Embassy Press Officer’s reply to a question on allegations in the UK concerning “Russian cyberthreats”
Q: How would you comment on statements of the British officials and allegations in the media drawing attention of the public to “growing cyberthreats from Russia”?
A: In recent days, we have again witnessed numerous warnings that the UK must prepare for an inevitable cyber attack from Russia “in retaliation” for airstrikes in Syria and the Salisbury incident. These reports follow a dangerous pattern of British rhetoric.
In February, the United Kingdom blamed the Russian Government for NotPetya cyber attacks of June 2017, calling them “a continued disregard for Ukrainian sovereignty” and stating that “the Kremlin has positioned Russia in direct opposition to the West”.
More recently, Home Secretary Amber Rudd, speaking on 11 April in Manchester, claimed that “over the past six months, the National Cyber Security Centre has responded to 49 incidents associated with Russian cyber groups”, and that “Russian actors have systematically targeted the UK amongst others, expanding the number of sectors targeted, in addition to the energy, telecoms and media”.
We consider these accusations and speculations as striking examples of a reckless, provocative and unfounded policy against Russia. We are disappointed by the fact that such serious claims have been made publicly, without any proof being presented and without any attempt by the United Kingdom to clarify the situation with the Russian side in the first place.
It would be useful to point out that Russia has made several proposals to the United Kingdom on different levels to establish bilateral mechanisms of cooperation in the sphere of information security. In December 2017, during Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson’s visit to Moscow, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation Sergey Lavrov proposed to launch a serious dialogue on this matter. Unfortunately, all our proposals have been ignored by the British side.
We have also noted that the British Government did not deny the numerous statements by MPs, experts and media regarding a possible “deployment” of “offensive cyber capabilities” by the United Kingdom against Russia. Prime Minister Theresa May did not directly reject such possibility during her statement in the House of Commons on 14 March. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office has also failed to deny that in official correspondence, despite our direct requests.
Given that in recent days the British media, instigated by official statements, has again started to exploit the issue of “cyberthreats from Russia”, impression grows that the British public is being prepared for a massive cyber attack by the UK against Russia, that will purport to be of a retaliatory nature, but would in fact constitute unprovoked use of force.
Russia is not planning to conduct any cyber attacks against the United Kingdom. We expect the British Government to declare the same.
Question: How can you comment on Russian position on the UN Resolution, based on the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the legal consequences of the separation of the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritius in 1965?
Answer: The Russian Federation has backed the Resolution, because it is being considered as part of the process of decolonization.
Question: How would you comment on the statement by Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt accusing Russia of “targeting the critical national infrastructure” and trying to “change the result of elections” in many countries?
Answer: Over the recent weeks, both Mr Hunt and his ministerial colleagues including Home Secretary Sajid Javid and Defence Secretary Penny Mordaunt have been rather restrained in the way they spoke of Russia. Today, the Foreign Secretary has returned to the usual militant anti-Russia rhetoric that has nothing to do with the reality. As accusations against Russia over manipulation of US presidential elections or poisoning Sergey and Yulia Skripal are falling apart, Mr Hunt has turned to another well-known topic.
On 20 May “The Guardian” published a new leak concerning last year’s incidents in Salisbury and Amesbury. Its contents, based, as before, on information from “sources close to the investigation”, lead to following conclusions.
First and foremost, it becomes increasingly clear that the loud-voiced accusations against Russia made right after the incident by Prime Minister Theresa May in March 2018 were not supported by any facts. For many months, investigators have attempted to credibly corroborate the government’s interpretation of those events, but, apparently, without any success. If one is to believe the newspaper’s source, law enforcement professionals are getting frustrated by constant political pressure they are experiencing.
Frankly speaking, we again have a feeling of deja vu. We heard same calls and laments many times already, when reconciliation of Eastern Aleppo and Ghouta was in progress. However, let me ask why the “humanitarian troika” did not hurry to convene a Security Council meeting, when the so-called coalition was razing Baghouz and Hajin to the ground? Back then civilians died, air strikes destroyed civil infrastructure, including schools and hospitals. What about Raqqa? Almost no one bothered about the fate of this city that in fact was destroyed.
Q: How would you comment on the FT article of 17 May stating that “a US-Iran conflict would provide cover for Russia to further their ambitions”, in particular “to annex eastern Ukraine or take a chunk of one of the Baltic states”?
A: Such kind of “analysis” in the FT, well-known by its professionalism and strive for objectivity, is quite surprising.
Embassy Press Officer's letter to the Editor of the Financial Times regarding the newspaper's piece dated 17 May 2019 on the Crimea Bridge - “Russian bridge throttles Ukraine ports”.
Question: How would you comment on the BBC’s plans to make a drama about the incident in Salisbury which took place in March last year?
Answer: Undoubtedly, we will study this film carefully when it is released. At the same time we would like to recommend the filmmakers to rely upon real facts as well as official and credible information of the investigation. So far, no meaningful results of the inquiry have been presented either to the Russian side or to the public. In these circumstances, the film risks becoming another propaganda tool imposing on the audience the political version of the incident supported by no evidence.
Question: Has there been any improvement in the working environment for the Russian diplomats in the UK? What’s the situation with the issuance of visas to the Embassy staff?
Answer: Despite isolated statements of the British authorities, we are not observing any qualitative improvements of the situation. Moreover, in certain aspects it is only getting worse. Recently, there has been an increase in the number of cases of biased approach of the UK Border Force officials towards Russian diplomats arriving to the UK on short-term assignments, as well as guests of the Embassy staff members.
Question: How would you comment on media publications that British MPs are calling to impose additional sanctions against Russia?
Answer: We have taken note of the publications in local media that the chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Russia, Chris Bryant, has urged Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt to impose sanctions against Russia using the
so-called “Magnitsky clause” to the Sanctions and Anti-Money Laundering Act.
Q: Does the Embassy have any further information in relation to the investigation into the death of the Russian national Nikolay Glushkov in London?
A.: More than a year has passed since Nikolay Glushkov’s death. Through all this time, the British authorities have been performing a strange political play, refusing to provide information on the investigation or to cooperate with the competent Russian authorities. The British side continues to ignore our numerous enquiries, including the official request of the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation for legal assistance over Russia’s own criminal case into the death of Nikolay Glushkov and the Embassy’s proposal to arrange a meeting between the Russian Ambassador Alexander Yakovenko and the Met Police Commissioner Cressida Dick.
Tweet Follow @russianembassy