“Navalny Case”: Questions Without Answers

Whatever astonishing it may seem to us, the so-called “Navalny case” keeps receiving international coverage and influencing international relations. An alleged crime, committed presumably on Russian soil, against a Russian national, suddenly became an issue of international importance. Suddenly, because if anything similar happened elsewhere, in any other country in the world, it would have been a purely domestic affair of that country with no foreign involvement, unless the said country explicitly asked for it. But not now, with Mr. A.Navalny.

Germany, for example, as the mainstream media keep reporting, intervened nearly since the moment it became known that Mr.Navalny was delivered to a hospital in Russian city of Omsk. Soon after Navalny was transported to Germany Bundeswehr said that he was “poisoned” with infamous “Novichok” nerve agent and the German side started demanding “explanations” and “answers” from Russia. As Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said, “they demand Russia to confess”. As for Russia, the only thing it demands is that German investigators cooperate with their Russian counterparts in order to solve the mystery of poisoning of, again, a RUSSIAN citizen, in RUSSIAN territory. To this day, they declined all requests and offers to cooperate. Why, one might wonder? Perhaps, it’s because for the West, there is no mystery in this case, it doesn’t want to solve anything, it wants to point fingers and simply designate the culprit. It doesn’t need the truth, it needs obedience to its will. Of course, Russia cannot accept such “method” of “investigation” as, despite the fact that the Western media keeps saying otherwise, Russia cares about its citizens health and safety, crimes against them must be thoroughly investigated. And what do we see instead of investigation? Correct, politics. This might be the answer to the paradox we are observing these days: the reports in the media on “Navalny case” multiply, yet they bring more questions and less answers. Because the West is not thinking of a way to solve the case, the West is too busy inventing new sanctions against Russia.

For example, here is what US National Security Council (NCS) Spokesperson John Ullyot said: “We will work with allies and the international community to hold those in Russia accountable, wherever the evidence leads, and restrict funds for their malign activities”. Because…“The Russian people have a right to express their views peacefully without fear of retribution of any kind, and certainly not with chemical agents”. The same old story of “US caring about democracy in Russia”. Just like it “cared” in Vietnam, Yugoslavia, Iraq or Libya. We all know what the US “care about democracy” looks like. By the way, as George Floyd’s death revealed, democracy in the US itself is not doing well these days.

We have already mentioned that so far, there are much more questions than answers in “Navalny case”. We would like to give you our thoughts on some of the questions, starting with the most burning one: why would Russia do this? We are not investigators, by all means, but even from a layman’s standpoint, there has to be a motive for a crime. So, what’s Russia’s motive? To eliminate Alexey Navalny for the reason of fear before his extreme popularity that made him “a threat to regime”?  Well, according to Levada Centre’s latest survey, Alexey Navalny’s approval rating was only 4%. President Putin’s rating, on the other hand, was 59%. Mind you, Levada Centre has no affiliation to Russian Government. So, 59% and 4%. What could be so “threatening” about a 55%(!) gap in President Putin’s favour that made the Russian state resort to attempted murder? There’s no answer, as Navalny’s political influence is obviously not the reason for his poisoning and thus the only plausible version crumbles. And even if we pretend that Navalny is a political figure on a par with President Putin, are you sure there’s no other way of disposing of a political rival? That brings us to another question without answer: why using “Novichok”, exactly? Doesn’t it seem odd? If Russia “highly likely” poisoned Mr.Navalny with a nerve agent which instantly reveals Russia’s involvement once discovered, why even consider using it? Why letting Navalny leave the country for Germany if the Russian authorities knew it was “Novichok” and the German specialists would easily figure that out? To get accused of an attempted murder and face new sanctions as soon and as certainly as possible? It’s nonsense and it cannot be explained by saying “Well, Russia did this just because it’s Russia” – this “explanation” is nonsensical on its own. Russia is doing a poor job of being a “criminal” in this “detective story” as it seems to be doing everything it can to be revealed and punished as soon as possible. Doesn’t it look inconsistent with the images, portrayed by Western media, of the devious and all-powerful Russian special services and the President himself – “former KGB officer” - who managed to manipulate elections and other democratic procedures in the US and many other countries in such a cunning way that most of their population didn’t even notice it? The only explanation to this paradox is this – Russia’s poisoning of Navalny is absurd, no matter how you look at it. There’s no motive, no point and no benefit for Russia to do this. Remember “Qui prodest?”, as a lawyer in the Roman Empire used to ask the judges in a criminal case. If the Russian Federation does not benefit from this crime, who does?

Poisoning of Navalny makes no sense for Russia but it does for the West. It’s a perfect pretext to reconsider the future of “Nord Stream 2” project as “a punishment for Putin”, to paint a picture of “evil Russia” once more. US never made a secret of its intent to stop “Nord Stream 2” and Navalny’s poisoning does not seem like a coincidence. On the contrary, the timing is perfect – the pipeline is almost complete. Have you noticed that German Chancellor Angela Merkel was urged to block “Nord Stream 2” right off the bat? If Russia is to be punished, why not punish it with something else? Did the West run out of ideas for sanctions? No, blocking “Nord Stream 2” just seems to be the motive here. Even the using of exactly “Novichok” makes more sense for the West – it’s already a whole media brand, created by the Western mainstream media thanks to the “Skripal case”. No need to explain anything new to mass audience, everyone already knows what “Novichok” is. Convenient. By the way, it’s pretty easy to notice similarities between the “Skripal case” and “Navalny case”. They are as like as two peas, especially in their complete lack of evidence and groundless demands to Russia.

The stories with the Skripals and Navalny reveal a number of other absurdities and inconsistencies in anti-Russian narrative.

Another curious question is what’s wrong with “Novichok”? What we mean to say is that for a military-grade nerve agent or “chemical weapon”, in other words, it is surprisingly, even disappointingly, non-lethal. The Skripals did not die after being exposed to it, neither did their cat, and now Alexey Navalny. Him, too, “miraculously” survived. These guys, whom, according to Western media, Russian authorities are supposed to hate and fear, look really invulnerable. Apparently. it was impossible to try and eliminate them with any other means. Knives and bullets would just bounce off their bodies, like off Superman’s, so it was not even worth trying. This is why Russian special agents decided to go straight for a chemical weapon. By the way, Russia, unlike some of our Western partners, had got rid of all its chemical weapons arsenal in 2017, according to its international obligations, and it was confirmed by OPCW.

Miracles just never stop happening when it comes to “Novichok”: everyone keeps surviving it. Including the people who travelled the same aircraft with Navalny and the Russian doctors who saved his life (with all sincerity, we extend our deepest admiration and best compliments to the doctors for their professionalism).

One more thing. Soon after Mr.Navalny started to breathe unaided, his spokesperson, Ms. Kira Yarmish, said he planned to return to Russia and, mind you, "no other option has ever been considered" If that’s true, then why would Alexey Navalny plan to return to Russia? To give the “evil Kremlin regime” another chance to kill him? To “die another day”, as in a James Bond movie?  We don’t think so. And then, another question arises: if the Western involvement was the sole thing that saved Navalny from lethal Russian Government’s conspiracy against him, why would he still think of Russia as a safer place to be than the US or Western Europe?