Aaron Bastani
Across 3 conflicts, Aaron Bastani's positions advance Russian Federation interests in 3 of 3.
3
3
Russian Federation (in 3)
People's Republic of China (in 3)
British-Iranian co-founder of Novara Media. Left-wing commentator and author of Fully Automated Luxury Communism. Covers UK and international politics from a socialist perspective.
Affiliations
Premises
US foreign military intervention is an extension of American imperialism and hegemonic maintenance
Defending territorial integrity against aggression is essential to maintaining the rules-based international order
NATO operates as an instrument of hegemonic power rather than genuine collective defense, unable to protect members when the threat comes from within the alliance
There is fundamental hypocrisy in opposing Iranian nuclear capability while accepting Israel's undeclared nuclear arsenal
The Iranian regime does not represent the will of the Iranian people
Iran's nuclear program is at least partly a rational response to legitimate security concerns
NATO expansion provoked Russia's invasion of Ukraine
A negotiated settlement is the only realistic path to ending the Ukraine conflict
Russia has legitimate security concerns about NATO military infrastructure on its borders
Positions
Greenland Crisis · 2026-01-21
Trump's demand for Greenland is US adventurism in the tradition of Latin American interventions - the Monroe Doctrine extended to the Arctic. The rules-based order is invoked selectively: when Russia violates Ukrainian sovereignty it's an outrage, but when the US threatens to seize Danish territory it's 'strategic necessity.' The double standard reveals that the rules-based order is a framework for US hegemony, not a genuine commitment to sovereignty.
If implemented, advances interests of
Kingdom of Denmark (indirect) — Bastani's framing validates Denmark's refusal as principled resistance to imperial coercion rather than mere stubbornness, providing international legitimacy for Denmark's position that Greenland is not for sale
European E3 (UK, France, Germany) (structural) — Framing US behavior as imperial adventurism strengthens the case for European strategic autonomy - if the US is an unreliable hegemon that selectively applies the rules-based order, Europe must build independent defense and diplomatic capacity rather than relying on US leadership
Russian Federation (structural) — The argument that US rules-based order is a framework for hegemony rather than genuine principle directly echoes Russian diplomatic rhetoric about Western hypocrisy, lending Western-origin intellectual credibility to the narrative that the US applies sovereignty standards selectively
US-Israel War on Iran 2026 · 2026-03-01
What we are witnessing is the imperial logic of the Anglo-American order laid bare. A country with three hundred nuclear warheads, backed by the world's largest military, has just bombed the civilian infrastructure of a nation of ninety million people - and we're meant to believe this is self-defence. As someone of Iranian heritage, I can tell you that the people being bombed right now are not the regime. They're ordinary Iranians - the same people who protested in 2022, the same women who took off their headscarves. The hypocrisy of claiming to stand for human rights while bombing the humans is simply staggering.
Stated purpose
Frames this as serving the global working class, particularly ordinary Iranians, against imperial capitalism that bombs the same civilians it claims to care about.
If implemented, advances interests of
Iranian Government (indirect) — If implemented, cessation of strikes and framing the war as imperial aggression would relieve military pressure on the regime, allowing it to consolidate under Mojtaba Khamenei while claiming vindication as victims of Western imperialism - the rallying-round-the-flag effect strengthens regime survival
European E3 (UK, France, Germany) (indirect) — If implemented, international accountability mechanisms and cessation of hostilities would restore the diplomatic framework the E3 invested decades building, and reduce the energy price shocks and refugee flows that directly impact European interests
Russian Federation (structural) — If implemented, the anti-hegemonic framing validates Russia's longstanding narrative that US foreign policy is imperial power projection rather than rules-based order, strengthening Russia's rhetorical position on Ukraine and undermining Western moral authority globally
Ukraine War · 2024-06-01
Russia's invasion is indefensible - let me be clear about that. But the idea that NATO expansion had nothing to do with this is historically illiterate. The West spent thirty years ignoring every warning, expanding a Cold War military alliance to Russia's doorstep, and then acted shocked when the predictable happened. You can oppose the invasion AND oppose the NATO expansionism that made it inevitable. The double standard is staggering - sovereignty is sacred when it's Ukraine, but not when it's Iraq or Libya or Palestine.
Stated purpose
Frames this as serving the global working class by opposing both Russia's criminal invasion and the NATO expansionism that made it inevitable, demanding negotiation over escalation.
If implemented, advances interests of
Russian Federation (structural) — Framing NATO expansion as the primary cause shifts moral responsibility away from Russia's invasion and toward Western policy choices, reducing international pressure on Russia and strengthening its narrative that the war is a defensive response to Western aggression
People's Republic of China (structural) — Western acknowledgment that spheres of influence are legitimate would validate China's claim over Taiwan and the South China Sea, establishing the precedent that great powers can veto their neighbors' alliance choices
Editor's note
Consistent anti-imperialist framework applied with asymmetric rigor: Western and Israeli actions receive detailed structural critique while Iranian and Russian actions get contextualized into near-irrelevance. His Iranian heritage adds genuine personal stakes that sharpen his analysis on some points but create blind spots on others. Asks the right questions about Western hypocrisy, but the answers are predetermined before the evidence arrives.
This assessment was generated by an LLM based on its training data. It is subjective, may reflect biases in that training data, and should not be treated as authoritative.