0 $
2,500 $
5,000 $
40 $
MARCH 2021

British Leadership Increases Anti-Russian Media Campaign Over Amesbury Incident


British Leadership Increases Anti-Russian Media Campaign Over Amesbury Incident

Forensic investigators wearing protective suits in Amesbury, Britain, July 6, 2018. © Henry Nicholls / Reuters

The situation over the so-called Amesbury incident is developing.

On June 30, 45-year-old Charlie Rowley and 44 year old Dawn Sturges were allegedly poisoned by what the British media and authorities describe as the Novichok nerve agent. The incident took place in the city of Amesbury, located relatively close [over 10 km] to the laboratory of Porton Down.

On July 8, Sturges died in the hospital and local police launched a murder inquiry.

Top British political establishment and local politicians have already launched a new fit of Russia-blaming despite a lack of any evidence confirming the supposed Russian involvement into both the Salisbury and Amesbury cases.

The political establishment clearly use the issue to fuel the ongoing anti-Russian campaign in the mainstream media. One of the goals is to prevent the shift in the perception of Russia and the Russians, which is shifting because of ongoing World Cup 2018.

On July 7, SouthFront released an analysis providing a look at the possible scenarios of this incident -“Who can be behind the Amesbury incident?“:

Poisonous substance of the “Novichok” type, which, according to the conclusions of scientists from Porton Down, was allegedly used to poison the couple from Amesbury, and which was previously used in March 2018 on Sergei and Julia Skripal, is covered by the Convention on the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons. All information about this type of poisonous substances comes mainly from the mass media, and the conclusions are based on the book of the American chemist Vila Mirzayanov, whose reliability is questioned.

Current facts on the events surrounding the incident in Amesbury are insufficient to make definite conclusions about who can be behind the act. However, there are several main versions:

– Dawn Sturges & Charlie Rowley were poisoned by the remnants of the substance used to poison Sergei and Julia Skripal.

– The crime was committed by Russian Special Services with unclear goals. For example, some kind of operation used to discredit the British Special services.

– The crime was carried out by the British Special Services with the view to discredit Russia on the eve of talks between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin.

– The crime was committed by a third party (another state, a terrorist organization, an individual or a group of individuals) in order to strengthen the divide between Moscow and Washington, destabilize the system of international relations or for personal financial or other interests.

– There could have been an act of negligence in dealing with dangerous substance of individuals mentioned in points 2-4, at the preparatory stages

Assuming for a moment that Dawn Sturges and Charlie Rowley were actually poisoned by  “Novichok”, it is necessary to evaluate the reliability of different versions using the following criteria: the presence of a goal and motive; availability of appropriate opportunities (financial, organizational, technical). In this case, the version according to which the British couple was poisoned by the remnants of a poisonous substance allegedly used to poison Sergei and Yulia Skripal, seems unlikely because of the inability to preserve its properties by poison agents for 4 months from the time of the Salisbury incident. The version that Dawn Sturges and Charlie Rowley found remnants of the substance used to prepare the attack on the Skripals also fails to withstand any criticism.




Do you like this content? Consider helping us!