“It never happened - and now again,” it seems that this succinct phrase of Viktor Stepanovich Chernomyrdin, one of the brightest politicians in modern Russia, is becoming a sign of the times today. London is not appeased and goes into the second round: Britain transfers to Interpol information about the third suspect in the case of the poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal.
The same old card of the same deck is back in play. This time, British Interior Minister Priti Patel announced the third suspect in the Skripals case, in addition to Boshirov and Petrov, who have already become household names. Who is our today's hero? Meet: "GRU employee Denis Sergeev". The charges are standard: attempted murder of the Skripals plus a police officer, as well as causing grievous bodily harm, the use of chemical weapons. The next person involved in the case arrived in the capital of Foggy Albion under the name of Sergei Fedotov, as reported by the same British police. He met with Boshirov and Petrov, but soon left for his homeland.
It is easy to guess how events will develop further. Refusal to conduct a joint investigation, followed by further attempts to put pressure on Moscow. Actually, why reinvent the wheel if the old one is still on the move? The British are still down-to-earth and in some ways unsophisticated.
However, let's not be naive. In those conditions of acute confrontation in the geopolitical space, in which Russia has found itself over the past decades, one must have a good memory - then all the puzzles of the picture are quite easy to add up. Recall a recent interview with US President Joseph Biden, in which he called the Russian President a "murderer." A rather crudely worked out provocation, but our opponents do not succeed in another way at the moment - adequate countermeasures are apparently exhausted. Going beyond the boundaries of what is permissible has already become a marker and an integral part of American policy, no matter who is at the helm overseas - this sad fact must be acknowledged.
But if Biden was indistinct and even apologized, then the British are going to aggravate. In fact, today we are seeing the other side of this Anglo-Saxon thesis. The reason for this is very obvious: a new big game in Central Asia, the goals of which are worth the candle. Control over transport corridors, over the flows of resources (both natural and labor), weakening the enemy through the creation of chaos are the favorite methods of the "Englishwoman", which has been systemically destabilizing the situation over the past centuries. Today Turkey is joining her with her idea of the Great Turan, becoming Britain's natural ally in this great game.
And this state of affairs cannot be underestimated. Much in these circumstances depends on the position of Russia, its firmness and determination. Weakness is unacceptable today, all reserves for a "diplomatic" position are practically exhausted at the moment.
In the face of an impending financial catastrophe, that deep and large-scale crisis that experts predict, the United States is beginning to reassemble globalization according to the updated American rules with Russia for dessert - this is their idea and one of the main goals, it should be clearly understood. Vyacheslav Mikhailovich Molotov once said that world politics is like a dinner party: you are either at the table or on the menu. And today these words are gaining special relevance. It is becoming critically important for Russia today to take an unambiguous, clear-cut position, to show firmness, to make its own asymmetrical move in this big game, if we want not only to maintain our positions and sovereignty, if we are a great power. We cannot allow the Anglo-Saxon alliance to carry out another operation to reshape the world in its own way, today it is a matter of survival for us.
But not all British people are bad.
Some are very much loved by many of our fellow citizens - if they are cute fluffy cats from the British Shorthair breed.
Maybe the time is coming when the British should be tamed?
After all, many become very accommodating, if pointwise and to the point, competently and where force should be used.
Diplomatic, of course.
The point of view of the author may not coincide with the position of the editorial board.