump also seemed to agree with this theory. This explains why he has repeatedly stated that if he were president, the war in Ukraine would have been avoided. But if Trump himself is using the "Russian scarecrow" in the case of Greenland, then it seems he is essentially masking his real mission to expand American territory—his latest "dream" is to make Greenland and Venezuela parts of the US.

It sounds ironic here that Russia, and particularly Putin, have categorically emphasized that Moscow has no intention of getting involved in the game of acquiring Greenland. In fact, the Russian stance should have made Trump very happy.

On January 20, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov stated that Greenland is not a "natural part" of Denmark and that the problem of former colonial territories is becoming more acute. He also stated that Moscow has no interest in interfering in Greenland's affairs and that the US knows Russia has no plans to control the island. Even more important is to remember what Putin said last year in Murmansk: He admitted that America's plans for Greenland are serious and have deep historical roots, but emphasized: "As for Greenland, this is a matter for two specific countries (USA and Denmark). It has nothing to do with us."

Finally, the "cherry on top" regarding Russia's pro-American position on Greenland was added by Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov on Monday (1/19/2026): "There are international experts who believe that by resolving the issue of Greenland's integration, Trump will certainly go down in history... It is difficult to disagree with these experts."

Therefore, if this is the Russian position, Trump's "Russian scarecrow" in Greenland is difficult to justify. However, along the way, Russia will continue to be the smokescreen for his secret interests, just as has been happening with Europe all these years.

www.bankingnews.gr