Live
David Cameron unveils anti-terror measures in a statement to the House of Commons
Latest
“Michael Ellis, a Conservative, asks if
Cameron will commit to consulting the Commons before taking punitive
action in Iraq?
Cameron says he always…”
Cameron's Commons statement – live
Live cover of UK Prime Minister David Cameron’s statement on new anti-terror measures.
Live
Sort by:
Latest first
Oldest first
Auto update:
On
Off
Michael Ellis, a Conservative, asks if Cameron will commit to consulting the Commons before taking punitive action in Iraq?
Cameron says he always believes in consulting the Commons. He will
keep it informed. But if he had to act urgently, for security reasons or
for humanitarian reasons, he would act without pre-authorisation from
the Commons.
Cameron says the new powers he is proposing will allow the
authorities to stop planes flying into the UK if they do not provide
sufficient passenger information. These are the kind of powers that
operate in the US, he says.
Cameron says there is little doubt Hamas uses people to protect its rocket. That is “absolutely despicable”, he says.
Grahame Morris, a Labour MP, asks if British
citizens serving in the Israeli Defence Force would be treated in the
same way as Britons fighting for Isis.
Cameron says he does not accept that. Israel was protecting itself
from terrorist attack, he says. Morris will regret making that comment,
he says.
Updated
Bob Stewart, a Conservative, says Isis will only be
defeated on the battlefield. The Iraqi forces are the people most
likely to do that. Will we give them as much support as necessary?
Cameron says that is fundamentally right. Supporting the Kurds and
supporting the Iraqi government are not alternatives, he says.
Labour’s John Woodcock asks Cameron to confirm that he is open to the idea of Britain mounting air strikes against Isis.
Cameron says he is not ruling anything out. He believes in consulting the Commons, he says.
But he says it is also important to confirm that, if necessary, the
government would act quickly without pre-authorisation from the Commons.
Steve Baker, a Conservative, says he was appalled
to learn that a British terrorist interviewed on Newsnight came from
Wycombe. If he returns, will he face the full force of the law?
Cameron says it is shocking to hear people like this say they just want to come back to Britain to bomb and maim.
Sometimes the evidence against these people does not meet a criminal burden of proof, he says.
Jason McCartney, a Conservative MP, says he backs targeted air strikes by Britain in Iraq against Isis.
Cameron says we should listen carefully to what the Kurds says. So
far we have just supplied them with non-lethal weapons, he says. But
Britain is prepared to go further, he says.
Cameron says he envisages the sanctions regime “getting tighter all the time” if Russia does not alter its policy in Ukraine.
Labour’s Barry Sheerman calls for a Commons debate
on these matters. And he says President Putin will not be alarmed by
anything he has heard. Britain needs to stand up to bullies, he says.
Cameron says he agrees there is a case for a debate. On Russia, he
says he thinks sanctions have an impact. Russia needs the west more than
they need it, he says.
Angela Watkinson, a Conservative, asks what meetings Cameron has had with the Muslim community to ensure they condemn Isis?
Cameron says Eric Pickles, the communities secretary, has taken the
lead on this. There has been a real difference. For example, after the
murder of Drummer Lee Rigby, many Asian and Muslim leaders were willing
to speak out.
Keith Vaz, the Labour chair of the home affairs
committee, asks if Cameron agrees on the importance of engaging with
ethnic minority communities.
Cameron says he has been pleased by how many Muslims have spoken out against Isis recently.
Crispin Blunt, a Conservative, says we have already
made “ugly” compromises over Egypt. Does he agree something similar is
required, to get countries like Russia and Iran involved in the fight
against Isis?
Cameron says he agrees countries in the region must play a greater part.
Labour’s Pat McFadden says getting rid of control
orders was the wrong policy for the wrong reason. He welcomes Cameron’s
U-turn. Will Cameron consider getting a new mandate from parliament for
action in the Middle East?
Cameron says those in the region must lead the charge against Isis.
Britain and other countries will help them.We must use our judgement
about how, he says.
John Baron, a Conservative, says the policy of
speaking loudly but carrying a small stick is often found wanting. Does
Cameron agree we should not be cutting 20,000 posts from the armed
forces.
Cameron says he does not agree. You cannot describe a £33bn defence budget as small, he says.
Sir Edward Garnier, the Conservative former
solicitor general, commends Cameron for not proposing wholesale reform
of the terror laws. Will the government consider any new measures very
carefully?
Cameron says he heard Garnier’s comments on the Today programme. (See 9.19am.) They set his calm tone for the day, he says. He says he has never supported knee jerk legislation.
Chris Bryant, the Labour MP, says Russia is
behaving like a terrorist state. Can Cameron finally say that those
involved in the murder of Sergei Magnitsky are not welcome in the UK?
Cameron says he has nothing to add to the letter he sent Bryant on this over the summer.
Sir Tony Baldry, a Conservative, says Donald Tusk’s comments at the weekend showed that EU reform is achievable.
Cameron says Tusk’s statement was positive. He looks forward to working with him.
Nadhim Zahawi, a Conservative MP with a Kurdish
background, says on a recent visit to the region he found that Isis were
issuing their own passports. He backs Cameron’s plans.
Labour’s Frank Dobson says we should be careful
about interfering with the rights of British citizens. If the security
services know enough about these people to say they should not be
allowed in, why can’t they be prosecuted? If we treat British
citizenship lightly, other countries will to.
Cameron says he agrees prosecutions are best. But, when Britain faces
an existential threat, sometimes that is not possible. Passports are
already taken away from dual nationals, he says.
John Redwood, a Consevative, says recent events
show the need for Britain to control its own border. Their weakest
border is our border, he says.
Cameron says we are not members of Schengen, so we can control our own borders.
Asked when the Iraqi army will be able to defeat Isis, Cameron says
its problem was that it was seen as a force representing just one part
of Iraq.
Labour’s Dennis Skinner says Cameron is trotting
out “garbage”. Two years ago he wanted the Commons to support Isis, and
to arm them. It’s only because of Labour that that did not happen, he
says.
Cameron says his recall is that that vote was about the use of chemical weapons. He was right to oppose them, he says.
Rory Stewart, the Conservative MP and new chair of
the Commons defence committee, asks when Cameron will pre-commit British
troops to the Baltics.
Cameron says this issue will be addressed at this week’s Nato summit. We need to make real Nato’s Article 5, he says.
Martin Horwood, a Lib Dem, suggests Nato should stop the French selling assault ships to Russia by buying them itself.
Cameron says it is hard to get the EU to agree to sanctions. But sanctions are being toughened, he says.
Alistair Burt, the Conservative former Foreign
Office minister, asks if the government has received a request for arms
from the Kurdish peshmerga.
Cameron says the Kurds have asked Britain to help transport arms. He
is not aware of a specific request for arms. But he would look upon such
a request favourable. They are our allies, he says. But he says he
wants them to remain part of Iraq.
Sir Gerald Kaufman, the Labour MP, asks what Cameron will do to stop a further attack on Gaza.
Cameron says he wants all parties to engage in talks.
Bill Cash, a Conservative, says international law does allow people to be rendered stateless in some circumstances.
Cameron agrees. Doing nothing ‘sticks in the craw”, he says.
Caroline Lucas, the Green MP, asks why Britain supplies arms to Saudi Arabia, a country that beheads its own people and funds extremism.
Cameron says Britain has some of the toughest arms controls laws in
the world. The Saudis have changed their approach to funding extremism,
he says.
Liam Fox, the Conservative former defence
secretary, asks what is being done to stop the sale of Isis oil. And
under what circumstances would Britain join air strikes.
Cameron says Isis makes a lot of money selling oil to Assad.
The military have delivered aid to Iraq, he says. Britain supports
the military air strikes. It is best to keep asking how can we best
pursue the national interest, he says.
Cameron says the joint terrorism assessment centre decided to raise the terrorist threat. It is independent, he says.
It is their decision, not mine.
Dominic Grieve, the Conservative former attorney
general, says he is concerned about plans to stop jihadists returning to
the UK. That would not only be against international law; it would be
against common law too. It is much better to prosecute these people
here, he says.
Cameron says he broadly agrees; he would like to see people
prosecuted. But the government also needs to look at any gaps in its
capabilities, he says.
Hazel Blears, the Labour former communities secretary, says she is disappointed that Cameron had so little to say about tackling extremism.
Cameron says he is sorry about that. There are few people in the Commons he agrees with more on this issue.
Peter Hain, the Labour former Foreign Office
minister, says Britain should urge Saudi Arabia to stop funding medieval
barbarism. And he calls for a full debate on foreign policy.
Cameron sidesteps the question about Saudia Arabia, but he says he
agrees that countries in the Middle East need to address this problem
themselves.
Sir Menzies Campbell, the former Lib Dem leader, says Cameron’s statement is more “nuanced” than some of the reporting over the weekend suggested.
But who would decide when to ban a suspected jihadists from returning to the UK? Would there be a right to appeal?
Cameron says he wants to work within the law.
But there is a problem. The government can excluded foreign
nationals, and people of dual nationality. But it does not have the same
power in relation to British nations, even if they declare allegiance
to another power.
Jack Straw, the Labour former foreign secretary, asks Cameron if he agrees Britain should re-engage with Iran.
Cameron says Britain is re-engaging with Iran, but “very cautiously”.
Sir Peter Tapsell, a Conservative, says it was a
mistake to support the Sunni uprising in Syria. The west should not
intervene in a civil war that has been running for 1,300 years, he says.
Cameron says he does not agree.
Cameron is responding to Miliband.
He thanks him for the constructive tone of his statement.
He confirms that the EU is looking at imposing sectoral sanctions on Russia.
He says he is pleased Labour will support the plans for seizing passports.
He says he thinks it important that the Prevent programme should be focused on counter-terrorism.
And, on Tpims, he quotes David Anderson, the independent reviewer of
terror legislation, saying that there is no need to return to control
orders and that Tpims are more civilised. David CameronPhotograph: BBC Parliament
Ed Miliband is responding to Cameron.
He starts by paying tribute to Cathy Ashton, Britain’s outgoing commissioner (and a Labour peer).
Does Cameron agree there is a need for sectoral sanctions against Russia?
Miliband says Isreal’s response to the threat from Hamas was not
justified. And today’s annexation of Palestinian land is “deplorable”.
Miliband condemns Isis (which he, likes Cameron, calls Isil). But we have to learn lessons from the war in Iraq, he says.
Defeating Isil will not be achieved by military means alone, he says.
What role is the EU playing in promoting an inclusive Iraqi government?
Miliband says it is unclear what Cameron is proposing in terms of
excluding people from the country. He wants more detail, he says.
On Tpims, Miliband welcomes the introducing of a “relocation” power.
This was recommended by David Anderson, the independent reviewer of
terror legislation, he says.
Control orders contained this power, he says. The government should never have abandoned them in the first place, he says. Ed MilibandPhotograph: BBC Parliament
Cameron turns to what the government is doing domestically.
He repeats some of the points he made at his press conference on Friday.
There are two areas where more action is needed.
First, more needs to be down to stop people travelling.
Passports are not an automatic right. The Home Office can take them away.
But the police cannot seize a passport at the border. The government will give them this power.
And the government’s royal prerogative powers (which allow the Home
Office to seize passports) are being challenged in the courts. If a
challenge succeeds, the government will legislate to give it the power
to do this. And it will start preparing the legislation anyway, he says.
The government wants to stop jihadists returning to Britain.
The authorities need a discretionary power to allow them to stop
people returning to the UK. It will work on the details, and introduce
them in proportionate way compatible with the law.
Second, more must be done to tackle extremists here.
Cameron says the government will beef up the Tpim regime, introducing
new relocation powers. (Control orders allowed the authorities to ban
people from certain areas. Tpims do not, but there has been pressure for
this to change.)
There is a lot of jeering from Labour at this point. Labour will present this as a U-turn.
Cameron also says he wants to impose new conditions on those subject to Tpims.
Cameron turns to the threat from Isis.
EU leaders agreed to coordinate action to crack down on those going to fight in Syria and Iraq, he says.
The root cause of this is a “poisonous ideology of religious extremism”, he says.
This is nothing to do with Islam, a religion followed by 1bn people which inspires countless acts of kindness every day.
We need a firm security response to Isis, Cameron says. Britain is
already providing equipment to Kurdish forces. A UN security council
resolution will disrupt flows of finance to Isis.
But, alongside this, there must be a political response.
In Syria there must be a political transition.
In Iraq there must be a genuinely inclusive government, he says.
Britain will continue to consider what further role is in the
national interest, including any possible further military action, he
says.
Cameron turns to Gaza.
The loss of life has been appalling, he says. And the civilian
casualties have been unacceptable. A Palestinian child’s life is worth
just as much as an Israeli child’s life, he says.
But the Hamas aggression was unacceptable.
Cameron says Israel’s latest seizure of land in the West Bank is completely unacceptable.
David Cameron is making his statement now.
He starts by talking about the appointments agreed at the EU Council.
Donald Tusk, the new council president, places a big emphasis on
meeting the concerns of Britain, Cameron says.
The EU summit discussed Russia and Isis (he calls it Isil, but our house style is Isis), he says.
Russia is trying to force Ukraine to abandon its democratic choices at the barrel of a gun, he says.
We know the danger of a nation state being undermined by force, he says.
The EU leaders agreed that new sanctions against Russia would be drawn up within a week.
Cameron says he does not accept that sanctions are not having an impact. Capital has been flying out of Russia, he says.
Damian McBride, Gordon Brown’s former spin doctor, used to work for
HM Revenue and Customs. He thinks the authorities already know quite a
lot about passengers boarding aircraft and, in a post on his blog,
he says that if forcing airlines to provide more information is the
main focus of David Cameron’s statement today, we should be sceptical.
Here’s an excerpt.
By a long distance, the majority of our potential suspects were
instead identified in advance via intelligence sources, surveillance
work, etc. both in the UK and overseas. In other words, the red flags
were waving long before those suspects ever checked onto a plane.
So I find myself puzzled and intrigued by the headlines saying that
David Cameron will today ask airlines to increase the information they
provide about their passengers, and that the government believes this
will be a significant addition to their armoury of weapons against the
Jihadists.
And let’s be clear: that is the headline measure from today’s package of anti-terror powers, so you’d expect it to be significant.
I’ll suspend judgement until I see all the details, or hear from
some of the security talking heads, but in the meantime, I’m prepared to
whisper a provisional call of ‘bullshit’ against this measure.
First, I’m not convinced there’s much useful information the
airlines can give the authorities beyond what they already provide. And
second, if our security services are genuinely reliant on that extra
passenger information to identify potential terror suspects, then we’d
better raise the ‘threat level’ to ‘Run!!’
David Cameron’s announcement will include a plan to share more
information about suspected jihadists with the Irish, my colleague Henry
McDonald tells me. He’s sent me this.
A list of suspected Jihadi fighters is to be shared between the Irish and British governments, the Dublin media reports today.
Airline passenger lists and finger printing at Irish airports will
be available to the UK authorities in case returning Jihadists from the
Middle East and Afghanistan try to travel back to Britain via Ireland.
The Garda Siochana is understood to have a list of 30 Jihadist
suspects who were resident in Ireland but have since moved to war zones
such as Syria and Northern Iraq, according to the Irish Independent.
The increased co-operation between the UK and the Republic comes
about after a weekend in which Irish soldiers for the first time ever
engaged in armed clashes with ISIS or Al Qaeda linked Islamist
militants.
Irish troops directed machine gun fire on the de-militarised zone of
the Golan Heights to rescue 38 Filipino UN peacekeepers who had been
encircled by the Al Qaeda inspired Al Nusra front.
A detachment of Irish peacekeepers managed to rescue their
colleagues from the Phillipines from UN post inside a buffer zone
between Syria and Israel.
Irish soldiers have been deployed on the Golan Heights with the UNDOF peacekeeping mission for the last 40 years.
David Cameron's statement on anti-terror measures
David Cameron will be making his statement in the Commons at 3.30pm.
On the Commons monitors, it is billed as a statement on the EU council, security and the Middle East.
The main focus will be on the new anti-terror measures Cameron
promised at the end of last week. But we might also learn something
about his thoughts about military intervention against Isis, the Russian
quasi-invasion of Ukraine, and the impact of the new European
Commission (and Douglas Carswell’s resignation?) on his plans to
renegotiate Britain’s membership of the EU.
Two rounds of interviews were conducted and at each stage the panel
source to select one person who could meet the demanding twin roles both
of procedural adviser to the house and of its chief executive officer.
The panel reached its decision on July 30. However a number of
colleagues have since expressed disquiet…
Their concerns fall into two categories. The first, helpfully raised
by the honourable member for Rutland and Melton [Sir Alan Duncan], is
whether the panel should have recommended separating the roles. I was
advised that the panel could not adopt this approach without prior
legislation.
As I have said, there is a compelling case for such a separation but
any change would, of course, require the support of the House.
The second concern is for free appointment scrutiny and was
initially put forward by the honourable member for North East Somerset
[Jacob Rees-Mogg]. A strong case can be made for it and on this point
also I wish to hear colleagues’s views.
In the circumstances, and having discussed the matter with the
leader and shadow leader of the House, I believe that a modest pause in
the recruitment process is desirable while such issues are explored and
the views of members solicited in detail. In the meantime, the functions
of the clerk and chief executive will be distributed between members of
the management board. I am sure the whole House will wish them well in
the discharge of these important duties while the matter is resolved
with good will and by consensus.
This is the verdict from John Bercow’s biographer.
Bercow backs down in row over new Commons clerk
Bercow’s statement is over.
He is not taking questions on it now. But there may be points of order later.
Here are the key points.
Bercow has confirmed that he has suspended Carol Mills’ appointment as Commons clerk.
He described it as a “modest pause”, and it was gracefully executed, it
is hard not to see this as a significant climbdown - “humiliating”
even, if I can get that past the cliche police - forced upon him
reluctantly by pressure from the many MPs opposed to the appointment. A
week ago Bercow’s allies were insisting he was determined to press on
with the appointment.
He has renewed his call for the post of Commons clerk to be
split, so that “chief executive component” is carried out by someone
separate.
He has accepted that a new candidate can only be appointed with the support of the Commons. This
makes it highly unlikely that Mills will ever take up the post she was
offered - the traditional clerk post, combining clerk and chief
executive.
Updated
The Commons is now sitting.
John Bercow says he is making a statement.
Currently the roles of clerk and chief executive are combined, he says.
But managing the Commons has become more complicated. Highly-skilled management is crucial.
His preference for splitting the post was not accepted by others before the new person was appointed.
So the Commons advertised a joint post, he says.
Two rounds of interviews were held. The panel reached a decision on 30 July.
Since then “a number of colleagues have expressed disquiet”.
They have two concerns, he says.
First, some MPs want to split the role. Bercow says he was advised
this would need legislation. Any change would require the support of the
house.
Second, some MPs wanted pre-appointment scrutiny. Jacob Rees-Mogg pressed for this. A strong case can be made for this.
Bercow says, having discussed this with William Hague, the leader of
the Commons, and Angela Eagle, the shadow leader of the Commons, he has
decided there is a need for a “modest pause” while these matters are
resolved.
He hopes this will be decided with good grace, he says.
Scottish leaders have warned voters they have until
midnight on Tuesday to submit their registration forms to vote in the
independence referendum. As the Press Association reports, Alex
Salmond, Scotland’s first minister, urged the “missing million” who are
not registered to vote to get out and harness “Scotland’s immense
wealth”. Johann Lamont, the Scottish Labour leader, said it is the
people least likely to vote who stand to lose the most if Salmond “has
got his sums wrong”. For more details, do take a look at our new daily Scottish referendum live blog.
A trade minister has defended the decision not to exclude
the NHS from the free trade deal the EU is negotiating with the US - the
so-called transatlantic trade and investment partnership (TTIP).
Lord Livingston said TTIP was essentially a free trade deal which would
lead to a series of benefits for businesses, workers and consumers. As
the Press Association reports, he said the NHS was not being excluded
from the deal because it would not be affected. “The NHS will not see
any change to its existing obligations - the deal would not change the
nature of what happens today,” he said.
Rebel Tory Eurosceptics will pledge in their personal manifestos at
next May’s general election that they will definitely vote for the UK to
quit the EU in the referendum Mr Cameron has promised in 2017. This
would be widely seen as a vote of no confidence in the Prime Minister’s
ability to win a good deal for Britain when he renegotiates its
membership terms after the election.
It would echo the warning by Douglas Carswell, the former Tory MP who defected to Ukip last week, who claimed Mr Cameron was not “serious” about EU reform
and wanted to recommend voting to remain within the union. Mark
Reckless, Tory MP for Rochester and Strood, told The Independent: “My
election manifesto will confirm my view that we should leave the EU.”
Other Eurosceptics predicted today that between 50 and 100
Conservative MPs would make the same pledge in their election material. A
revolt on that scale would be almost impossible for Tory HQ to prevent.
George Osborne’s attitude to the European Union has gone through an
“unmistakable hardening”, leading him to wonder if Britain would be
better off leaving, according to his biographer.
The chancellor now also acknowledges that wanting to leave the EU
has become a mainstream ambition, rather than something that obsesses a
few on the fringe of his party, according to a new edition ofGeorge Osborne: The Austerity Chancellor, by Janan Ganesh ...
According to Mr Ganesh, his views hardened after he came to office.
“He remained a supporter of British membership and shook his head at the
casualness with which some colleagues talked of exit. But he had
arrived at two conclusions,” Mr Ganesh wrote. “The first was that exit
was no longer unthinkable: a sequence of events leading to that end
could be imagined, and it was not just the crazies and the bores who
were enthused by this.
“The second conclusion was that a large EU country outside of the
eurozone was in an increasingly invidious position. The currency bloc
was becoming the real decision-making crucible and voting weights were
shifting in its favour on matters of vital British interest, such as
banking.
“Britain was one of the largest financial contributors to an
organisation whose inner circle was doing its own thing. His mood on the
subject varied, but, at his bleakest, he wondered whether such an
arrangement could last.”
There is no government in the Western world that would even
contemplate an act so self-defeating, so short-termist, and so
barbarically contemptuous of the rights of the population. That is why
all three main parties have correctly ruled out expansion of Heathrow
airport, in the form of a third runway.
So it is mystifying and depressing to learn that some in Whitehall
want to use the cover provided by Sir Howard Davies to effect a colossal
U-turn: by announcing that this option is back on the agenda – for
consideration post May 2015.
He also says that, under his plans for a new airport in the Thames
estuary, “an Orly-style airport” (ie, a small one) could remain at
Heathrow. Previously he seemed to advocate closing Heathrow completely.
(His new stance may have something to do with his decision to seek the
nomination to stand as the Tory candidate in Uxbridge, where Heathrow is
the major employer.)
Senior Lib Dem Danny Alexander recently announced the party wants to persuade the Tories to axe the hated levy before next year’s election.
But Shadow Work Secretary Rachel Reeves last night said they should work with Labour to end it now.
David Davis, the Conservative MP and a friend of Andrew Mitchell’s, says today’s “plebgate” report is damning. He told me:
What we have got here is evidence of industrial-scale dishonesty.
There was clear collusion. The Met try to avoid the word conspiracy, but
there is clear evidence of collusion, and an attempt to do harm to the
elected government of the day.
He also says that the report also contains some evidence suggesting
that there was a premeditated plot to undermine Mitchell. The Met do not
draw this conclusion, but Davis says the report includes text messages
sent by one of the diplomatic protection officers on duty at Downing
Street on the night of the incident that would be open to this
interpretation.
About 20 minutes before Mitchell’s altercation with an officer at the
Number 10 gates, the officer sent a text to his partner saying:
Sorting out what could turn into a major prob lol not for me though x
Later, after the incident, he sent her another message:
Done what I can’t do now so it’s up to segts to sort it out in the morning lol x
And the following day he sent her a message saying:
One of the cabinet government ministers that I’ve had a run in with
before got ump with being told to use pedestrian gate with his pedal
cycle, told one of our guys ‘you don’t run the country we do your all a
punch of fucking Plebs
Updated
The Sun’s Tom Newton Dunn, who broke the original “plebgate” story, claims that this video is particularly significant.
That’s because it seems to confirm PC Toby Rowland’s claim that
members of the public passing the Downing Street gates were visibly
shocked by Andrew Mitchell’s behaviour.
The main Met report also provides some new detail about Andrew
Mitchell’s previous altercations with the police about access to Number
10. This is from a summary of the statement provided by an (unnamed)
former head of security and business continuity at Number 10, “civil
servant 2”.
Civil Servant 2 stated there were very few incidents or issues about
entry to Downing Street but is aware of two occasions when Andrew
Mitchell MP was inconvenienced when trying to enter the road for cabinet
meetings.
The first was between March 2011 and May 2011. Mr Mitchell stated
that he was unhappy that he had been to the back gate of the ‘L’ shaped
road and been denied entry and sent to the front gate. At the time Mr
Mitchell was Secretary of State for International Development. He stated
that he did not wish to make a big deal of the incident but didn’t want
to see it repeated. Civil Servant 2 believed that Mr Mitchell used the
word ‘fucking’ in the conversation but this was in relation to
the incident and was not aimed at an individual. Civil Servant 2
believed he said something like ‘they should have fucking known who I am’. The language did not bother Civil Servant 2 as it was not aimed at him.
The second incident was between May and June 2011 and was again at
the back gate of Downing Street. A Cabinet Minister had been let through
with his protection officers but Mr Mitchell on his bike was refused
access. Mr Mitchell was deeply unhappy about the refusal and stated that
‘if it happens again tell them I’ll write to the Commissioner and make a
formal complaint;’ he pointed out that this was the second occasion and
it was ‘becoming ridiculous’. Again Mr Mitchell swore but Civil Servant 2 could understand his frustration.
In the autumn of 2011 it was decided that cyclists should not go
through the front gate. This was for security reasons. Though this
policy was written down Civil Servant 2 expected the officers based at
Downing Street to exercise their discretion and judge each situation on
its merits.
An armed Metropolitan police officer who was on duty in Downing Street on the night of the so called Plebgate incident involving the former chief whip Andrew Mitchell texted a colleague two days later to say that she could “topple the Tory government”.
The text is published in a lengthy report by the Metropolitan police
into Operation Alice, its investigation into the incident in Downing
Street on 19 September 2012, which ended Mitchell’s cabinet career. The
Met has also released CCTV footage of the incident.
Deputy assistant commissioner Patricia Gallan, who was in charge of
the Operation Alice investigation, said that allegations that officers
had conspired to falsify statements had “damaged public trust and
confidence in us”.
And the report also reveals that PC Gillian Weatherley, who sent a
picture of PC Rowland’s “plebgate” email to a colleague who gave it to
the Sun, boasted about being able to “topple” the government.
On 21st September 2012 at 6:50pm, a text message was sent from PC Weatherley’s mobile phone number to Officer 18 that read, ‘This
will make you feel better, I’m the officer that stopped the chief whip
leaving Downing St in Wednesday. He didn’t swear at me but Toby that let
him out the side gate. I could topple the Tory government x’ (SIC).
Here’s the key document - the 56-page Met report into the “plebgate” affair (pdf).
It summarises all the evidence exhaustively but - rather
frustratingly - does not pass judgement on the key allegation at the
centre of the story: that Andrew Mitchell told a police officer at the
gates of Downing Street: “You’re fucking plebs.”
Mitchell, who resigned as chief whip over the allegation, continues
to deny this very strongly. But the officer who made the allegation, PC
Toby Rowland, was not subject to any criminal prosecution or misconduct
proceedings. The Met report says there was insufficient evidence to
justify taking action against him.
Here are extracts from the report about the Met’s interview with Rowland.
PC Rowland was interviewed twice under Police Misconduct Regulations
in relation to Mr Mitchell’s allegations that he did not use the
phrases which PC Rowland attributed to him in his report.
On the first occasion, PC Rowland repeated the events as written in his pocket book and email. He said, ‘Whilst
on duty there, at that post, I was dealing with a person entering via
the front pedestrian gate to Downing Street regarding an ongoing
function that was happening. On my return to the main vehicle gates I
saw a male who later identified himself as the Government Chief Whip and
who I subsequently confirmed was Mr Andrew Mitchell. He was stationary
on a pedal cycle speaking to PC Weatherley. Mr Mitchell was demanding to
be let out of the vehicle gates into Whitehall. I explained to Mr
Mitchell that he must use the pedestrian gates. I repeatedly said to Mr
Mitchell, “I’m more than happy to open the side pedestrian gate for you
sir, but its policy that we are not to allow cycles from the main
vehicle entrance”. I further added that if the policy changed I was more
than happy to allow use of the vehicle gates, but up to that point that
he must use the pedestrian gates.’
Mr Mitchell repeatedly stated he was the Chief Whip and he would use
the main vehicle gates but on being told that no other officer would
open the gates for him he went to the side pedestrian gate with PC
Rowland. As they neared the gates PC Rowland could see as usual several
members of the public directly in front of the fence opposite the
pedestrian gate. As they got to the gate, Mr Mitchell said ‘Best you learn your fucking place, you don’t run this fucking Government, you’re fucking plebs’. PC
Rowland said he could see that several members of the public were
visibly shocked by this outburst and that he was alarmed by this abuse
directed at him by a senior member of the government and the language
used. PC Rowland said to Mr Mitchell, ‘Please don’t swear at me sir, if you continue to, I will have no option but to arrest you under the Public Order Act”. Mr Mitchell remained quiet, but as he cycled off said, “You haven’t heard the last of this”’
PC Rowland went on to describe that he thought Mr Mitchell appeared
agitated and that he was demanding to be let through the gates. He said
that the officers were calm and polite throughout their dealings with Mr
Mitchell and that the reasons for not opening the main gates for him
were explained.
PC Rowland said that they were quite close to each other when Mr
Mitchell swore at him and that he was adamant that Mr Mitchell had used
the words, ’Best you learn your fucking place, you don’t run this fucking Government, you’re fucking plebs.’ PC Rowland said that he wasn’t familiar with the word ‘pleb’ prior to this incident.
PC Rowland was asked why he had warned Mr Mitchell under the Public Order Act and said, ‘Because
he was swearing in a public place where there were members of the
public who showed a visible reaction to that and whilst I am aware that
under the Public Order Act you don’t have to warn, I think it’s the
right thing to do, to warn someone that they adjust their behaviour and
if they can do that then I’ve done my job.’ PC Rowland was asked to describe the members of the public in more detail but was unable to.
PC Rowland was asked about his perception of Mr Mitchell saying, ’You haven’t heard the last of this,’ and said that he thought he would make a complaint to the police senior management or Downing Street ....
In the second interview, PC Rowland was shown the Downing Street
CCTV footage in detail and he was asked to talk through what had
happened and exactly where the exchange with Mr. Mitchell took place. He
gave a full account and stated that Mr. Mitchell began swearing at him
as they were on the pavement walking towards the inside and shortly
before they reached the pedestrian gate. PC Rowland gave Mr. Mitchell a
public order warning as he opened the gate, after Mr. Mitchell swore at
him. Mr. Mitchell then said, ‘You haven’t heard the last of this’ from outside the gate.
PC Rowland was asked to point out on the CCTV which members of the public were the ones which he quoted in his notes as being ‘visibly shocked.’ He
indicated that it was the male with the rucksack, who appeared to
follow the officer and Mr Mitchell as he exited the gate. PC Rowland
said he had looked this male in the eyes and at the same time he was
aware of the two female members of the public seen walking towards
Trafalgar Square. It was pointed out that these two people appear to be
looking away from the incident toward the camera and their attention was
not on Mr Mitchell. PC Rowland said that he had looked out as Mr
Mitchell was swearing and had seen these people in his ‘periphery vision’ and perceived their reaction. He formed the opinion he needed to warn Mr Mitchell about his behaviour; ‘I remember making eye con. I remember thinking at that moment I’m going to have to do something’. He maintained that this was his perception of the events as they happened in real time ...
PC Rowland’s recall during the second interview was limited in
places, particularly around his movements on his return to Apex House
but his recollections around the incident central to this enquiry remain
unchanged. His account is supported by the notes/report that he
completed very soon after the incident.
Mr Mitchell’s aide memoir was first drafted between 12th and 18th
November 2012. In this he admits to swearing in his conversation with PC
Rowland and acknowledged that the officer warned him about his
behaviour. In the course of the enquiry, a number police officers came
forward to give statements about occasions where Mr Mitchell has been
rude or abrupt.
Mr Mitchell said in his own statement that as he was exiting the pedestrian gate of Downing Street that, ‘I think I said that I would pursue this matter further the next day.’ However, Sir Jeremy Heywood said in his statement that when he met with Andrew Mitchell, ‘he denied threatening the officer with words such as you haven’t heard the last of this’.
Here’s an extract from the covering note released by the
Metropolitan police explaining why four officers were dismissed from the
police over “plebgate”.
Keith Wallis was sentenced to 12 months in prison on 6 February
following his conviction for misconduct in a public office. Wallis was
dismissed from the MPS without notice on 26 February.
On that same day, James Glanville was also dismissed after evidence
that on 20 September he passed information about the incident to the Sun
newspaper.
Glanville later provided the newspaper a photograph of an email sent
by PC Toby Rowland to his supervisors, which Glanville got from Gillian
Weatherley who had been on duty at Downing Street that night. He
subsequently lied about his actions in statements given to detectives
from the Alice team.
On 30 April Gillian Weatherley was dismissed, after evidence was
found that on 20 September she spoke to James Glanville about the
incident the night before and went on to send him a photograph of an
email sent by PC Toby Rowland to his supervisors via a multi media text
message. The pair, Weatherley and Glanville, went on to exchange 12 text
messages over the course of 20 - 22 September all of which she deleted.
Gillian Weatherley subsequently gave inaccurate and misleading statements to the detectives from the Operation Alice team.
Susan Johnson was dismissed on 20 May, after evidence was found that
a person closely connected to her contacted the Sun newspaper on 20
September, and that around that time the two exchanged text messages and
a phone call.
The team found further evidence that later that same day Keith
Wallis emailed Susan Johnson a copy of the email that he had sent to his
MP falsely claiming to have witnessed the incident at Downing Street.
Keith Wallis then went on to tell Susan Johnson that on 25 September he
had had a meeting with his MP. At no time did she report the matter to a
senior officer.
On 23 May the gross misconduct panel in the case of a PC from the
Diplomatic Protection found the case against him not proven. It was
alleged that the PC had lied to the operation Alice investigation team
by providing them with a statement to say he had not spoken to PC Keith
Wallis, since March 2012.
Two officers were subject to local misconduct in relation to
statements they provided to the investigation team or inappropriate
comments and have received final written warnings.
I’m having problems uploading the new Met material. Until I can find it, I can’t tell how significant it is.
The Met have also released some new video of the plebgate incident. Here it is.
The Metropolitan police have just released documents about their inquiry into “plebgate”.
I will post details as soon as I get them.
Tory MP Sir Tony Baldry standing down
Another Conservative MP has announced he’s standing down. It’s Sir Tony Baldry.
But Labour won’t be able to depict him as another backbencher
worried about his prospects of re-election. Baldry has been MP for
Banbury since 1983 and had a 18,227 majority at the last election. Here’s Baldry’s full statement.
Updated
Chris Kelly has spoken to his local paper, the Express and Star. He did not tell them why he was standing down, but he did say that he was wishing Douglas Carswell “all the best” - which sounded rather like an expression of support for Carswell’s Ukip candidature in the forthcoming Clacton byelection.
Here’s the quote from Kelly.
I won’t be joining UKIP, though I wish Douglas Carswell all the
best. He has been a superb MP and it’s honourable to stand for
re-election.
Here’s Michael Dugher, the shadow minister for the Cabinet Office, on Chris Kelly’s decision to stand down.
Another Tory MP is giving up on David Cameron, who can’t even
persuade his newest MPs that he has the answers. Confidence in the prime
minister is collapsing even inside his own party, with MPs formerly
loyal to David Cameron throwing in the towel rather than fighting on.
Hardworking people desperately need a government which will deal
with the cost-of-living crisis. Instead we have a weak Prime Minister
and a divided Tory Party turning in on itself.
Tory MP in marginal seat announces he is standing down
Garnier says government should be 'very careful' about new terror crackdown
Sir Edward GarnierPhotograph: BBC News
On the Today programme this morning Sir Edward Garnier,
the Conservative former solicitor general, said the government already
had the power to take away passports from people planning to travel
abroad to take part in jihadist activity. Referring to reports that
Cameron will announce measures to impose a temporary ban on jihadists
returning to the UK, Garnier suggested this was unwise.
Whether that’s practical and whether that’s wise is another matter.
We do have to consider what can be done, but also what can be done
within the law. Parliament can pass any law it likes, but the government
is bound by at least two UN conventions on statelessness and it seems
to me that the Government already has many laws in its locker which it
can use.”
I think we need to be very careful. We need to do an audit of the
laws that we have and the laws that we don’t have, and make sure that we
don’t simply, during the course of the next weeks or months, pass new
laws which simply replicate existing laws.
A temporary ban on British jihadists returning to Britain.
Measures to tighten terrorism prevention and investigation measures (Tpims).
Measures to make it easier for the intelligence agencies to get information about airline passengers
More cooperation with Turkey and Germany with a view to preventing jihadists returning to the UK.
This morning Sir Edward Garnier, the Conservative former solicitor
general, suggested the plan to impose a temporary ban on jihadists
returning to the UK was unwise. I will post his comments in detail
shortly.
I will be covering the Cameron plans, and the reaction to them, in detail.
But I will also be looking in some detail at the Metropolitan
police’s report into the “plebgate” affair, and John Bercow’s statement
on the Commons clerk appointment.
Here’s the agenda for the day. 11am: Number 10 lobby briefing 11am: Metropolitan police release their report into the Andrew Mitchell “plebgate” affair. 1pm: Alistair Darling, head of the Better Together campaign,
gives a speech on the impact Scottish independence would have on
families. 2.35pm:John Bercow, the Commons Speaker, is expected to make a statement to MPs about the appointment of the new Commons clerk. 3.30pm:David Cameron makes a statement to MPs about the government’s new anti-terror measures. Around 5pm: Theresa May, the home secretary, is expected to make a statement about the Rotherham child abuse scandal.
As usual, I will also be flagging up any breaking political news,
posting summaries with a round-up of all the day’s developments, and
highlighting the most interesting political articles on the web.
If you want to follow me on Twitter, I’m on @AndrewSparrow.
Khadijah Dare, 22, was born a non-Muslim in Lewisham, south
London, but is now said to be of grave concern to British security
services as she calls for more jihadi recruits. Dare appears in an ISIS
recruitment video, right, holding an AK-47 and calling on British
Muslims to abandon their families and their studies and join her in
Syria. She has even posted pictures of one of her sons with the
semi-automatic rifle that is the terrorist's weapon of choice, left,
believed to have been taken at the home she shares with her extremist
husband, Abu Bakr, inset.
Kiev's forces suffered a further setback in their war with
pro-Moscow separatists, with Ukraine's military revealing it had pulled
back from defending a vital airport in the east of the country. Military
spokesman Andriy Lysenko said Ukrainian forces had pulled back from the
airport near Luhansk. However, they had destroyed seven Russian
tanks and identified a major build-up of Russian forces to the north and
south of the city.
'If I want to I can take Kiev in a fortnight': Putin's threat to
Europe revealed by EU boss as Ukraine loses control of key airport
Putin made an incendiary remark to the European Commission President
He said that his forces could march to the Ukrainian capital in two weeks
Two seamen are missing after a rebel artillery attack on a patrol boat
Sergei Lavrov said negotiations on Monday should seek a ceasefire
Putin says rebel-held areas should be granted 'statehood', splitting Ukraine
Analysts say Putin wants to establish a 'frozen conflict' to solidify his gains
Published:
08:17 GMT, 1 September 2014
| Updated:
16:07 GMT, 1 September 2014
Russian
President Vladimir Putin made a bellicose statement to the European
Commission President, telling him that his armed forces could 'take Kiev
in a fortnight'.
The warning was made to Jose Manual Barroso over the phone, according to Italian newspaper La Repubblica.
it
came as Kiev's forces suffered a further major setback in their war
with pro-Moscow separatists, with Ukraine's military revealing that it
had pulled back from defending a vital airport in the east of the
country.
+16
Warning: Mr Putin (right) made a
bellicose statement to the European Commission President, Jose Manual
Barroso (left), telling him that his armed forces could 'take Kiev in a
fortnight'. The pair are pictured here on August 20
+16
Putin listens to an explanation during a visit to the Mammoth Museum of the North-Eastern State University in Yakutsk, Russia
+16
Denial: Mr Putin insists that Russian troops are not involved in fighting in eastern Ukraine
+16
People loosen parts from a burned-out Ukrainian armored personnel carrier in the village of Hrabske, eastern Ukraine
+16
The wreckage of an armoured personel carrier is seen at an abandoned checkpoint in Olenivka, 12 miles south of Donetsk
+16
Ukrainian soldiers patrol in an APC in
the Donetsk area. Ukrainian troops have retreated from the Lugansk
airport and a nearby village in the east after coming under artillery
fire
Military spokesman Andriy Lysenko said Ukrainian forces had pulled back from the airport near Luhansk.
However,
they had destroyed seven Russian tanks and identified a major build-up
of Russian forces to the north and south of the city.
'According
to our operational data, there are no fewer than four (Russian)
battalion-tactical groups in Ukraine,' he told reporters, adding that
each one comprised 400 men.
Earlier, Russia faced claims from Ukraine that the rebels it backs had fired on a naval vessel with artillery.
Two
seamen are missing after the attack, which came as the Kremlin
increased pressure for an immediate ceasefire, at the same time as
calling for rebel-held areas to become a separate state.
+16
Russia Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov
said negotiations taking place on Monday should seek an immediate
ceasefire in eastern Ukraine. Pictured are pro-Russian rebels preparing
arms for an assault on Ukrainian army positions in Donetsk airport
+16
A Pro-Russian rebel armed with a heavy machine gun prepares to attack Ukrainian troops at Donetsk airport
+16
Russian President Vladimir Putin,
center right, poses for a photo with athletes while attending the Judo
World Cup in the city of Chelyabinsk in Siberia, Russia, on Sunday.
Analysts said Putin wants to establish a 'frozen conflict' to
consolidate his gains in Ukraine
+16
A man shoots at targets depicting a portrait of Russian President Vladimir Putin in a shooting range in Lviv
+16
Figure of hate: A target depicting a portrait of Putin that's riddled with bullet holes
Ending
hostilities now would consolidate gains for pro-Moscow forces, which
the Kiev government say are simply a front for Vladimir Putin.
Russia
Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said Ukrainian forces must pull back
from positions from which they can hit civilian targets, and
negotiations taking place on Monday should seek an immediate ceasefire
in eastern Ukraine.
'They
must leave positions from which they can harm the civilian population,'
Lavrov told students in Moscow. 'I very much count on today's
negotiations being devoted above all to the task of agreeing an
immediate ceasefire, without conditions.'
He
also said that from Russia 'there will be no military intervention (in
Ukraine), we are for an exclusively peaceful resolution of that most
serious crisis, that tragedy'.
Russia Today
filmed the BBC's John Sweeney confronting Mr Putin directly about the
crisis. He asked him if he regretted the deaths in Ukraine.
Mr
Putin said: 'The current government in Ukraine does not want to conduct
political negotiations with the eastern regions of the country.
Political and essential negotiations.
'What was the purpose of the military actions in the east of the country? What provoked the reactions in the eastern regions?
'The
Ukrainian military encircled the big cities and villages. They were
shelling houses directly. The purpose of people in eastern regions is to
take them away from the villages and stop them shelling the villages.
This is what is being neglected in the Western countries.'
Analysts
said that Putin wants to establish a 'frozen conflict', which would
consolidate his gains in the region, giving him permanent strong
influence in Ukraine.
The
talks in the Belarussian capital Minsk will bring together
representatives of Russia, Ukraine, the OSCE security forum and
separatist rebels in eastern Ukraine.
Lavrov's call for a ceasefire came after Ukraine accused rebels of shelling a Navy patrol boat.
Two
seamen are missing after Sunday's separatist rebel artillery attack on a
patrol boat in the Sea of Azov, and eight seamen were rescued, a
Ukrainian border guard official said on Monday.
'The
cutter has sunk. We managed to save eight sailors, thanks to other
cutters coming to their rescue. Seven of them are injured or burned. Two
sailors have gone missing. We are continuing rescue operations,' the
official, Serhiy Astakhov, told Reuters.
'After
analysing the situation, we believe that this attack was from an
artillery system but we don't know yet where it was fired from,' he
said.
+16
Conflict: A map showing the military state of play in eastern Ukraine
+16
Analysts said that Putin wants to
establish a 'frozen conflict', which would consolidate his gains in the
region. Pictured are Ukrainian troops riding in an armoured vehicle in
the Donetsk region
Ukrainian
President Petro Poroshenko accused Russia on Monday of launching
'direct and open aggression' which he said had radically changed the
balance on the battlefield against Kiev in its fight against pro-Russian
separatists.
'Direct
and open aggression has been launched against Ukraine from a
neighbouring state. This has changed the situation in the zone of
conflict in a radical way,' he said in a speech at a military academy in
Kiev.
Ukrainian
troops and local residents were reinforcing the port of Mariupol on
Sunday, the next big city in the path of pro-Russian fighters who pushed
back government forces along the Azov Sea this past week in an
offensive on a new front.
Following
events last week in Ukraine there would be high-level personnel changes
in the Ukrainian armed forces, Poroshenko said.
Moscow
denies the presence of Russian tanks and troops in Ukraine, despite
what Nato and Western governments have said is overwhelming evidence to
the contrary.
+16
A volunteer helps dig trenches near a block post of the Ukrainian army to defend Mariupol from pro-Russian rebels
Lavrov
added that any new sanctions from the European Union or the United
States would force Russia to protect its economy, citizens and
businesses.
In
the case of new sanctions over the Ukraine crisis, he said, 'we will
first of all start from our own interests - protect our economy, protect
our social sphere, protect our businesses and at the same time draw
conclusions from the actions of our partners'.
Lavrov
played down Russia's exclusion from the Group of Eight over its
annexation of Ukraine's Crimea, saying the forum had lost much of its
significance since the formation of the wider G20.
Meanwhile,
lights went off temporarily overnight in most cities on the Crimean
peninsula, which Russia seized from Ukraine in March, with local leaders
accusing Kiev of sabotage.
+16
Ukrainian army servicemen repair an armoured vehicle at their position near Debaltseve, Donetsk region
Some
two-thirds of the normal electricity supply from Ukraine went off
around 1900GMT, Russian news agency Itar-Tass cited the local
electricity distributor as saying, plunging into darkness major cities
as Yalta and Sevastopol, the home of the Russian Black Sea Fleet.
Supplies
to the peninsula, which is dependent upon Ukraine for 80 per cent of
its electricity, were eventually restored, said energy distribution
company Crimenergo, but there was no explanation from Ukraine as to the
reason for the outage.
But Crimea's acting governor accused Kiev of using electricity as a weapon against the peninsula.
'It
is the latest act of sabotage by the Ukrainian authorities, this time
aimed at disrupting preparations for the schools' reopening for the
beginning of the school year,' Sergei Aksyonov was quoted as saying by
RIA-Novosti news agency.
No comment was immediately available from the Ukrainian authorities.
Ukraine says its military is riddled with Russian spies
Concern: Valeriy Heletey says that the Ukrainian army is riddled with Russian spies
With
pro-Russian forces making significant gains in Ukraine, Kiev's defence
minister has vowed to set up a SMERSH-style counter-intelligence agency
to stop Moscow's infiltration weakening his armed forces.
Amid
fears that the conflict could descend into full-scale war between the
two former Soviet states, Valeriy Heletey claimed that his army is now
engaged with Russian servicemen in both Donetsk and Lugansk regions.
The
pro-Kremlin forces - which Kiev insists are spearheaded by Vladimir
Putin's troops - have now seized control of Lugansk airport and are
strengthening around Novoazovsk in Donetsk region, they claim.
The claims come as Nato leaders prepare to meet in Wales for the alliance's toughest summit since the end of the Cold War.
With
his army in retreat, defence minister Heletey said he was setting up a
new counter-intelligence service based on Stalin's feared SMERSH -
'death to spies' - system established in the Red Army during World War
Two.
'Today
like never before, it is important to get rid of the Russian 'fifth
column' within the Ukrainian Armed Forces and Defence Ministry, and more
importantly, in the units and regiments engaged in the Anti-Terrorist
Operation,' he said.
The service 'will be somewhat similar to SMERSH and operate mainly on the front-line and in the military command bodies'.
It
would 'identify and destroy enemy agents' and 'uncover instances of the
non-fulfilment of military orders by commanders as well as instances of
desertion'.
+16
Ukrainian servicemen rest near their military equipment inside a military camp in the Donetsk region
The
special service will be 'directly subordinated to me', said Heletey, a
former policeman appointed by President Petro Poroshenko to crush rebels
in the east of Ukraine.
'Russian
troops appeared not only in Donetsk but also near Lugansk airport and
in other towns,' he told Ukrainian TV, admitting the task facing his
army - which is seeking military equipment from the US and EU countries
-'has become more difficult'.
This
was confirmed by both intelligence and other responsible services,
including eyewitnesses who have seen them in Donetsk', he alleged.
'Right
now we are already fighting not against the self-proclaimed republics -
DPR, DLR [Donetsk and Luhansk people's republics].
'We are fighting against Russia. The Kremlin decides what happens in Donbass, what to do next.'
He warned: 'Everything is decided in the Kremlin. We are holding talks with representatives of the Kremlin.'
He
claimed the Russian had plans to 'redraw the map' in the region,
including in the unofficial statelet of Transistria, a region of Moldova
bordering Ukraine to the west, which is entirely supported by Moscow.
While not acknowledging the presence of Russian troops, a rebel spokesman in Lugansk said:
'We
have managed to take the airport under our control. It is a very
important strategic point, we have been fighting for it for a long time
and now we have taken it.'
Concern
was high today over the fate of both Ukrainian forces and their Russian
captives amid Kiev claims that separatist forces including Russians
opened fire on a convoy of evacuees, breaking an agreement.
Borys
Filatov, a senior official in the Dnipropetrovsk regional state
administration, said: 'The Russians gave their word to let the people
evacuate. However, they started to shoot.'
Sources have put the number of dead at dozens or even hundreds, but there is so far no confirmation.
'Our convoy also had tens of wounded and captured Russian troopers. They also were killed,' said Filatov.
Poroshenko and his military commanders are seeking weapons and intelligence support from the West.
However, Ukraine is not a Nato member, and major Western countries have indicated they will not deploy troops on the ground.
HOW PUTIN'S 'STATEHOOD' GAMBIT RAISE THE STATES IN UKRAINE FOR KIEV
A
shift in President Vladimir Putin's language on the conflict in eastern
Ukraine reflects a transformation in the situation on the battlefield
and sounds a warning to Kiev to negotiate sooner rather than later.
Putin's
spokesman Dmitry Peskov was quick to tell journalists that the Kremlin
leader was not demanding independence for pro-Russian separatists when
he said on Sunday that talks should take place immediately 'on the
political organisation of society and statehood in southeastern
Ukraine'.
But
in the context of the separatist war in which the rebels have made
startling gains in the space of a week - with the help, Ukraine and its
Western allies say, of Russian tanks and troops - the formulation had an
ominous ring for Kiev.
It
was the first time that Putin had publicly talked about 'statehood' in
the eastern Russian-speaking regions where rebels are fighting to break
away from Ukraine, in a war that has killed some 2,600 people since
April.
The
implication was that if Ukraine fails to reach a quick settlement with
the rebels on 'federalisation', the term Moscow has previously used for
enhanced autonomy in the east, then it may find itself facing demands
for something much bigger.
'I
think it's a conscious or unconscious hint that the longer the
situation lasts, and the longer it takes Kiev to discuss it, the worse
the conditions will be,' said Fyodor Lukyanov, editor-in-chief of the
journal Russia in Global Affairs.
After
the past week's rebel advances, he said, 'I think as a minimum,
Ukrainian leaders are being given to understand by Moscow: whatever you
do, you will not win this war. Therefore it will either go on endlessly
or, as (Putin) said yesterday, substantive negotiations are needed.'
In
another significant shift in terminology, the name used by the rebels
for their eastern lands - Novorossiya, or New Russia - appears
increasingly to be part of Kremlin parlance.
Putin
first used the expression in April, calling it a Tsarist-era name for
territory that had historically been Russian but was incorporated, 'God
knows why', into Ukraine in the early years of Soviet power in the
1920s.
Ukrainians
consider the term deeply offensive and say it shows Moscow's imperial
ambition to wrest territory from their thousand-year-old state, which
has had shifting frontiers during centuries of dominance by Austria,
Poland, Lithuania and Russia.
Putin's
spokesman Peskov used the term again on Sunday, and the Kremlin website
on Aug. 29 published a message to the rebels entitled 'Russian
President Vladimir Putin has appealed to the militia of Novorossiya'.
GUESSING GAME
The
language coming from the Kremlin appears calculated to increase
pressure on Kiev, while keeping Ukraine and the West guessing about
Moscow's ultimate objective.
Russia
denies intervening in Ukraine militarily despite the protestations of
Europe and the United States, and in the face of overwhelming evidence
including satellite imagery, eyewitness reports and the capture of
Russian soldiers on the territory of its former Soviet neighbour.
What
is indisputable is that the separatists, in the space of a week, have
recovered from the brink of defeat, opening a new southern front and
breaking through to the coast of the Azov Sea, where they succeeded in
shelling a Ukrainian navy vessel from the shore on Sunday.
With
the rebels firmly back on the offensive, Putin may calculate he can
ease back on covert Russian military support and thereby avoid a
threatened new round of Western sanctions and a further escalation of
tension with NATO, which holds a summit in Wales this week.
As
if to emphasise that Russia can turn to powerful alternative partners
if further sanctions materialise, he presided on Monday over a ceremony
to mark the start of work on Gazprom's 4,000 km (2,500 mile) 'Power of
Siberia' pipeline, part of a $400 billion deal to supply Russian gas to
China for the next three decades.
Against
such an uncertain background - military, political and economic - Putin
himself has said in the past week there is no knowing how and when the
Ukraine crisis will be resolved.
Russia
has several models for the outcomes of 'frozen conflicts' that have
allowed it to keep leverage over neighbours since the Soviet Union broke
up.
Moscow
annexed Ukraine's Crimea peninsula in March. In other parts of the
former Soviet Union, Russian troops defend a breakaway region of Moldova
without recognising its independence, and safeguard two rebel regions
of Georgia that Moscow recognised after a brief war in 2008.
Some
analysts speculate Putin might settle for a solution in eastern Ukraine
that resembles Bosnia's Serb Republic - an entity formally within
Ukraine with sufficient power and autonomy to block Kiev from adopting
any course of action that Moscow opposes, in particular any attempt to
join NATO.
Lukyanov said Putin himself may not know the final objective.
'I
don't think there is any clear model, and the target is moving,' he
said. 'He doesn't have a strategic plan, but at each step he understands
what needs to be done.'
