14 December 2018
Moscow: 21:15
London: 18:15

Consular queries:  
+44 (0) 203 668 7474  
info@rusemb.org.uk  

 
285 days have passed since the Salisbury incident - no credible information or response from the British authorities                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     277 days have passed since the death of Nikolay Glushkov on British soil - no credible information or response from the British authorities

PRESS RELEASES AND NEWS

02.05.2018

Embassy press officer replies to a media question regarding new statements by National Security Adviser Sir Mark Sedwill on the Skripals poisoning

Q: How can you comment on the remarks by Sir Mark Sedwill at the House of Commons Defence Committee on 1 May, when he called the British reaction to the Salisbury incident an example of the new “fusion doctrine” in action?

A: We have noted two main elements in Sir Mark’s statements. First, he admitted that no suspects have been identitified to date in the Skripals investigation. Yet Russia was accused of this crime almost immediately. Second, the UK has no evidence of Russia being involved into the poisoning, or having developed chemical poisons in violation of its international obligations (and no such evidence can possibly exist; it is worth reminding that Russia has clearly stated in a diplomatic note that it has nothing to do with the poisoning).

Mr Sedwill again portrays his letter to NATO Secretary General as a manifestation of unprecedented transparency. In reality, the letter contains nothing but publicly known facts and, on the other hand, unverifiable assertions with reference to secret services.

In other words, Sir Mark has again confirmed that the most serious accusations put forward against Russia as well as the ensuing far-reaching foreign policy decisions accompanied by mobilisation of the whole Western bloc, were based on pure assumptions.

If this is what the “fusion doctrine” is about, then we are convinced that this doctrine runs contrary to the genuine interests of the British people. Instead of strengthening national security, it bears the riks of hasty and ill-conceived decisions damaging the quality of UK’s relations with its international partners and undermining the country’s credibility. This is also true about the essence of the response to “Russia’s behaviour” that London has chosen, namely to expel diplomats (and to inevitably face reciprocal expulsions of British personnel), the very people whose job is to improve relations. Brexit requires exactly the opposite strategies.

Meanwhile, Sir Mark’s attempts to provide a doctrinal basis for the inappropriate moves by the Government cannot negate the fact that Russia, in violation of consular conventions, has been denied access to its nationals, Sergei and Yulia Skripal. We have no information on their whereabouts and cannot verify the British statements regarding the health and wishes. Equally, there is no information available on the course of the investigation, while the numerous media leaks turn out to be false, time and again. The situation regarding the murder of another Russian citizen, Nikolay Glushkov, is hardly any better.

We reiterate our demand to the British Government to ensure compliance with their international legal obligations and the universal rules of international relations, and to urgently provide the Russian side and the public with meaningful proof that Sergei and Yulia Skripal are not forcibly isolated. For our part, we reiterate our readiness, expressed more than once, to cooperate with Britain in investigating the Salisbury incident within the framework of existing international mechanisms. We expect London to show the same attitude with regard to the legal assistance requests sent by Russian Prosecutor General’s Office in the framework of the criminal case opened in Russia with respect to the attempt on life of our citizens.

 




LATEST EVENTS

13.12.2018 - Statement of the Russian Federation on the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration, Marrakesh, December 11, 2018

The Russian Federation supports the adoption of the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration. This compromise document covers many dimensions of international migration, including humanitarian aspect, development issues, human rights and fight against crime.


12.12.2018 - Embassy comment on the state of the investigation into the death of Nikolay Glushkov

Nine months have passed since former Deputy General Director of Aeroflot Nikolay Glushkov, a national of the Russian Federation, mysteriously died in London.


11.12.2018 - Joint statement by Angola, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bolivia (plurinational state of), Burundi, China, Comoros, Congo, Cuba, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Eritrea, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Mozambique, Myanmar, Nicaragua, Pakistan, Russian Federation, State of Palestine, Syrian Arab Republic, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), Viet Nam, Zimbabwe at the Fourth review conference of the chemical weapons convention, the Hague, November 30, 2018

We, the States Parties to the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on their Destruction (CWC), committed to achieving the goal of freeing the world of chemical weapons, strongly condemn the use of chemical weapons by anyone, anywhere and under any circumstances.


09.12.2018 - Embassy Press Officer’s reply to a media question concerning the accusations of “Russian involvement” in the cases of Scott Young and Alexander Perepilichny

Question: The Sunday Times articles today speculate on the possibility that, despite earlier claims, Mr Scott Young and Mr Alexander Perepilichny were killed, while also hinting at the alleged “Russian link”. How could the Embassy comment on that? Answer: These and similar “sensations” follow the same traditional pattern. As always, no official information is provided, only leaks in the media from unknown sources. Upon this rickety foundation, fancy theories are built, with a remarkably rich collection of modal verbs used. And as always, publications appear on the eve of an important political event, such as Brexit deal vote. It is really hard to avoid the impression that we witness a pre-meditated political game to draw the public attention from the less glamorous sides of UK foreign and internal affairs.


09.12.2018 - Embassy Press Officer’s reply to a media question concerning the UK position on chemical weapons attack in Aleppo, Syria

Question: How would you comment on the statement by the UK FCO spokesperson on chemical weapons use in Aleppo? Answer: The statement reflects the worst traditions of the modern UK diplomacy in both form and substance: no attempts are made to present any evidence supporting its allegations, instead phrases of little value, such as “likely”, “highly likely” or “highly unlikely”, are being used excessively.


07.12.2018 - Embassy Comment on the situation with Russian nationals Sergei and Yulia Skripal

More than nine months have passed since the incident with the Russian citizens Sergei and Yulia Skripal. The British authorities have been in breach of their obligations under five basic international conventions as they persistently refuse to work together with the Russian side, fail to use official channels for bilateral exchange of information and make every effort to cover up the circumstances of the incident. The Skripals have not been seen alive for a long time. Their whereabouts and health status are unknown.


06.12.2018 - Embassy Press Officer’s reply to a media question concerning recent publications in the British media concerning alleged increase of Russian intelligence activity

Question: How would you comment on British media reports claiming that British security services are currently witnessing intensive activity of Russian intelligence officers allegedly working under diplomatic cover? Answer: Unfortunately, the spy hysteria in the British society is aggravating. The content of such publications, which regularly appear in the British media with the connivance of the authorities, shows that the current Conservative government is increasing its efforts to create a “toxic” image of the Russian Embassy in order to complicate our interaction with the British public as much as possible. Embassy staff travelling across the country is an absolutely normal, lawful and indispensable part of their work and daily life. Yet it is displayed as some kind of intelligence missions. This amounts to an attempt to limit the Embassy’s routine operations to a minimum.


05.12.2018 - Embassy Press Officer’s reply to a media question concerning the UK Government’s assessment of Ukraine’s actions

Question: The UK Government openly distorts the circumstances of the incident in the Kerch Strait on 25 November. What do you think is the reason for that? Answer: Unfortunately, the Ukrainian provocation in the Black Sea, as well as the general situation in the region, continues to be used by a number of Western countries, including the UK, to stir anti-Russian rhetoric. The details of the incident, most notably the blatant and deliberate violation of the territorial waters of the Russian Federation by the Ukrainian ships, are ignored by the UK Government. A number of British media outlets have also given a biased assessment of Russian actions in the Kerch Strait.


05.12.2018 - Embassy Press Officer’s reply to a media question concerning recent appeals of the British officials to impose new sanctions against Russia

Question: Recently British government officials have been actively urging to step up pressure on Russia by imposing new sanctions. How would you comment on this matter? Answer: We have taken note of such calls. Those statements have clearly shown the anti-Russian essence of the current Conservative government’s policies. The British officials are doing their utmost to avoid conducting a normal intergovernmental dialogue with Russia, while using only the language of ultimatums and sanctions, and are actively urging their partners, first and foremost in Europe, to act in a similar manner.


04.12.2018 - Embassy Press Officer’s reply to a media question concerning accusations of “spying” made against Channel One Russia journalists

Question: How would you comment on the publications in British media claiming that “Channel One Russia” journalists were involved in some sort of “spying activity”? Answer: We have taken note of the numerous publications with accusations against “Channel One Russia” journalists of “spying”, as well as of the instruction by the British Ministry of Defence that soldiers should not talk to Russian journalists and report them to the police if they ever see them near military installations. Such ungrounded accusations raise much concern. “Channel One Russia” works in the UK officially and openly, with all the necessary paperwork, in accordance with British law. In fact, this cannot always be said about certain UK journalists working in Russia.



all messages