British Prime Minister Boris Johnson believes that rumors about Russia's influence on the elections in the UK resemble myths about the Bermuda Triangle. The Prime Minister made such a statement on the eve of the BBC during a televised debate on the eve of the early parliamentary elections scheduled for December 12.
Answering a question from one of the viewers when the report of the parliament’s intelligence and security committee on Russia's interference in the “democratic processes” in the UK, including the 2016 Brexit referendum, will be published, Johnson replied that there was no evidence of such an interference.
“I am not aware of any evidence of interference in any British election event. The reason why I have long decided not to publish (this report. - RT ) is because I see no reason to change the normal schedule, ”Johnson said.
According to him, “this is nonsense, like the Bermuda Triangle. It’s the same nonsense as the assumption that the results of the referendum, in which 17.4 million people voted for Britain to leave the EU, were somehow distorted, falsified, unfair or wrong and should now be canceled. ” As a result, the Prime Minister expressed confidence that British citizens made an independent decision on leaving the EU.
Recall, on October 31, the chairman of the British Parliament’s intelligence and security committee, Dominic Grive, accused Johnson of delaying the publication of a report on Russia's influence on the British elections and the 2016 referendum. Johnson’s opponents clung to the news, including Labor leader Jeremy Corbin, who suggested that perhaps the Conservative Party leader has something to hide.
This is not Johnson’s first such statement in the last few days. During a meeting with voters on November 20, the British Prime Minister also expressed the opinion that there was no interference from Moscow.
“I saw absolutely no evidence of any Russian interference in British democratic processes,” Johnson emphasized then.
However, earlier and in other circumstances, Boris Johnson’s words about “Russian intervention” sounded somewhat different. For example, on December 22, 2017, when Johnson served as British Foreign Secretary, during a visit to Moscow, he argued with his Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov over “Russian interference” in the Brexit referendum.
- Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov (right) and British Foreign Minister Boris Johnson during a meeting. 12/22/2017
- RIA News
- © Alexey Filippov
In response to Lavrov’s statement that, according to Johnson, there is no evidence of Russia's influence on the plebiscite, the future prime minister said that he meant “unsuccessful” attempts to influence.
“It is very important if you acknowledge Russian attempts to interfere in our referendum. Whatever they were, they were unsuccessful. If they had success, then everything would have been completely different, ”the head of the British Foreign Ministry addressed the Russian side.
However, before that, Johnson managed to declare that the Russians “did not play a role” in the referex on Brexit. At the same time, he admitted that Russia could influence elections in the UK in the future.
In March 2017, the then Foreign Minister of Great Britain distinguished himself by stating that although there is no evidence of Russia's influence on the British political system through cyber attacks, Moscow supposedly “has opportunities” to influence British politics.
As Natalya Yeryomina, professor at the Department of European Studies at the Faculty of International Relations of St. Petersburg State University, noted in a conversation with RT, the contradictions in Boris Johnson’s position on the issue of “Russian intervention” are caused by the difference in the political interests of Johnson himself: when he was the minister and now when he heads the government.
“Now Boris Johnson is preparing for the election. It is important for him to win with a big advantage. Therefore, it is important to deny any possibility of external influence on the Brexit referendum and elections. He needs to show that Brexit is the choice of the British people, and Moscow has nothing to do with it, ”Yeryomina explained. - Well, in the rank of Minister of Foreign Affairs, he got his points inside the political establishment, saying that there is a common enemy, a kind of threat that he is fighting very seriously. So Johnson played to strengthen his position as minister. ”
With the opinion that the position of the British leader regarding Russian intervention depends on the political situation, Vladimir Schweitzer, head of the department of social and political studies at the Institute of Europe of the Russian Academy of Sciences, agrees.
“Johnson is different in that in the political game he changes his point of view on the go. This is the logic of working for an unprepared voter who hears this statement and then votes as necessary in the elections, ”Schweitzer said in a conversation with RT.
“Political game”
According to Natalya Yeryomina, everyone in the British political class understands that the words about Russian intervention are “a political game, rhetoric for which there is no reason.” However, politicians continue to use these allegations for their own purposes.
It is worth noting that in October 2018, the British government published a report in which it stated “that the government did not see evidence of the successful use of misinformation by foreign political forces, including Russia, to influence British democratic processes.”
British parliamentarians met this statement with dissatisfaction, as it contradicted the conclusion of the committee on digital technology, culture, sports and the media of the British Parliament, published in July.
" Russian trace "
Despite the fact that Boris Johnson did not give the go-ahead for the publication of a report on “Russian interference” in the elections, information on the contents of the document periodically falls into the media.
On November 10, The Sunday Times announced that the report on Russia's influence, which Johnson refuses to publish, shows the names of nine Russians who allegedly sponsored the Conservative Party. On November 17, the newspaper said that in a report that Johnson did not publish, the British Parliament’s intelligence and security committee did not rule out the possibility that Russia influenced the British vote on leaving the European Union. Also, according to the newspaper, the report claims that RT and Sputnik were popular on social networks on the eve of the Brexit referendum.
According to Western journalists, the report used information from "experts" such as former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele, founder of the British Hermitage Capital Fund, William Browder, and one of the authors of an unconfirmed report on bed adventures of Donald Trump in Russia. Recall, William Browder is a defendant in five criminal cases in Russia, including murders and the organization of a criminal community.
The British media also reported on the Labor Party’s plans to check Prime Minister’s adviser Dominic Cummings for his ties with Russia. The reason for suspicion was information about the work of Cummings in Russia in the 1990s. The Times even found a photo of a future adviser Johnson knocking a carpet in a Moscow courtyard to cover this topic.
"Turning into Trump"
The scandal with the search for “Russian influence” on Johnson’s circle received a response across the ocean. Former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton called the refusal to publish a report on "Russian interference" in the British election "inexplicable and shameful." According to her, “there is no doubt” that Russia is trying to influence the policy of “Western democracies”.
Commenting on Clinton’s statement, the representative of the Liberal Democrats party, Chuck Umunn, accused Johnson of becoming more and more “transformed” into Donald Trump.
In turn, Johnson himself rebuked his main political rival Jeremy Corbin that he “sided with Putin” after the Salisbury incident.
On November 5, in the British Parliament, the shadow Foreign Secretary, Labor Emily Thornberry, entered into a skirmish with conservative Christopher Pincher. Both parliamentarians found out whose party is more closely connected with Russia.
- Demonstration of Brexit supporters in front of the British Parliament
- Reuters
- © Henry Nicholls
According to Vladimir Schweitzer, so far all the accusations of British politicians against each other in ties with Russia “sound frivolous.”
“The British will vote based on considerations related to domestic politics,” the expert is convinced.
According to Natalya Yeryomina, allegations of ties to Russia will not have a significant impact on elections in the UK.
“There will be no critical significance for the election campaign. British society tends to vote traditionally, but now the Laborites are very seriously divided on the issue of Brexit. And the conservatives, for the most part, have rallied around the idea of Brexit and Boris Johnson, ”she concluded.