The Russian embassy in the UK on Wednesday slammed London over British Foreign Secretary James Cleverly’s comments about Ukrainian attacks inside Russia.
In response to a drone attack that hit Moscow on Tuesday and targeted residential buildings, Cleverly said Kyiv has the right to “project force beyond its borders to undermine Russia’s ability to project force into Ukraine itself.” He added that “legitimate military targets beyond its own borders are internationally recognized as being part of a nation’s self-defense.”
In response, the Russian embassy said Cleverly was encouraging Ukrainian attacks on civilians. “The hostile statements by Britain’s top `diplomat’ cannot be viewed as anything but an attempt to encourage the Kiev regime to carry out more attacks on civilian facilities and our civilians,” the embassy said, according to Russia’s TASS news agency.
“Apparently, from their windows, the Foreign Office — or Estonia — sees residential blocks in Moscow as ‘legitimate military targets,’” the embassy added.
Dmitry Medvedev, the deputy chair of Russia’s security council and former president, also responded to Cleverly’s comments, warning British officials are “legitimate military targets” for Moscow because of the UK’s role in the war.
“The goofy officials of the UK, our eternal enemy, should remember that within the framework of the universally accepted international law which regulates modern warfare, including the Hague and Geneva Conventions with their additional protocols, their state can also be qualified as being at war,” Medvedev wrote in English on Twitter.
“Today, the UK acts as Ukraine’s ally providing it with military aid in the form of equipment and specialists, i.e., de facto is leading an undeclared war against Russia. That being the case, any of its public officials (either military, or civil, who facilitate the war) can be considered as a legitimate military target,” the former president added.
Cleverly’s comments came after the UK began supplying Ukraine with Storm Shadow missiles, which can hit targets up to 250 kilometers (155 miles) away, a longer range than the rockets the US has been providing Kyiv. The British have been leading the charge in escalating NATO involvement in the war, including being the first country to promise Western-made tanks. The UK also played a role in pressuring President Biden to sign off on the delivery of F-16s to Ukraine.
Cleverly is not acting cleverly, but he’s not alone. All this would not have been possible if Biden wasn’t the President that’s least cleverly at restraining the British. To see the British warmongering weasels for what they are, see “operation unthinkable.” Churchill was not satisfied even after draining the blood of tens of millions. The British public did us all a favor in removing him from office once WWII was over.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Unthinkable
Agreed. Operation Arkangel has never ended.
Churchill’s fingerprints are all over the sinking of the Lusitania in order to get the U.S. into the WWI. NO escort. Ship’s captain has the ship throttled back. Him and the screeching of JP Morgan.
“”All this would not have been possible if Biden wasn’t the President””
come on man! do you think that anything would be different if a republican was the POTUS? omg let’s examine the republican roster = oh shit what is her name? oh ya, Boebert. oh sh*t what is her other name? oh ya, M T G, wait, what? oh ya there are some other geniuses that all wear the red hats (Trump) – WTF guess what red + blue equals purple – guess who’s color is purple ? oh shit could it possibly be some other guys 5000 miles away from here and yet still have some kind of sway about the way things are done way over here?
Russia attacked the headquarters of Ukraine Intelligence Services earlier this week. Any British advisors who might have happened to be there were buried in the rubble.
Well, THAT should teach the Brits a lesson! The West will certainly end their support of Ukraine after such an effective strike!
I have no illusions that the Brits will end their support of Ukraine. But I do think they may have learned that any personnel they send into the country will be targeted with prejudice.
As I’m sure the Brits expect.
Extreme prejudice. The love-hate that exist between Russians and English is hundreds of years old.
Article title:
“Russia Says UK Encouraging Ukrainian Attacks on Russian Civilians”
Well, the UK did not encourage targeting civilians. What British Foreign Secretary James Cleverly said was:
“Legitimate military targets beyond its own border are part of Ukraine’s self defense… and we should recognize that.”
That’s a lot different than encouraging the targeting of civilians.
Medvedev needs to chill a bit, he’s got his own internal problems within the Kremlin.
And why is the Kremlin complaining about it when they have been targeting Ukrainian civilians for almost 16 months now? Need I compare civilian deaths toll on both sides?
It’s war and Russia started it.
Mr. DeCamp also avoids including that this is in the neutral source he uses for his ‘quote’
https://english.alarabiya.net/News/world/2023/05/30/After-attack-on-Moscow-UK-says-Ukraine-has-right-to-defend-itself-beyond-borders
This is not the first time I have seen Mr. DeCamp selecting what he writes to make the western / Ukrainian side look worse than what is actually the case.
Agree. While I commend him for writing often, I’m not sure if his glitches are deliberate, lack of attention to details and/or due to production workload.
his name is Cleverly.
you couldn’t make that sh*t up.
He cleverly omitted the part that the drones targeted residential buildings. Of course, if he were cornered, he’d say that he wasn’t talking about that drone attack. Always worded so there can be some plausible denial.
Is there any evidence that the drones targeted residential buildings, other than one side’s claim that they targeted residential buildings?
And hey, based on the Russian perspective on attacks that destroy civilian facilities in Ukraine, wouldn’t any civilian casualties be the Russians’ fault for not having evacuated/surrendered Moscow anyway?
“In response to a drone attack that hit Moscow on Tuesday and targeted residential buildings, Cleverly said”
I assumed it was corroborated.
It’s now becoming abundantly clear that NATO wants this war to continue. They see Russia as a wounded animal and are supplying more and more long range lethal weapons to Ukraine to wear Russia down so NATO can finish off the kill. If a layman like me can come to this conclusion? What do you think the BRICS nation have determined? With bellicose statements coming out of London. It’s only a matter of time. BRICS nations will ignore Western sanctions and come to the aid of Russia. Then viola WW3.
If a layman like you arrive at this conclusion then it is possibly because it is just wrong:
1) Russia has nukes – NATO will not be finishing off the kill
2) the BRICS have had a year to change their stance, they have not, their trade with Russia pales compared with their trade with the west, so saving Russia will come at enormous cost to their economies.
Are you crazy?? You need to be a screen writer.
No just rational.
I’m not wrong. The West is looking for regime change in Russia. Usher in a so called democracy and pilfer Russia’s resources. Just like they’ve done in other parts of the world. Putin knows crossing that use of nuke red line means that is the death nail in his coffin/presidency. Plus the continued China bashing when it comes to Taiwan. May make that economic cooperation with the west untenable. China is looking at a U.S military build up in its region of influence. BRICS nations will not cut their nose off in spite of their face when it comes to trade. They’ll clandestinely support Russia with military support while skirting Western sanctions. That right now is a given. As the Russia regime change gets closer that support will be overtly done.
Very likely true, but regime change can be achieved without invasion, if it cannot then it will not trump the importance of not invading a nuclear armed country.
The West will not be in control over Moscow and hence will only exercise the kind of control that sanctions allow them, but honestly that is pretty much already.
Ask yourself; Have they done so to even one nuclear armed country? If the answer you come up with is no then think about why it is so!
Yes but so does invading Russia proper mean for the west – they know that according to Russian policy they are supposed to use their nukes if their control over said nukes are endangered or the enemy is at the gates of Moscow.
You mean the continued support for Taiwanese independence?
It is making it harder, the Chinese are looking at a major economic collapse if they lose their export to the west, the west is looking at a very significant problem of home-shoring very large quantities of products – so not sure either party wants it to go that far.
that is going to be extremely hard seeing as their support will be seen travelling on the oceans and detectable in components the Russians lose on the battlefield.
Why do you suppose they would risk their own economies to salvage an economy slightly smaller than that of Italy – how is Russian demand going to make up for all the trade with the very much larger and very much richer west?
“Russia Says UK Encouraging Ukrainian Attacks on Russian Civilians Britain’s
foreign secretary said Ukraine had the right to ‘project force beyond
its borders’ in response to the Moscow drone attack”
Russia has a right to attack London!
The flaw in your argument underlined, and for your benefit what Cleverly actually said was:
So your friends just being economic with the truth.
Forgotten in all of this is the fact that the U.S. is the force behind the encirclement of Russia, the final push is to take Crimea and the warm water port of Russian ships. A stupid game of Risk, when there could of been a smarter game of cooperation, as Russia wanted 30 years ago, but was denied by the U.S.. It is also a stupid game of castle keep, to stay at the top of the world, not being a “police” of the world. Wherever we stick our MIC nose, bad things happen to those countries. I am sick of it. I do not want my children, grandchildren, great grandchildren sacrificed to the desires of the war mongers. I am older and will be gone soon enough.
Russia is not encircled – but yes that was at one point the US plan AFAIK.
I think it is going to be the second to last push, but that’s just me thinking that the Ukrainians will face much the same problems as the Russians if they try to cross the line of control over which they have been fighting with the Russian infused rebels since 2014.
The Europeans certainly tried to engage through trade, and see where that got the Germans!
We can easily agree upon the notion that the US meddles in far more countries than it should.
The issue here is whether we break the notion very widely held that a nation cannot engage in war of aggression for territorial conquest – if we break with that principle then we will face far more wars than in previous decades – simply because war then is a potentially more attractive option.
Encouraging? Kremlin and their soft diplomatic rhetoric… The cowardly English pests are providing direct material support for terrorist activities. Targeting data, weapons and equipment and ammunition. Following the twisted logic of this ‘Clever’ anglosaxon rat, London is a legitimate military target for Russian strikes.