69 thoughts on “Putin’s Motivation”

1. There are many great plans still to unfold for Putin, I think that he has the potential to lead the newly reformed UN in the future. Beware today the Ides of March, if they were to assassinate Putin the nation would fall into the safe hands of Ksenia Sobchak.

   Russia’s Sobchak Brings Presidential Campaign To Washington

   https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-sobchak-washington-visit-russia-election-sanctions/29023879.html

2. The motivations and machinations of the Kremlin are way above my pay grade and any speculation by me pointless, I’ll just watch and listen.

3. But anyone who fancies their chances will know beyond doubt that should they challenge his rule, they will be arrested and thrown in jail or killed.

   Except… doesn’t Skripal living free and clear in Salisbury somewhat undermine that? Him, alive, enabled Western intelligence agencies to say, ‘If you work for us and get found out, then yes, you might have to spend a few years in prison, but we’ll get you out as part of a swap and then you can live free and clear in the West. Look, we’ve done it before.’

   Killing him, in a way which deliberately makes it perfectly clear via the means used that it was done by the Russian government because there are no other credible suspects, sends the message that no, the West can’t protect you. Betray Russia and you will die in a horrible way, and we’ll get your kids too.

   (And what’s more, if things work out the way Putin hopes, the West which failed to protect you won’t even avenge you: they might huff and puff a bit but ultimately they will back down and brush it under the carpet just like they did over the Malaysian aeroplane because they simply don’t have the guts to challenge Russia.)

4. S – how does Putin expect the next spy swap to work, then?

   Tim – I don’t follow that guy’s reasoning. “We know it’s Russian because it’s a chemical compound developed by Russians, we don’t need to compare it to a sample.” Isn’t that circular logic?

   My $0.02: whether it was Russia or not, everybody thinks it was Russia, and so we have to react.

   We ought to have two distinct goals in mind: justice – which involves finding and punishing the perpetrator, whoever it may be – and national security – which involves making sure nobody thinks you can do this sort of thing in Britain and get away with it. If Russia is actually the perpetrator, then this simplifies things, but they must be punished regardless.

   Luckily for us, they’ve chosen to take the piss, so we needn’t feel so bad if our retaliation is unfair. Since they don’t seem to mind the world thinking that they did do it, they can’t much complain if we treat them as though they did.

   Of course, it will still help matters if we agree to give them a sample or get some independent testing or whatever. “Let there be no doubt!”

5. Except… doesn’t Skripal living free and clear in Salisbury somewhat undermine that?

   Not at all. Any Russian you would have asked would not have deemed this man safe by virtue of his living in Salisbury. Under close protection in the US maybe, but not living freely in the UK. Any Russian would have assumed he’s not dead simply because nobody wanted to kill him.

   Betray Russia and you will die in a horrible way, and we’ll get your kids too.

   Again, this message didn’t need reinforcing. And the kids? His daughter lived in Russia and was only visiting her father. If Putin wanted to send such a message, killing the daughter in the foyer of her apartment block would work just as well.

   If there is a message Putin wants delivered as a result of this incident, it’s more likely that Britain is weak and can’t retaliate in any meaningful way. If Skripal had been living in New York, I doubt he’d have been attacked. Therefore, post Brexit, the Eastern European countries should not look to Britain for protection when the EU falls to pieces, or to show solidarity against an EU telling them they must take in a million refugees each, but Russia. Perhaps.

6. Further thought: is the US justified in re-arresting Anna Chapman now?

7. Luckily for us, they’ve chosen to take the piss, so we needn’t feel so bad if our retaliation is unfair. Since they don’t seem to mind the world thinking that they did do it, they can’t much complain if we treat them as though they did.

   This is what makes me think the real aim of all this is to make Britain look weak and worthy of derision. The message isn’t for Russians – they don’t care about Britain – so it must be for someone else. My guess is Eastern Europeans or perhaps EU states who might be tempted to side with Britain over a spat with Russian in future.

8. Further thought: is the US justified in re-arresting Anna Chapman now?

   The Americans don’t seem to be interested in this story. I’m not surprised given up until Skripal was found slumped on a park bench their biggest enemy, or at least the one inviting the most criticism, appeared to be Trump.

9. how does Putin expect the next spy swap to work, then?

   He’s clearly decided that sending this message is worth losing subsequent spy swaps.

   Any Russian would have assumed he’s not dead simply because nobody wanted to kill him.

   Surely if you want to keep your reputation for being able to kill anyone, anywhere, you do actually have to kill someone who is supposedly safe every so often? Like, maybe once a decade? Just like if you want a reputation for violence then you do have to punch someone once in a while.

   If there is a message Putin wants delivered as a result of this incident, it’s more likely that Britain is weak and can’t retaliate in any meaningful way

   I think that’s part of it too, as indeed I wrote above. The West is weak and has no guts; Russia may have fewer nukes and tanks than NATO but is stronger because it has the guts to do something like this (or invade Ukraine, or bomb Syria) and then blatantly lie about it while looking the West in the face until the West backs down.

   If Skripal had been living in New York, I doubt he’d have been attacked

   Perhaps Putin also wants to test the USA’s resolve. If America doesn’t do anything concrete to help the UK, maybe we’ll see a Russian killing in the USA in the near future.

10. Surely if you want to keep your reputation for being able to kill anyone, anywhere, you do actually have to kill someone who is supposedly safe every so often?

    Again:

    Any Russian you would have asked would not have deemed this man safe by virtue of his living in Salisbury. Under close protection in the US maybe, but not living freely in the UK.

11. You say that, but after a while, if SIS keep telling you that if you work for them, even if you get caught, you will still be able to live out the rest of your life in the comfort of the West because look, this guy is doing it, then you might start to believe they have a point.

    I mean, even if you think the only reason he’s alive is that ‘nobody wanted to kill him’ then you might start to think, ‘well, nobody wants to kill me either, so if he can sell secrets to the West and then live a full life in the UK because nobody wants to kill him, then maybe I could do that too.’

12. This is what makes me think the real aim of all this is to make Britain look weak and worthy of derision.

    I agree that the Russians want to discredit Britain, and are certainly taking advantage of this incident, but I wonder whether they would go so far as nerve gas. As corrupt and dysfunctional as they are, I don’t think we should rule out other actors, as you mentioned t’other day.

    Nor should we rule out some kind of false flag conspiracy type thing. I feel silly even typing that – isn’t it an absurd notion? But then last week I would have said a Russian nerve gas attack in Salisbury was an absurd notion too.

    It also seems unlikely for them to botch the operation like they did, which is making people think that they deliberately incurred “collateral damage”. But, as I mentioned yesterday, I don’t think we should overestimate them. People fuck up all the time – perhaps even Putin.

    I remembered a quote from some Russian journo (no idea as to her credibility) to the effect that Putin only thinks six weeks ahead. Obviously the specificity of the claim is bollocks, but I don’t think it impossible that he doesn’t really think long-term. Most of our politicians don’t.

    I know you disagree, but just because Putin managed to claw his way to the top in Russia doesn’t automatically make him a Machiavellian genius. You might well say that some Mafia don is a master strategist, yet if he’s so clever, why isn’t he making his fortune in such a way that the police aren’t interested in him?

    Same with Putin: if he’s so clever, surely he can think of a better way to demonstrate British impotence than simply punching Britain in the face and daring them to punch back.

    Not to mention the collateral damage this will cause for his own intelligence operations: all his spies in England kicked out, not to mention the impact on morale for the rest.

    Which leads me to S – He’s clearly decided that sending this message is worth losing subsequent spy swaps.

    It’s not just the spies he can’t get back after they’re caught, mind you, it’s the effect on the spies he already has and may recruit in the future. A captured spy is “blown” (heh), and is of no further use, even if repatriated. They repatriate to incentivise continued spying by others, and to disincentivise cooperation by the captured spies: yes, you may get caught, but we’ll try to get you back if we can, and it’ll all be alright.. What do Russian spies think now, knowing that if they get caught in the west they’ll never see their families again; and worse, they’ll rot in jail, unless of course they have something interesting to tell their captors.

    The more I think about it, the more I can see the ways in which this would be a bad move for Putin. S, you think Putin definitely authorised this, yeah? Do you think he dun goofed?

13. Again I’ll mention a point I made in the previous thread no-one seemed very interested in. There is an election in Russia this weekend. Looking tough and mean seems to help his image (cf Crimea approval ratings). I’m not saying that’s necessarily the reason to order a hit, but in the domestic media he has definitely been playing up to this a bit in the relatively few statements he has made.

    Often foreign relations is more about politics than geopolitics.

14. I wonder at the timing of this, given the election in Russia on Sunday. Also, Nikolai Glushkov, a former associate of Beresovsky, died in London the other day, though it’s no more than speculation so far that it was suspicious. If the Russian state was responsible for either/both, who is the target audience in Russia, if it is related to the election timing?

15. And not everything that the western MSM is keen to lay directly at the door of the Russian state necessarily turns out to be state-backed:
    https://climateaudit.org/2018/03/11/arrest-of-the-lurk-banking-trojan-gang/

16. Motives for the Salisbury Poisoning (in no particular order):
    1. Putin sending a message of some kind
    2. Putin crony seeking favour
    3. 3rd party, settling a grudge against the spy (betrayed friend, etc)
    4. 3rd party settling a grudge against the daughter, for reasons yet to be discovered
    5. The UK, or other false flag, doing a dodgy dossier, again.
    6. Bungled handover of sample stolen from nearby secret chemical weapons base…
    7. Clinton/DNC housekeeping after Nunes memo
    8. Space aliens testing extent of cohesive planetary response to imminent invasion. Watch the skies!
    9. The Illuminati seeking to isolate Russia
    10. An anti-Putin lobby, wishing to depose him.
    11. The EU seeking to punish the traitorous UK for Brexit by provoking isolation, collapse of Government and shutdown of power network.
    12. An ecomentalist seeking to turn off all the gas power stations
    13. The Joker, or Unabomber, just some random nutter having a laugh
    14. The Hostmen (or OPEC) trying to influence the Oil price
    15. Donald Trump. Because.

    The Avengers (etc) have a lot to answer for!

    The point being, there seems precious little evidence between any of these plausible and ridiculous potential motives. Each is as good as the other, until someone can demonstrate some evidence. Like from CCTV?
    As to the ‘Who benefits’ angle. Well, rather a lot of people, actually.

17. S, you think Putin definitely authorised this, yeah?

    I don’t know about ‘authorised’ in the sense of something like a scene from The West Wing where they all get together and someone briefed them on the details of the plan and he said, ‘do it.’ but I’m pretty sure nothing much happens in Russia, and certainly nothing like this, that Putin doesn’t at least tacitly approve of.

    After all if this really was someone acting totally against Putin’s wishes, then why hasn’t Putin hung them out to dry? Or if he doesn’t want to hand them over to the West for PR reasons, I wouldn’t suspect their own life expectancy would be terribly high…

    It’s not just the spies he can’t get back after they’re caught, mind you, it’s the effect on the spies he already has and may recruit in the future

    I’m aware of that, and this may well make Russian spies less willing to take risks. But on the other hand, he may think that is worth it.

    Heck, he may think that fear of their own side is a better motivator for his own spies: even rotting in a Western jail is better than what will happen to them if they refuse to follow orders…

    (‘Putin’ as shorthand here for ‘whoever’s in charge in Russia’ — I’m sure that, like Assad, Putin is merely the figurehead for the cabal who took over post-soviet Russia: not a puppet, but not in all-powerful sole control à la Stalin, either.)

18. The point being, there seems precious little evidence between any of these plausible and ridiculous potential motives. Each is as good as the other, until someone can demonstrate some evidence

    Yes, if you only consider motive. But murder is also about means and opportunity, and it’s the ‘means’ here that basically cuts out everyone other than the Russian government, or someone operating with their approval, and makes them the only plausible suspect.

19. There is an election in Russia this weekend. Looking tough and mean seems to help his image

    I replied to this point, but perhaps to someone else: I don’t think this has anything to do with the Russian election. I haven’t heard a single Russian voice expressing admiration for this (in contrast to, say, the Crimean annexation) and I very much doubt this is the sort of thing Putin does to impress ordinary Russians.

20. basically cuts out everyone other than the Russian government, or someone operating with their approval

    You have a touching faith in the Russian government, I must say. When I lived on Sakhalin, the local authorities took 2-3 years to pay attention to any directive Moscow issues. Russia is a lawless place, with a lot of bad people, not all of whom are singing from the same government hymn-sheet.

21. Putin is merely the figurehead for the cabal who took over post-soviet Russia

    Oh boy.

22. Is there anything in the news over there about Syria and the Security Council?
    There’s your motive.

23. Russia is a lawless place, with a lot of bad people, not all of whom are singing from the same government hymn-sheet

    I’m sure, but how many of them both have access to the USSR’s most deadly nerve agents, and aren’t on Putin’s radar? Damn few I’d reckon. Like zero.

24. Oh boy.

    See http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/stories-43260651 for an interesting take.

25. I’m sure, but how many of them both have access to the USSR’s most deadly nerve agents, and aren’t on Putin’s radar? Damn few I’d reckon. Like zero.

    You seem to be labouring under the impression that Russia is like Britain, only colder and with more vodka. It isn’t.

26. So… you reckon there are loads of Russians with access to top-grade nerve agents, who the Russian government knows nothing about?

27. S,

    If I’d wanted Cathy Newman on here, I’d have asked her. Go and bore someone else.

28. I’m sorry, you keep making oblique statements like ‘You seem to be labouring under the impression that Russia is like Britain, only colder and with more vodka. It isn’t.’ and I’m not sure exactly what you’re trying to say.

    Is Russia such a ‘lawless place’ that there are Russians who have possession of this nerve agent, unknown to the Russian government?

29. All you’re doing is asking one loaded question after another, custom-fit for the narrative you subscribe to. It’s tedious in the extreme. For the sake of other readers here I’m going to explain this once and not interact with you any further.

    I said:

    You have a touching faith in the Russian government, I must say. When I lived on Sakhalin, the local authorities took 2-3 years to pay attention to any directive Moscow issues. Russia is a lawless place, with a lot of bad people, not all of whom are singing from the same government hymn-sheet.

    This means that in Russia it is not unusual to find elements of the government acting not in accordance with Moscow’s wishes. This has been a feature of Russia since its inception, and it even infuriated Stalin. Rather than understanding this point, you said:

    So… you reckon there are loads of Russians with access to top-grade nerve agents, who the Russian government knows nothing about?

    Nobody suggested “loads” of Russians. A few would suffice. Nobody suggested the Russian government “knows nothing about them”, this is just bullshit inserted into the question because it serves the narrative you’re trying to push, a la Cathy Newman. You make absolutely no effort to understand the point being made, you just ask more dumb loaded questions. And this is all you do, every time. It’s tedious, and I’m not going to bother engaging with you any more. Perhaps someone else will.

30. But… if the attack was carried out by an element of the Russian government, whether acting in accordance with Moscow’s wishes or not, isn’t Theresa May exactly right in blaming the Russian government and demanding they explain themselves?

    So at this point, if it is the case that the attack was carried out by an element of the Russian government that had gone rogue and was acting without authorisation, Moscow should admit that and hand over those responsible.

    If they don’t do that, they are at least protecting said rogue elements, if not tacitly approving of their actions, and therefore Moscow is responsible for what those elements did (in the same way as Theresa May would be responsible if a section of the SIS went rogue and started assassinating people all over the place, and she didn’t immediately shut it down, make it public, and hand over those responsible).

    So even in that situation, the Russian government is still responsible and May’s actions are perfectly fair and reasonable, whether or not she hands over those samples that this all started about.

31. It would be hardly surprising if some of these nerve agents went missing in the 90’s. The government could barely keep up with containing, let alone destroying the stockpiles of old soviet stuff, they had to request help from the Americans and others to do so.

    Who knows how many undesirable groups have small caches of stolen nerve gas shells (or worse), ready to use against opponents? Did none of this end up on the black market at some point? Seems hard to believe considering just about everything else was for sale at the time.

    This article is from 1998 and gives some perspective: https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/inatl/longterm/coldwar/leonidovkaa.htm

32. It would be hardly surprising if some of these nerve agents went missing in the 90’s.

    The US did a pretty decent job of cleaning it up. I’d be more likely to believe this was swiped recently from existing stocks, even removed legitimately for a benign purpose and then diverted. Russian government agencies are thoroughly corrupt, stuffed with people with all sorts of competing interests and fighting turf wars, not to mention the conflicts of interest. When the Russian army was fighting the Chechens, Russian military officers made money selling arms to the Chechens. How the hell do you keep control of stuff in an environment like this?

33. Have a look at this post for an example of the dysfunction of Russian government agencies.

34. Post here casts some doubt on whether Novichoks exist, or can be reliably identified. I have no idea of the credibility of the source. Comments from those who do would be appreciated.

35. dcardno,

    Craig Murray is a bellend of the first water, proper tinfoil hat conspiracy-monger. I’d not trust a damned word he says. See here for a response.

36. Russian government agencies are thoroughly corrupt, stuffed with people with all sorts of competing interests and fighting turf wars, not to mention the conflicts of interest. When the Russian army was fighting the Chechens, Russian military officers made money selling arms to the Chechens. How the hell do you keep control of stuff in an environment like this?

    It’s difficult but that is the job of a government. And if it fails, it’s responsible for that failure. and if it fails and covers up that failure instead of admitting it, then it is not just responsible for that failure, it’s guilty of it.

    If this was done by a rogue element of the Russian government which was not under Moscow’s control, then Moscow have had their chance to admit that and ask for international help in cleaning their house. That they haven’t would make them just as guilty as the rogues.

    So either this was done with the Russian government’s knowledge and approval in advance, or they have subsequently demonstrated their approval by not handing over those responsible but instead covering up their crimes.

    Either way, Moscow is responsible.

37. https://pjmedia.com/richardfernandez/fourteen-days/

38. “It’s difficult but that is the job of a government”

    Except the Russian “government” has no job ither than looting. That some sort of order does emerge from the incentives of this job does not mean it is any order of the sort “like Britain, only colder”. It is not a mafia’s job to keep anyone other than it’s dons safe.

39. Lol, I just read the burning of Craig Murray on twitter. Although the scientist’s (Clyde Davies) view (who was burning Craig Murray) whilst interesting, really just showed a couple of formulas of nerve agent and then ranted for a bit. I didn’t see it as proof of Russian guilt as he did. In fact, I couldn’t really conclude anything other than Novichoks are a family of agents with the same chemical structure – there is an obvious question therefore about pinpointing where it was made.

    What made me laugh more was the ‘applause’ from the other left leaning twitter commentators as to what a great lesson in science he had just showed them. I guess the left don’t get to see science and facts they agree with very often, so the sight of a couple of chemical formulas is like an oasis in a desert for them.

40. Not sure how this is connected to Salisbury, but a Russian plane has dropped a few tons of gold bars over Siberia through its cargo hatch today.

41. Damian, that was my take on Clyde Davies’ response as well. I will take his word for it that Novichoks exist (which casts some doubt on everything that Craig Murray says, I suppose), but I think it’s one logic step too far to say that “therefore these came from Russia” unless you can make the argument that “Russia is the only possible source.” Perhaps that’s true – but that’s well out of my circle of competence.

42. dcardno – right, but even if Russia is the only possible source it doesn’t follow that Russia is responsible for this, except in the sense that S uses above. Russian boffins might have made the substance, but it doesn’t necessarily follow that it was Russia that had it sprayed in the old boy’s face

43. What made me laugh more was the ‘applause’ from the other left leaning twitter commentators as to what a great lesson in science he had just showed them. I guess the left don’t get to see science and facts they agree with very often, so the sight of a couple of chemical formulas is like an oasis in a desert for them.

    Indeed, and as is common on social media once Davies got into his stride he decided to step away from his area of expertise and start weighing in on internal Russian politics – hence this post. You see this *a lot*.

44. Matthew McConnagay: …but even if Russia is the only possible source it doesn’t follow that Russia is responsible for this…
    Yes – absolutely. You have several logical steps from there: that the US, UK, Germany, Japan (etc) couldn’t make the stuff (I’ve no idea); that it was a Russian government operation rather than one mafia flavour or another; that it was an approved operation, not a ‘rogue’ unit, or faction fighting a battle we know nothing of. If you can make it over those hurdles, I think it is reasonable to think that Putin knew in advance, and it had at least tacit his approval. But I think we are a long way from there.

45. Regarding the forthcoming election in Russia.

    If Putin did order it to show that he’s a strong man/firmly in charge/sticking it to the man to show that Russia can’t be pushed around, then …

    He’d have to admit it and publicise it so that he could take credit for it. It doesn’t seem likely that he would tell certain select people with a warning “don’t tell anyone else” to indirectly boost his popularity. It is truly said that only one person can keep a secret. More than one, it’s out whether you want it publicised or not. So it seems a weird way of gaining kudos for it.

    He’s not publicising it so what would be the point of him ordering it to boost his popularity?

    As for gold bars being “lost” out of an aircraft over Siberia, clearly it is a clandestine, in full view of everyone, with publicity stretching to the western press, secret payment for the hit. In the words of Homer Simpson, DOH! It’s OBVIOUS.

    If the tin foil hat fits and all that … >};o)

46. It would be interesting to know the shelf life of this Novichoks. Might help narrow down origins.

47. Don’t assign motive to what could equally be a colossal cock up.
    I think this was a botched assassination. They weren’t supposed to find clues.
    The assassins were supposed to use a small amount of this material – enough to do the job but no more. Not enough to leave traces. But as with the polonium back in 2006 they aren’t very competetant and they’ve gone and left very big clues as to where they are from.
    Maybe even the daughter wasn’t a target and just happened to be visiting on the day they moved in for the kill.

48. Always ask, Cui Bono? Here’s a few:

    Draw attention away from the Telford rape gangs.
    Confuse the Russian voters just before their election.
    Undermine Brexit.
    Further increase the (mainly irrational) Western hatred of Russia.

    Cack-handed attempted murders like these have all the hallmarks of a rather different group, based in the West.
    And the manufacturing method for this binary nerve agent is freely available – even Amazon have a book with the details!

    As Russia presently provides 22% of the UK’s gas requirements, it’s rather unlikely Mrs Maybe would do anything to jeopardize that supply – not only would some lights really go out, but your gas central heating needs electricity to function – go figure (with a warm coat handy).

49. So the agent was supposedly found in the daughter’s luggage. The thot plickens…

50. So the agent was supposedly found in the daughter’s luggage.

    Gotta say, everyone’s blithely assumed the father was the target and the daughter collateral. I’d at least hope that Plod would investigate her background a little before Theresa May invokes Article 5 and we go to war with Russia.

    Oh wait, Cressida Dick is in charge. In that case, does “duck and cover” still work?

Comments are closed.