The British government is "almost certain" that Russia interfered in the UK elections. Another attempt to blame foreigners for their own troubles (a la "with a high degree of probability") demonstrates the desperation in Downing Street, losing control of the discourse.

Was it a "Report on Russia"? The British media with Pavlov's dog reflexes treated him that way - and even waited outside the front porch of former opposition leader Jeremy Corbin. Poor Corbin. For four miserable years of leadership, he was labeled as a Czech agent, sometimes a GDR, sometimes even a Soviet one. It got to the point where the BBC's flagship program Newsnight overlaid a picture of him with the background of the Kremlin. And now, when he has left his post, he is still being watched at the door, because it can be said with “almost certainty” that “Russian subjects” “contributed to the dissemination” of TRUE information about conservatives on the Internet.

“Almost sure” is “highly likely” in a new way. The phrase has practically no meaning, but with such a weighty hint. And instead of “GRU” they now say “Russian subjects”.

No evidence, no facts, the main thing is to let Pavlov's dogs off the leash, and it is desirable that they run in the wrong direction.

Who is the "Russian subject"? Russian citizen? Any guy who is hanging out on the Internet, sitting in family shorts with his mother in the kitchen in Rostov-on-Don? Or is it President Putin himself supposed to be having fun on Reddit? Any of these options (or neither), but it is clear that the second is intended.

But, of course, this was not any "Report on Russia". It was an injection by the British government, which realizes that it can no longer prevent the publication of this report on Russia - after the recent embarrassment took away its control over the parliamentary committee on intelligence and security, which has blocked the publication of the report for almost a year.

The fact is that conservative renegade Julian Lewis reached an agreement with opposition parliamentarians in the committee and put forward his candidacy against his own party member, ex-minister Chris Grayling. Defeated him and was quickly expelled from the party.

When I first met the future head of the intelligence and security committee, he was an undercover agent infiltrated into the ranks of Labor! He briefly led a party branch in London's Newham North East constituency (although his conservatism and contacts with the Freedom Association's Deep State were known) and led rearguard battles in defense of Minister Reginald Prentice. He defended himself from his party comrades, and as a result became the highest-ranking Laborite, deserted to the Conservative camp.

The next time I met Lewis was in the early 1980s, when I was marching side by side with the head of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, Monsignor (he was a priest in those years) Bruce Kent. We walked more than 600 kilometers from Faslane, the home of nuclear submarines, to Bergfield, the site of nuclear weapons production. Every night we rallied against Reagan's deployment of cruise missiles and ballistic missiles in Europe. And we didn’t have a more devoted companion than Julian Lewis! He pursued us at every step and criticized us every evening at every meeting - however, politely. Its goal was simple: to fly the NATO flag even in the most inhospitable environment. He did it well.

If the Conservatives thought Julian Lewis had a conflict of interest and was torn between state and government, now that he was expelled from the party, they will know what he really is.

Because while there will be attempts to make the report about Russia talk about Russia, in reality it is about the Conservative Party.

I am sure that after exposure, "Russian subjects" in fact will be sponsors of the Conservatives. And not only not by the agents of the Kremlin - many of them cannot stand Vladimir Putin, and some even fled Russia! These may be “subjects” and “Russians”, but they are not “Russian subjects” in the sense in which the conservatives and their media will present it.

Many of them funded the Conservative Party to better establish their own nests in and around London. Some in this way tried to keep themselves and their often dishonestly acquired funds as far as possible from Russian justice.

London is teeming with oligarchs: Russian, Saudi, Chinese, various. As an opponent of the oligarchy, I have no more sympathy for the Russian oligarchs than for the Arab ones, and I have no intention of defending them. But I will not defend the ruling Conservative Party that has stuck to them. Especially one in which Russian-British relations are at their worst in the last 100 years.

The author's Twitter is @georgegalloway.

The author’s point of view may not coincide with the position of the publisher.