The Russian state isn’t as
monolithic or as powerful as we
believe, argues phillip blond |
 |
Poor Alexander Litvinenko died last November 24 in horrible sickening circumstances; he was poisoned after drinking tea mixed with the radioactive isotope Polonium-210. According to the British police, all the evidence (and there is a lot of it) points to this murder being committed by Andrei Lugovoi, a former KGB/FSB agent who had tea with Litvinenko on November 1.
Clearly Litvinenko was murdered - but by whom?
Wild accusations that President Putin ordered this assassination are farcical. His killing served neither Putin's interests nor those of the Russian state. Litvinenko's worst accusations against the Russian secret service (the FSB) - that in order to start a new war in Chechnya, it had organised the bombings of residential apartment blocks in Moscow - had already been aired and published. Litvinenko was widely viewed as |
|
 |
 |
|
| Wild accusations that President Putin ordered Litvinenko’s assassination are farcical |
|
|
unstable and deranged; killing him would only legitimise and propagate his claims. He was best ignored.
The idea of a KGB/FSB revenge killing against a former agent who betrayed his service is equally ridiculous. Though concepts of honour and betrayal are real in Russia, it would have to have been approved at a political level where notions of vengeance would have been superseded by wider political calculations.
However, Litvinenko was certainly killed by somebody who could orchestrate and use state power. Polonium-210 can only be produced in a nuclear facility and is wildly expensive as a result; the amount poured in his tea could have cost well over $1m. Moreover the use of former FSB agents (who never really retire) can only be arranged through the auspices of the state.
Since Litvinenko's death was not in the interests of the state, the motive can only be that he threatened that other arm of the Russian power structure - business and commerce.
In Russia, Putin has followed a
 |
