Retaliating against Russia

To The Times

There is good reason to believe that the attempted assassination of Sergei Skripal was planned in Russia. Only Russia had a plausible motive. Nerve gas is a state product, held under state security. It would be inconceivable that instructions for the use of nerve gas would be anything other than subject to clearance at the very top level.

The attack on Skripal and his daughter was an attack on the West as a whole. Russia will never admit responsibility, just as there has been no acceptance of Kremlin responsibility for the murder of Alexander Litvinenko. But as and when the facts of this foul crime are established, we owe it to ourselves and the wider world to pin the guilt where it lies. If the presumption is justified that Russia is to blame, the revulsion that we should feel needs proper reflection in our immediate actions and in our wider policies. Those might include high-level political boycotts of the World Cup, enhancing the degree to which we implement similar provisions to those of the US Magnitsky Act, or direct sanctions on persons deemed to be involved. Reducing our embassies to chargé d’affaires level, which would be an inevitable result of our requiring the Russian ambassador to leave London, would also be an option. Sir Andrew Wood, British ambassador to Russia 1995-2000

To The Times

At a time when relations with Russia are worsening, it might be wise for us to remember the background to the ending of the old Cold War. After the Soviet Union collapsed, accompanied by a great drop in Russian morale, the West, instead of offering understanding, encouragement and even financial aid, moved the boundaries of its military alliance, backed by Nato forces, on to Russia’s western border, even cutting off some of its sovereign territory. This was because the Baltic states felt threatened by Russia’s proxy military aggression in the Crimea and Ukraine. They joined Nato and pleaded, as was their right, for a military deterrent to protect them from future aggression. This would have been near impossible for Nato to refuse; but for Russia, with its obsession over past Western invasions, it must have looked like a threat and even a provocation.

There is nothing much that can or should be done about this, except to recognise that it may partly account for Russia’s increasing aggressiveness in order to re-establish what would be (in its eyes) a more equitable balance of power. Field Marshal Lord Bramall, Crondall, Hampshire