Russia

The Tories’ great worry after the last election was that they had effectively vaccinated the electorate against Jeremy Corbyn. They feared that the next time they tried to show that he was extreme, weak on national security and too friendly with the West’s enemies, voters would yawn and declare that they had heard it all before. They would be immune to any attacks on the Labour leader. Compounding this worry was the fear that Corbyn would present himself, as he had quite successfully during the general election campaign, as a more mainstream figure than he really is. If Corbyn had followed this ‘kindly grandad’ approach, the Conservatives would be in deep trouble right now. Labour’s moderates would also lack any obvious cause for complaint.

With Russian poisoners stalking the streets of Salisbury and the real possibility of a hot war with the Kremlin’s troops in Syria, The Spectator’s debate this Wednesday – What does Russia want? – could hardly be more timely. The line-up of guests we’ve assembled promises to be an explosive mixture. Russian Presidential candidate Ksenia Sobchak, who made a doomed run against Vladimir Putin in March’s elections on a platform of liberal reform, will lead the anti-Kremlin side. Sobchak is more than just a prominent liberal politician – she’s the ultimate political insider. Sobchak’s father Anatoly was an iconic liberal mayor of St Petersburg – and was Putin’s boss and political mentor in the years after he left the KGB.

After Theresa May's Cabinet agreed on the 'need to take action' in Syria, it seems a matter of when, not if, military strikes against the Assad regime take place. But the strikes won't be the end of the matter politically. Labour have been quick to stir up trouble, with Jeremy Corbyn describing the government as 'waiting for instructions' from Donald Trump. The British government is also struggling to keep up with a Russian propaganda barrage.

Theresa May has never published her case blaming Russia for the Salisbury poisoning. She has reason to be wary of Blair-style intelligence dossiers, and she didn’t need to make everything public to win the support of allies. But as things stand, her case against Russia is open to misinterpretation by the Kremlin. As we have seen with this morning’s headlines. Yesterday, Sky News interviewed Gary Aitkenhead, chief executive of Porton Down, who said: “We were able to identify it as Novichok, to identify it was a military-grade nerve agent. We have not verified the precise source, but we have provided the scientific information to the government, who have then used a number of other sources to piece together the conclusions that they have come to.

Theresa May's widely-praised handling of the Salisbury poisoning hit a bump in the road this afternoon with the news that British scientists at Porton Down have not been able to establish that the Novichok nerve agent used to poison Sergei and Yulia Skripal was made in Russia. In a clumsy interview, Gary Aitkenhead, the chief executive of the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory at the facility in Wiltshire, said although the nerve agent was identified as Novichok, scientists had not been able to prove it was created in Russia. The government were quick to go into damage control mode - making clear that this was 'only one part of the intelligence picture' and it did not alter their verdict that the only plausible explanation was that Russia was responsible for the attack.

Oh dear. It's no great secret that the Parliamentary Labour Party has struggled to get to grips with Jeremy Corbyn's response to Russia over the poisoning of a former Russian double agent on British soil. However, up until now they had refrained from criticising him directly in the Chamber. Today John Woodcock decided to go there following Theresa May's statement on Russia.