The Kremlin’s best-laid plans came unstuck as Interpol announced on 21 November that South Korea’s Kim Jong-yang has been chosen as its new chief. Kim, acting president of the global police body, was chosen by delegates in Dubai to replace Meng Hongwei, who went missing in China in September.

Beijing later claimed that Meng had resigned after being charged with accepting bribes.

Led by the US, western officials had called for rejecting Alexander Prokopchuk - a Russian interior ministry official and current Interpol vice-president - over fears Moscow could abuse the role to target political opponents.

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo had thrown his weight behind Kim, who will serve out Meng’s term until 2020. “We encourage all nations and organisations that are part of Interpol and that respect the rule of law to choose a leader with integrity. We believe Mr Kim will be just that,” Pompeo told reporters.

Critics had raised concerns over Russia’s previous applications for Interpol Red Notices - international arrest warrants - to target those who have fallen foul of the Kremlin.

Interpol’s president chairs its General Assembly while day-to-day operations are handled by secretary general Juergen Stock.

In an open letter, a bipartisan group of US senators said choosing Prokopchuk would be like “putting a fox in charge of a henhouse”.

Anti-Kremlin figures, including Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny, had raised concerns. “Our team has suffered from abuse of Interpol for political persecution by Russia. I don't think that a president from Russia will help to reduce such violations,” he tweeted.

The controversy comes amid concerns over accusations of Russian agents attempting to poison a former spy in Britain and trying to hack the network of the global chemical weapons watchdog. Ukraine, deeply at odds with Moscow over its annexation of Crimea and support for separatists, threatened to pull out of Interpol if Prokopchuk prevailed.

However, Russian spokesman Dmitry Peskov dismissed the US senators’ letter as a “vivid example” of an attempt to interfere in the vote.