A few weeks ago in London, Sergei Skripal, his daughter, several police officers, and several dozen random passersby were poisoned. According to British Prime Minister Theresa May, they were poisoned with the nerve agent “Novichok,” which could only have been produced in Russia. This was followed by diplomatic sanctions. Where this conflict may lead in the future is difficult to predict at the moment. What is more interesting is what really happened, and what was the plan?
Although the accusations against Russia, coming from Britain, the EU, and the USA, lack logic, I suggest considering all versions of what happened.
Version #1: Punishment. The task was to eliminate a former GRU officer, now a traitor, as a warning to others, which, according to Deputy Director of the European Academy of Intelligence Joseph Fitsanakis, is a normal practice among intelligence services worldwide. It was important to make it as demonstrative as possible, to reduce the temptation for current intelligence officers. The version seems plausible, but why use the nerve agent? It is very expensive, dangerous, and inevitably leads to an international scandal, clearly linking the murder to Russian intelligence. Wouldn’t it have been enough to just shoot the traitor?
Version #2: Negligence. The task was the same - elimination, but carefully, without an international scandal. However, the operation failed. More people were affected than planned, and the main goal was not achieved. This happens. The question remains - why use an expensive and very dangerous nerve agent? Why risk the success of the entire operation if the executor could have just shot the target?
Version #3: Defamation. As Russia’s permanent representative to the UN Security Council Vasily Nebenzya believes, this assassination attempt was created as another reason for “smearing and black PR against Russia.” In other words, the British poisoned the former spy, his daughter, and several dozen of their own citizens, including police officers. Perhaps. But why use a nerve agent whose origin is difficult to prove? Why not use a weapon that would leave no doubt about Kremlin’s involvement?
Version #4: Provocation. The Kremlin’s plan was to create another reason for escalating tensions between Russia and the Western world. The spy was just a means, not the goal. The true goal was to create an incident where Moscow’s role is obvious but unprovable. This was another successful move in the second Cold War. In this case, the nerve agent fits perfectly into the overall plan. Its connection to Russia is difficult to prove, its exclusivity ensures maximum news coverage, and it is more interesting than the outdated polonium.
The last version seems to me the most realistic and at the same time the most frightening. It is difficult to answer definitively why Russia and the rest of the world need a new Cold War. Surely, there is much to gain for all participants, as both Russia and the USA and Europe are so enthusiastically heading towards confrontation.
Translated by ChatGPT gpt-3.5-turbo/42 on 2024-04-20 at 17:44
