EXCLUSIVE Britain will not be intimidated by Moscow spies, writes Foreign Secretary DAVID LAMMY as he sanctions 21 Russian operatives
Soviet spies once stopped at nothing to murder dissidents and gain an edge over the West. Across the world, they operated in the shadows, poisoning enemies, spreading disinformation, and destabilising democracies. Today, their successors in the GRU, Russia 's military intelligence service, continue that dark tradition.
I remember all too well the horror of Alexander Litvinenko's murder in 2006, recklessly poisoned with radioactive polonium in a London hotel. I was in government then, and it felt miraculous more Londoners did not die as a result.
In 2018, Russian operatives were equally reckless. Incredibly, Sergei and Yulia Skripal survived their poisoning with a military-grade nerve agent in Salisbury. But the attack killed Dawn Sturgess, left Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey seriously ill, and could have claimed many more lives if not for the swift response of our emergency services.
We know a great deal about how Russian operatives work. Investigations into these and other attacks reveal many patterns. One is that cyber operations often lay the groundwork.
In the Skripal case, GRU Unit 26165 previously targeted Yulia Skripal's email accounts with malware before the attempted murder. The same unit conducted online reconnaissance on civilian shelters in Mariupol in Ukraine in March 2022 – only one day before the Mariupol Theatre was bombed, killing innocent civilians, including children.
These are not isolated incidents. They are part of a broader GRU campaign to destabilise Europe, undermine Ukraine's sovereignty and threaten the safety of British citizens.
That is why today I am sanctioning 21 Russian operatives. These individuals are responsible for cyber and hybrid operations targeting Britain and some of our closest allies.
We are acting following close collaboration with the FBI and with vocal support of NATO allies. And the Government is strongly committed to deepening our defence and hybrid cooperation with friends in Europe as well. In just a few months, we've agreed a new Security and Defence Partnership with the EU, a Lancaster House 2.0 Declaration with France, the Kensington Treaty with Germany and the biggest uplift in NATO defence spending in the history of the Alliance.
Together, these agreements send a clear message: Europe is toughening up.
But these sanctions are not just a signal. They have real bite, restricting the movement and financial access of those responsible for malign GRU activity. They expose the GRU's methods and personnel to public scrutiny. And they make it easier for us to share intelligence with partners so they too can prepare for future threats.
And this is just one of the measures we are taking. Much of our work to deter these threats is necessarily secret. But with the Spending Review committing £600 million to improve our intelligence services' capabilities and the Foreign Office establishing a new counter-hybrid taskforce, we are ready to counter Russia's new age of sabotage and subterfuge.
By shining a light on the GRU and their operations, we make it harder for them to act with impunity. That makes Britain safer, which is fundamental to this government's Plan for Change.
We will not be cowed by those who seek to do us harm. The GRU's operatives may hide behind screens and shadows, but we see them clearly – and we will act decisively to stop them.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
12 minutes ago
- The Independent
Where to watch the ‘One Night in Idaho' documentary
On 13 November 2022, the tight-knit community in the Idaho town of Moscow were left reeling after the murder of four college students. University of Idaho undergraduates Kaylee Goncalves, 21, Madison Mogen, 21, Xana Kernodle, 20, and Ethan Chapin, 20, were stabbed to death at their home in the middle of the night. Their two other roommates, Bethany Funke and Dylan Mortensen, were the only people in the house to survive. After a seven-week manhunt, the now-convicted mass murderer Bryan Kohberger was found at his family home. For three years, he professed his innocence before switching his plea to avoid the death penalty, just weeks before he was due to stand trial. The police revealed little about the investigation owing to a gag order in place, which was lifted by the judge ahead of the sentencing. But many questions remain unanswered, including the motivations behind his attack. In a bid to put the victims and their families front and centre, directors Liz Garbus and Matthew Galkin have made a four-part documentary titled One Night in Idaho: The College Murders. It follows the family and friends of the victims in the aftermath and explores the impact of social media sleuths during high-profile cases. Here's everything you need to know about it, including where to stream. What is 'One Night in Idaho: The College Murders' about? The four-part series recounts the night of the murders, where four students were stabbed in their off-campus house in the quiet town of Moscow. Exploring the aftermath of the killings, it features the grieving family, friends and wider community. The documentary features exclusive interviews with Stacey and Jim Chapin (parents of Ethan Chapin), and Karen and Scott Laramie (parents of Madison Mogen), none of whom have previously been interviewed about the murders. The directors of the series – Liz Garbus and Matthew Galkin – wanted to shake up the true crime format by putting the victims at the forefront, rather than the suspect. Across four episodes, One Night in Idaho also explores the impact and damage of internet sleuths who became obsessed with the case, some of whom attempted to sneak into the University's classes and dorms, and others even into the roped-off house. Where to watch 'One Night in Idaho' in the UK All four episodes of One Night in Idaho are now available on Amazon Prime Video. If you're not already a member, you can sign up for a 30-day free trial. After that, a Prime membership costs £8.99 per month or £95 per year. Alternatively, you can subscribe to Prime Video alone for £5.99 per month.
Telegraph
13 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Record number of farms shut in wake of inheritance tax raid
A record number of farms were forced to close for good this year after Rachel Reeves's tax raid made the future of thousands of rural businesses unviable. A total of 6,365 agriculture, forestry and fishing businesses have closed over the past year, according to the Office for National Statistics (ONS), the highest since quarterly data was first published in 2017. The majority of these closures took place during the first six months of the year after Ms Reeves, the Chancellor, announced in October that she would cut the amount of inheritance tax relief available to family farms. Just 3,190 businesses in the sector have been set up over the same period. It leaves a net loss of 3,175, indicating the number of farms is shrinking at the fastest pace on record. Victoria Atkins, the shadow environment secretary, said the farm closures were a result of 'Labour's disastrous tax policies'. She added: 'The crippling NICs increases, alongside the family farm and family firm taxes, are destroying generational businesses, creating job instability and even leading to devastating suicides. 'These statistics prove that Labour do not understand our rural communities and our rural communities cannot afford Labour.' Lee Anderson, a Reform UK MP, said rising taxes and red tape were 'pushing British farming to the brink'. 'No government in modern history has done more damage to rural Britain than Labour is right now,' he said. 'Farms are closing at twice the rate new ones are opening. This is completely unsustainable. Labour has betrayed the industry that helped build this country.' 'Beaten from post to pillar' Farmers are also grappling with the soaring cost of fertiliser and a poor harvest following the recent drought and floods last year. James Grindal, a 55-year-old third-generation farmer in South Leicestershire, said the poor weather and barrage of costs mean new farmers and entrepreneurs are reluctant to set up businesses in the industry. He said: 'Yields are quite a bit down this year, it has been so dry – we have not had decent rain for four or five months. 'People have been beaten from post to pillar. Whichever way you turn you seem unwanted. 'The Government is not over-supportive of us, with inheritance tax relief disappearing.' Mr Grindal's 84-year-old father still works on the farm and remains a part-owner. However, he warned that the Chancellor's tax raid meant that when his father dies, the family will be unable to invest in the farm as planned. Mr Grindal said: 'He is still actively involved in the farm – he still sits on tractors occasionally, why shouldn't he own a bit of the land he has worked hard to own? Out of nowhere [this tax was] dropped on us. 'When he passes away we are going to have to pay a fair bit of tax on that. It will probably stop us from doing some of what we are doing. 'I could understand the tax if we were going to sell it. But we are not, we are going to keep growing corn and feeding people.' Currently, family farms do not incur inheritance tax, receiving full relief on the usual 40pc rate. Under the changes introduced by Ms Reeves which take effect from April 2026, inheritance tax will be charged at a rate of 20pc, above a threshold of £1m. Farmers have objected that their businesses are typically cash-poor and low-margin, meaning they will be forced to sell chunks of their land to settle the bill. Mr Grindal said that the tax changes meant his teenage sons would be even more reluctant to take on the family business. 'There are not many people coming new into the industry. I've got two boys, 19 and 17, and I very much doubt they will come into farming,' he said. 'There is not a great deal of encouragement to get up at the crack of dawn and work all day and not get much reward for it, when they see what else they can do.' Confidence at 'rock-bottom' Tom Bradshaw, president of the National Farmers' Union, said confidence in the industry was 'at rock-bottom' with farmers facing 'a number of challenges.' The inheritance tax rise came as 'another bitter blow and another attack', he said. Mr Bradshaw added: 'It creates this continuing sense that the industry isn't valued and its worth to the country isn't being recognised. 'I can understand why the psychology is there that people will be taking the decisions that they may be resigned to sell off, and they are no longer able to make a living off it.' Victoria Vyvyan, president of the Country Land and Business Association, said taxes and red tape were undermining farmers' efforts to make ends meet. She said: 'This report says what ministers won't: rural businesses are being pushed to the edge. 'Farmers trying to modernise or diversify are blocked at every turn – by red tape, by National Insurance rises, by a government that talks growth while pulling out the foundations beneath it. 'Still, the countryside carries on. New businesses are opening. People are holding on. But grit isn't a strategy. What's needed now is simple: stability, clarity, and a government willing to listen – before more farms are lost and more families are forced out.' Michael Oakes, who sold his dairy business last year and now runs a beef herd in the West Midlands, said the rising demand for renewable energy was also compounding farmers' woes. He added: 'You've got some landlords taking land out of food production to put into solar.' Ms Reeves's tax change, which alongside a similar reduction in the relief for family businesses is set to raise up to £520m per year for the Exchequer, caused immediate political ructions with farmers driving tractors into central London to protest outside Parliament. MPs also heard emotional evidence from family farms about the dangers of the tax raid. Jonathan Charlesworth, a farmer in Yorkshire, said his father, John, took his own life in fear of the inheritance tax raid. Other farmers have told The Telegraph that the impending increase has opened a 'suicide window' for elderly business owners who worry they will impose a financial burden on their children and grandchildren by staying alive beyond April of next year. Any hopes the plans might be softened were dashed with the publication of the Finance Bill this week which confirmed the changes will come into force next year. A Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs spokesman said: 'Our commitment to farming and food security is steadfast and farming profits in the UK increased by £1.6bn last year. 'We are slashing costs and red tape for food producers to export to the EU, have appointed former NFU president Baroness Minette Batters to recommend reforms to boost farmers' profits, and we're ensuring farmers get a bigger share of food contracts across our schools, hospitals, and prisons.'
Telegraph
13 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Britain can dodge climate lawsuits if it pays UN, Vanuatu lawyer says
Britain can dodge climate lawsuits from other countries if it makes 'significant and meaningful' contributions reflecting its historical responsibility for global warming to a UN fund, Vanuatu's lawyer has said. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) opened the door for countries to sue each other for contributing to climate change, including past emissions, in a landmark legal opinion on Wednesday. The case was brought by a coalition of nations suffering from rising sea levels and extreme weather, but which have barely contributed to global pollution. Margaretha Wewerinke-Singh, associate professor of sustainability law at the University of Amsterdam, is legal counsel in the case for Vanuatu, the world's most climate-vulnerable island. 'The opinion provides a legal basis for such a lawsuit should any state choose to pursue that? Whether or not that is chosen is of course another question,' she told the Telegraph the day after her courtroom victory. 'Litigation is not really in anyone's interest, certainly also not in the interest of states that are seeking reparations for climate harms,' she added in an exclusive interview. In 2022, world governments agreed to set up the UN Loss and Damage fund to compensate states that are disproportionately harmed by climate change. It is still at an early stage of implementation. It has initial capital of about £517m but the fund is expected to need trillions to cover loss and damage, and many governments have not yet committed funds to it. In 2023, the UK pledged up to £40m as an early contribution. Professor Wewerinke-Singh said Britain was involved in talks over the fund and needed to put more money into it. 'If that happens, and the contributions of the UK are significant and meaningful, and show that the UK is mindful of its historical responsibility, then I think climate vulnerable states will not rush to sue the UK,' she said. Climate vulnerable states were aware they were harmed by a problem they did not cause, and it was not fair for them to be forced to depend on charity, Professor Wewerinke-Singh said. In 2015, Vanuatu lost 64 per cent of its GDP when it was hit by a typhoon in an extreme weather event. 'Vanuatu and all the climate-vulnerable states are finding themselves in a state of continuing crisis,' she said. 'There needs to be a shifting of the burden from the victims to the polluters. This opinion makes it clear that those who are harmed indeed have rights to claim reparations.' The ICJ opinion has said it is up to states to decide how to assign blame for climate change. If they failed to do so, the courts could, she said. Professor Wewerinke-Singh said liability could be worked out by looking at each country's overall contribution to emissions that can be quantified. 'Basically the proportion of contribution can then be matched with the proportion that states should pay for damages,' she said. Though the UK contributed close to 100 per cent of all global CO2 emissions in the 1700s, this share has rapidly declined over time, according to data from the Global Carbon Budget. At 4.4 per cent it now sits behind the United States (23.8 per cent), the European Union (16.5 per cent), and China (15.0 per cent). A lawsuit could be launched by a single nation or a large coalition of them.132 nations supported the ICJ case. Senior Conservatives and Reform UK politicians have urged the Government to ignore the opinion amid fears Labour will follow it, as Britain implemented an ICJ advisory opinion when it gave the Chagos Islands to Mauritius last year. The advisory opinion issued on Wednesday in The Hague is a way of clarifying specific questions of international law, and is not legally binding. It does carry moral authority and will be influential on the future of environmental litigation. Vanuatu's lawyer said it was a 'mistake to treat the opinion as non-binding' because the law that the court had clarified with the opinion was binding. She said, 'If states don't do what the court says needs to be done, then they breach their obligations, their hard law obligations. So it really is a shift.' Even if a state walked out of the UN Paris Agreement, like the US is doing, it could not walk out of those obligations, she said. Professor Wewerinke-Singh was asked if she feared that historical climate reparations could be caught up in the same culture wars as demands for reparations for slavery. She admitted it was a risk but added, 'when we talk about reparations, it may sound very polarising, but it doesn't need to be. 'It can be a very collaborative process. It doesn't need to be contentious. It doesn't need to be about court battles. It can be done in a very civilised, mature way.' She said the world needed to discuss how to settle the issue 'in a way that benefits us all, that keeps us all safe, that ends the climate crisis, but also redesigns societies in ways that are sustainable and so everybody can have a dignified life'. After the decision Ralph Regenvanu, its minister of climate change adaptation, said Vanuatu would take the ICJ ruling to the UN General Assembly and 'pursue a resolution that will support implementation of this decision'. Legal analysis of the opinion for its government said, 'For Vanuatu, the opinion is both shield and sword: a shield affirming its right to survival and a sword compelling the world's major emitters to act in line with science and justice.'
