Categories: Op-Ed

The European Game Of Expulsions By Owei Lakemfa

Serious diplomacy has, this Easter Season, given way to the farcical drama of European countries expelling Russian diplomats, with the latters’ country also retaliating. This week, 25 countries, including non-European allies like the United States, Australia and Canada, and the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), had knocked out 158 Russian diplomats, with Russia absorbing the punches and throwing its own. There is the joke that American president, Donald Trump was watching the CBS 60 Minutes programme, when he was asked how many Russian diplomats should be expelled, and he looked at the screen, saw 60 Minutes and decided that 60 Russians should be expelled.

In descending into Cold War politics, no shots have been fired, and may not be; it is actually more of shadow boxing. The ostensible reason for this street musical is the tragic attempted murder of Russian double spy, Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia, who were on March 4, found unconscious in Salisbury, Britain. Skripal was a Russian intelligence agent found guilty of “high treason in the form of espionage” and imprisoned in 2006 before being exchanged in 2010 for some Russians accused of spying in the US.

British Prime Minister Theresa May said the poison used was a “military-grade nerve agent of a type developed by Russia” and concluded that Russia was “highly likely” to have made the attempt. Also, the attack bore resemblance to the murder of Alexander Litvinenko, a former KGB agent who fled prosecution and took asylum in Britain. On November 1, 2006, he fell ill and passed away twenty days later. The autopsy showed he had ingested poison – polonium-2010, and the Russians were accused of administering it.

The Russians denied being behind the Salisbury attack and asked the British for evidence beyond mere suspicion. An angry Britain responded by expelling 23 Russian diplomats, and the latter retaliated by also expelling an equal number of British diplomats and shutting down the British Council in Russia.

As a non-actor in this drama, and examining Prime Minister May’s submission to the British Parliament this Monday, that no other country “has a combination of the capability, the intent and the motive to carry out such an act”, I wonder if this is the same country that produced Sir Arthur Conan Doyle and his fictional smart detective ‘Sherlock Holmes’. If it is true that the poison was the type produced in Russia, is there no possibility that a third country or party could have used it, knowing that Russia will be blamed?

As it is, Britain has no conclusive proof, no evidence, and makes no presumption of innocence; it simply found Russia guilty, probably on the basis of the latter’s ‘bad boy’ image. It is like a crime committed in a neigbourhood and the police asks itself ‘who is the bad guy around’ and concludes that he is not just the suspect, but is in fact guilty. There is a saying that if the witch cries in the night, and the child dies in the morning, who does not know that it was the witch that killed the child? For good old fashioned Britain, Russia is the witch; it must have carried out the attack.

Britain might have been quite distraught and emotional about the Salisbury attack, but how do you explain the herd-like reaction of over two dozen countries, expelling Russian diplomats? Is it just a matter of siding with an ally, even if its position is highly flawed or an attempt by the European Union to show Britain that it needs solidarity within a common union, rather than Brexit?

The Euro-American outrage over the attack on Sergei Skripal is more political than a concern for human life. If this were not so, there should have been a similar wave of expulsion of Saudi Arabia diplomats for the country’s atrocious bombings of social gatherings, hospitals and schools in Yemen, which (according to the United Nations) had by November 2017 resulted in 5,295 civilian deaths and 8,873 injured. Rather than call the Saudis to order and stop these war crimes, countries like United States and Britain have increased their weapon sales to the Saudis. The Independent newspaper reported that rather than caution the Saudis, Britain, in the wake of the Yemeni massacres, increased the number of British-made bombs and missiles sold to Saudi Arabia by almost 500 percent, with over £4.6 billion realised from these sales of arms.

I feel I am in a cinema hall waiting for the second part of this expulsion film; so I need to stretch my legs, get popcorn and a bottle of Zobo drink to watch Part II, which may be titled “Russia Retaliates”.

Perhaps the most honest admission that the reasons for the expulsion of Russian diplomats is primarily political, came from the NATO Secretary-General, Jens Stoltenberg, who told the press that the Salisbury attack was a mere trigger; he lists some of the sins of Russia: “We have seen the illegal annexation of Crimea, we have seen the destabilisation of Eastern Ukraine, we have seen cyber attacks, we have seen hybrid tactics, we have seen Russia investing heavily in modern military equipment and the willingness to use military force against neighbours”.

There is also the apprehension that Russia’s international image would be boosted by its hosting the 2018 World Cup, so there is need for Russia-bashing. Hence, amongst Britain’s ‘sanctions’ against Russia, is barring cabinet ministers and members of the royal family from the World Cup. Also, the British secretary of state for Foreign Affairs, Boris Johnson revealed that pressure is being put on the English team to boycott the World Cup in Moscow, because Russian president, Vladimir Putin would likely use it “like Hitler used the 1936 Olympics”.

So the international leaders of human rights and the sanctity of human life, have reduced the victims of the poison attack, to mere pawns in the chess game against Russia. The current expulsion game is like a reality show; even Stoltenberg admits that the primary effect on Russia is that the expulsions may reduce its capability to carry out intelligence work in the countries its diplomatic strength have been reduced. Generally, sanctions against Russia by the West have become seasonal with a lot of drama, but little effect. One major one was the 2014 sanctions over the Russian “annexation” of Crimea and its alleged interference in Ukraine.