Blaming the Russians

To The Guardian

If President John F. Kennedy’s 1963 assassination had been handled as the British Government has done with the Skripals’ poisoning, dozens of Soviet diplomats would have been expelled, trade arrangements and contacts with the Soviet Union would have been cancelled, and Soviet ships docking at US ports would have likely been seized. After all, Kennedy’s alleged assassin had resided in the Soviet Union and had long been married to a Soviet citizen. To his credit, President Lyndon B. Johnson – unlike Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson – called for an investigation and avoided voicing any conclusions beforehand, while refraining from pressuring allies to blame the Soviet government.

There are many questions on the Skripal case that deserve answers, which only a thorough investigation can provide. Why was Mr Skripal living in Salisbury, and did he have any recent dealings with MI6, the British repository of chemical or nerve agents said to be located nearby, or Russian mobsters? Did Britain not long ago stock the nerve agent Novichok and (if so) what controls were in place at the time of the incident? Was Skripal re-enlisted by British intelligence to assist or spy against diplomats or the Russian government? What motive would the Russian government have for eliminating a former intelligence officer who was supposedly inactive, living a life of quiet retirement? And, on sovereign rights, did MI6 not violate Russian sovereignty when it recruited Mr Skripal as a spy – in Russian territory? Why would the poisoning be carried out before Russian presidential elections, and would it not reflect negatively on Mr Putin’s candidacy? Luis Suarez-villa, professor emeritus, University of California, Irvine, US

To The Guardian

Novichok agents were never standardised and weaponised for military deployment by the Russians. Any stocks probably exist in only one research institute that is perhaps the most secure place in Russia. The idea that “rogue” elements got hold of the material is a fantasy. This action was done by the Russian state on direct instructions from Vladimir Putin. There is no other remotely credible explanation.

Jeremy Corbyn’s reference to the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) is not correct. This is attempted murder using a poison that would have a role as a chemical weapon in warfare, but the attack in Salisbury is not a use of chemicals in war. The OPCW reference is a complete red herring created by the Russians for which Corbyn has fallen hook, line and sinker. As for sharing samples with the Russians, that is akin to sharing the evidence of a murder with the murderer. Corbyn’s question about the analysis is also confused. The identification of the agent as a Novichok agent means that it is adequately characterised. Since the country that invented and developed these agents is Russia, its source is Russia and since an ex-russian agent is the target, to claim there is any ambiguity is ludicrous. John Cookson, Bournemouth, Dorset