The Government has enough evidence to pursue Russia after the Skripal case

Why do some people think that the Government’s claim that Russia is responsible for the use of a nerve agent in Salisbury is not based on evidence? After all, would Britain, along with the backing of Nato, really accuse a nuclear power like Russia of such a terrible crime without a shred of evidence? All indicators suggest Russia is responsible. Even if the Kremlin didn’t order the use of the nerve agent themselves, they must still be held accountable for letting such a deadly weapon get in the hands of the wrong people.

Lewis Chinchen
Sheffield

To Jeremy Corbyn and his supporters clamouring for “proof” of Russian involvement before we publicly blame Putin’s regime: what are you expecting the UK government to do to provide the greater proof you seek?

If we sent the Russians the sample they requested they will analyse it and say it was not theirs – just like they claimed all the soldiers crossing from Russia into Eastern Ukraine with tanks in 2014 were not theirs, just like they claimed the bombing of the Malaysian Airlines plane over Eastern Ukraine in July 2014, killing hundreds of innocent civilians, was nothing to do with them.

I commend the Government for acting swiftly and decisively and calling out the outrageous Russian behaviour, as the leaders of France, Germany and the US have also felt there is already the evidence to do.

Roger James
Cambridge

Those in the Labour Party who have supported the Early Day Motion, which unequivocally blames the Russian state for the Salisbury attack, do so in utter disregard of due process: there is no hard evidence as yet of where culpability lies, as has been clearly emphasised by the police, and no adherence to international law as related to the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, whose 192 signatories, including the UK, in October 2017 celebrated the verified destruction of the totality of Russia’s chemical weapons.

The existence within Russia of rogue actors, including powerful oligarchs and the Russian mafia, is not disputed. Search among them too for possible culprits, and obey the rule of law both national (innocent until proven guilty) and international (10 days for a response from the accused after receipt of sample for testing).

Dot Phillips
Leeds

The Skipal incident was a tragedy and the Government is using it as an excuse to take public funds and transfer them to the private sector. They are investing £48m of taxpayers’ money in a new chemical warfare defence centre. Speaking with Radio 4, Boris Johnson said that in the Cold War “we faced the possibility of thermonuclear conflict and I don’t believe that is on the cards today, thank heavens”. Therefore, it seems apparent the £48m spent on the new chemical warfare defence centre is not to protect the public but to satisfy some other government objective.

Louise Wildsmith
Address supplied

The Tories have received £820,000 from Russian-linked oligarchs in the last 20 months and £3m since 2010. In 2014 a secret government document revealed plans to stop any sanctions against Russia that might damage the City. Labour has attempted to introduce legislation that could prevent certain Russian individuals entering Britain or block their assets: how mysterious, then, that the Tories blocked it for “technical reasons”.

It is the Conservative Party who are in the pockets of foreign powers and who represent a threat to our national security. Well done, Jeremy Corbyn: you are acting as the leader of a political opposition – and not the head boy of the lower fifth.

Julie Partridge
London

Where is the international opprobrium and the threat of sanctions against Turkey as they attack the Kurds in Afrin, Syria? Where is the international opprobrium and the threat of sanctions against Israel as they continue to ethnically cleanse the region (and now Jerusalem) of the Palestinians, adding the “breach of loyalty bill” to their toolkit? The silence is shameful.

Rachel McKenzie
London

You report that Theresa May has doubts about the adequacy of delivery in the NHS, education and other public services: she must be trying to square a circle because the basic ethos of the Tory Party is to have minimal taxation, particularly for the wealthy, together with minimal state involvement in service provision. The Reagan/Thatcher argument that this would encourage economic growth, leading to cash trickling down to pay for services has long proved to be fallacious. In reality you cannot have low taxation and high quality public services. The Scandinavian countries, where high taxation and excellent services are the norm and are accepted by the people, have long recognised this as is shown by happiness surveys where they come out top.

The Tory Party tries to achieve its low tax ambitions by exploiting public sector workers and relying on the goodwill of health staff, teachers and other public servants to keep the creaking system going.

Patrick Cleary
Devon

I must applaud the splendid but tragic article on the plight of the Rohingya by Pauline Latham. Many of us suspected, even years ago, that the leader of Myanmar had no real interest in democracy. Now, at last, the truth is beginning to be irrefutable, thanks to the harrowing task undertaken by said MP and others. Sadly Aung San Suu Kyi is and has only ever been interested in two things: Aung San Suu Kyi and the divine right to rule! This is not to diminish the monstrous behaviour of the military over many years, but just to show the reality of the callous indifference of the alleged head of the country. Many actions now need to be taken against this regime of which the least important, but vital, is the revocation of the Nobel Peace Prize.

Robert Boston
Kent