Fools Russian in

The Salisbury poisonings have been badly handled. Surely our Foreign Secretary should – in the first place – have gone to his Russian equivalent, and asked if there had been any theft of chemical weapons from Russia, while asking the same question of all Nato countries, and explaining the reason for the question. It could be possible that Russia does not know that some of its poisons have been stolen. We would also publicly affirm that none of our chemical weapons have been stolen.

Russia then says something, or says nothing. That is international diplomacy. Instead, we posture and threaten, and gain the support of a nation whose leader acts on impulse.

Do we never think things through? Russia supplies the UK with gas. We are hardly in a position to threaten them.

MALCOLM PARKIN

Gamekeepers Road Kinnesswood, Kinross

I am increasingly doubtful the Russian state is involved in the nerve attack in salisbury. craig Murray, our former ambassador, who has good connections to the Foreign Office, has shown in his blog that there is considerable doubt on the origins of the attack. Why would Putin agree to this attack, when he had Sergei Skripal

in prison for years and could have bumped him off without notice? Also, he was swapped for Russian spies and the evidence is that both sides respect these swaps. What is also concerning is the way in which the media have uncritically accepted the British government line – I remember how we were lied to over weapons of mass destruction to get us into the war with Iraq.

I am also appalled at the way Jeremy Corbyn is being treated for rightly asking for proof of Russian involvement before precipitate action is taken.

Finally, we in Scotland, as the home of the UK’S so-called nuclear deterrent, would be a primary target in any hot war that comes out of this cranking up the Cold War.

For all these reasons let’s have more analysis and evidence before ratcheting up the Cold War yet again.

HUGH KERR

Wharton Square, Edinburgh

In the welter of comments on the poison attack on an ex Russian spy and his daughter, it seems odd that the focus of coverage should relate so strongly to Alex Salmond and his link to Russia Today. Some of these attacks appear opportunistic and come from politicians and people who have a very blinkered view of the democratic value of freedom of speech. There has also been criticism made by people who clearly have never looked at Mr Salmond’s show.

Those who took the trouble to do so would have seen a powerful attack on Russia’s poor record in human rights by Peter Tatchell. They would also have seen an interview with a senior ex-mi5 operative who pointed out that the nerve agent used by North Korean agents of Kim Jongun to murder his half brother was manufactured by Britain. People in glass houses?

GILL TURNER

Derby Street, Edinburgh