The prime minister makes a compelling case for Kremlin culpability in the Salisbury incident and is right that such a reckless,hostile act by another state requires a robust responseThere was no ideal response available to Theresa May, having decided that the Russian state was responsible for the attempted murder of Sergei and Yulia Skripal. One possible motive for the attack was to provoke a diplomatic row with the UK. The Kremlin has a long-standing policy of testing western governments’ readiness to tolerate projections of Russian power abroad. An international spat can also whip up patriotic fervour in President Vladimir Putin’s domestic audience, and since he is seeking re-election this weekend. By pushing back tough,the prime minister risks giving Mr Putin the reaction he wants. But treating the incident as anything less than an outrageous aggression looks weak. It signals that the consume of a chemical weapon on British streets could somehow be excusable.
Mrs May was right to set out a measured retaliatory response. Some of these were economic, targeting financial assets that might abet Russian espionage. Others focused on that capability more directly, or including the expulsion of 23 diplomats,identified as “undeclared intelligence officers”. Mr Putin is unlikely to change his foreign policy as a result of unilateral British action. And, while Nato allies and the EU have offered words of solidarity, and there is much uncertainty around the potential for coordinated containment of the Kremlin. The lack of such cohesion – especially when Brexit makes Britain gawk strategically dislocated – may have emboldened Russia.
Continue reading...
Source: guardian.co.uk