Iain, it’s a brave man who argues with Anne Applebaum on the topic of Russia, and I’m not very brave. However, as much as I’d agree with a great deal of what she has to say about Putin’s activities in Russia, I think that it’s worth making a few points.

Allowing Putin to host the G8 will not “establish the principle that authoritarian governments can receive the imprimatur of the international political establishment – as long as they are rich enough.” That pass has been sold decades ago (if you doubt me, look how China is now treated). The G8 junket won’t make much difference one way or the other.

Much as the arrest, and ‘trial’, of Mikhail Khodorkovsky was, to say the least, disturbing (and the treatment of him in jail has been disgraceful), I’m not fully convinced that the fall of one of the oligarchs, individuals who were widely seen in Russia as being above the law, can be said (at least without some sort of qualification) to have “put a permanent dent in national respect for the rule of law”.

Anne argues that “a G8 summit is not a normal, bilateral meeting. The G8 is an informal gathering of the world’s largest industrial democracies. By allowing Russia to head it, we have accepted Russia as one of us.” I just don’t think so. It’s a boondoggle with added pomp, pomposity and a tricky relative, it’s most likely legacy a forgotten communique. To be fair, Anne is careful to make the point that the G8 has more status outside its ranks than within them. Perhaps, a little. But a lot? I doubt it. What would be remembered, however, at least by the Russian leadership is if they were snubbed. And at this point, we don’t need to snub Russia. As Anne herself correctly says “advocates of realpolitik are absolutely right to argue that we should have normal relations with Russia, that President Putin is a potential ally on many issues, that Russia is not North Korea.” Indeed it is not. Nor is it Iran. And that, for now, is what counts.

Is Anne Applabaum wrong to say that the West should continue working for more democracy within Russia? Of course not, not least because, as she points out, there is a strong case in realpolitik for doing just that. Nevertheless, realpolitik is often a matter of uncomfortable priorities and difficult choices. At a time when lunatics are eyeing the keys to the bomb in one madhouse, and trying to set off missiles from another, this is no time for the West to make another enemy. Last time we discussed this topic I quoted Churchill in my support, this time I’ll go for Lyndon Johnson and his remark about J. Edgar Hoover, a tent and, well, urination.