Russian diplomat hits back at British counterpart’s comments
VLADIMIR VINOKUROV, ambassador of the Russian Federation to Jamaica, is rejecting claims by British High Commissioner to Jamaica Asif Ahmad about the alleged involvement of the Kremlin in the recent poisoning of a Russian ex-spy and his daughter on British soil.
At the root of the international spat is the discovery of 66-year-old Sergei Skripal and his 33-year-old daughter Yulia, who were visiting the United Kingdom (UK) from Moscow, in a catatonic state on a public bench near a shopping centre in Salisbury, England, on March 4.
Both were taken to the Salisbury District Hospital where medical staff determined that the pair had been poisoned with a nerve agent, later identified as a Russian-developed ‘Novichok’ agent by British Prime Minister Theresa May, who demanded an explanation from the Russian government.
RUSSIA GONE TOO FAR
In commentary published in The Gleaner on Monday, Ahmad, who took up the local post in August, declared that “Russia has gone too far”, stating that more than 130 ordinary residents in Salisbury are being checked for contamination.
“The UK is home to over 800,000 people of Jamaican heritage. All of us in Britain and the wider world are now exposed to the threat of chemical warfare. The last time we faced this in Europe was in World War II,” he argued, further cautioning that: “The only possible response from Jamaicans and others who know right from wrong is to condemn Russia for declaring war on civilians using a forbidden chemical weapon.”
In a response sent to The Gleaner yesterday, Vinokurov charged that the comments by the British diplomat reek of Russophobia.
“Evidently there is no proof or evidence that Russia has something to do with poisoning. Russia is blamed for the crime on the principle, ‘who else could do such a bad thing?’,” he opined. “The British side stated that the poisonous agent used was a Novichok: ‘a military-grade nerve agent of a type developed by Russia’, but flatly denied Russia’s official request to provide a sample,” Vinokurov charged.
“How are you supposed to argue your case if the other side refuses to cooperate, present no evidence, and gives no information on the case,” the Russian diplomat added.
This is a response to an article (‘What a nerve, Russia’) published in The Gleaner by British High Commissioner to Jamaica and The Bahamas Asif Ahmad on April 2.
THE BRITISH High Commissioner accuses Russia of “heinous attack on civilians” by a military-grade weapon nerve agent and of violation of Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC). First, a little bit of history. I’d like to recall here the statement made in 2002 by then Prime Minister Tony Blair about the intelligence assessment “beyond doubt” that Saddam has continued to produce chemical and biological weapons. We all know the consequences – hundreds of thousands died in Iraq.
Now let’s look at the incident that took place in a small town of Salisbury right next to Porton Down defense science and technology laboratory, which is known for developing VX nerve agent and experimenting with chemical warfare agents.
Very soon after it was announced that Mr Scripal and his daughter were poisoned and before any of the essential facts could have been known (the investigation is still ongoing), the British media and politicians pointed the finger at Russia, despite our official statements that we had nothing to do with it.Of course, the question is how a fair investigation can be held if it has already been declared who is the perpetrator?
According to the great Sherlock Holmes, it is a capital mistake to theorise before one has data. Insensibly, one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.
From the beginning, Russia offered its cooperation in the investigation, especially because Mr Scripal’s daughter is a Russian citizen. The United Kingdom refused to share any details of the case or provide any evidence. Instead, the UK Government presented Russia with a 24-hour ultimatum – “confess or else”. How are you supposed to argue your case if the other side refuses to cooperate, present no evidence and gives no information on the case?
The British side stated that the agent used was a Novichok: “a military-grade nerve agent of a type developed by Russia”, but flatly denied Russia’s official request to provide a sample.
It is worth mentioning that the evidence submitted by Porton Down experts is much less categorical – “the findings indicated exposure to a nerve agent or related compound”. And there is nothing contradictory about our position on the nerve agent known in the West as “Novichok” - it has never been produced or stored in the Russian Federation.
COULD HAVE BEEN PRODUCED ANYWHERE
Mr Ahmad mentions “Russian” scientist Vil Mirzayanov – actually, ex-Soviet scientist – who has been living in the United States since 1995 and hardly is a credible witness.
By the way, he himself disclosed “Novichok” formula in his book published in 2008 and wrote that the chemical components of that nerve agent “are ordinary organophosphates that can be made at commercial chemical companies that manufacture such products as fertilizers and pesticides”.
So if you trust him, then you also have to accept that this Novichok could be produced practically anywhere.
The British High Commissioner talks about ordinary residents in Salisbury being checked for contamination. But a specialist in accident and emergency services at the Salisbury district hospital, replying to a newspaper article, wrote that “no patients have experienced symptoms of nerve agent poisoning in Salisbury and there have only ever been three patients with significant poisoning”.
Evidently, there is no proof or evidence that Russia has something to do with poisoning. Russia is blamed for the crime on the principle “who else could do such a bad thing”? If it’s not Russophobia, then I don’t know what it is.
Our country is one of the initiators of the Chemical Weapons Convention and officially declared last year the complete elimination of chemical weapons. We consider any use of chemical weapons by anyone under any circumstances absolutely unacceptable.
In order to unblock the situation with the Salisbury incident and since the British side refuses bilateral dialogue or collaboration, Russia convenes a special session of the OPCW Executive Council.
We have officially posed questions to the British side about the incident and expect to receive answers. We are still ready to engage in open and constructive cooperation with the United Kingdom on this case within the framework of the CWC and other relevant international treaties. But Russia will make every effort to find out the truth about what really happened in Salisbury.