A collective response to Putin is needed
Russia’s brazen disdain for Theresa May’s ultimatum to explain why one of its former spies was poisoned by a Soviet-era nerve agent in Salisbury has plunged relations between the two countries into their worst crisis since the fall of the Berlin Wall. There was, indeed, a Cold War feel to the Prime Minister’s statement yesterday announcing the ejection of 23 “diplomats” from the Russian embassy in London. In 1971, confronted with evidence of systematic Soviet espionage in the UK, the Heath government deported 105 suspected spies. In 1985, Britain expelled 25 embassy staff and businessmen following the defection of Soviet double-agent Oleg Gordievsky; and in 2007, four diplomats were expelled over the killing of Alexander Litvinenko. Predictably, Russia responded with tit-for-tat expulsions, as it doubtless will again.
Given the gravity of the UK Government’s accusations, the measures outlined by Mrs May are a relatively restrained retaliation for what she has characterised as an unlawful attack on Britain by the Russian state. A boycott of the World Cup and the closure of Russia Today, the Kremlin TV mouthpiece, were mooted but did not materialise. There will be no official British representation at the football tournament in Moscow this summer but the England team will take part.
New powers to target those who abuse human rights – the so called Magnitsky law – will be brought forward and assets frozen where there is evidence they are used to threaten lives.
But since financial sanctions already operate against supporters of Vladimir Putin – both over the Litvinenko killing and the Crimea annexation – there was limited scope for these to be extended.
Hitting the regime’s rich oligarchs in their pockets is a proven way of hurting those around Mr Putin. New ways of doing so need to be explored. But this is not work we can do alone. What is essential is that this does not just become a bilateral stand-off between the UK and Russia. Expressions of sympathy and solidarity from our allies are welcome, but they need to be translated into collective action. To that end, planned sessions of the UN security council, Nato and the EU must do more than issue condemnatory statements of the sort President Putin has heard and scorned before.
Some countries may not be inclined to take the British allegations at face value without incontrovertible evidence of Kremlin involvement. In which case, intelligence showing the likely source of the Novichok agent responsible for poisoning Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia needs to be shared with Britain’s allies, if it has not been already.
This is much more than just a matter for the UK. Ever since the Russian invasion of Georgia, President Putin has broken every tenet of international law, culminating in the annexation of Crimea. His country’s cyber-warfare programme has targeted parliamentarians in Germany and businesses in Denmark. Russia’s attempts to manipulate the political process in Europe and America is well documented. A far tougher stand needs to be taken or like every despot, elected or not, Putin will see international indecision and disunity as an invitation to go further. He delights in fomenting trouble and causing instability abroad, and needs to discover that a serious price is to be paid. The very fact that the Russians used a nerve agent that could be traced back to the Kremlin indicates how bold he has become.
The Prime Minister’s response to the Salisbury outrage has been commendably robust – unlike the craven posturing of Jeremy Corbyn, who seems unable to bring himself to denounce an attack on the country whose government he aspires to form. One domestic bonus for Mrs May is that her stand has united the Tories behind her even as it has divided Mr Corbyn’s party against him. Since he cannot defend the national interest from outside aggression he is utterly unfit for that office. Even his own MPS can see that.
It is essential that this does not just become a bilateral stand-off between the UK and Russia