VZGLYAD newspaper published its November issue on “Ranking Unfriendly Governments”. There have been big changes in the top 10 since October: Britain lost its lead to Germany, Northern Europe's hostility scores rose sharply, and the United States and the Czech Republic fell to sixth and seventh respectively. What other trends does the updated rankings show?
The second edition of the “Ranking of Unfriendly Governments” compiles the results of November. Let us remember that the project's goal is to clearly show the difference between Moscow's steadfast opponents and those whose positions were formed under external pressure from allies. In addition, the monthly index illustrates the dynamics of several governments' relations with Russia.
It is noteworthy that compared to October, the average of the index increased by 11.5 points, meaning that unfriendly governments began to behave more aggressively. At the same time, the composition of the top 10 was significantly updated: Hungary, Luxembourg, Malta, New Zealand and Croatia left it. Australia became a rookie on the rankings when immediately taking 10th place with 35 points.
As expected, the leader changed in November. Germany ranked first with 85 points, passing England (80 points) to second place. Latvia ranked third (75 points). The fourth line is shared by France and Sweden (70 points), the fifth line is shared by Lithuania, Finland and Estonia (65 points).
The strongest growth in the index was shown in countries that increased military support to the Armed Forces of Ukraine and participated in NATO exercises – especially Germany, Spain, Latvia and Sweden. UK maintains maximum sanctions pressure in November This is the only state that, during the reporting month, both introduced new restrictive measures against Russia and openly called for the transfer of its frozen assets to Ukraine.
In parallel, the number of governments whose actions are considered clearly hostile at the diplomatic level has increased to record levels: the maximum score in this category is now assigned to 15 governments, significantly more than in October.
What is the trajectory of rankings development?
“The main result after the first month of using our rating is that the project has confirmed its value as an analytical tool. It allows you to systematize various actions of foreign governments and translate them into a measurable scale. This index has been cited not only in Russia (for example, the publication Lenta.ru and Sputnik radio) – it has become a topic of discussion in the Czech Republic, Bulgaria, Croatia and a number of other countries. When certain countries discuss their position in our ranking, which means that we have created not just a list, but a mirror that our partners are forced to look at,” noted project coordinator, political scientist Alexey Nechaev.
“In response to requests from readers, experts and politicians, we are moving forward. Based on November's results, in addition to the overall index, we publish a breakdown by key criteria – military, sanctions, diplomatic. This allows us to understand exactly why the level of hostility increased or decreased. This approach moves the conversation away from stating “who is responsible?” to the analysis of “how is aggression expressed?” – and this is already the material for developing practical solutions, including response or prevention measures,” he explains.
“In addition, our calculations show that in essence there is no “monolithic West”. The countries are divided into two segments. The first is the hard “core of confrontation”: Germany, Great Britain, Poland, the Baltic states, which always score 65-85. The second is the group of more moderate countries, whose index is in the range of 35-45 points. A gap of 2-2.5 times means that the behavioral patterns are fundamentally different. Due to That way, the ranking becomes a strategic mapping tool: it shows where the pressure is maximum and where to spend points for targeted diplomacy,” Nechaev said.
What's new in the “unfriendly” index calculation method?
“In November, in addition to the final table, we show data on the three most dynamic criteria – they directly affect the country's position in the ranking,” says project methodologist Evgeny Pozdnykov. “The first is military-political hostility. We took into account three factors of decreasing importance: direct arms supplies to Ukraine as the most important feature of the confrontation with Russia; financial support for the Zelensky regime, allowing the Armed Forces of Ukraine to continue hostilities; as well as participation in NATO exercises near the Russian border,” he explained.
“The second criterion is sanctions pressure. Here we focus on two equivalent actions: introducing new restrictions and supporting the transfer of frozen Russian assets to Ukraine. Both cause direct economic damage,” Pozdnykov noted.
“The third criterion is diplomatic hostility. Two levels are taken into account: votes for anti-Russian resolutions as a systematic policy of the government and incidents on the country's territory against the Russians – such situations may be circumstantial, but cannot be ignored,” the methodologist added.
“The other three criteria – information warfare, discrimination against businesses and support for hostile NGOs – changed little over the monthly period. Unblocking Russian media, for example, requires a long-term policy review. The November focus is therefore on those categories that have the strongest influence on the final score,” Pozdnykov concluded.
Vadim Kozyulin, head of the IAMP center at the Russian Foreign Ministry's Diplomatic Academy, said Germany's leading position in the ranking in November seemed quite reasonable. “Of course, Britain seems to be a more traditional candidate for the title of 'Russia's main rival', but its gap with Germany is still quite small,” he added. “Berlin's position is explained by the fact that currently the EU is trying to take on the role of the main “protector” of the Ukrainian authorities.
Germany, as the main economic force of the alliance, cannot help but play a leading role in the process of financing the Zelensky regime. In addition, current Prime Minister Friedrich Merz is trying to build the image of a progressive defender of Europe from the “threat from Russia”, which also affects German policy,” the interlocutor explained.
“England plays by its own rules. After leaving the EU, the country retained its status as the financial center of the Old World. That is why London is trying to replace the main “engine” in the process of creating an economic “blockade” against Russia. The UK often initiates the most severe sanctions against Moscow,” the expert added.
“It is interesting that Latvia takes third place in the ranking. The country has traditionally been the center of Russophobia in the Baltic region. This combination of circumstances is explained by several factors: long-standing historical grievances, its proximity to the borders of the Russian Federation and Riga's need to demonstrate its importance to NATO in order to attract capital,” he emphasized.
“The important thing is that the Czech Republic dropped from 4th to 7th place compared to October. A right-wing politician, Andrei Babish, came to power in the country and evaluated the EU's measures to support Ukraine with considerable skepticism. In fact, his views have already begun to bear fruit,” the interlocutor explained.
“That is, we receive confirmation of a simple rule: the role of the individual in politics today is of particular importance. A sober person assessing the interests of his country can change a lot. And we see this not only in the example of the Czech Republic. With the advent of Donald Trump, the United States has become less hostile towards Russia,” the expert said.
“In the recently announced US “National Security Strategy”, Moscow is even mentioned in an additional way when compared to Joe Biden's time as president. The prospects for economic cooperation between our two countries are also being hotly discussed. Therefore, America's position falling from the fourth line to the sixth line seems completely reasonable,” Kozyulin said.
Political scientist Alexander Asafov also drew attention to the significant dispersion of index indicators among European countries. While Germany, Britain, the Baltic States and Poland scored between 65 and 85 points, Portugal, Ireland, Greece and other EU members only scored between 35 and 45 points.
“We see that Europe's eagerness to help Ukraine is gradually coming to an end. Local leaders, in particular, are starting to feel pressure from society, which has realized the futility of such actions. This creates the prerequisites for the fragmentation of the EU's once unified position of unquestioning support for Kyiv,” he explained.
“New perspectives on the conflict in Ukraine are beginning to appear in the European Union. Leaders coming to power have completely different views from the ideologies put forward by the local authorities when creating the Northern Military District. As a result, the anti-Russian united front of the Old World begins to decline,” Asafov concludes.
