Embassy Press Officer on unanswered questions regarding the Salisbury poisoning
Question: At yesterday's briefing, the Official Representative of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs said that the Embassy had asked quite a few questions that remain unanswered. What are those questions?
Answer: Indeed, we are witnessing a blatant violation by the UK of its international obligations under the 1963 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations and the 1968 bilateral Consular Convention. We have not received a response to our multiple questions and requests made through diplomatic notes. Failure by Britain to engage in normal diplomatic exchange with the Embassy on this matter is regrettable.
The questions to which we are awaiting answers are as follows:
1) What is Mr and Ms Skripal's exact diagnosis and condition?
2) What treatment are they receiving?
3) Is that treatment the same as that provided to Sgt Nick Bailey?
4) Is it true that Yulia Skripal has regained consciousness and can communicate, eat and drink?
5) Mr Bailey has been discharged, Yulia Skripal is getting better, but why is Sergei Skripal still in a critical condition?
6) Did Mr Bailey, Mr Skripal and Ms Skripal receive antidotes?
7) Which antidotes?
8) How were the right antidotes identified?
9) Did they actually help or harm?
10) The Embassy immediately informed the FCO that Mr Skripal's niece has been enquiring of her uncle's and cousin's health. Why have the authorities ignored her?
11) Why are there no photos/videos confirming that the Skripals are alive and at hospital?
12) Did the Skripals agree on Salisbury CCTV footage to be shown on TV?
13) If not, who agreed on their behalf?
14) Can that person also agree on hospital photos/videos to be published?
15) Why are consuls not allowed to see the Skripals?
16) How are doctors protected against chemical exposure?
17) Can consuls use the same protection?
18) Where, how and by whom were blood samples collected from the Skripals?
19) How was it documented?
20) Who can certify that the data is credible?
21) How can we be sure that the chain of custody was up to international standards?
22) Through what methods did experts identify the substance so quickly?
23) Had they possessed a sample against which to test the substance?
24) Where had that sample come from?
25) Nerve agents act immediately. Why was it not the case with the Skripals?
26) Leaks suggest the Skripals were poisoned at a pub, at a restaurant, in their car, at the airport, at home... Which version is the official one?
27) How to reconcile quick political moves with Scotland Yard's statement that the investigation will take "months"?
The annual Russo-British Business Forum took place in London on 18 June, hosted by the Russo-British Chamber of Commerce (RBCC) with support from the Russian Embassy and the Russian Trade Delegation in the UK.
The Russian Ambassador Alexander Yakovenko, RBCC Patron HRH Prince Michael of Kent and other officials, CEOs of Russian and British companies representing industrial, high-tech and finance sectors, as well as academia attended the event. More than 200 participants were registered at the Forum.
Question: Could you please comment on the possible visit by President of Venezuela Nicolas Maduro and the statement made by U.S. national security adviser John Bolton that Maduro has signed a defence contract with Russia in order to “buy” permanent support from Moscow.
Sergey Lavrov: Regarding the statement made by Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro about his plans to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin – yes, we are always ready to meet with our Venezuelan colleagues at the high and top levels, and such contacts will certainly take place in the foreseeable future. So far, no specific dates have been discussed and, accordingly, no specific contacts have been planned. But I repeat, we are always open to such meetings.
Q: How would you comment on the official statement by the UK Government pointing the finger at Iran for the attacks on oil tankers in the Gulf of Oman on 12 May and 13 June?
A: The conclusions contained in that statement are not supported by any evidence. In our opinion, its absence makes it impossible to draw conclusions on anyone’s responsibility for the incidents.
Russia calls upon the whole international community to show restraint in their assessments, avoid using biased one-sided approaches and look into the events carefully. We are convinced that no one should be blamed until a thorough and unbiased international investigation is completed.
The United States has again accused Russia of violating the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT). The latest statement to this effect was made by the US Defence Intelligence Agency on June 13.
We point out once again that all these accusations are completely groundless. They cannot be regarded as anything other than an attempt to justify Washington’s preparations to withdraw from the CTBT and to resume full-scale nuclear tests.
I would like to reaffirm our full support for this format which has become a tradition. It is called “The Primakov Readings.” The prestige of this forum is growing. In five years, it has become one of the most authoritative and representative international expert venues. I think this is only natural because in one way or other everything linked with Mr Primakov is simply “doomed” to succeed considering the wealthiest intellectual legacy left by this outstanding state and political figure and scholar.
Prior to visiting Kyrgyzstan to attend the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation summit and Tajikistan to take part in the summit of the Conference on Interaction and Confidence-Building Measures in Asia, President Vladimir Putin answered the questions of Radik Batyrshin, President and Editor-in-chief of the Mir Interstate Television and Radio Company.
Question: Does the Embassy have any new information regarding the circumstances of the mysterious murder of the Russian national Nikolay Glushkov in London that happened on 12 March 2018?
Answer: The Embassy regrets to state that, as 15 months have passed since this crime, the British authorities continue to disregard our numerous enquiries concerning course and results of the investigation into the murder of former Deputy Director General of “Aeroflot” Mr Nikolay Glushkov in the UK.
We have noted the continued complaints about Russia “violating” the INF Treaty in the NATO leadership’s public rhetoric on the subject, while urging the Russian side to “show political will and abide by the Treaty to save it.” As we understand it, such rhetoric will increase as we approach August 2, when the United States withdrawal procedure will be completed, destroying it completely. What Russia has to do with this is completely incomprehensible. As far as we understand, by replicating the accusations against our country, NATO representatives are trying to help Washington camouflage the true causes of the INF collapse and to divert attention from America’s true intentions by creating a kind of propaganda veil with such comments and statements.
Q: How will you comment on the publication by the Times arguing that Moscow “has rejected calls by President Trump to stop bombing of the Syrian rebel enclave of Idlib”?
A: We regard the publication as another attempt to mislead the readers about Russia’s true intentions in Syria. Our country remains fully committed to agreements on stabilization in Idlib, and to the Turkish-Russian memorandum dated 17 September, 2018. Let me remind you that the memorandum reiterates strong commitment to eradicate terrorists from the Syrian soil. Guided by these principles and in response to aggressive actions by terrorist groups in Idlib, Russia is providing necessary support to the Syrian governmental in order to clean up this area from the armed elements recognised by the international community, including the UK, as terrorist organisations.
Tweet Follow @russianembassy