The true purpose of "inflating" the case of Skripal
The lack of any convincing evidence of Russia's involvement in the attempted assassination of ex-colonel of Russian intelligence Sergey Skripal and the generally contrived character of the charges are noted in a variety of expert publications. However, few people remember that the case of Skripal is already the second in the last year of the use of chemical weapons for the assassination.
On February 13, 2017, Kim Jong-Nam, a half-brother of the DPRK leader and the one who fell into disgrace and was removed from the succession of the high office, was killed in Kuala Lumpur. It is surprising that the murder of a member of the ruling family caused less resonance than an attempt on the forgotten traitor. Moreover, today the Western community is ready to set negotiating with the DPRK, despite the practically proven guilt of the North Korean authorities in organizing the assassination.
At the same time, the fact of an artificial escalation of the situation around the attempt on the Russian defector is on the face. In the case of Kim Jong-Nam's death, the case was treated as an ordinary assassination and the world community did not accuse North Korea of attacking Malaysia. In turn, the attempt on Skripal, according to NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, is "the first use of offensive chemical weapons in Europe for the entire period of post-war history."
It is noteworthy that the elder brother of the North Korean leader was poisoned with British-made VX gas. It is currently available only in US arsenals. In this case, the leadership of Malaysia should have accused Washington and London of organizing the killing of Kim Jong Nam?
What is the true purpose of "fanning" the case of Skripal? The main goal of London is to discredit the elected Russian President Vladimir Putin for the next term. At the same time, the British authorities are solving several tasks.
First, do not let the Russian authorities successfully hold the World Cup, which will be held in Russia this summer. The tournament will bring tremendous economic benefits to the country, and the British authorities obviously can not reconcile with the defeat of their bid for the championship and until the last hope to disrupt the competition in Russia. Therefore, one of the requirements of the English establishment is the boycott of the 2018 World Cup. This explains the desire of London to make a scandal far beyond the borders of Europe. So, for example, the British ambassador to Indonesia Moazzam Malik urged local authorities to join the anti-Russian campaign.
Secondly, expose Russia as an aggressor to justify raising defense spending. Chief of the General Staff of the UK Nick Carter prepared a report in which he proposes to increase defense spending against the backdrop of an increased Russian threat. The report says that the United Kingdom, with its current level of funding for the armed forces, is not able to cope with the threat of a hybrid war with Russia.
Thirdly, Theresa May uses anti-Russian rhetoric to divert attention from the failures of the Cabinet to exit the UK from the EU. Experts believe that the British authorities initially did not calculate the extent of problems associated with brexit. Against the backdrop of failures in the negotiations with Brussels on the terms of withdrawal from the EU, the British authorities began to fan an international scandal involving the poisoning of ex-GRU agent Sergei Skripal in Salisbury. According to analysts, the outbreak of diplomatic scandal helped Therese May to divert attention from the failures in negotiations on the terms of brexit, and also to rally the NATO allies in the face of an imagined threat from the east.
Thus, the case of Skripal looks like another information provocation of London in the confrontation with Moscow. The world community has not seen any evidence of the use of chemical weapons, which casts great doubt on the accusatory verdict of Britain and the authority of Therese May as one of the leaders of the Western world.