The British security services were distracted by the post-September 11 terrorist threat and did not give enough priority to Russia’s attempts to gain influence in the United Kingdom, which Moscow regarded as one of its main intelligence targets, Intelligence and Inter-party security in the British Parliament. Committee said.
British politicians allowed wealthy Russians with deep ties to the Kremlin to gain influence and access in London. Cultural institutions, public relations firms, political groups and even real estate agents became involuntary “agents” of the Russian state, according to the report.
“Russian influence in the UK is the new normal,” the report concludes. “Successive governments have welcomed the oligarchs and their money with open arms, providing them with a means of recycling illicit finances through London’s ‘laundromat’ and connections at the highest levels with access to Kingdom companies and political figures United, “the committee said in a press release accompanying the report.
The findings are the result of an eight-month investigation into Russia’s influence on UK politics and public life. The report was delayed when Prime Minister Boris Johnson called a general election when it was being completed. The committee criticized the delay in publishing.
In one of the key sections of the report, which deals with the Brexit referendum, the British government is accused of failing to conduct a thorough investigation into allegations of a Kremlin-sponsored campaign of influence. “We have not been provided with any post-referendum evaluation of Russia’s attempted interference,” the report says, drafting a clause that follows. “This situation is in stark contrast to the United States’ handling of allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election, where an assessment by the intelligence community was conducted within two months of the vote, with a unclassified summary that was made public. “
One of the committee members, Stewart Hosie, told reporters at a press conference that the government was afraid of what such an investigation might show. The report called on the UK intelligence community to produce and make public an assessment of Russia’s role in the Brexit referendum.
More broadly, British intelligence agencies did not see the security of the UK voting process as part of their role because they feared the problem was a “hot potato,” according to the report.
The document, with a redacted annex, was based on closed-door interviews with experts and members of the country’s intelligence community. Johnson was accused of blocking its publication before last year’s general election, in which his Conservative Party won a landslide victory.
Opposition politicians accused the government of a cover-up, saying it could raise uncomfortable questions about the validity of the 2016 Brexit referendum and expose alleged Russian connections by some in the ruling conservative party.
Opening the press conference that launched the report’s release, Kevan Jones, a Labor lawmaker who served on the committee under his previous chairmanship, said the report’s delay was due to Johnson not giving his permission for the report to be published. in the standard 10 days after his presentation to Downing Street.
Various explanations offered by the government for the delay of the report “are categorically not true.” The delay had “fueled speculation” about what the report might say about Russia’s participation in the 2016 Brexit referendum.
Much of Johnson’s team inside Downing Street worked on the victorious Vote Leave team, the official Brexit campaign during the 2016 referendum, including its senior adviser, Dominic Cummings. Since the referendum, there have been numerous allegations that the Vote Leave campaign, which was led by Johnson and contained many members of his current cabinet and political advisers, misled the public on a variety of topics from the economic realities of Brexit to immigration. Therefore, the delay in the report and subsequent speculation that it contained a smoking gun linking Brexit to Russia would have been potentially damaging to many of the government’s top figures.
.
