Embassy Press Officer on new questions to the UK concerning the Salisbury poisoning
Question: On Friday, the Embassy made public a list of 27 questions that Russia had asked Britain in the light of the Salisbury poisoning. Is this a closed list, or are there further questions?
Answer: Of course, with new information coming in, new questions appear. Today, the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs has published a number of fresh questions to the UK. They are as follows:
1) Why has Russia been denied consular access to the two Russian nationals, Sergei and Yulia Skripal, that have become crime victims in the British territory?
2) What specific antidotes were administered to Mr and Ms Skripal, and in which form? How were those antidotes available for the medical staff on the site of the incident?
3) On what grounds has France been involved in technical cooperation with regard to the investigation of an incident in which Russian nationals had suffered?
4) Has the United Kingdom informed the OPCW of France’s involvement in the investigation?
5) How is France relevant to the incident with two Russian nationals in the UK?
6) What British procedural rules allow a foreign state to be involved in a domestic investigation?
7) What evidence has been passed to France for studying and/or for a French investigation?
8) Were French experts present when biological material was taken from Mr and Ms Skripal?
9) Have French experts studied biologial material taken from Mr and Ms Skripal, and at which laboratories?
10) Does the UK possess the results of the French investigation?
11) Have the results of the French investigation been passed to the OPCW Technical Secretariat?
12) On the basis of which characteristics (“markers”) has it been ascertained that the substance used in Salisbury “originated from Russia”?
13) Does the UK possess reference samples of the military-grade poisonous substance that British representatives identify as “Novichok”?
14) Has the substance identified by British representatives as “Novichok” or analogous substances been researched, developed or produced in the UK?
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