PRESS RELEASES AND NEWS
Pages: ««« :: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 :: »»»
Q.: Has the Embassy received any new information from the British authorities concerning the circumstances of the death of the Russian national Mr Nikolay Glushkov in London?
A.: Unfortunately, the British authorities have not provided us with any new information concerning the course of the investigation into the death of Mr Glushkov since 26 April, when Assistant Commissioner of the Met Police Mr Neil Basu QPM replied to our query with a short letter.
Throughout the recent months the Embassy has made several attempts to contact Met Police senior officers, including by suggesting a meeting between the Ambassador and the Commissioner of the Met Police in order to clarify the situation around the investigation into the death of the Russian citizen. Moreover, as the request of the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation for legal assistance in the criminal case opened in Russia on the death of Mr Nikolay Glushkov was delivered to the Home Office on 23 April, we have suggested to the British side to consider holding bilateral consultations on this matter between our respective authorities.
Question: UK Foreign Minister Jeremy Hunt has on a number of occasions stated that Vladimir Putin would be “the only person rejoicing” over a no deal Brexit. How would you comment on that?
Answer: The European Union is Russia’s important neighbour and partner in politics, business, culture and people-to-people contacts. We are interested in a strong, stable and positively predictable European Union.
The Islamic Republic of Iran, the Russian Federation and the Republic of Turkey (hereinafter – the Parties) reaffirmed their strong commitment to the sovereignty, independence, unity and territorial integrity of Syria and agreed on the following:
Question: On 29 July The Daily Mirror presented a new version of the incident in Salisbury that “at least two teams of Russian hitmen were responsible for the Salisbury novichok attack”. How would you comment on that?
Answer: We have taken note of this information. One would notice that over the last two or three weeks the British media quoting “reliable sources”, have produced so many versions of the incidents in Salisbury and Amesbury that even professional investigators would struggle to make any sense out of them.
Unfortunately, the endless flow of leaks in the British media only contributes to the anti-Russian campaign run by the UK government. Such policy helps spread allegations around the incidents, not supported by facts thus hampering establishing the truth and bringing those responsible to justice.
Q.: How would you comment on media reports claiming that the number of Russian pupils in British independent schools has decreased by almost a thousand over the last three years?
A.: We have noted these report, quoting the Independent School Council, claiming that in January there were 2806 pupils from Russia studying in British independent schools, compared to 3611 three years ago. It is not surprising given the numerous reports on deteriorating quality of education and security in British private schools.
Question: On 28 July The Guardian published an interview with Mr John Glen MP where he claimed that Russia was responsible for the incident in Salisbury. How would you comment on that?
Answer: The Embassy has taken note of Mr John Glen’s interview. His unsubstantiated statements are misleading. The secrecy around the investigation into the Salisbury and Amesbury incidents as well as the reluctance of the British authorities to provide the international community with any evidence testify to the irresponsible position of the UK government supported by nothing but the so-called "solidarity" of its EU and NATO allies.
Q.: How would you comment on the telephone conversation between Yulia Skripal and her cousin Viktoria that, according to the Russian media, has recently taken place?
A.: The Embassy has no reliable information concerning contents of this conversation, and can neither deny nor confirm any information published in this regard, as the British authorities in violation of their international obligations continue to deny us access to Yulia Skripal.
This is not the first public statement on behalf of Yulia Skripal, but even her TV appearance on 23 May did not dispel our doubts over her freedom to do and say what she wants. Back then we were under impression that Yulia did not use her own words and was reading a pre-written statement. We pointed out the facts supporting such conclusion.
Question: On 24 July ITV aired an interview with Charlie Rowley, one of the victims of the incident in Amesbury. Does that mean that he is no longer being kept in isolation?
Answer: We have watched the interview with Mr Rowley carefully. We have to note that what we saw was a clipped rather than continuous video footage. It is unclear why the full version of the interview did not go on air, where and when the conversation took place, just as whether and to what extent it was controlled by the police. Together with daily conflicting media leaks that makes the whole picture of the incident increasingly obscure.
Among other things, Charlie Rowley’s statement absolutely obfuscates the topic of the infamous “Novichok”, persistently assigned to Russia by the British authorities and the media despite the well-known fact that such substance could be produced by any professional chemical laboratory.
We have noted that the British authorities have been carefully concealing all information regarding the “Novichok” and have offered no explanations for the numerous conflicting reports concerning its properties. I
I. PREAMBLE
1. We, the Heads of State and Government of the Federative Republic of Brazil, the Russian Federation, the Republic of India, the People's Republic of China and the Republic of South Africa, met from 25 - 27 July 2018 in Johannesburg, at the 10th BRICS Summit. The 10th BRICS Summit, as a milestone in the history of BRICS, was held under the theme "BRICS in Africa: Collaboration for Inclusive Growth and Shared Prosperity in the 4th Industrial Revolution".
Question: How would comment on a new statement of a Foreign Office spokesperson condemning Russia’s “illegal annexation” of Crimea?
Answer:The events in Crimea were preceded by a coup d’état in Kiev supported by the West. It was a blatant violation not only of the Constitution of Ukraine, but also of the agreement of 21 February 2014 between President Viktor Yanukovych and the opposition, mediated by Germany, France and Poland.
In the FCO’s statement Russia was blamed for breaching international law. Let us remind that the coup in Kiev created a direct threat to human rights and physical safety of Russians and Russian-speakers in Crimea. Faced with this situation, in which the people of Crimea was effectively deprived of its right to self-determination within the Ukrainian state, the lawfully elected local authorities decided to hold a referendum where citizens were asked whether they preferred Crimea to join Russia or remain part of Ukraine. With a 83.5% turnout, 96.8% of the voters supported joining Russia.
Pages: ««« :: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 :: »»»
| 
