Wednesday, March 14, 2018

14 March 2018: Russia and the UK Poison Case

Today is the thirtieth anniversary of the day I reported for duty to the FBI and began a nearly twenty-year career in national security. Twelve of those years I spent working against agents of the USSR, so I think it's fitting I post my opinion on an issue in the news.

My present opinion on the 'Russian poisoning' case over in the UK:

The ease with which anyone could have poisoned Skripal and his daughter and left people to jump to conclusions that it was those dastardly Russians should give more people pause. It is quite possible that the Russians had nothing to do with it. Does anyone really think that neither we nor the Brits or any other player has Novichok?

Skripal had been a double agent for the Brits. From my perspective, as a former branch chief of DA ops for the AFOSI, the Russians wanted one or more imprisoned agents back. Arresting Skripal upon his return to Moscow years later, positioned the Russians to having someone the Brits wanted back -- and thus the currency was established. In the 2010 spy swap involving Russia, the US and UK, Russia got their preferred illegals (deep cover or NOC agents) back because they could give Skripal back to the Brits.

So why poison Skripal? Because it would look to knee-jerk reactionaries like the Russians 'got revenge'. But the Russians had already tried and convicted and imprisoned Skripal -- they could have executed him then (or poisoned him in prison). Instead, they gave him back in a swap. Another player poisoning Skripal would serve the saber-rattling objectives of a military-industrial-intel complex in the West and serve radical left/right political objectives in the US and UK, setting up the Russians a la the USS Maine.

Until I see something that convinces me that there is an 'otherwise', this is my opinion on this issue.

No comments:

Post a Comment