Where does the "Kremlin's hand" grow from where

On September 8, new details of the activities of two alleged officers of the Russian special services, who are suspected of trying to kill Sergei Skripal and his daughter Julia in the British city of Salisbury in early March, became known. British experts call these poisoners inexpired and amateurs and compare them not with James Bond, but with Mr. Bin . How right are they?

On September 5, British Prime Minister Teresa May said that Skripal and his daughter, Russian intelligence officers poisoned the Novice nervous substance by order of the Kremlin. The British prosecutor's office published photos of the suspects in the attack, they are known under the names Alexander Petrov and Ruslan Boshirov. Earlier, the media reported that these two men introduced themselves to the businessmen when receiving British visas and presented current passports, however, the names and surnames in them could be false.

The USA, France, Germany and Canada supported the position of Great Britain. On September 6, Safety -British Deputy Minister of Internal Affairs Ban Ben Wallace, President Vladimir Putin, is personal responsibility for poisoning in Salisbury, since he, as the head of state, “controls, finances and sends the Russian special services. In the former Skripals House in Salisbury on September 8, according to the British television channel Sky News, military specialists began work on disinfecting the territory and eliminating the remnants of the Novice substance.

Experts work near the house of Sergei and Julia Skripal. March 2018

The latest news in the investigation of an attempt on Sergey and Julia Skripal in an interview with Radio Liberty is commented on by an independent political scientist and publicist Andrey Ostalsky , who lives in the UK:

- The Telegraph publication , citing sources in the British government, reported that the alleged officers of the Russian special services Alexander Petrov and Ruslan Boshirov from September 2016 to March 2018 visited Europe about 30 times, and especially often Switzerland. In London, however, until the last they did not disclose their personalities. Why was such a decision made?

-I once spoke with one of the BBC journalists specializing in intelligence, counterintelligence and security topics. And he explained to me that there are different levels of development of intelligence material. Suppose two people are suspected of the fact that they are officers of the Main Directorate of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of Russia, that they carry out some tasks in Europe. The case starts on them. A mass of data is going to it - but this does not mean that all immigration posts need to immediately be transferred to this information. Because then it is possible, on the contrary, to frighten off the performers of these operations, while there is a need to get as much information about them as possible. If you want, the more often even they come, the better in terms of counterintelligence. Another thing is that in this particular case, of course, it probably never occurred to the British counterintelligence, that this time they would not come with some kind of intelligence mission, not only to convey something, to make some contact with someone, but to try to make murder, and even with the help of a neuro-paralytic substance.

- The Telegraph gives such a version - that the British government was also afraid for the fate of its fans who found themselves in Russia during the World Cup.

- Maybe there was such a consideration. But other versions are much more convincing to me. Because after all, the world of intelligence and counterintelligence is completely separate. And it often exists in parallel to the world in which ordinary police or migration service live and operate. Of course, there is a moment when contact is made between them, when some important information is transmitted. Sometimes this is done late, errors are made because of this. This is an unconditional risk if you allow you to actually freely enter the famous scouts of an unfriendly country into your territory. But the special services, apparently, will go to this. This is a rather complicated professional question. In addition, it is not completely clear, and The Telegraph does not even know what they did there, these two when they arrived six times, for example, to Geneva. One phrase is of great interest that there is some kind of key person, of those with whom they had contact in Geneva, from the point of view of understanding the entire organization of the operation against the Skripals. Here, too, the field for fantasy opens.

One phrase is of great interest that there is some kind of key person, of those with whom they had contact in Geneva

But it was most amazed to me that all these contacts were really recorded! And now it becomes clear why, with such confidence, Prime Minister Teresa Mei in parliament officially stated that she was convinced that these were Russian military intelligence officers, and not even some other Russian special department. Apparently, the real names of these two are known, although they can also be pseudonyms. In addition, the British did not hide that even after they began to suspect that they were behind the attempt on the Skripals (I can call you the date when this happened was the first days of May, apparently, the 3rd or 4th day when the number in the London City STAY HOTEL was found, where these two were stopped, and there were taken samples and were found these days. Microscopic traces of the "beginner"), in London they did not want to publish information, delayed this moment. Because the special services believed that there is a chance that Alexander Petrov and Ruslan Boshirov could reappear on the territory of one of the Western European countries. And by that time, the special services of all these countries, and their migration services were warned that if such people appear, they must be given a signal and they would be immediately arrested. But these two had the mind to go anywhere since then.

The alleged Alexander Petrov and Ruslan Boshirov in Salisbury. March 4, 2018

-In the UK, each publication of new information about this case causes a living socio-political discussion. What responses were caused by the fact that these two names became known, and what experts say about the circumstances of the attempt? What is called, the ominous "hand of the Kremlin", or vice versa - laugh at the fact that this very hand, in general, "grows out of the wrong place"?

- Rather, the second opinion sounds more often, yes, they laugh. Public opinion, of course, is still very scared. But professionals, experts, such as Ben Wallace, Deputy Minister of Internal Affairs of Great Britain, who oversees safety and counterintelligence issues, said that all this operation reminded him not of a movie about James Bond, but the film "Agent Johnny Inglish." There, the famous comedian Rowen Atkinson, the notorious Mr. Bean, depicts an absurd nonsense, awkward pseudo -exploration, who is all falling out of his hands and nothing happens.

And, say, a former military officer, and now the deputy of the parliament, Johnny Mercer , who apparently, who had previously been with some intelligence structures, said that if he were the head of Russian military intelligence, he would not even entrust the plumbing work in the toilet ... He said then that the British public had a incorrect idea of Russia, which allegedly grew up some terrible terrible. The intelligence monster, which must be afraid of everyone. A quote from his speech: "Putin should be treated with the contempt that he deserves. He is just a dumb thug, standing at the head of the mafia state. And this is a tragedy for the Russian people."

Maybe it was a "distraction"?

And then interesting questions arise. The version was already nominated, in my opinion, in Russia it was first sounded that maybe it was a “distraction operation”? So everything went ridiculously, so they were substituted, "lit up", as if specially wanted it. Although it is unlikely ... But why did this happen? And quite curious all sorts of versions in social networks walk. For example, that they weren’t that they were specially substituted, but they didn’t even think about conspiracy - because the highest Russian leadership is quite satisfied with the continuing growth of tension in relations with the West, the strengthening of the “besieged fortress syndrome”. This perfectly distracts the population of Russia itself from internal economic problems. Therefore, they came across - and good! And let the British be more afraid, they will know with what terrible force they deal with. This is one theory.

The second theory is that really Russian agents learn from mistakes. And Russian military intelligence allegedly already made many such mistakes, unlike its competitors from the SVR, the former intelligence of the KGB of the USSR. All 14 murders have been discussing in recent years, Russian immigrants, as is considered in the UK who caused the anger of the Kremlin. The murder of Alexander Perepelichny was committed absolutely flawlessly. So some rare poison he was poisoned that so far experts simply break their heads over his composition, although few doubt that it was precisely poisoning. Or the death of Boris Berezovsky, which is officially qualified as still unexplained suicide. But in fact, whoever I speak from the most diverse British circles, no one believes in it. It is simply impossible to prove. If it was a murder, then it is "perfect"! It turns out that it was committed in a room locked from the inside. Just a classic mystery in the style of Agatha Christie. That is, not all such murders are committed so clumsy.

- There is another publication noticeable against the backdrop of our conversation, in The Guardian , the fact that British investigators studying the circumstances of the murder in March this year in the suburbs of London Nikolai Glushkov , a friend Boris Berezovsky, believe that they tried to poison him back in 2013. Glushkov’s body was found in his house with traces of strangulation a week after the assassination attempt on Sergey and Julia Skripal. And back in 2013, as it turns out, he met with some suspicious strangers and then almost died. Is everything connected in one large spy ball?

- Yes, this publication aroused precisely these days a great interest, as if it were a link in the same chain, it turns out. But no one can present evidence of the exact here. What happened in 2013? An ambulance arrived, Nikolai Glushkov lay unconscious on the carpet at the hotel. And it turned out that the day before he drank champagne with two guests from Russia. And when he came to his senses, they helped him. In general, if it was, if it was, it was not fatal and generally not difficult. Nevertheless, Glushkov himself immediately said to the doctors: "I know what happened, - my two guests poisoned me." And then the doctors laughed at him a little behind him, they say, these Russian suspicious, paranoia, of course, went further on their business. Now, in connection with the Skripals case, of course, everyone remembered and told about this to the journalists of The Guardian newspaper.

- One way or another, the attempt on the Skripals took place, and its consequences turned out to be terrible - then British citizens became random victims, and a painful blow was inflicted on the reputation of some British politicians and counterintelligence. If you look at what happened at a certain angle, then, after all, both Mi5 and Scotland Yard can be accused of inability to work?

- It is possible, although we are talking about fundamentally different political and life values. Until now, before the work of the Skripals, even after the case of Alexander Litvinenko, the British authorities could not fully allow the use of methods that Teresa May now calls just gangster. And he emphasizes: “In Britain, we cannot answer with such methods, because we are a law-abiding state. We have our own internal laws. We are holy adhere to the principles of international law. Because of this, we, of course, are weak in the face of an enemy, for which nothing forbidden exists at all. He can act as you like, without thinking about anything like that.”

Oleg Kalugin, a former KGB general, who lives in the United States, but is going to move to the UK, is concerned about it. He thinks whether he himself was safe, and gave an interview to the Daily Mirror newspaper, saying the following: "I know, Russian special services consider the United Kingdom of Soft Spot." That is - a soft, easy place for such an operation, where everything can get away with it. And Kalugin, of course, called on London to tighten the measures that are taken against the Russian and special services and diplomats, called for the expulsion of the Russian ambassador from London to simply make it possible to understand that this would not be more allowed. Because, as Kalugin claims: "According to my information, it is quite possible that Russia is preparing new killings in British territory."