Could a hostile state have set fire to the PM's house?
Russia is targeting Britain and every other European member of Nato in a 'grey zone' or 'hybrid' campaign, encompassing actions short of armed conflict. This generally includes disinformation operations and physical sabotage, particularly against any infrastructure linked to Ukraine.
Last year, arsonists burned down a warehouse in London belonging to a Ukrainian business. Two British men admitted to being part of this group; one has pleaded guilty to taking money from a foreign intelligence service.
But Russia's 'grey zone' campaign is not known to have included any attacks on individuals in Britain, at least not since the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. So far Russian intelligence appears to have stuck to sabotage and disinformation without climbing any further up the escalatory ladder.
The higher rungs might in theory include targeting high-profile individuals. But firebombing a property linked to the Prime Minister would amount to leaping to the top of the escalatory ladder, skipping every rung in between, making it unlikely that Russia or any other hostile state would have been involved.
In the past, of course, Russian intelligence has targeted individuals in Britain, murdering Alexander Litvinenko in London in 2006 and trying to kill Sergei Skripal in Salisbury in 2018. The latter incident claimed the life of Dawn Sturgess, a British mother-of-three, who happened to come into contact with the Novichok nerve agent used against Skripal.
But Russia considered both Skripal and Litvinenko to be its own citizens who had betrayed their country by working for British intelligence. Trying to kill them would have been seen in Moscow as justified retribution rather than action against the British state itself.
The same applies to Iranian intelligence, which has also targeted individuals in Britain. But in every known case, these were Iranian dissidents or Iranian journalists critical of the regime. There is no public example of the Iranian state singling out a British politician, let alone one so senior as the Prime Minister.
Identifying two homes and one car linked to Sir Keir would have required planning and sophistication, but this would still have been possible for a well-motivated individual or group.
So while it is not impossible that a foreign state is involved, the finger of suspicion at least initially will probably point towards radical campaigners or activists.
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
8 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Caisse's $3.2-billion investment in a nuclear project is the kind of deal Canada wants — too bad it's in the U.K.
The Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec's $3.2-billion investment in a new nuclear energy facility this week is the kind of deal Canada is hoping the country's largest pensions and institutional investors will step up to fund — but it's happening overseas, in England, alongside the U.K. government. The Quebec's pension giant's 20 per cent stake in the Sizewell C nuclear power station in Suffolk was part of a final funding push to greenlight the project, of which the U.K. government owns 44.9 per cent. Once completed, the country's first new nuclear plant since 1995 is expected to reduce carbon emissions and provide more than 60 years of 'clean, reliable power to the U.K. grid, helping to boost the U.K.'s economy (and) strengthen energy security.' The deal is noteworthy for a couple of reasons: first, it capitalizes on a renewed push for nuclear power as countries search for less carbon-intensive options alongside a more recent desire to rely less on imported energy amid geopolitical tensions and trade upheaval driven by United States president Donald Trump. It also comes in a country where the government's push for more institutional investment in infrastructure is being met with some success, both domestically and abroad. In May, ahead of publication of a final review that could impose investment quotas on large pension providers in the United Kingdom, 17 of them — responsible for managing about 90 per cent of defined contribution pensions — signed an accord pledging to invest 10 per cent of their portfolios in assets to boost the economy by 2030. This will include investments in infrastructure, property and private equity, and half will be 'ringfenced' for the United Kingdom, an allotment projected to inject about £25 billion into the economy. The consortium backing the nuclear project, which is the first direct investment in nuclear by the Caisse, includes French energy operator EDF, British multinational energy and services company Centrica and investment partner Amber Infrastructure. This structure is not unusual for the Caisse, a seasoned global infrastructure investor. But a key draw is undoubtedly the project's financing structure. The U.K. government will foot the majority of that bill — an important consideration for institutional investors because of the potential for cost overruns common in infrastructure projects. Officials told the Canadian Press that the Caisse would begin receiving compensation right away, and that there are agreements with the British government that protect the pension fund's return in the event of overruns or significant delays. The project financing is coming through the U.K.'s National Wealth Fund, which was created by Keir Starmer's Labour government. It replaced the U.K. Infrastructure Bank and is intended to be the government's principal investment vehicle, with the express aim of creating conditions to draw in private investors. 'It's an ambitious project in terms of size and complexity,' said Sebastien Betermier, a finance professor at McGill University, adding that the Caisse is arguably one of the world's most advanced investors when it comes to new infrastructure builds referred to as 'greenfield' projects. He credited the U.K. government's success in forging partnerships with private investors to a strong track record of designing regulatory frameworks for privately-operated businesses and 'de-risking' investments for institutional investors. 'In this particular project, I believe the U.K. government was able to reduce the level of construction risk for investors and provide a dividend yield early on,' said Betermier, who has done extensive research on pensions. 'This project shows it is possible to generate win-win opportunities for governments and pension funds in infrastructure (projects), and hopefully we can learn from it here in Canada.' Past efforts by the Canadian government to include the country's pension funds in major infrastructure projects have largely fizzled, with complaints that the government isn't offering up projects with enough size and scale. Furthermore, potential projects haven't come with sufficient policy assurances or guarantees that the private investors will be adequately compensated for the risks they're taking, particularly if they're being asked to participate in building them. An exception has been the Caisse, which has a dual mandate to support economic development in Quebec alongside meeting investment objectives to pay pension beneficiaries. For example, the Caisse was a major investor in the province's The Réseau express métropolitain (REM) mass transit project, which was beset by cost overruns. The $6.3-billion cost of the Montreal light-rail system presented in 2018 had risen by 26 per cent by 2023. It rose further last year, reaching $8.34 billion. While the project was also backed by Quebec and the federal government, the Caisse was responsible for overruns. However, the pension manager structured the deal to derive revenue from ridership, advertising and real estate development, with a forecasted annual return of eight per cent over 30 years. The Caisse is also unique among Canadian pensions when it comes to energy transition. In 2021, the Quebec pension management organization pledged to divest completely from oil producers, which could have given the Caisse an edge with the U.K. nuclear deal. Plus, in May, CEO Charles Emond told the Financial Times that the Caisse plans to deploy more than £8 billion in the U.K. 'in the coming years,' increasing its exposure in the largest investment destination outside North America by 50 per cent. In the article, Emond praised the 'clarity' of its business environment, the 'ability to execute deals' and its 'welcoming approach' to investors. Perhaps it was not a coincidence that Starmer dispatched Rachel Reeves, the U.K.'s chancellor of the exchequer, to Canada to talk up the investment destination last summer. This was followed by a cross-country tour by U.K. trade officials looking to partner with Canada's pension funds to address, among other things, Britain's decades of underinvestment in infrastructure, with the lowest levels among G7 countries. When it comes to enticing Canada's pension giants to invest more at home, Prime Minister Mark Carney appears to be trying to change the conversation: his focus is on the need to create infrastructure and energy corridors to unify and strengthen Canada's economy and reduce dependence on the United States. During his spring campaign, Carney pledged to use $150 billion of government funds to kickstart private sector investment in projects ranging from housing, defence production and transportation infrastructure to digital innovation and patents, critical minerals and energy. 'Our plan is expected to catalyze $500 billion in new investment over the next five years,' the costed platform said, a similar if slightly less ambitious target than the UK's plan to draw in £3 of private investment for every £1 of government money. But there are a few things the Canadian government has to get right with its 'Maple 8' pensions, including the Caisse, as well as other large institutional investors such as Brookfield Asset Management (which had been a rumoured front-runner to invest in the Sizewell C nuclear power station), if it hopes to replicate what the U.K. government has done. For starters, Canada's infrastructure efforts lack both coordination and a comprehensive evaluation framework, crowding out private investors rather than drawing them in, Betermier said in a research paper on infrastructure banks around the world, published by the C.D. Howe Institute in May. Government efforts since 2016 have led to sprawling commitments of more than $180 billion for infrastructure projects spread over 20 federal departments and agencies, primarily in the form of grants and subsidies, he pointed out, adding that provincial governments, too, have tried to get in the game over the past decade. 'Having multiple grants and investment agencies operating in the same market means there is a high risk of competition between the agencies,' Betermier wrote. 'Coordination between these organizations, along with regular engagement with the private sector, will be critical in order to generate maximum engagement from the private sector.' Canada could also take lessons from other governments, such as using loan guarantees to underwrite the risk of projects, as is done in the European Union's under the InvestEU model. Other infrastructure banks allow projects to move forward with the expectation that private investors will come aboard in the future, while Canada's flagship infrastructure bank needs to secure private investment partnerships for a deal to move forward. Large-scale public-private projects are also hobbled by the lack of a comprehensive evaluation framework for short- and long-run performance, said Betermier, whose paper compared public infrastructure banks in Australia, California, Canada, the Nordic-Baltic region, Scotland and the U.K. The Canada Infrastructure Bank, launched with much fanfare in 2017 and a goal of every government dollar being matched by private sector investment of $3 to $4 — a target later reduced to $1 to $2 — failed to live up to that promise. By 2022, a House of Commons standing committee on transportation, infrastructure and communities recommended abolishing it. A couple of weeks ago, the Parliamentary Budget Officer estimated that the infrastructure bank would disburse $14.9 billion in 2027-28, well short of its $35-billion target. However, the PBO noted that the $1-billion target for Indigenous investments has already been met. Among the many reasons for the struggle in Canada, Betermier said, is that most of the country's infrastructure assets – including airports, seaports, railways, and utilities – remain publicly owned by federal, provincial or municipal governments. This stands in sharp contrast to countries like Australia and the U.K., where Canadian pensions have been, and continue to be, big investors in infrastructure assets that provide diversification, hedges against liability risks, and offer opportunities for high risk-adjusted returns and direct value creation. Canada's big pensions are ready for airport privatization. Are Canadians? 'Not theirs for the taking': Can the Canadian pension model survive a new era of politicization? Another Canadian pension giant puts brakes on China investment 'The lack of infrastructure assets available for sale to (pension and other institutional investors in Canada) has become a hot topic recently because it is one of the reasons why Canadian pension funds have decreased their domestic investments over the past decade,' he wrote. 'For infrastructure banks to successfully catalyze investment in infrastructure from private banks and large institutional investors, Canadian governments must actively support and commit to a private-sector role in the infrastructure market.' • Email: bshecter@ Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
8 minutes ago
- Yahoo
US mulls limited authorizations for oil firms in Venezuela, sources say
By Marianna Parraga, Matt Spetalnick and Timothy Gardner HOUSTON/WASHINGTON (Reuters) -U.S. President Donald Trump's administration is preparing to grant new authorizations to key partners of Venezuela's state-run oil company PDVSA, starting with Chevron, which would allow them to operate with limitations in the sanctioned OPEC nation, four sources close to the matter said on Thursday. If granted, the authorizations to the U.S. oil major, and possibly also to PDVSA's European partners, would mark a policy shift from a pressure strategy Washington adopted earlier this year on Venezuela's energy industry, which has been under U.S. sanctions since 2019. A senior State Department official said in a statement they could not speak about any specific licenses to PDVSA's partners, but added the U.S. would not allow President Nicolas Maduro's government to profit from the sale of oil. The U.S. might now allow the energy companies to pay oilfield contractors and make necessary imports to secure operational continuity, two of the sources said. "Chevron conducts its business globally in compliance with laws and regulations applicable to its business, as well as the sanctions frameworks provided for by the U.S. government, including in Venezuela," a company spokesperson said. Though Venezuela and the U.S. conducted a prisoner swap this month, relations between the two countries have been tense for years, and the Trump administration has publicly supported opposition leaders who say their candidate won last year's election, not Maduro. Trump in February announced the cancellation of a handful of energy licenses in Venezuela, including Chevron's, and gave until late May to wind down all transactions. The U.S. State Department, which in May blocked a move by special presidential envoy Richard Grenell to extend the licenses, is this time imposing conditions to any authorization modifications, so no cash reaches Maduro's coffers, the two sources added. But Secretary of State Marco Rubio could still decide to ban the move at the last minute or modify the scope of the new authorizations. It was not immediately clear if the terms of the license that could be granted to Chevron would be reproduced for other foreign companies in Venezuela, including Italy's Eni and Spain Repsol, which have been asking the U.S. to allow them to swap fuel supplies for Venezuelan oil. The U.S. Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
8 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump DOJ sets up ‘strike force' to probe unfounded Obama '16 vote claims
President Donald Trump's Department of Justice has set up a 'strike force' to probe unfounded claims that former President Barack Obama illegally pushed allegations that Russia interfered in the 2016 election to boost Trump. Attorney General Pam Bondi said she's eager to 'investigate potential next legal steps' following the release of a report on the issue from Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard that accused Obama of hatching a 'treasonous conspiracy.' 'We will investigate these troubling disclosures fully and leave no stone unturned to deliver justice,' Bondi said in a statement. Impartial analysts say there is nothing new in Gabbard's dossier and no evidence of wrongdoing by Obama. It doesn't refute the widely accepted fact that Russia sought to influence the 2016 campaign on Trump's behalf and against Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton. Critics say administration officials are seeking to gin up new controversies to distract attention from the politically damaging calls for Trump to release more information on the Jeffrey Epstein sex trafficking case. Trump has no secret of his intent to use federal law enforcement to suit his own personal and political interests, effectively rejecting decades of independence for the Department of Justice. Gabbard has claimed that newly declassified files prove a 'treasonous conspiracy' by the Obama administration in 2016 to politicize U.S. intelligence in service of casting doubt on the legitimacy of Trump's White House win. The intelligence chief cited emails from Obama officials and a 5-year-old classified House report in hopes of undermining the intelligence community's conclusion that Russian President Vladimir Putin wanted to boost Trump and denigrate Clinton. Russia's activities during the 2016 election remain some of the most examined events in recent history. Multiple bipartisan investigations, including one led by now-Secretary of State Marco Rubio, found that Russia sought to interfere in the election through the use of social media and hacked material. The evidence doesn't back the notion that Russia successfully hacked voting machines or rigged voting totals to help Trump and hurt Clinton. But Obama never claimed that it did, and publicly said there was no evidence of vote tampering in December 2020 as Trump prepared to take office for his first term. _____
