PRESS RELEASES AND NEWS
Pages: ««« :: 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 :: »»»
On 14 of March Russian Ambassador Alexander Yakovenko was summoned to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office where he was informed that 23 diplomats were declared personae non gratae.
We consider this hostile action as totally unacceptable, unjustified and shortsighted.
All the responsibility for the deterioration of the Russia-UK relationship lies with the current political leadership of Britain.
Mr Chairperson,
In connection with the vicious attacks launched by British officials in London, as well as the statement by the head of the British delegation to the OPCW with regard to Russia concerning the suspicious story of two persons poisoned with a toxic agent in Salisbury, we would like to state the following.
The British authorities’ unfounded accusations of Russia’s alleged involvement in using poisonous agents on their territory are absolutely unacceptable. Our British colleagues should recall that Russia and the United Kingdom are members of the OPCW which is one of the most successful and effective disarmament and non-proliferation mechanisms. We call upon them to abandon the language of ultimatums and threats and return to the legal framework of the chemical convention, which makes it possible to resolve this kind of situation.
On March 13, Ambassador of the United Kingdom to Russia Laurence Bristow was summoned to the Russian Foreign Ministry, where First Deputy Foreign Minister Vladimir Titov strongly protested the evidence-free accusations by the UK authorities of Russia’s alleged involvement in the poisoning of Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia.
It was stated that the actions of the UK authorities are a clear provocation and that the Russian Federation was not involved in the incident that took place in Salisbury on March 4, 2018. From the Russian side, it was emphasised that Moscow will not respond to London’s ultimatum until it receives samples of the chemical substance to which the UK investigators are referring and until the UK demonstrates compliance with the Chemical Weapons Convention that stipulates a joint investigation into the incident, for which Moscow is ready. Without that, there can be no sense in any statements from London. The incident appears to be yet another crooked attempt by the UK authorities to discredit Russia.
Any threat to take “punitive” measures against Russia will meet with a response. The British side should be aware of that.
Q: Can you comment on yesterday’s threats of cyber attacks against Russia?
A: Statements by a number of MPs, “Whitehall sources” and “experts” regarding a possible “deployment” of “offensive cyber-capabilities” cause serious concern. Not only is Russia groundlessly and provocatively accused of the Salisbury incident, but apparently, plans are being developed in the UK to strike Russia with cyber weapons.
Judging by the statements of the Prime Minister, such a decision can be taken at tomorrow’s meeting of the National Security Council. We invite the British side to once again consider the consequences of such a reckless move.
Q: Has your mission made any contact with the UK authorities over the wellbeing of Sergey and Julia Skripal?
A: Literally the next day after the first reports on the poisoning of Mr Skripal and his daughter the Embassy officially requested the Foreign Office to provide information on their health situation and the investigation. This is important to us since his issue has become quite a negative factor for the relations between our countries due to the unfounded accusations against Russia advanced by the media. British officials don’t provide any additional information and don’t distance themselves from the media campaign. The investigation is being concluded in a non-transparent manner, whenever for the Russian side nor for the public. Quite naturally, this is a source of concern.
Q: Has the Embassy received information from the British authorities upon request on the “Sergei Skripal case”?
We are impressed by the statement of the Foreign Secretary in Parliament today. The Foreign Secretary spoke in such a manner as if the investigation was already over and Russia was found responsible for what had happened in Salisbury.
We regret that instead of a proper official clarification on the issue the Foreign Secretary chose to threaten Russia with retribution. Looks like the script of yet another anti-Russian campaign has been already written.
Q.: How would you comment the situation with the alleged poisoning of MI6 agent Sergei Skripal in Salisbury?
A.: The situation regarding the hospitalisation of Sergey Skripal and another person on 4 March, as described by the British media, causes serious concern.
Given the continued media speculation on Russia's role in Eastern Ghouta, and in the light of Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson's statement of 5 March, accusing Russia of acting contary to UN Security Council resolution 2401, we believe it useful to briefly recapitulate the main facts pertaining to the situation in Eastern Ghouta.
Q: According to the Downing Street spokesperson, Prime Minister Theresa May and US President Donald Trump “agreed that the overwhelming responsibility for the heart-breaking human suffering lay with the Syrian regime and Russia”. How does it relate to the real situation on the ground and Russia’s efforts in bringing an end to suffering of the population in Eastern Ghouta?
A: There are at least three reasons why we cannot accept these allegations.
Firstly, the UN Security Council resolution 2401 aimed at alleviating suffering of the people in Eastern Ghouta calls upon all the countries with influence in Syria, including the United Kingdom and the United States, to pressure warring sides to end the fighting.
Pages: ««« :: 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 :: »»»
| 
