Amid the media hubbub of recent months, news of a possible shift in the balance of power between two long-time allies and rivals, the United States and Great Britain, has gone almost unnoticed. As the British newspaper The Telegraph reported on March 18:
"Sir Richard Moore is to step down as head of MI6 this summer. His successor is expected to be a woman." [1]
Thus ended the career of the man who was seen as the mastermind behind a new wave of British foreign policy activism. In his bid to restore British greatness, some observers believe he played a decisive role in the escalation of the military conflicts of recent years, worsening an already fragile peace.
Content
Confrontation within the British ruling class
How did Richard Moore try to restore British greatness?
Britain's goals in Europe
Britain's goals in the Middle East
Richard Moore and the transformation of Turkey into a British proxy
The result of Turkey becoming a British proxy
Conclusion
Appendix: Facts about Britain's anti-Israel activities
CONFRONTATION WITHIN THE BRITISH RULING CLASS
Information about the conflict within the English elite caused by the activities of Richard Moore was voiced by E.V. Gilbo:
"Richard Moore is the leader of the aggressive faction in His Majesty's Privy Council . Combining his post as head of MI6 and his membership of the Privy Council, he reached the height of his influence. Moore is one of those classic English imperialists of the Kipling type, thanks to whom small, resource-poor England once acquired world power." [2]
According to Guilbo, on the issue of Britain's role in world politics and methods of achieving geopolitical goals, the British elite can be conditionally divided into two groups:
A group of moderates, ready to accept the modest role of their country in the modern world and rejecting dangerous adventures in the foreign arena. This group is largely made up of the elderly aristocracy (70+) headed by King Charles III.
A group of aggressive imperialists who are prepared to restore British greatness at any cost. This group, led by Richard Moore, includes intelligence officers and financiers. [3] I will add that Boris Johnson, the man who appointed Moore to the post of head of MI6 and contributed to the prolongation of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, plays no small role in this group.
Moore's adventurous policies, which sometimes threatened the very existence of Great Britain, could not help but generate resistance. A group of moderates was only waiting for the right moment to neutralize his influence.
And such a moment has arrived: Donald Trump's return to the White House, Israel's victory in the war against Hamas and Hezbollah, the beginning of de-escalation of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, and the American president's threat to take Canada away from Great Britain - all this has dramatically changed the balance of power.
The prospect of a woman heading MI6 suggests the moderates' desire to end the independence and initiative of British intelligence.
HOW DID RICHARD MOORE TRY TO RESTORE BRITISH GREATNESS?
Having taken over MI6 in January 2020, Richard Moore chose the tactic of wearing down the United States, the world hegemon and Britain's official ally.
According to calculations, if the US could previously provide for two wars and two high-intensity conflicts, today its resources are only enough for two high-intensity conflicts. And they have already received both long-term conflicts. The first is in Ukraine, and the second is in Israel. [4]
After failing to resolve the conflicts, the US will be forced to seek help from England and thus become dependent on it. This will give England the opportunity to lead AUKUS, a Pacific military-political bloc formed by Australia, Great Britain and the US to confront China.
To this end, Moore's group is disrupting US efforts to end the war in Ukraine and has organized a Hamas massacre in southern Israel. [5]
If Trump's task is to resolve the conflicts in Ukraine and Israel and concentrate the main resources of the United States for the competitive struggle with China, then Moore's task is to complicate Trump's peacekeeping activities as much as possible. [6,7a]
Moore's tactics carry a significant risk: they could provoke a backlash as the Trump administration realizes who is really waging a covert war against the United States. When asked why President Trump might not strike at Britain to stop its subversion, E. V. Guilbo responded:
"And the Trump administration is today solving roughly the same problem as Russia - exiting its semi-colonial status and restoring its sovereignty. To do this, Trump needs to solve the so-called "English question". However, given the degree of influence that Britain retains in the structures of the deep state, intelligence agencies, media and Masonic circles of the United States, he cannot yet afford an open conflict. Nevertheless, Trump is capable of gradually clearing American state institutions of British agents and eliminating British proxies, thereby step by step strengthening the position of the United States." [7b]
Let us now turn to the specific goals of Richard Moore's group.
BRITAIN'S GOALS IN EUROPE
In the new world order, divided into macro-economic zones, Great Britain lays claim to Western Europe, which it was able to reformat in the 80 post-war years. Problematic Eastern Europe, according to British plans, should come under Russian control. The division of Europe can take place either along the Polish-German border or along the Yalta line, dividing Western and Eastern Germany. [8-10]
To implement this plan, according to E.V. Gilbo, Great Britain inspired Russia's invasion of Ukraine on February 24, 2022.
Both the Kremlin leadership's geopolitical ambitions and its finances, which are under British control, played a role in drawing it into the conflict. [11]
As for the British-controlled Ukrainian leadership, according to Guilbo, it took measures aimed at facilitating the Russian invasion and left the country before the military operation began. Zelenskyy, who remained in Kyiv, was probably not privy to this.
The facts, which point to a strange coordination of actions by the Russian and Ukrainian leadership, have raised suspicions among some about a possible "deal" between them. However, it is claimed that these events were part of a single scenario, developed in London.
However, the Russian blitzkrieg was not successful. Parts of the Ukrainian armed forces not privy to the plot resisted the Russian troops who were not expecting it. As a result, the quick special operation turned into a protracted standoff.
In an interesting coincidence, three months after the start of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, Richard Moore was awarded the title of Knight Commander of the Order of St Michael and St George for his services to national security and foreign policy. [12]
BRITAIN'S GOALS IN THE MIDDLE EAST
Control over trade routes to Europe is one of Britain's levers of influence over the Brussels bureaucracy and European leaders.
Using the terrorism of the IRGC and the Houthis, Britain is trying to control the trade route through the Bab el-Mandeb that feeds Europe. [13,14]
In addition, Britain is trying to thwart attempts The US wants to create an overland trade corridor "India-Middle East-Europe" passing through Saudi Arabia and Israel, and also to prevent the implementation of China's "Belt and Road" trade project aimed at Europe.
To achieve these goals, the UK cooperates with Qatar, Turkey and radical Islamic organisations such as the Muslim Brotherhood and its offshoot Hamas. [15] The international Muslim Brotherhood network has three main centres - in the UK, Qatar and Turkey - allowing it to coordinate its activities on different fronts. Notably, Turkey has long supported Hamas and granted citizenship to its members. [16-19]
The Hamas attack on Israel on October 7, 2023, which resulted in a protracted war, has cast doubt on the possibility of the India-Middle East-Europe corridor, and the civil war in Syria, which brought down the Assad regime, has pushed it into an uncertain future. One Belt, One Road project.
Moreover, Hamas's attack on Israel fits into the traditionally hostile course towards Israel of the British Foreign Office and its intelligence service MI6. Since the foundation of Israel in 1948, the policy of the Foreign Office and its intelligence services has been aimed at weakening and even eliminating the Jewish state [see Appendix]. According to Jonathan Spyer, a researcher at the Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security:
"British diplomatic approach views Israel primarily as an irritant, as a factor complicating Britain's relations with the Arab world... Israel is seen as the cause, rather than one of the victims, of radicalism, instability and anti-Western sentiment in the Arab world... This concept has always prevailed in the Foreign Office and it is this concept that has the final say in the implementation and interpretation of British policy." [20]
As for Richard Moore himself, he demonstrated his hostility to Israel throughout his activities in Turkey. It was Moore who set Turkey at odds with Israel, who had been allies before him. It was he who promoted the Muslim Brotherhood theme in Turkey, one of MI6's favorite themes. Richard Moore pursued a consistent anti-Israeli policy throughout his career. [2]
According to E. V. Gilbo, the British secret services are behind the Hamas attack on Israel:
"It is time to abandon the myth that some Hamas special forces organized a surprise attack on Israel. It is clear that there cannot be any Hamas special forces. All intelligence services know which countries have special forces.
This is clearly a British operation. They took military hostages and left. And then the British sent "civilians" from Gaza into the defenseless territory of Israel, who massacred the civilian population." [4a]
A. I. Fursov holds a similar point of view:
"The beginning of the conflict between Israel and Hamas shows the handwriting of the British secret services. We see how the Americans are trying to dampen this conflict, and the British are spinning it.
The British need a major war in the Middle East to get the US bogged down. Such a war is possible if they succeed in igniting a confrontation between the Shiites and Sunnis. However, Israel stands in the way of this scenario. That is why the British have always opposed the creation of a Jewish state. It is no coincidence that Kissinger, who, according to him, always agreed with the British position, said in 2012 that Israel would not exist in 10 years." [4b]
RICHARD MOORE AND THE TRANSFORMATION OF TURKEY INTO A BRITISH PROXY
Modern Turkey was born in the 1920s as a result of the reforms of Kemal Ataturk. His policies, known as "Kemalism", was aimed at modernizing the country and was based on six principles: republicanism, national state, nationality, secularism, state regulation and westernization. The guarantor of maintaining Ataturk's course was the Turkish army.
Since the main obstacle to the subordination of Turkey to British interests were the Kemalists in the Turkish army and intelligence services, they became the target of Richard Moore's attack.
The British intelligence services' chief Turkologist and fluent Turkish speaker, Richard Moore began his career in Turkey as an MI6 resident from 1989 to 1992. In 2014, he was appointed British Ambassador to Turkey.
In pursuing his goal, Moore played on Erdogan's ambitions for authoritarianism, Islamization and the expansion of Turkish influence in the territories encompassing the Great Turan - the Turkic belt, from Syria to the Volga region and China's Xinjiang.
Richard Moore was helped to achieve his goal by the attempted military coup in Turkey on July 15, 2016. The suppression of the coup, accompanied by numerous human rights violations, worsened Turkey's relations with the US and the EU and led to Erdogan's international isolation. It was at this point that Richard Moore took advantage of the political instability to become a trusted confidant of the Turkish president. As Turkish journalist Omer Guler notes:
"In the midst of the general alienation, Britain has emerged as one of Erdogan's strongest allies. Richard Moore was the only Western ambassador who was quick to back Erdogan's version of the coup, and the British government turned a blind eye to Turkey's serious human rights abuses since the coup was crushed." [21]
According to E.V. Gilbo, the failed coup was provoked by Moore with the help of Fethullah Gьlen's opposition group. The purges in the Turkish army and intelligence services that followed the suppression of the coup allowed Moore to replace the Kemalists with people loyal to Great Britain and effectively subjugate the country's security agencies. [6]
It appears that Guilbo's version is close to the truth, because the following year, 2017, Richard Moore was awarded the Order of St Michael and St George for services to relations between Great Britain and Turkey. [12]
THE RESULT OF TURKEY BECOMING A BRITISH PROXY
By turning Turkey into a British proxy, Richard Moore concentrated in his hands a huge influence that extended over almost all of Asia. Turkey, Qatar, the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas provided influence in the Middle East, while Turkic subversive groups opened up the roads to the Caucasus, Central Asia, the Volga region, Siberia and China for Britain.
E.V. Gilbo notes:
"During his time as ambassador to Turkey (2014-2017), Moore effectively subjugated the country's intelligence services. He created a network system of sabotage groups promoting the ideas of Great Turan, the Great Ottoman Empire, and Islamism. This network operates across the vast territory of the Turkic belt of Eurasia, from the Uyghur region of China, through the Uzbek regions of Afghanistan, to the Turkmen-populated areas of Syria.
In addition, Moore managed to bring the special services and army of Azerbaijan under his control. Moore's main strength is the system of special services of the Turkic-speaking states and Turkic-speaking terrorist groups. [7]
Since the appointment of Richard Moore as head of MI6 in 2020, Turkish intelligence has become the main instrument for implementing British policy across much of Asia.
• We saw how they worked in Afghanistan, where they control a significant part of the Afghans. Not very tight control, but this control comes not from Ankara, but from London.
• We saw the situation in Kazakhstan when they tried to carry out a coup and do something similar to Uzbekistan. [22]
• We see a situation in Azerbaijan where, in fact, not only the special services, but also the army are no longer subordinate to the president and are directly controlled by Turkish officers, who, ultimately, report not to Ankara, but directly to Richard Moore.
• The war between Armenia and Azerbaijan that we know of, which ended in a strange game of give-and-take, is explained by the fact that both sides were controlled by London. The current president of Azerbaijan has allowed a situation where his armed forces and special services are controlled from London. [6]
It was Richard Moore, who managed to bring Erdogan and the Turkish military-political elite under control, who is the developer and executor of the policy that is perceived as Erdogan's policy.
It is not that Erdogan is Moore's puppet, but rather that Moore is a provider of elegant solutions for Erdogan. Moore's goal is to use Turkey as an instrument of English policy in Central Asia, Afghanistan and Iran. Of course, this kind of expansion leads to the depletion of Turkey's resources and its subsequent collapse. But Moore does not care much about this. [2]"
Journalist Pepe Escobar, a specialist in the Middle East and Central Asia, adds detail to the picture of British influence:
"In December 2021, another coup was prevented in the Kyrgyz capital Bishkek. Sources in Kyrgyz intelligence claim that several NGOs with ties to the UK and Turkey were involved in its organization.
Tajik political scientist Parviz Mullojanov reports that about 8,000 Salafi jihadists have been transported from Syria and Iraq to northern Afghanistan. These forces form the bulk of ISIS-Khorasan, which has re-emerged near the border with Turkmenistan. Some of these jihadists have been sent to Kyrgyzstan, from where they can easily cross the border into Kazakhstan.
In May 2021, MI6 officer Jonathan Powell met with the leadership of Jabhat al-Nusra, which controls many Central Asian jihadists. The agreement was that the jihadists would not be considered "terrorists" if they followed an anti-Russian agenda. This was one of the key steps that paved the way for the jihadists to be sent to Afghanistan and then to Central Asia.
The origins of this offensive date back to 2020, when former British ambassador to Turkey Richard Moore was appointed head of MI6.
Richard Moore is a rabid Russophobe and a proponent of the Great Turan idea - a fantasy of a confederation of Turkic-speaking peoples from West Asia and the Caucasus to Central Asia and the Russian republics on the Volga. With the exception of Turkmenistan, MI6 has deep roots in all Central Asian countries, skillfully using pan-Turkic rhetoric as a means of countering Russia and China.
Erdogan himself is actively involved in promoting the idea of a Greater Turan, especially after the establishment of the Turkic Council in 2009. Erdogan's neo-Ottomanism has wide support among the Muslim Brotherhood, although this movement differs significantly from pan-Turkism, which is based on the idea of Turkish dominance." [22]
CONCLUSION
Why, despite his success in unleashing military conflicts and spreading terrorism, will Richard Moore be forced to leave his post as head of MI6?
The most likely reason is the return of Donald Trump to the White House, whose policies are radically different from those of his predecessor, John Biden, the leader of the pro-British Democratic Party.
Moore's activities have come into sharp conflict with the Trump administration's policy of de-escalating conflicts, suppressing terrorism, rejecting environmental radicalism and the "Diversity, Equity and Inclusion policy" (DEI).
The controversy is compounded by the fact that Richard Moore is also an environmental activist. In May 2021, he announced the launch of "green espionage", in which MI6 intelligence began identifying states that were failing to meet their commitments to reduce carbon emissions. [12]
Moore has also demonstrated his ideological commitment by publicly supporting the LGBT movement. In February 2021, he issued an apology to MI6 officers who had been dismissed in the past because of their sexual orientation, calling the agency's policies at the time "wrong, unfair and discriminatory."[12]
It is possible that the Trump administration, united with the moderate part of the British establishment, forced Moore to resign.
Regardless, Richard Moore's resignation and replacement with a more moderate figure will be positive news - primarily for the countries of Eastern Europe and the Middle East, which have become the arena of British special operations.
APPENDIX: FACTS ABOUT BRITAIN'S ANTI-ISRAEL ACTIVITIES
Britain had sought to establish control over Palestine since the mid-19th century, investing considerable resources in this endeavour. London may still be unable to forgive Israel for the loss of this territory, which served the British Empire as a bridgehead protecting the Suez Canal, provided a land corridor from India to Egypt, and was the final destination for an oil pipeline from Iraq to the port of Haifa, where the Royal Navy refuelled. [33,34]
Moreover, modern Israel is seen by Great Britain as a factor complicating its relations with the Arab world. [20] In any case, London's anti-Israel line, despite a change in rhetoric and more sophisticated methods, remains essentially unchanged.
Below is a brief list of facts illustrating Britain's anti-Israel activity.
• The British White Paper of 1939 effectively repealed the Balfour Declaration, set a quota of 15,000 Jewish immigration per year, and presented a plan for the creation of a majority Arab state in Palestine, a plan Britain followed until the creation of the state of Israel in 1948. [23]
• Britain played a central role in the creation in 1945 of the Arab League, the most powerful international anti-Israel organization. [23]
• Great Britain abstained from voting on the UN Resolution on the partition of Palestine on November 29, 1947. It was prevented from voting against by its post-war financial and economic dependence on the United States. [23]
• In 1947-48, British intelligence agencies in Cairo, Amman and Baghdad worked to organize a military Arab invasion of the territory of the future state of Israel. After victory, Britain promised to divide western Palestine among the Arab countries. Britain planned to retain Haifa with its port and oil refineries, as well as the Negev region, which opened the way to Sinai and Egypt. [25] The British plan was implemented on May 15, 1948, when the armies of five Arab states invaded Israel.
• In January 1949, when it became clear that the Arab armies would not be able to destroy Israel, Britain decided to enter the war against the Jewish state. Foreign Secretary Ernest Bevin issued an ultimatum: if Israel did not immediately withdraw its troops from Egyptian territory, Britain would declare war on it. The threat of an Anglo-Israeli conflict was averted by the intervention of President Truman and the British public, who did not want a new war. [24]
• General Ivan Serov, the first chairman of the KGB and a confidant of Stalin and Khrushchev, wrote in his diaries, published in 2016: "The British government was always against the creation of Israel." [26]
• After the Six-Day War of 1967, Britain sought to limit the damage that Israel's victory did to its interests. Speaking at the UN General Assembly on June 21, British Foreign Secretary George Brown demanded Israel's withdrawal from the conquered territories, warned Israel against annexing East Jerusalem and demanded a solution to the Palestinian refugee problem. Brown's speech marked a deterioration in British policy towards Israel and the beginning of growing Anglo-Israeli tensions, with Israel and Britain finding themselves on opposite sides of the debate on virtually every issue in the Middle East. [27]
• During the Yom Kippur War of 1973, when Israel was attacked by three Arab states, Britain declared neutrality and imposed an arms embargo on all sides. This decision had a negative impact only on Israel, not on its enemies. British military equipment in service with Israel required ammunition and components, while Egypt and Syria were actively supplied by the Soviet Union. The British arms embargo on Israel was lifted only in 1994. [23]
• Britain supported three resolutions condemning Israel's military actions during the Yom Kippur War. [23]
• During the Yom Kippur War, Britain denied the United States, which was supplying arms to Israel, the right to land on the island of Cyprus en route to Israel. [23]
• In 1980, Britain supported the Venice Declaration, which called for the inclusion of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) in the diplomatic process, despite the PLO's terrorist status and its stated goal of destroying Israel. [23]
• British Royal Family Boycotts Israel since its foundation, while members of the royal family have made numerous official visits to Arab states. An exception was Prince Philip's unofficial visit to Israel in 1994 to support the Oslo peace process, which turned out to be a new form of the old British policy of destroying Israel. [23]
• Britain became a major partner of the Palestinian Authority (PA), created as a result of the Oslo peace process. In 1995, Prime Minister John Major became the first Western leader to meet Yasser Arafat on PA territory. In November 1998, Britain provided the PA with a $100 million aid package. [23]
• British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson played a key role in pushing through Resolution 2334 against Israeli settlements, adopted by the UN Security Council on 23 December 2016. [28]
• According to documents from Edward Snowden's archives, published in 2016, British intelligence agencies spied on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Israeli diplomats for years. The spying also targeted Israeli defense companies, government agencies responsible for international cooperation and university research centers. [29]
• According to a June 2024 report by the Ngo Monitor, the UK government funds numerous non-governmental organisations (NGOs) involved in anti-Israel activities such as boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) and lawfare. Some of these NGOs have links to terrorist organisations. This funding continued after the Hamas massacre on 7 October 2023. [30]
• In March 2024, two senior members of the British intelligence community - former National Security Adviser Peter Ricketts and former MI6 chief Alex Younger - called on the British government to use arms sales as leverage on Israel to stop the destruction of Hamas. [31]
• In February 2025, the leader of the UK Conservative Party, Kemi Badenoch, accused the public broadcaster BBC of systemic bias against Israel and called for an investigation into a BBC documentary on the war in Gaza, narrated by Abdullah al-Yazuri, the son of a Hamas minister. Badenoch demanded to know how much the BBC paid Hamas to make the film. This is important, Badenoch noted, because Hamas is designated a terrorist organisation in the UK. [32]
[13] E.V. Gilbo "Iran Strategic Prospects" (10.04.2025). Part of the IRGC is directly controlled from London, for example, the IRGC missile forces, which, on behalf of the Houthis, fire at ships in the Bab el-Mandeb Strait and Israel. The rest of the IRGC is controlled by London through its agents.