British Scholar and Diplomat Weighs in on the Western Narrative Around the Navalny Poisoning

Craig Murray: Opposition figure Navalny may possibly have been targeted by Russian state, but Western narrative doesn’t add up

FILE PHOTO: Alexey Navalny © Sputnik / Valery Melnikov

Craig Murray is an author, broadcaster and human rights activist. He was British Ambassador to Uzbekistan from August 2002 to October 2004 and Rector of the University of Dundee from 2007 to 2010.

I have posted his comments before on this blog as he is intelligent, fair, and honest, and not part of the demonization of Russia that permeates western governments and NATO in particular.

Yes, this article is from RT, but is written entirely by the retired British diplomat. Also, you will never read such unbiased reporting in western mainstream media.

Once Russian anti-corruption campaigner Alexey Navalny was in Berlin it was only a matter of time before it was declared that he was poisoned with Novichok. The Russophobes are delighted.

This of course eliminates all vestiges of doubt about what happened to the Skripals, and proves that Russia must be isolated and sanctioned to death and we, in the West, must spend untold billions on weapons and security services. We must also increase domestic surveillance and crack down on dissenting online opinion. It also proves that Donald Trump is a Russian puppet and Brexit is a Russian plot.

I am going to prove beyond all doubt that I am a Russian troll by asking the question Cui Bono? (who stands to gain from poisoning Navalny?), brilliantly identified by the Integrity Initiative’s Ben Nimmo as a sure sign of Russian influence.

I should state that I have no difficulty at all with the notion that a powerful oligarch or an organ of the Russian state may have tried to assassinate Navalny. He is a minor irritant, not remotely as politically important in Russia as he is portrayed by the Western press, but not being a major threat does not protect you against political assassination in Russia.

What I do have difficulty with is the notion that if Putin, or other very powerful Russian actors, wanted Navalny dead, and had attacked him while he was in Siberia, he would not be alive in Germany today. If Putin wanted him dead, he would be dead.

Let us first take the weapon of attack. One thing we know about a “Novichok” for sure is that it appears not to be very good at assassination. Poor Dawn Sturgess is the only person ever to have allegedly died from “Novichok,” accidentally, according to the official narrative. “Novichok” did not kill the Skripals, the actual target. If Putin wanted Navalny dead, he would try something that works. Like a bullet to the head, or an actually deadly poison.

“Novichok” is not a specific chemical. It is a class of chemical weapon designed to be improvised in the field from common domestic or industrial precursors. It makes some sense to use on foreign soil as you are not carrying around the actual nerve agent, and may be able to buy the ingredients locally. But it makes no sense at all in your own country, where the FSB or GRU can swan around with any deadly weapon they wish, to be making homemade nerve agents in the sink. Why would you do that?

Further we are expected to believe that, having poisoned Navalny, the Russian state then allowed the airplane he was traveling in, on a domestic flight, to divert to another airport, and make an emergency landing, so he could be rushed to hospital. If the Russian secret services had poisoned Navalny at the airport before takeoff as alleged, why would they not insist the plane stick to its original flight plan and let him die on the plane? They would have foreseen what would happen to the victim during the flight.

Next, we are supposed to believe that the Russian state, having poisoned Navalny, was not able to contrive his death in the intensive care unit of a Russian state hospital. We are supposed to believe that the evil Russian state was able to falsify all his toxicology tests and prevent doctors telling the truth about his poisoning, but the evil Russian state lacked the power to switch off the ventilator for a few minutes or slip something into his drip, in a Russian state hospital.

Next we are supposed to believe that Putin, having poisoned Navalny with novichok, allowed him to be flown to Germany to be saved, making it certain the novichok would be discovered. And that Putin did this because he was worried Merkel was angry, not realising she might be still more angry when she discovered Putin had poisoned him with novichok.

There are a whole stream of utterly unbelievable points there, every single one of which you have to believe to go along with the western narrative. Personally I do not buy a single one of them, but then I am a notorious Russophile traitor.

The United States is very keen indeed to stop Germany completing the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, which will supply Russian gas to Germany on a massive scale, sufficient for about 40 percent of its electricity generation. Personally I am opposed to Nord Stream 2 myself, on both environmental and strategic grounds. I would much rather Germany put its formidable industrial might into renewables and self-sufficiency. But my reasons are very different from those of the USA, which is concerned about the market for liquefied gas to Europe for US producers and for the Gulf allies of the US. Key decisions on the completion of Nord Stream 2 are now in train in Germany.

The US and Saudi Arabia have every reason to instigate a split between Germany and Russia at this time. Navalny is certainly a victim of international politics. That he is a victim of Putin I tend to doubt.

Thank you, Mr. Murray, for writing this. I was about to myself, for what I'm worth, but I am glad you saved me the effort. 

Like the false-flag chemical weapons assault in Douma, Syria, for one to accept that the perpetrator of such crimes was Assad, you would have to believe he is phenomenally stupid. Yet, Assad remains in power after ten years of furious assault by those who wish him gone. How stupid can he be?

UK Reporter Astounded By What He Found in Douma

Ditto, Putin! We all know that Russia is a violent country and that Russian politics has always been a blood-sport. We also know that there are many oligarchs in Russia, Britain, and elsewhere, who have secrets they do not want Navalny to expose. That surely must include Putin and many people close to him. He must also be under some pressure to protect those oligarchs. But, as Craig states, if Putin wanted Navalny dead, he would be dead. Especially if it was Putin who ordered the hit on the Skripals, he would make sure the dosage would be deadly. Two failed hits in a row, makes no sense.

So, it could have been an oligarch who either was afraid of being exposed for corruption, or it could have been an oligarch who wanted to bring Putin down. Most oligarchs would not want to bring Putin down for they have gotten filthy rich with him in power.

Who else would benefit from bringing Putin down, if we can reverse Craig's question to 'who stands to gain the most by blaming Putin'? Now we have a much wider field? Ukraine, for instance, is Russia's closest enemy. The USA and its Gulf allies would love to prevent the completion of Nordstream 2, which is not very far from happening. 

NATO is demanding that Russia expose its Novichok program. The UK, however, refuses to answer whether Porton Down has a Novichok program. I think both should be exposed for public perusal.

Personally, I cannot believe that anyone who rises to the level of Putin and stays there for decades, is capable of being so utterly stupid. As with the Skripals, the poisoning came before a crucial time, exactly 2 weeks before a presidential election in Russia. Here, Navalny is poisoned just before the completion of Nordstream 2 and billions of dollars in gas money going to Russia rather than the US or the Gulf states. 

It's hard to believe anybody could be that stupid. It's not hard to believe that western decision-makers think that we are stupid enough to believe he is.