EMBASSY INFORMS
Pages: ««« :: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 :: »»»
Question: 4 August marks five months since the Salisbury incident with the Russian nationals Sergei and Yulia Skripal. This length of time would seem enough to have established clarity in this case. Has there been any progress in your interaction with the British side?
Answer: We have to note again that, unfortunately, no such interaction has taken place so far. We continue to knock at the closed door trying to receive answers to the numerous questions we raised, including on what happened to the Russian citizens in Salisbury, where they are now and what is their health condition.
Question: In one of its earlier comments the Embassy announced that it had requested assistance of the UK authorities in arranging a meeting with Chief Executive of the Porton Down Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (DSTL) Gary Aitkenhead and his colleagues. Has the British side replied to this query?
Answer: Unfortunately, neither the Embassy’s public comment, nor its official request for a meeting with Porton Down experts sent to the FCO in April have been answered. We have accumulated a number of questions that require substantive replies. Their list is growing as the investigation progresses, while the British authorities’ attempts to classify the circumstances of the poisoning in Salisbury and Amesbury only strenghten our suspicions that the incidents are somehow linked to Porton Down activity.
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
Pages: ««« :: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 :: »»»
| 
