The distinction is responsibility. If he were operating under orders from Russia, Russia bears ultimate responsibility for his actions. If they have no control over him and his actions merely benefit them, he bears responsibility for his own actions.
>Going by that standard, 95% of all Russian peasant farmers are "Russian Agents" and that's pure ridiculousness from any angle.
Oh please, you're the one being ridiculous. I think we all know there's a line between farming for the good of civilization and actively working to push an agenda. C'mon.
Well, then I suppose it was indeed a PR stunt for the Russians to accept South African farmers, and they are according to your logic indeed Russian Agents! That is assuming a PR campaign pushes an agenda, and I would argue it does.
There is a difference between and unwitting pawn, especially in a circumstance like that, and someone who acts with full knowledge as to what they're doing. I don't understand why this is difficult.
