The Tribune

IT would not be surprising if British Prime Minister Theresa May is now reflecting on the well-worn dictum of her predecessor Harold Wilson in the mid-1960s that a week is a long time in politics. None can deny that a lot can happen in a short space of time in the political world, but even the most prescient of observers could not have predicted the poisoning atrocity earlier this month on British soil and the boost to her reputation as a result of her effective handling of this sudden major incident.

Having been preoccupied for so long with the United Kingdom’s forthcoming departure from the European Union and continuing to endure constant criticism from both sides of the Brexit debate, Mrs May was faced unexpectedly with a crisis in the city of Salisbury in the south of England involving the poisoning and attempted murder of a former Russian spy, Sergei Skripal, and his daughter Yulia, for which Russia has been blamed.

This incident required deft handling and her performance has shown her in a new light. She has been praised on all sides as a strong leader, even being described by some as Churchillian, displaying a cool, calm and steely resolve in standing up to the Russian bear.

The detailed circumstances of this attack remain largely unknown since it has left the two Russians hospitalized in a critical condition and unable to communicate. But it has been determined by British security authorities that a nerve agent called Novichok, which has been developed by Russia, was used. This has led the UK government to conclude it is highly likely Russia was responsible, either as an officially sanctioned act or because the state had lost control of this military grade material.

Since the Russian government has declined to respond to Britain’s request for an explanation, that remains the position. Meanwhile, samples from the scene in Salisbury are being examined by experts from the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons.

Reportedly, the attempted murder of the Skripals is the first use of chemical weapons on European soil since 1945 and it is claimed this has potentially endangered the lives of hundreds (or more) of British people. Such an outrage has been variously described as a wilful and reckless act hostile to Britain as a nation and unreservedly unacceptable. Given the protection of the lives of its citizens is the first duty of the state, a strong reaction and tough stance led by Mrs May was inevitable.

She described the action as a crime and brazen flouting of international law and the Chemical Weapons Convention and pledged a threat of this sort against British lives on their own territory would never be tolerated.

Against a background of increasingly hostile and inflammatory rhetoric – both Britain’s accusations of Russian responsibility and the latter’s denials and counter-claims of disinformation - there has been a tit-for-tat expulsion of diplomats.

But so far there seems to be little prospect of new economic sanctions while some EU countries remain dependent on Russian gas imports. However, Britain has secured support from France, Germany and the USA who have explicitly agreed that Russian involvement is the only plausible explanation of the attack, though Mr Trump’s message of congratulation to Mr Putin on his election victory failed to mention the Salisbury incident.

Mrs May is seeking further support from EU countries at this week’s Brussels summit meeting as she stresses Russia’s action also represents a threat to democracies across the continent. It appears Britain is considering other retaliatory measures like tightening up on visas and cracking down on so-called dirty money being laundered through London within the vast wealth crooked oligarchs have siphoned out of Russia into property and shares in the UK.

The question now is whether the Salisbury attack is part of an ongoing campaign by Mr Putin of state-sponsored assassinations to silence Russian defectors, emigres or dissidents whom he regards as traitors or enemies and to warn all Russians that challenging his regime is potentially life-threatening. The Russian track record in relation to this is chilling, with a number of assassinations in recent years including that of former Russian spy Alexander Litvinenko who died from radioactive poisoning in London in 2006.

While Mr Putin has just been re-elected for another six-year term, Kremlinologists are speculating about an inner circle around him who are intent on exercising greater power on the global stage, and Russia’s recent expansionism and aggression – Crimea, Ukraine, cyber warfare and interference in US elections, threats to the Baltic states – do not augur well for world peace.

As the diplomatic stand-off escalates, Mrs May’s reputation has been enhanced. She has re-emphasised once again the West’s values as the foundation stones of human freedom – the rule of law, free speech, toleration of dissenting and minority views, a free press, fair and democratic elections and a thriving civil society.

We should never forget these values apply as strongly in small countries like The Bahamas.

While we may be insulated from most of the horrors happening elsewhere in the world, we need constantly to be on our guard to protect ourselves at home against overweening political leaders or others who may be tempted to disregard the liberal and democratic principles that define us as a nation.