PRESS RELEASES AND NEWS

30.03.2018

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"?

Show comments (5)

LATEST EVENTS

On 10 September 2020, Russian Ambassador Andrei Kelin hosted the former President of WorldSkills International Mr Simon Bartley at his residence to present him with a Certificate of Commendation from the Government of the Russian Federation awarded for his outstanding work in promoting the WorldSkills Russia movement.

On 7 September 2020, Russian Ambassador Andrei Kelin and Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office Director General Thomas Drew discussed the situation regarding the hospitalisation of Alexei Navalny. The British side has called for an investigation of the case. The Ambassador stressed that voicing unsubstantiated accusations and politicising an essentially medical and legal matter was unacceptable.

The report was prepared before last year’s general election, but its publication was long delayed by the ruling Conservatives, and opponents of Boris Johnson accused him of doing it specifically to downplay the Russian threat and prevent his party from losing credibility. Now, however, the report, written in part by well-known retired MI-5 employee Christopher Style (creator of the file on Trump’s “Russian contacts”), has been published. The British press has been disappointed: there is no proof of Russian interference in the Brexit referendum (although they cannot understand how the British voted to leave the EU when most of the political elite, almost all of the press and the City were against it), although there are rumours of attempts to influence the Scottish independence referendum. This, however, is London’s point of view; from Moscow’s perspective, the report is sensational, because its authors’ conclusions are the best evidence that the British powers-that-be are prepared to work in the Kremlin’s interests. Style and Browder (another co-author of the report) do not in fact understand this, but this is the skill of the so-called KGB heirs’ game. But let’s start at the beginning.

The human rights situation in Ukraine continues to degrade. The Kyiv authorities adopt legislative acts contrary to the rules of national law and international obligations. Human rights activists document systemic violations of fundamental human rights and freedoms. Referring to the need to combat the so-called Russian aggression and separatism, political opponents, independent journalists, media outlets, and undesirable members of public organizations are being prosecuted. The rights of internally displaced persons, the Russian-speaking population, and representatives of national minorities are limited. The clergy and parishioners of the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church are being prosecuted. The right to liberty and security of person is not respected. In Ukraine, there are numerous facts of illegal detention, torture, intimidation, ill-treatment, sexual violence, including to obtain confessions or compel cooperation.

The Embassy has noted the statements by the UK Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab concerning unspecified “Russian actors” who have “almost certainly” sought to interfere in 2019 UK General Election through “online amplification” of sensitive documents relating to the UK-US Free Trade Agreement, as well as the alleged responsibility of “Russian Intelligence Services” for cyber attacks aimed at stealing research information on coronavirus vaccine development.

The decision by the British Government to impose sanctions against a number of Russian officials invoking the death of Sergei Magnitsky in 2009 reflects the self-declared status of the UK as the global leader in sanctions policy. All questions regarding the circumstances of Mr Magnitsky’s death have been answered long ago. Today’s decision was quite obviously conceived merely as a public move.

Question: How would you comment on the recent reports in British media that Russia supposedly offered “bounty” to the Taliban to kill UK as well as US soldiers in Afghanistan?

Dear Editor, I feel compelled to express disagreement with the Financial Times coverage of Russia’s efforts to combat the Covid-19 pandemic. Judging by your reports, Russia’s response has been to manipulate with figures at home and to spread disinformation abroad, with the government acting inefficiently and doctors having inadequate protection. This distorted picture requires a refutation. Even by most pessimistic accounts, Russia’s performance in terms of healthcare system capacity and death rate is among the best of all major countries.

Sir, Roger Boyes is wondering why Russian industrialists (he calls them ‘oligarchs’) are helping to fight Covid-19. Are they suddenly ‘embracing philanthropy’, or ‘cleaning up their nasty image’, or else seeking to impose a ‘new compact’ on the ‘floundering’ government?

Attempts to distort the results of the defeat of Nazism and the decisive contribution our country made, which are continuing in Washington even during these days of universal celebration of the 75th anniversary of Victory, cause utter indignation.