Johnson went, let Johnson live. London should give Ukraine everything but nuclear weapons - an interview with a British journalist
What to expect from both candidates, how the UK policy will change in relation to Ukraine in the fall, when one of them will sit in the premiere chair, and what will be done by Boris Johnson now - says Andrey Ostalsky, British journalist and writer, in the past - tells from London, in the past - Editor -in -chief of Russian service BBC. Olena Tribushna spoke to Ostalsky, the editor-in-chief and the presenter of the YouTube channel are questions.
- Your premier derby ends, two are coming to the finals - Risha Snak and Liz TRASS. If you evaluate through the prism of how Britain's attitude to Ukraine changes in the event of a victory of each of them - what policy will they be pursuing? - Not only me, but most political traffickers are convinced that the UK's policy in support of Ukraine will not change, by no means. We have heard Liz Tras many times, who spoke on these topics and confirmed it.
But Risha Snak, a financier, seemingly like a "budget" to the brain, which fights all agencies for saving funds, including the Ministry of Defense, which theoretically should not like that billions of pounds are spending to support Ukraine - But he answered these questions. In an interview with The Sun, he said that he who was not the Prime Minister, the country will remain the main ally of Ukraine, nothing will change.
And he added: in general-become the prime minister, first of all, where I will go to Kiev. - What Johnson did for Ukraine, what he held, largely led to the public position of Britain herself. His personal leadership and proactive attitude towards Ukraine support was the primary.
Do you see Snak and TRASS? - There is a completely clear nationwide consensus inside the leading conservative party, and beyond - none of the opposition parties presented in Parliament opposes the course that Johnson conducted, does not oppose it - nothing like that. One hundred percent support from the Labor and personally from their leader Cyrus Starmer, from the Liberal-Democratic Party, and from the Green, and from the Scottish National Party-from all.
I have never heard of the North that Johnson was doing something there. It was just a merit for him, they all recognized it, even his most cruel critics-that his Ukrainian politics, his Ukrainian front was exactly what he should, and anyone should continue to do the same, without giving way to him.
There is even such a theory-one can argue, but I heard such a view that it was his successful Ukrainian policy that has extended his stay in the prime minister's chair because she to some extent compensated for the catastrophic failures he had in domestic politics. You see which paradox: in essence, the domestic policy pursued by Johnson also had no objections - at least inside the conservative party.
This is a rare case, perhaps even the only one when the uprising against the Prime Minister was only due to his personal traits. But these traits were unbearable. They annoyed the public so. It is, first and foremost, about falsehood, that it was impossible to believe almost nothing from what he said, sometimes on serious questions, sometimes from frivolous, but as if a person opens his mouth - and cannot tell the truth. But - except for the Ukrainian issue.
Some even said that Johnson has something from Putin. First, this falsehood, secondly, does not surrender. He burned on this-he defended the kind of [Owen's consservator], who was accused of horrific corruption, almost neglected the whole giant parliamentary procedure that existed for decades to save him. He lied about parties. And finally, with this Chris Pincher is a story with sexual harassment.
And again, the fact that Johnson defended him, but in how he did - a word of truth, we do not give our own, another - the law. This trait was terribly annoyed by the British, so much that the whole conservative party began to lose their rating, lagging behind Labor, seriously.
That's when this uprising happened, because conservative deputies said: Well, we lose the next election because our leader is unable to tell the truth? - Is it irritation at the political level or at the level of simple Britons? In Ukraine, Johnson is considered not a national hero . . . - Yes, I understand that Ukraine saw a completely different Johnson. Well, and I also saw him as on the streets of Kiev - he just behaved incredibly, well done. I absolutely understand his popularity in Ukraine.
But in the United Kingdom he did not behave so much. He behaved quite differently. Sometimes arrogance came out, and kept others for fools. It was the measurements of public opinion of ordinary citizens and forced the conservatives that rebel. They are very sensitive to this. As soon as they realized that through Johnson, because of his strange manner, the whole party goes to the bottom, can lose and most likely loses the next elections - then they began to take action.
More than 50 people in three days resigned - the highest officials of the country. It was to manage the country of Johnson with anyone, so he told him, "I will not go for nothing, what do not do with me, though kill me, I will stay in this chair", and I still had to put up with it. - What do you think it is waiting for him in politics? There are great doubts that a person with this character, ambitions and with such a political career will simply go to retirement.
Do he predict any next step in his career? - Many people now ask such a question, especially he ended his farewell in Parliament with a phrase "goodbye, tiny" - a terminator who will return sooner or later. Perhaps.
But on the other hand, the observers who know it personally say: listen, he feels so felt in the water when he reads lectures, speeches after festive evenings - this is when the corporation invites a figure and he entertains the public for an hour or two, him They pay crazy money, 250 thousand pounds or more. Even Teresa May does this, and Johnson is really "Vrun, Boltun and Khokhotun", including in a good way. He is a charming man, incredibly witty, full of surprises, with crazy self -irony.
A completely vivid, unusual personality. He will have tremendous success as a speaker. Well, he writes perfectly - the column in the Daily Telegraph newspaper will probably lead as before. Books. And all this will be sold for crazy money. He can live like honey to drink. And I repeat - he is there in his element. However, he is not quite a politician. Not quite a statesman. He is a completely peculiar and unusual person.
And it seems to me - why feel these disappointments again? Instead, you can get a rock star again and swim in money. Although hard to say. Maybe some insult, on the contrary, will push him. Some tell him, come on, create your own party, Johnson. Someone has already found ready money to give it. - In Ukraine, after his resignation, we were joked that if you do not need Johnson as a prime minister, then let us. - I assure you, you would quickly be disappointed in it.
He was wonderful as the Prime Minister of the country, which is all soul on your side. In Britain, they saw the true essence of the Putin regime much earlier, because at first there was a murder of Litvinenko, and then the most terrible thing was the attempt on the violinists in Salisbury, when it came to every ordinary British: there is a state that can use a terrible weapon of mass destruction on the streets of our cities.
Only one woman was killed and several people became disabled, and there could be hundreds and even thousands. And it calmly does a state that considers itself a civilized, European one. And Putin's name then studied-any Briton now knows it, and the sign is absolutely negative. In some sense, it helped the British. They were already mentally prepared for Putin to be able to anything.
When the war began, there was the only impulse here - Ukraine to support Ukraine for fundamental reasons, and because they saw what it was. Boris Johnson, by the way, also did not always occupy such a position - when he was a foreign minister, he was such a lobbyist Putin that there was no other in the government. He pushed Britain to restart. It was, however, to Skripal. This moment, apparently, was also crucial for him.
But still, all this was after the annexation of Crimea, after the murder of Litvinenko, after Georgia - it would seem who should be to be to say after all this: let's be friends with Putin? It was Boris Johnson. That's another strange feature for you. However, he should be given granted - when he was asked, what is your most important mistake in a political career, he said: I was an idiot when I believed that Putin could be friends with Putin.
And he was as if he repented that he showed an example of Ukraine's support. - Earlier, London was the capital of rich Russians. After the full -scale war began, sanctions were imposed - how did the moods in relation to the Kremlin regime have changed? - Public opinion in Britain has long been tuned against Russian oligarchs. From the point of view of the classic British, it is dubious money made in a dubious way of capital - in most cases, not quite honest and normal, to put it mildly.
Secondly, everyone knew that these oligarchs were related to Putin. These famous courts - Berezovsky against Abramovich, Potanin with his wife. The attitude towards them was disgusting in society, and often it was possible to meet in the press speeches of people who said: Why do we make this "laundry" for Russian money? What do we need? By the way, again, one of those who allowed it to do it to the Russian oligarchs then was the mayor of London Boris Johnson.
He then welcome Russian money, recorded greetings in the broken Russian language, said that Boris was named in honor of the Russian friend of his parents. Then he played a completely different role, and revised his position only after the start of the war. Well, at least looked at. Now everyone is discussing that Petro Aven was able to prove the court that he could not do without 100 thousand pounds. It turns out that people work for him.
If this money is blocked, then the British lose their earnings. Homes fall apart because there is no way to look after them. It is, of course, a drop in the sea, what he was given, compared to the billions that he had here - he, of course, will not get them back. However, many believe that the British court was too liberal. But Avene does not want to go home too - you know what a strange story? And he is not alone. Both Friedman and others, smaller oligarchs - they are kept for Britain.
A new British visa is almost impossible to get a Russian citizen. Point. All, you understand? There will be no new visa - you will not come. And so those who have made their way here are trying to stay. For some reason, he does not pull home. Of course, their presence is much less noticeable here. Even those who have retained some positions, they are unnoticed, try not to get on their eyes, because they understand that they are not very popular.
Even the calls to send everyone to one Russian citizens come to the call. Even one of the candidates for prime ministers, by the way, is very decent, Tom Tuendhahat, he appealed with this. But it has not come to this, and in my opinion, it should not reach, because there are enough anti -Putin people, led by [Michael] Khodorkovsky.
What, too, take them and send them all, send them to the arms of the Putin Gulag? Apparently, it would be incorrect, unreasonable and disrespectful to anyone, including Ukraine. - The capital of the Russians and their property in London really arrest and select? - And here is a big problem. It is easy enough to freeze property and capital, which is mainly made to considerable amounts of money.
Confiscate them and give Ukraine money, as public opinion calls - fair, but there is a contradiction with the principle of privacy, which is terribly important for the British. It can be overcome, but it should be done very reasonably. This should be a court decision. The legislation is not perfect in this sense. Parliament was going to work on this, but now we have such a brew, the change of government has not been before. Yes, I think they will return to this issue and will resolve it.
Canada finds some solutions. And Britain, I think, will achieve this too, but not immediately. - How do moods on Ukraine and war in Ukraine change in Ukraine? It is often said that fatigue comes from the war in Europe. Are the British tired? - There is such a danger. I would not say that this is already going on - I don't see that. But we all predict heavy winter with high energy prices, with inflation. We have it here, in Britain, under 10%. Some say that in winter it will be 20%, as in Russia.
This, of course, will hit people strongly on the wallets. And many fear what people say, they say, Ukraine is, of course, a wonderful thing, but my life is one thing, and please go, think about facilitating my economic destiny. Demonstrations, protests can begin. In France, they say, they are already happening. The British, of course, the people are patient and fundamental in terms of attitude towards Russia and Ukraine, so their patience can be counted to some limit. But to which we do not know.
It is very important now that the new government will do. There is a strictest dispute - two economic schools have encountered. Risha Snak is a representative of an orthodox point of view. I also belong to it as an economist, and I will say honestly immediately: now not to decline in taxes - this is what Liz TRASS offers. It proposes to cancel taxes at least £ 30 billion per year. The money will have to be taken from somewhere. She wants to borrow them.
But when borrowing, there will be an inflation, an increase in consumer rates and mortgages. It can be a big blow to life in Britain. A rather terrible experiment, because if the trass is wrong, and apparently, it will become a prime minister-it can accelerate unpleasant processes in society, including socio-political. But you see what a thing. If conservative deputies were voted to the end, as it was before the finals, then, of course, Risha Sunak won with a large break.
The Times - it is a centrist - showed the data of the polls: 91% of readers want Snak, and only 9% - Liz Traass. They believe that it will be much more competent prime minister, especially in everything related to the economy. But the survey among ordinary members of the Conservative Party shows on the contrary - 62% for LIZ TRASS and only 38% for Risha Snak. And these people will decide.
- If the Snak becomes a prime minister, does the whole government be restarted and, for example, Liz Tras and Ben Wallace will leave it? - I can be mistaken, but it seems to me that anyone who is not the prime minister, Ben Wallace will not touch and he will remain the Minister of Defense. It is most popular with conservatives. To touch it will probably be very stupid.
And it will be an important symbol of the continuity of politics in this direction - only in the Ukrainian, because in the rest of the directions, on the contrary, there will probably be an attempt to distinguish itself from Boris Johnson and his slightly toxic heritage. - Britain was among the countries that most supplied weapons to Ukraine before the war.
Is there any resources in Britain to supply us weapons, will it continue for the new government? - I am not a specialist in the military field, but experts say that the British gave two -thirds of their opportunities to Ukraine or they in the process of transfer. That is, they even expose their army. Well, the defense industry will receive new orders. There is hope, of course.
But in general, it is very generous - and it should be, I do not think that someone will deny, because once again I will emphasize: everyone understands that this war is not just for the freedom of one state, but for the liberal world order in general. Therefore, it is necessary to give Ukraine everything that is possible except nuclear weapons. And everything else must be given. It seems to me that Britain comes out of this, Ben Wallace comes out.