Tag Archives: Theresa May

Britain, Economic, Government, Politics, Russia, Society

UK measures and sanctions on Russia still leaves us vulnerable

BRITAINopinion-1

IN measured but uncompromising language, Theresa May handled herself extremely well in the House of Commons this week as she outlined the Government’s response to Vladimir Putin’s use of a lethal nerve and chemical agent on British soil. The Prime Minister’s rhetoric was equal to the profound seriousness of the occasion.

Her resolute demeanour and command of her brief – no doubt learned from her long experience of security matters at the Home Office – put to shame Jeremy Corbyn’s efforts to defend the Russian state and his attempt to score petty political point scoring.

In a new low for British politics, the Labour leader parroted the Kremlin line, suggesting it was unfair to blame Putin without first sending him scientific samples of the toxin in the Salisbury attack.

To his discredit, too, Mr Corbyn even appeared to pin part of the blame on budget cuts to the British diplomatic service.

Corbyn’s response to this grotesque violation of international law and British sovereignty – in which scores of our citizens were put at risk of agonising death – was: “It is essential to maintain robust dialogue with Russia.”

Who would honestly believe dialogue would bring to heel a former KGB officer who exults in presenting himself at stopping at nothing to eradicate his country’s enemies?

Even the SNP in Scotland, never a party solid on defence – incoherent on NATO and divisive over Trident – have grasped the gravity of the situation.

First Minister Nicola Sturgeon said: “It is very clear that Russia cannot be permitted to unlawfully kill or attempt to kill people on the streets of the UK with impunity.”

The SNP’s party’s Westminster leader Ian Blackford assured the Commons that his party backed the Government and that “a robust response to the use of terror on our streets” was required.

However, we must be realistic. On their own, the measures outlined by the Prime Minister are high unlikely to shake Putin out of his contempt for the international order.

 

YES, Mrs May’s approach is a start. Her expulsion of 23 Russian diplomats identified as spies, the most radical such measure for more than 30 years, should seriously undermine Russia’s intelligence network. These expulsions were always going to be met with a tit-for-tat response.

Other sanctions – including the freezing of Russian state assets deemed a threat, the suspension of high-level contacts and increased security checks on private flights, customs and freight – also sends a signal that Britain will not let state-sponsored gangsterism flourish with impunity.

The truth, though, is that Mrs May held back from other measures that could have inflicted serious harm on the Russian economy.

The reasons for such caution are clear. One is that Britain depends on Russia for 20 per cent of our gas, leaving us desperately vulnerable to punitive Russian reprisals.

Another is that BP, our biggest company, has a vast holding in Russia’s biggest oil company, while the City launders billions in the country’s dirty cash.

And politicians have run down our Armed Forces, spending only £36billion a year on defence. Putin, with a defence budget of £44-50billion – and has an army ten times the size of ours – will feel safe to sneer.

Yet, Russia’s economy is only two-thirds the size of ours. We could be doing much more to match Putin’s military strength.

As for energy security, wasn’t it criminally irresponsible to allow last year’s closure of Britain’s biggest gas storage facility, leaving our reserves at today’s perilously low levels?

Given our vulnerability, the sanctions may have gone as far as Britain could go alone without the international effort needed by straining every sinew to secure.

There is one gesture that could signify abhorrence of the Salisbury atrocity. Whilst it is welcomed that no government minister or member of the Royal family will attend the World Cup in Russia this summer, wouldn’t a boycott by the England team and other countries who are equally infuriated ram home the message more powerfully?

Standard
Britain, Government, NBC Warfare, Russia, Society, United Nations, United States

Britain expels 23 Russian spies in biggest reprisal since Cold War

BRITAIN

MOSCOW has vowed revenge against Britain after Theresa May ordered the biggest purge of Russian spies since the Cold War.

In a barely-veiled threat, the Kremlin said its response to what it described as a “hostile” package of measures announced by the Prime Minister “would not be long in coming”.

The United States has vowed to stand shoulder to shoulder with the UK in its response to Russian involvement in the Salisbury chemical attack.

Nikki Haley, the US ambassador to the UN, said: “If we don’t take immediate concrete measures to address this now, Salisbury will not be the last place we see chemical weapons used. They could be used here in New York, or in cities of any country that sits on this council. This is a defining moment.”

Britain’s deputy UN ambassador Jonathan Allen accused Russia of deploying “a weapon so horrific it is banned from use in war”.

In a forceful statement to MPs, Mrs May said the Kremlin would be made to pay for its role in the Salisbury attack.

She confirmed that Moscow had failed to meet a deadline to explain how the Russian-produced military nerve agent Novichok came to be used in the attempt to murder former spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia.

She said Russia had “treated the use of a military-grade nerve agent in Europe with sarcasm, contempt and defiance”. She added: “There is no alternative conclusion other than that the Russian state was culpable for the attempted murder.”

The PM outlined a series of tough sanctions, including the expulsion of 23 suspected spies posing as diplomats as well as the threat of financial sanctions against Russian oligarchs and cronies of President Putin with assets in London.

The expulsion of diplomats is the biggest since 1985 and is designed to “fundamentally degrade Russian intelligence capability in the UK for years to come”.

High-level diplomatic relations will be scrapped, with an invitation to Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov to visit the UK revoked.

Mrs May also suggested that covert reprisals would be undertaken – in an apparent hint at cyber attacks aimed at damaging the Russian state’s propaganda machine.

British sources said Mrs May was willing to unveil even tougher sanctions if the Kremlin hit back.

A senior government official said: “We are responding in a way that is robust, it gives us the ability to respond if the Russians escalate but it is also in line with the rule of law, all of which is in stark contrast to the way the Russian state has behaved both in this instance and wider areas of policy. Further options remain on the table.” The official said that if the measures fail to produce a change in behaviour from the Kremlin… “we will look again.”

But Moscow has warned that the UK would face reprisals for the “groundless anti-Russian campaign.” The Prime Minister told MPs that the UK “does not stand alone in confronting Russian aggression”, with messages of support already received from key allies such as the US, France, Germany and NATO.

She added: “This was not just an act of attempted murder in Salisbury, nor just an act against the UK. It is an affront to the prohibition on the use of chemical weapons, and it is an affront to the rules-based system on which we and our international partners depend.”

Veteran Conservative MP Kenneth Clarke said the “bizarre and dreadful” use of a nerve agent appeared to be “a deliberate choice by the Russian government to put their signature on a particular killing so that other defectors are left in no doubt that it is the Russian government”.

Mrs May confirmed that Prince William and Prince Harry will join ministers in boycotting this summers football World Cup in Russia, but Government sources say that, although she called on the FA “to consider their position”, she will not order the England team to withdraw as there is no sign that other countries would join a walkout.

Labour MP Stephen Kinnock said: “The Russia World Cup risks vindicating the Putin regime. We should look at postponing the World Cup and hosting it in another country.”

Revised Foreign Office travel advice for Russia has warned of an upsurge in “anti-British sentiment or harassment” in a country plagued by violent football hooliganism. A Whitehall source said the estimated 2,000 fans who have bought tickets were likely to be issued with “very robust” travel advice.

 

Standard
Britain, European Union, Government, Politics, Society

Britain lays down gauntlet to EU with ‘Brexit blueprint’

BREXIT

The British Prime Minister delivers her long awaited speech and blueprint for Brexit.

THERESA May has thrown down the gauntlet to Brussels by saying that the EU had a “shared interest” in making a success of Brexit.

In a long-awaited speech, the Prime Minister has set out a detailed blueprint for Brexit that would maintain trade links, while setting Britain free to decide its own destiny.

After Brussels accused her of “cherry picking” the parts of EU membership it likes, Mrs May pointed out that all trade deals work that way.

And, with the clock ticking down to Britain’s exit in March next year, she urged the EU to accelerate trade talks.

She said: “We know what we want. We understand your principles. We have a shared interest in getting this right. So, let’s get on with it.”

The speech, delivered last Friday at Mansion House in the City of London, follows weeks of Cabinet wrangling over how far to go in making a clean break with the EU.

In a decisive statement, Mrs May said she would lead Britain out of the single market, rejected calls to join a customs union, called time on the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice and vowed to end free movement of people.

The PM said Brexit would produce “a stronger, more cohesive nation”. And she dismissed calls for a second referendum, saying: “We won’t think again on Brexit. The people voted for it and it is incumbent on the Government to deliver it.”

But she also warned that making a clean break with Brussels would come at the price of reduced access to European markets. “I want to be straight with people – because the reality is that we all need to face up to some hard facts,” said Mrs May.

“We are leaving the single market. Life is going to be different. In certain ways, our access to each other’s markets will be less than it is now. How could the EU’s structure of rights and obligations be sustained, if the UK – or any country – were allowed to enjoy all the benefits without all of the obligations? So we need to strike a new balance.”

Mrs May’s intervention does appear to have succeeded in uniting the warring factions of the Conservative Party without immediately alienating Brussels.

In a speech that was long on detail, Mrs May:

. Rejected “unacceptable” EU plans to keep Northern Ireland in the customs union after Brexit, which she warned would break up Britain.

. Said the UK may continue to respect EU state aid and competition rules – a move that could frustrate a future hard-Left government bent on imposing socialism.

. Pledged to maintain regulatory standards that are “as high as” the EU’s, even if they are achieved by different means.

. Warned that the European economy would lose out if it tried to punish the City.

. Set out two options for maintaining light-touch customs arrangements between Britain and the EU.

. Confirmed she was willing to walk away without a deal if the EU tried to punish Britain.

She also said that Britain could pay to remain in EU regulatory bodies in areas such as chemicals, medicine and aerospace – promised to negotiate a deal on fishing that would give British trawlermen a “fairer allocation” of fishing rights and said that Britain would demand “domestic flexibility” in areas like the emerging digital sector to prevent tech start-ups being held back by EU red tape.

On the critical balance between divergence from EU rules and access to the single market, Mrs May said she expected many regulations for traded goods to remain “substantially similar” in the immediate future.

But, critically, she said Parliament would be free to change them in future “in the knowledge that there may be consequences for our market access”. She said disputes would be settled by an “independent mechanism” – not EU judges.

Mrs May said she would not be knocked off course by hardliners on either side of the debate, saying she wanted the count.

In the run-up to the speech, Eurosceptic MPs were on red alert for any signs of backsliding.

However, most appear content that Mrs May had struck the right balance. Former Conservative leader and Brexiteer Iain Duncan Smith described the speech as “pretty good”.

And Tory ex-chancellor Lord Lamont said it was now time for diehard Remainers on the Tory benches to stop undermining Mrs May.

Sarah Wollaston, a leading Tory Remainer, described the speech as “pragmatic and positive”.

But diehard Remainer Anna Soubry struck a sour note, about Mrs May’s blueprint, saying: “It will not deliver the same benefits, the positives to our economy, as we currently have.”

The EU’s chief negotiator Michel Barnier welcomed the “clarity” that Britain wanted a clean break, saying this would help Brussels finalise its negotiating guidelines.

 

AT the end of last week, and for the best part of an hour, Theresa May rattled off her Brexit objectives in a huge number of areas: agriculture, fisheries, migration, the Irish border, manufacturing, financial services, energy, science, haulage, nuclear safety, education and culture. People said they wanted more detail about her negotiating position prior to Britain leaving the European Union, and that’s exactly what she gave them.

What emerged was a pragmatic, common sense approach behind which she appears to have succeeded in uniting Cabinet colleagues as diverse as the Europhile Philip Hammond and the hardline Brexiteer Boris Johnson.

In some areas, Britain is bound to remain closely aligned with our partners’ rules and trading standards. But as Mrs May pointed out, this is true of every trade deal ever struck.

Crucially, however, the red lines the Prime Minister drew from the start remain intact. Come what may, we will be taking back control of our borders, laws and money – with British judges and a sovereign British Parliament no longer obliged to take orders from Brussels or the European Court of Justice.

For the avoidance of doubt, Mrs May spelled out yet again that this will mean withdrawing from the single market and customs union. There will be no second referendum.

. See also Britain will be entitled to walk away without a deal with the EU

Standard