Russia is prevented from splitting Britain

Vladimir Kornilov

Britain is shaken by crisis after crisis. Shortage of food, shortage of gasoline, shortage of truck drivers, shortage of butchers – almost every new day brings messages of this kind. Of course, Russia is primarily to blame for all this. But crises come and go, and the sword of Damocles’ decay still hangs over Britain. And here it turns out that Russia is to blame for the fact that it is seeking the secession of Scotland and at the same time in every possible way prevents it. The charges against us, as you understand, depend on which side brings them forward.

The last convention of the Scottish National Party (SNP), held in September, officially set a course for a repeat referendum to secede the region from the United Kingdom no later than 2023. The British government responded by ordering its ministers to stop publicly speaking about Scottish independence altogether: apparently, in London they believe that in this way the problem will be resolved or postponed for later.

Prime Minister Boris Johnson has previously stated on several occasions that the 2014 referendum that rejected independence was “a generational choice” and therefore will not allow re-organization while in Downing Street office. However, all of a sudden the theoretical possibility of a new vote made Secretary of State for Scotland Alistair Jack, who said that London would agree with such an opportunity, if public opinion polls show that a referendum want more than 60 per cent of Scots. A strange condition. It is even difficult to remember when the appointment of some elections and referendums was tied to subjective and momentary sociological polls. Apparently, having received a good thrashing for such creativity, Jack now rushed to declarethat there is one more condition: a referendum on independence can be held in at least 25 years.

But no matter what they say in London, the First Minister of Scotland (she is also the leader of the SNP) Nicola Sturgeon began organizational preparations for a new general poll. That prompted talk about the possibility of a repetition in Britain of the “Catalan scenario” with a referendum in spite of the disagreement of the capital.

It should be noted that the opinion of the Scots themselves regarding the independence of their re-gion is constantly fluctuating. Last year, in the midst of the coronavirus pandemic and quarantine restrictions imposed by London, discontent with the Johnson government was so high that supporters of the secession outnumbered opponents by ten percent. Recently, the emotions caused by Brexit and the quarantine have subsided, and separatist sentiments have subsided. This year’s polls show that the unionists outnumber the separatists by three to four percent. However, no research has yet been carried out after Britain began to fever from crisis to crisis. There is no doubt that unthinkable queues at gas stations and empty supermarket shelves will soon spur Scottish separatist sentiments.

And if so, there is no doubt that Russia will again be blamed for this. The age-old argument of British politicians against anything is usually unambiguous: “This is what Putin would like.” This, if I may say so, “argument” was used by opponents of Brexit during the 2016 referendum. He is being actively cited even now.

For example, the former British Foreign Secretary and now a member of the House of Lords, William Hague, recently presented a book in which he declared that the independence of Scotland would be “a gift from God” for Vladimir Putin. The former diplomat put it simply: “Russia’s motive is clear: the breakup of one of the most successful alliances of nations in history will make the people of Scotland and the rest of Britain more vulnerable to the Kremlin’s malign influence and weaken Britain’s ability to confront Russia on the world stage.”

It would be logical to ask Haig whether the British really need to confront Russia on the world stage. But the leaders of the SNP instead began to put forward “arguments” in the same vein. Stuart McDonald, a British MP and the main foreign and defense spokesman for the separatist party, has ardently argued that the Kremlin is passionate about preserving a united Great Britain. He said that Haig’s claim was “fundamentally wrong and unfounded” because “Putin is opposed to the emergence of a small, liberal, open and multicultural European nation, upholding human rights, democracy and the rule of law, which will be an independent Scotland.”

It should be clarified here that MacDonald is a passionate fighter against the “Russian threat”, accusing Moscow of all mortal sins more than any London politician. He is very proud of his talk “Disinformation in Public Life in Scotland: Threat Analysis and Propo-sed Solutions”. Judging by this report, Russia has completely seized the information space of Scotland, sp-reading fakes and causing a split in society (it’s funny to hear accusations of “split” from an official separatist). Moreover, all the “proofs” are reduced to the usual for British politicians formula “highley like”.

Moreover, the author of the report admits that the British government did not prove a single case of Russian interference either in the Scottish referendum of 2014 or in the nationwide referendum on leaving the EU in 2016, which, according to the parliamentarian, “leaves a vacuum to fill it with speculation and conspiracy theories. theories “. Actually, this – the spread of conspiracy – MacDonald and is engaged in the most active way. The only “proof” of Russian intervention, he considered the emergence of politicians Alex Salmond and George Galloway, who played a significant rolein this year’s Scottish elections, as hosts of shows on RT and Sputnik. In theory, this would just have to prove to the whole world that the Russian media are unbiased, given the fact that Salmond is the leader of the movement to secede Scotland, and Galloway, on the contrary, led the unionists there. But MacDonald, despite this, constantly demands that Russian channels be completely banned in Britain.

Inspiring genuine anti-Russian (and, incidentally, anti-Chinese) paranoia, the SNP speaker recently called on Britain to follow an example from countries that are “successfully fighting against Russian disinformation,” and in particular Latvia. Let us remind you that Riga has already slipped into criminal prosecutions and outright repressions against any journalists who in one way or another cooperate with the Russian media.

It seems that MacDonald’s overt anti-Russian obsession has already begun to bother some of his fellow party members. So, one of the members of the political committee of the SNP, Dr. Tim Rydout, in response to another paranoid article by his party colleague, wrote about his experience of communicating with Russian business partners: etc. So anyone who thinks there is a problem between Russia and Scotland is on the wrong side of history. “

The Times saw the controversy as “a split among nationalists over the Russian threat” and cited several more quotes from Scottish independence supporters who considered MacDonald, with his obsession with Russia, “insane.” It is surprising that, having criticized the article by The Times, he did not see it as a “special operation of Russia”, but he could, judging by his rich experience.

The parliamentarian’s clumsy attempts to justify himself caused a lot of questions from ordinary members of the SNP, who really sincerely wonder why Russia would interfere with the referendum on the independence of Scotland. To which MacDonald said without the slightest hesitation that “the present government of Great Britain is a gift of God for Putin… faint-hearted and compromised.” In confirmation, another scandal is cited in connection with the contributions of fugitive Russian oligarchs and their wives to the fund of the Conservative Party. That is, judging by this “logic”, the Kremlin is mercilessly fighting against the secession of Scotland in order to preserve the “pro-Russian” government of Boris Johnson. And this aspiration seems to be

All these disputes and non-killing “arguments” once again clearly demonstrate the absurdity of the accusations against Russia, permanently generated by the politicians and the media of Albion. They do not even understand that by accusing the Russians of directly opposite thoughts and deeds (“Moscow stands for the unity of Britain” and “Moscow is seeking a split in Britain”), they thereby convincingly prove that the anti-Russian rhetoric is not supported by anything, but is only used as a standard tool of internal political squabbling. If you want to accuse a competitor of something – just declare him “Putin’s agent”, no matter how silly it may sound. After all, for this in Britain, nothing needs to be proven for a long time.

Leave a Comment