Putin is thought to be testing how isolated Britain is after Brexit and he won't like the results

[Soph0571]

But another explanation has grown in prominence in recent days: That targeting Skripal was a way of testing how isolated Britain has become after its vote to leave the European Union in 2016.

The idea was posited by Chatham House fellows James Sherr and John Lough, who said Moscow may be attempting to establish whether Britain's European allies will support retaliation, or "simply send their best wishes."

---------------------------------------------------

And if Putin is testing how adrift Britain is following Brexit, Glees said he will not like the results.

"There’s the ultimate irony: We’ve held up two fingers up to the European Union [and said] 'we’re going with Trump.' When actually, the European 27 have come out very strongly with Theresa May," the professor said.

[link:http://uk.businessinsider.com/vladimir-putin-is-testing-how-isolated-britain-is-after-brexit-2018-3|

[Denzil_DC]

1. That's one take.

I'm quite open to the idea that Putin, or perhaps some rogue cut-out acting on Russia's behalf, is behind this attack, but it seems an unduly unsubtle, provocative and indiscriminate method (which might bear out the argument in the OP) given the other ways they've used to exact revenge in the past.

Like many others, I'd like to see as much concrete evidence as possible before escalating the situation further - although they signed up to the EU leaders' joint statement, the French had been hanging back on that basis, for instance.

The added irony is the way the Tories have sucked up to and encouraged Russian oligarchs to tuck away their money in property etc. in London and been only too happy to meet with and take cash from them - which would become more difficult if the UK stayed in the EU beyond January 2019, when the new tax and anti-money laundering directives come into force (which might be an argument against the OP).

It does, though, as the article says, highlight who our main allies in the world are in times of crisis at the moment. How stupid to be seeking to distance ourselves from them, and turning to Trump's America, MAGA cap in hand, looking for trade deals and help.

[RandomAccess]

2. I think Putin is testing the waters in other ways --

how far he can go with his outrageous acts before being pulled up short. He's done a number of things that affect us that a US President ought to object to strenuously, but this one hasn't. He's trying to push the limits. The "unsubtle" is part of it, IMO -- thumbing his nose at the world.

[Denzil_DC]

4. I think that claim and this OP are running away beyond currently known facts.

Here's another theory about what happened, for instance: https://www.democraticunderground.com/100210365868

It's no more a conspiracy theory than what Chatham House are currently suggesting above without hard evidence.

Among doubters, there have been claims that there's no way to trace the origin of the Novichok. My understanding is that this isn't clear, because the isotope ratios of certain elements in it could be used to identify their geographical origin.

That in itself wouldn't clear up the mode of delivery (there have been a few official stories about that so far - doorknob, luggage etc.), culprits nor motivation, but it would be a step forward.

[RandomAccess]

5. I guess you didn't see this --

Unless you have some special knowledge and experise that surpasses that of the people speaking and referenced here in this video, I'll assume they're right and you're --- out in the poppies or something.

Oh, and who they were after is basically immaterial, IMO.

[Denzil_DC]

6. Perhaps you could explain exactly what in that footage is supposed to be so persuasive?

All I'm seeing is a bunch of political posturing and conjecture with a strong dash of appeal to authority - predictably, except from Trump, of course, who's away with the fairies anyway.

As for what I can only assume is your attempt at a silly insult with the "out in the poppies" thing, I'm pretty inured to all that crap having lived through the run-up to the Iraq War, both IRL and online - and my skepticism served me well at that time - so I respectfully suggest you save it for somebody who gives a damn.

We might - might - eventually find out what actually happened, and I wouldn't be surprised if the threads lead back to Putin in the end, but there are too many inexplicable loose ends at the moment to pass definitive judgement.

As for the thesis in the OP - at the moment, utterly predictably, Theresa May's standing has been improved, so if that was the plot, it's been a spectacular backfire, and it wouldn't have taken a genius to predict that would be the case.

[T_i_B]

7. I would tend to agree

I do think that Britain is seen as being a soft touch at present, and our current foreign policy of leaving the EU and kowtowing to President Fart is making that much worse.

Theresa May's reaction so far has been OK-ish (certainly better than Gavin Williamson's outburst), but she will need to go further with action against Russia. Also worth remembering that there is a lot of pro-Russian sympathy among Brexiteers. The reactions of President Fart and Jeremy Corbyn have both been very disappointing. Just two years in to the Brexit Age and the Conservatives have become UKIP, Labour have become InfoWars, and UK sovereignty has become Russian.

The one thing we have in our favour at the moment is NATO membership, which necessarily entails solidarity from our allies. Even at a time when we are deliberately wrecking the links that hold us together by leaving the EU.

[lapfog_1]

3. Using a military developed Nerve Agent created by the Russians

it is / was so easy to trace this back to Putin

The timing is important too... as well as targeting the daughter.

This was a message aimed at Manafort. Keep your trap shut, do not take a plea and do not cooperate. Serve the rest of your life in prison and we will leave your family alone.

[T_i_B]

8. A very good article by Caroline Lucas about this

One that makes the attempts of many online Labour supporters to play partisan point scoring games and engage in conspiracy theories look so much worse in comparison.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/russia-jeremy-corbyn_uk_5aa46df6e4b07047bec712d4

Here are two facts. One: Britain has a long history of foreign policy errors, some of which have had catastrophic consequences. Two: The Russian Government is vicious, authoritarian and downright dangerous, and it was almost certainly responsible for the recent nerve agent attack in Salisbury. What I can’t work out is why so few people seem able to hold both of these opinions at once.

Having said all of this, I am not afraid to say that sometimes governments get it about right on foreign affairs, and that Theresa May’s reading of the attack on Salisbury is likely one of those times. There is a caveat here, and it’s an important one: I have no access to classified documents. Unlike ministers, and indeed senior members of the Labour frontbench, I am not on the Privy Council - so I have access to the same evidence as those of you reading this.

It is on that basis, and my reading of what happened with the murder of Alexander Litvinienko too, that I have concluded that the Government is probably right to say that the Russian state was, at the very least, complicit in the attempted murder of the double agent Sergei Skripal. The nature of the attack, the nerve agent used and the target point towards Putin’s Government - and their response doesn’t suggest they truly want to prove it wasn’t them. France, Germany and the USA have quite clearly pointed the finger at Russia too - noting that this is the first offensive use of a nerve agent in Europe since World War Two.

In light of this evidence - I do believe that the Government are correct to say they will “get tough” on Russia - indeed I wish they had done much more. While I can’t say I have a problem with expelling diplomats I believe that we also need harsher action against those Putin cronies who have money stashed away in London, often in speculative property - why not hit them where it really hurts and confiscate their assets? The Prime Minister could have frozen the luxury properties of people such as Alisher Usmanov or Igor Shuvalov, Russia’s deputy prime minister, who has a flat overlooking the Ministry of Defence. She didn’t - and today her own Defence Secretary was left telling the Russias to “go away and shut up” - probably because he knows that the measures announced so far just aren’t enough. It might be a good time for the Tories to think again about accepting huge sums of money from potentially dodgy Russian donors, too.

[Denzil_DC]

9. Unfortunately, the partisan point-scoring isn't confined to Labour supporters.

Last edited Mon Mar 19, 2018, 12:25 AM - Edit history (1)

You'll know well that I couldn't be classed as a Corbyn fan (and you should certainly know that I'm no Russia apologist), but this is the backdrop chosen for the BBC's flagship nightly news magazine earlier last week:



In response to widespread anger at what has been perceived as a blatant visual smear (and quite a sinister one at that) against the leader of the opposition simply for urging caution and waiting for evidence, the BBC's social media team has been on the defensive:

Link to tweet

BBC News Press Team
✔
@BBCNewsPR

This. And the programme didn’t ‘photoshop’ the hat either. …

Link to tweet

Salman Anwar @_SalmanAnwar

The Corbyn Moscow background is a standard background used by Newsnight. They used it a couple of months ago with Gavin Williamson. The claims of BBC Bias are absurd.

Oh, really?

Link to tweet

BBC News Press Team
✔
@BBCNewsPR
Replying to @ToryFibs

The photo was not altered. We often recycle backdrops when covering stories of a similar theme, in this case Russia, and will include an image of an individual if they are the focus of the story. Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson has also appeared over this backdrop previously.

Anti-Gamm❄️n @morelikewater

It's been photoshopped pic.twitter.com/Njo55kpf54

Did somebody say "conspiracy theory?

Link to tweet

Jo Maugham QC
✔
@JolyonMaugham

Just remembered I have a written message from a senior BBC bod explaining (unambiguously) that the BBC does code negative messages about Corbyn into its imagery.

Meanwhile, north of the border, despite Nicola Sturgeon quickly coming out firmly in support of May's actions, the Tories have been trying to make hay about the fact that Alec Salmond has an independently produced show that airs on Russia Today:



Other media are also experiencing "glitches":

Link to tweet

OffGuardian @OffGuardian0

LOL - @guardian opened comments on @jeremycorbyn’ s piece calling for sanity over Russia for about 10 mins, then slammed them shut when people began overwhelmingly endorsing him.

“Comments opened in error” they say. Yes, we can believe that. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/mar/15/salisbury-attack-conflict-britain-cold-war …

Link to tweet

OffGuardian @OffGuardian0

curious update here - even tho @guardian claimed comments were originally opened “in error” they actually RE-opened them several hours after our Tweet went out.

Only THIS time there was an army of anti-Corbynites ready to attack him....

Link to tweet

…

So far, as alleged vectors for delivery of the poison agent, we've had powder, liquid, something in a restaurant, car door handles, a suitcase, car air vents, their clothing, and yesterday's accepted narratives are today's debunked stories:



Much as I respect Lucas and agree with a lot of what she's written above, she's somewhat uncritical of May's response. On the basis of "Qui bono?", I'd say there's one winner out of the current situation:





The Tories would have sold your granny and mine (RIP) for photo ops like that during the last election.

To be clear, I'm not unhappy with sanctions against the mafia that the Tories have allowed/invited to take over swathes of the country, and I'd have liked to see them happen even without this attack, but I can't forget or excuse May's initial response, which was to threaten "a cyberattack", which is the sort of war where we'd be very quickly likely to come off worse.

And having ignored the accepted protocols for an incident like this, the administration was rather slow to enlist the procedures of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons and supply the required samples. And their conduct is still inexplicable:

Tories block draft UN Security Council statement calling for ‘urgent and civilized’ investigation into Skripal poisoning attack

Following Theresa May’s statement in the House of Commons yesterday which explicitly apportioned blame onto Russia for the poisoning of Double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter in Salisbury last week, the British government have reportedly blocked a UN Security Council (UNSC) statement drafted by Russia which called for an "urgent and civilized" investigation "in line with OPCW standards" into the incident.

https://evolvepolitics.com/tories-block-draft-un-security-council-statement-calling-for-urgent-and-civilized-investigation-into-skripal-poisoning-attack/

Even if they mistrust UN procedures in this case, it's hard to see the problem in holding parallel investigations.

Meanwhile, in the fog of war, few are covering this aspect (which Lucas does clearly touch on above), though it has bubbled up in the media numerous times in the past:

Why does Putin treat Britain with disdain? He thinks he’s bought it.

“Londongrad” is the nickname, not entirely affectionate, that wealthy Russians have bestowed upon Britain’s capital. The term doesn’t just designate a physical place, though many Russians do indeed live here. Londongrad is more properly a state of mind — encompassing not only the nonresident owners of large houses in Kensington, but also the British institutions, banks, law firms, accountants, private schools, art galleries, and even the Conservative Party fundraisers that have gone out of their way to accommodate them.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/why-does-putin-treat-britain-with-disdain-he-thinks-hes-bought-it/2018/03/16/9f66a720-2951-11e8-874b-d517e912f125_story.html

[T_i_B]

10. Alex Salmond's Russian toadying is also of concern

I know you think he's wonderful and you won't like me for saying it, but it stinks. No better than Farage or George Galloway.

As does the Tory links to Russian oligarchs. The Russian sleaze in UK politics runs deep on both left and right. As such, any attempt to crack down on Putin's antics will face considerable opposition.

Expecting a long winded, blustering and very angry reply in 3.......2........1......

[Denzil_DC]

11. Do you have any idea how many Tory and Labour politicians

have graced the RT airwaves in the past few years?

As for Salmond "toadying", I don't think you'll have seen any of his shows, not that I'm a fan.

The fact that a calm, reasoned post from me, for the second time in this thread, has elicited an insult, this time on the lines of predicting "a long winded, blustering and very angry reply", says everything about how quickly our political discourse degrades under stress and disinformation.

[T_i_B]

12. Far too many Tory and Labour politicians yes

But that does not exempt the SNP from criticism when they do the exact same thing.

One thing that Corbynites are currently up in arms about is Corbyn being excluded from certain security briefings. To be brutally honest, I can understand why he wouldn't be trusted with such matters, given his history of being an apologist for the Russian regime. However, the same would also apply to a vast swathe of the Conservative party with dubious links to Russia. If politicians on all sides cannot be trusted with such matters then that is a matter of grave concern.

[Denzil_DC]

13. "The exact same thing", you say?

As a Privy Councillor and Leader of the Opposition, I see no excuse for excluding Corbyn from briefings. If the fear is he'd spill beans, I think the Russians may know what's going on already. If he then asks inconvenient questions, who's to blame him?

And the point isn't that the SNP are squeaky clean (though comparatively speaking, they are - Salmond's not even an elected official at this stage, unlike the many from other parties who've been happy to appear on RT, his show is independently produced, and Sturgeon's been taking a lot of heat from some quarters for her support of May), it's that the Tories, in this neck of the woods anyway, have somehow been taboo to criticize while only too ready to point the finger.

For instance, I haven't seen any of the other parties blatantly take cash from Russians in return for access (£160,000 to play tennis with Boris, £30,000 for dinner with Ruth Davidson, likewise for Williamson ... that's a lot of cash to splash just for a bit of "fun" ).

Time was when that was frowned upon - or even a resigning matter - whatever the nationality. It's given rise to absurd situations that go way beyond hypocrisy: