The US/UK Anti-Russia Conspiracy and the Skripal Affair

VISIT MY NEW WEB SITE: 

stephenlendman.org 

(Home – Stephen Lendman). 

Contact at [email protected].

The Skripal incident was likely hatched by both countries, one episode among numerous longstanding efforts to demonize Russia – improved relations ruled out entirely.

US/UK policies toward Russia are joined at the hip, both countries partnering in Russophobic harshness.

On Thursday, Sergey Lavrov blasted Britain, saying

“Russia is worried over the health and position of the Skripals, whom the British authorities dragged into this provocation,” adding:

“The British authorities’ refusal to grant consular access is a reason enough to consider the current situation as abduction or intentional isolation.”

This is utterly unacceptable” – Washington equally responsible for what happened, he failed to stress. Virtually all Russophobic actions by either country are joint efforts, neither regime going it alone on relations with Moscow.

Despite no chance for improved relations with both countries in the near, intermediate, and likely longterm, official Russian policy seeks mutual cooperation.

Lavrov:

“We are ready for concrete cooperation with Britain. We urge London to cooperate honestly within the framework of the criminal case Russia’s Investigative Committee opened over an attempt at premeditated murder and of the relevant queries the Prosecutor-General’s Office dispatched to Britain.”

He extended a similar overture to Washington, despite continuing deterioration in bilateral relations, nothing showing signs of improvement, endless examples of the most dismal relations in the post-WW II period.

Lavrov:

“We have repeatedly stated that we positively assess President Donald Trump’s desire to establish normal dialogue between our countries,” adding:

Despite positive-sounding Trump rhetoric, it’s “reversed by Russophobic sentiments soaring in the US establishment” – near unanimously by Congress, notable hostility from Trump’s war cabinet.

Raging hawks John Bolton and Mike Pompeo are militantly Russophobic. Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation director Alexandra Bell said

“(b)etween (them), you’re looking at a neocon foreign policy jacked up on steroids.”

Lumping Russia, China, Syria, Iran, and North Korea together, Bolton said

“(a) national security policy…based on…faith that (these countries) will honor their commitments is doomed to failure.”

He called (nonexistent) Russian US election meddling “a casus belli, a true act of war, and one Washington will never tolerate,” adding:

“For Trump, it should be a highly salutary lesson about the character of Russia’s leadership to watch Putin lie to him” – a bald-faced lie, continuing:

“And it should be a fire-bell-in-the-night warning about the value Moscow places on honesty, whether regarding election interference, nuclear proliferation, arms control or the Middle East: negotiate with todays Russia at your peril.”

Diplomatic engagement with Washington expecting positive results when betrayal followed many times before is hoping for what’s unattainable.

Pompeo considers Russia Washington’s mortal enemy. During his Senate confirmation hearing, he said

“Russia continues to act aggressively, enabled by years of soft policy toward that aggression. That’s now over,” adding:

“The actions of this administration make clear that President Trump’s national security strategy, rightfully, has identified Russia as a danger to our country.”

Relations are polar opposite – Washington a mortal threat to Russian security, not the other way around.

As America’s top (undiplomatic) diplomat, Pompeo promised toughness in advancing US interests, notably in dealing with sovereign independent countries like Russia, China, Iran and others.

Lavrov said the Kremlin wants to establish “friendly relations with the US” without compromising its principles and national interests.

Washington demands no less, wanting all other nations bowing to its will, making improved relations with Russia and other independent countries unattainable.

Hoping for improving relations won’t change things. Hegemons don’t operate that way, wanting control, not mutual cooperation.

America wages endless wars of aggression to achieve its goals, Russia on its target list for regime change. Chances for improved bilateral relations are virtually nil.

*

Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the CRG, Correspondent of Global Research based in Chicago.

VISIT MY NEW WEB SITE: stephenlendman.org (Home – Stephen Lendman). Contact at [email protected].

My newest book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: How the US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”

http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html


Comment on Global Research Articles on our Facebook page

Become a Member of Global Research


Articles by: Stephen Lendman

About the author:

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at [email protected] His new book as editor and contributor is titled "Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III." http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com. Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network. It airs three times weekly: live on Sundays at 1PM Central time plus two prerecorded archived programs.

Disclaimer: The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article. The Centre of Research on Globalization grants permission to cross-post Global Research articles on community internet sites as long the source and copyright are acknowledged together with a hyperlink to the original Global Research article. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: [email protected]

www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.

For media inquiries: [email protected]