‘HIGHLY LIKELY RUSSIA BEHIND SPY NERVE AGENT ATTACK’– MAY
The euphoria at the end of the Cold War evaporated to be replaced with anger and resentment. As fingers point towards Russia following the nerve agent attack on former spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter, political editor David Williamson examines why our
IT IS “highly likely” that Russia was behind the nerve agent attack on Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia, Theresa May told has MPs.
The Prime Minister said the substance used was a “military grade” nerve agent produced by Russia and there were only two possible explanations – either Moscow was behind the attack or it had lost control of its stockpile of the poison.
The Prime Minister said Russia’s ambassador Alexander Yakovenko had been summoned to the Foreign Office to explain what happened.
Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson has told him that Moscow must “immediately provide full and complete disclosure” of its novichok nerve gas programme to the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, giving Russia until the end of today to respond, said Mrs May.
In a dramatic statement after a meeting of the National Security Council, during which she received the latest intelligence analysis and an update on the investigation, Mrs May told MPs: “It is now clear that Mr Skripal and his daughter were poisoned with a military-grade nerve agent of a type developed by Russia.”
She added: “Based on the positive identification of this chemical agent by world-leading experts at the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory at Porton Down; our knowledge that Russia has previously produced this agent and would still be capable of doing so; Russia’s record of conducting statesponsored assassinations; and our assessment that Russia views some defectors as legitimate targets for assassinations; the Government has concluded that it is highly likely that Russia was responsible for the act against Sergei and Yulia Skripal.”
That meant “either this was a direct act by the Russian state against our country” or Vladimir Putin’s government had “lost control of this potentially catastrophically damaging nerve agent”.
The Kremlin has denied the involvement of the Russian government in the nerve agent attack on the Skripals.
But Mrs May said: “On Wednesday we will consider in detail the response from the Russian State. Should there be no credible response, we will conclude that this action amounts to an unlawful use of force by the Russian State against the United Kingdom.”
That would result in Mrs May setting out “the full range of measures that we will take in response”.
She said: “This attempted murder using a weapons-grade nerve agent in a British town was not just a crime against the Skripals. It was an indiscriminate and reckless act against the United Kingdom, putting the lives of innocent civilians at risk. And we will not tolerate such a brazen attempt to murder innocent civilians on our soil. “
Mrs May used her statement to pay tribute to Wiltshire Police Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey, who is in a serious but stable condition in the Salisbury District Hospital.
Commons Foreign Affairs Commit- tee chairman Tom Tugendhat said Russia’s actions were “deeply threatening to the British people”.
Ahead of the Prime Minister’s statement, the Russian embassy accused the UK Government of playing a “very dangerous game” with British public opinion and warned of the risk of “serious longterm consequences”.
In a statement on the embassy website, a spokesman said: “We would like to stress once again that we are outraged by the anti-Russian media campaign, condoned by the Government, that influences the investigation and has a psychological effect on British residents.”
Russian President Vladimir Putin dismissed questions about his state’s alleged involvement in the Skripal case.
On a visit to a grain centre, he told the BBC: “We’re dealing with agriculture here... and you talk to me about some tragedies. Get to the bottom of things there, then we’ll discuss this.”
THE poisoning of a former Russian spy and his daughter with a nerve agent in Salisbury only adds to the sense that a new Cold War is under way.
The fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 and sights such as the first McDonald’s opening in Moscow a year later spurred hopes that the suspicion and antagonism that had defined relations between the West and Russia would give way to a new era of partnership.
Such aspirations – at least in Britain’s case – were laid to rest when Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson responded to the poisonings by telling MPs: “It is clear that Russia is, I am afraid, in many respects now a malign and disruptive force.”
Here are eight reasons relations with Moscow have turned toxic:
■ 1. Nato expanded right up to Russia’s borders
Russians who hoped that the end of Communism would see their country reborn on the world stage as a superpower with a booming economy were disappointed.
The USSR collapsed and former Soviet states jumped at the chance to join Nato. This – coupled with economic woes and embarrassing reports of Boris Yeltsin’s drunkenness – created the sense that Russia was weakened and that former allies were now foes.
The Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland joined Nato in 1999 and the Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania – plus a string of other eastern European countries – entered the alliance in 2004. Since then there have been further accessions by states that see Nato as a protection against dominance by Moscow. There was once heady talk that Russia could join Nato but Putin was a fierce critic of its intervention in Libya in 2011.
He said: “When the so-called civilized community, with all its might, pounces on a small country, and ruins infrastructure that has been built over generations – well, I don’t know, is this good or bad? I do not like it.”
■ 2. Putin was outraged by the invasion of Iraq Putin pledged solidarity with the United States in the immediate aftermath of the September 11 terror attacks but tensions soared as the White House turned its sights on Iraq.
The Russian leader described the invasion of Iraq as the “most serious crisis the world has faced since the Cold War”. He clearly did not want to live in a world in which the US felt confident enough to invade countries without explicit UN authorisation.
When Tony Blair attempted to heal relations he got short shrift, with Putin pointing to the lack of success in tracking down Saddam Hussein or weapons of mass destruction.
He asked: “Perhaps Saddam is still hiding somewhere in a bunker underground, sitting on cases of weapons of mass destruction and is preparing to blow the whole thing up and bring down the lives of thousands of Iraqi people.”
3. Russia is angered that critics of the Kremlin have found a comfortable home in Britain
Russian oligarch Boris Berezovsky fell out with Putin and set home in London. In 2003 he was granted asylum status but he did not keep his head down – far from it.
When asked by the Guardian if he was fomenting a revolution in Russia, he “You are absolutely correct.”
Russia’s prosecutor general pushed Britain to hand him over. The UK’s refusal fuelled Russian perceptions that Putin’s foes are welcomed with open arms in London.
In 2007, Putin fumed: “They in London have 30 persons hiding who are wanted by our law enforcement bodies for committing grave and especially serious crimes. But London doesn’t give a damn and gives refuge to people accused of committing especially serious crimes.”
■ 4. Britain is angry at the killing of people on UK soil
A turning point in UK-Russian relations came in 2006 with the fatal poisoning in London of former spy Alexander Litvinenko, a close friend of Boris Berezovsky.
An inquiry reported in 2016 that it was a “strong probability” that the person accused of killing him did so under the direction of the Russian security service, the FSB.
Theresa May faces a diplomatic and security crisis fraught with the potential for things to get much worse
Laying the blame at the door of the Kremlin, it concluded the “FSB operation to kill Mr Litvinenko” was probably approved by Putin.
Russia has refused to extradite key suspects. Buzzfeed recently published a report on “14 suspected hits on British soil”, fuelling the suspicion that powerful Russians feel they can get away with murder.
5. World leaders snubbed the Sochi Olympics
Russia spent an estimated $50bn on the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi but a host of world leaders opted not to attend the opening ceremony. The likes of Barack Obama, David Cameron and Angela Merkel stayed away.
Putin might have hoped that the event would project as image of Russia as a modern and sophisticated destination. Instead, there was outcry in the West in the run-up to the Games at a new law banning gay “propaganda”.
If a direct Russian link is established between the Salisbury poisonings there will be immense pressure for western leaders to boycott the Russia 2018 World Cup in its entirety. This may intensify the impression in Russia that there is little point in trying to win the embrace of the Nato and EU members that at best should be seen as rivals.
6. The Kremlin is angered at what it sees as western attempts to overthrow governments
Russia saw the West’s hand in the “colour revolutions” that swept through former Soviet states. The “Rose” uprising in Georgia in 2003 was followed by the “Orange” revolution in Ukraine in 2004 and the “Tulip” overthrow of the President of Kyrgyzstan in 2005.
Russian officials, according to Anthony Cordesman of the Centre for Strategic and International Studies, saw the revolutions as nothing less than “a new US and European approach to warfare that focuses on creating destabilizing revolutions in other states as a means of serving their security interests at low cost and with minimal casualties”.
7. Russia plunged Europe into crisis when it annexed Crimea and backed Ukrainian rebels
The Kremlin saw the 2014 Ukrainian revolution that ousted pro-Russian President Viktor Yanukovych as a western-backed coup. Russian forces seized the Ukrainian province of Crimea – which has a Russianspeaking majority.
A controversial referendum saw the vast majority of Crimeans vote to join the Russian Federation but to much of the world this looked like the straightforward annexation of one country’s territory by another. This, combined with Russian support for pro-Moscow rebels in eastern Ukraine, created the most serious breakdown in east-west relations since the end of the Cold War.
Theresa May said this was the “first time since the Second World War that one sovereign nation has forcibly taken territory from another in Europe”.
8. Britain sees Russia as a source of ‘fake news’
US politics has been rocked by the investigation into alleged Russian interference in the 2016 election and the Prime Minister last year warned that the country’s actions “threaten the international order on which we all depend”.
Mrs May used her speech at the Lord Mayor’s Banquet to accuse Russia of trying to “weaponise information” and “plant fake stories and photo-shopped images in an attempt to sow discord in the West and undermine our institutions”.
Russia will argue it is more sinned against than sinning
When the West complains that Russia spreads disinformation on Twitter, it will argue the US and Europe and supported the overthrow of friendly regimes. And when attacked for its interventions in Ukraine or Syria, Russia can challenge the West on the success of its operations in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya.
But if it is proved that Russia is pursuing a policy of murder within the borders of the UK, Theresa May will be confronted with a diplomatic and security crisis fraught with the potential for things to get much worse.