CORBYN ‘PLAYING RUSSIA’S GAME’

Boris hits back after being accused of inflating Moscow’s role in spy attack

‘Nothing has changed’

BORIS Johnson last night accused Jeremy Corbyn of ‘playing Russia’s game’, as a furious row erupted over Moscow’s involvement in the Salisbury nerve agent attack.

The Foreign Secretary rounded on Mr Corbyn after the Labour leader said he had ‘exaggerated’ the case against Russia.

Mr Corbyn seized on a statement by the head of Porton Down, Gary Aitkenhead, who said the military research facility could not prove the Novichok nerve agent used in the attack on former spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia came from Russia. The Labour leader said this contradicted a claim by Mr Johnson last month when he said Porton Down had been ‘absolutely categorical’ in saying Russia had produced the nerve agent.

The Foreign Office yesterday deleted a post on Twitter which made a similar claim.

Mr Corbyn said Mr Aitkenhead’s statement had left Mr Johnson with ‘egg on his face’.

The Labour leader, who has been accused of cosying up to Moscow, added: ‘Either the Foreign Secretary has information that he’s not sharing with Porton Down or it was a bit of exaggeration.

‘I don’t know which it is, but I think we need a responsible, cool approach to this.’ Shadow home secretary Diane Abbott said Mr Johnson had ‘misled the public’.

But Foreign Office sources said Mr Johnson had always been clear that the analysis by Porton Down was only one part of an intelligence assessment that pointed the finger firmly at Russia. And last night, Mr Johnson hit back angrily, accusing Mr Corbyn of siding with the Kremlin. The row came as:

The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) rejected Moscow’s calls for Russian officials to take part in the investigation of the Salisbury poisoning;

Russian spy boss Sergei Naryshkin claimed the poisoning of Mr Skripal and his daughter was a ‘grotesque provocation rudely staged by the British and US intelligence agencies’;

The European Union backed Britain, saying it was time for Moscow to answer the UK’s ‘legitimate questions’ about the attempted assassination;

Former British weapons inspector Hamish de Bretton Gordon said it was time for ministers to ‘lay out what the evidence is’ against Russia to counter the Kremlin’s propaganda;

Russia called an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council, which will be held in New York today;

Moscow launched a fresh bid to distract attention from the case with a bizarre demand to know the whereabouts of the Skripals’ pets.

In a series of messages on Twitter last night, Mr Johnson contrasted Mr Corbyn’s behaviour with that of Britain’s allies. He said: ‘Twenty- eight other countries have been so convinced by the UK’s case they have expelled Russians. In contrast, Jeremy Corbyn chooses to side with the Russian spin machine.

‘Porton Down identified the nerve agent as military grade Novichok. Russia has investigated delivering nerve agents – likely for assassination – and as part of this programme has produced and stockpiled small quantities of Novichok. And Russia has motive for targeting Sergei Skripal.

‘ It is lamentable that Jeremy Corbyn is now playing Russia’s game and trying to discredit the UK over Salisbury attack.’

Whitehall sources last night acknowledged that Mr Aitkenhead’s ‘clumsy’ interview and the Foreign Office’s ‘incompetent’ tweet had been ‘unhelpful’ in winning the information war against the Kremlin.

But they stressed the intelligence picture had not changed, and said Western allies were steadfast in their support for the UK. A German government spokesman said ‘ nothing has changed’. She added: ‘We share Britain’s view that there is a high likelihood that Russia is behind it.’

European Commission spokesman Alexander Winterstein said: ‘ Our understanding is that the role of the (Porton Down) experts there was to identify the type of agent that was used, not the source of the agent.’ The French Embassy said Paris ‘reiterates solidarity with the UK’ and ‘urges Russia to answer the UK’s questions’.

At a special meeting of the OPCW in the Hague, member states voted by 15 to six against Russia’s request to take part in the investigation. Russia’s only supporters were Iran, China, Algeria, Sudan and Azerbaijan.

Vladimir Putin’s spokesman yesterday demanded an apology from Theresa May, saying: ‘This idiocy has gone too far’.

Speaking on a visit to Turkey, the Russian president said: ‘What we expect is that common sense will in the end prevail and there will not be this damage in international relations that we have seen recently.’

UK security minister Ben Wallace played down Mr Aitkenhead’s remarks, saying: ‘When we work with forensic scientists, the scientist tell us what something is. They tell me a gun and a type of gun was used. But the attribution of who used it and exactly how it was used is a matter for the broader investigation.’

Mr Wallace said Moscow had ‘form’, adding: ‘President Putin has said himself that traitors should kick the bucket. The Duma has passed legislation to say it’s okay to assassinate people... We know from [murdered spy Alexander] Litvinenko that they have done the same thing in the United Kingdom.’

HOW depressingly predictable that the Kremlin has seized on remarks by the head of Britain’s chemical defence laboratory to suggest they support Vladimir Putin’s claims of innocence over the poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal.

In fact, Gary Aitkenhead is merely stating the obvious – with an honesty that no Russian government employee would have risked – when he says Porton Down cannot say for certain where the toxin was manufactured. As he points out, that is not a scientist’s job.

But he confirms beyond question that the poison used in Salisbury was a militarygrade nerve agent of the Novichok family (which is known to have been developed in Russia) and that it could probably have been produced only by a ‘state actor’.

As for which actor that might have been, evidence from every other source points emphatically and solely at the Kremlin, with its egregious record of statesanctioned assassinations across Europe.

So overwhelming is the case against Putin that two dozen countries have joined Theresa May in expelling Russian diplomats, with the unwavering support of the European Commission, Nato and the United Nations.

Indeed, what we have witnessed since the vile attack on the Skripals is a resounding demonstration of international solidarity behind the rule of law against the aggression of a rogue state.

So how contemptible that Jeremy Corbyn and Diane Abbott are playing the Kremlin’s game, signalling their readiness to give Putin the benefit of the non-existent doubt. Their aim is clear: To sow uncertainty and embarrass our Government – at any cost.

What does it say about our would-be future prime minister and home secretary if they’re prepared to risk undermining an international coalition in Britain’s support – and the safety of our citizens – for the sake of cheap political capital?