The veiled threat behind Putin’s latest move against Britain

Vladimir Putin is escalating intimidation tactics against Britain in the diplomatic sphere as his war in Ukraine enters a deadly new phase. The Russian ambassador to the UK, Andrey Kelin, who had been the representative in London since 2019, was withdrawn from his post last month. Moscow has submitted no candidates to replace him and embassy staff reportedly have no knowledge of when his successor might be appointed. It is only the latest development in a relationship between London and Moscow that has already sunk close to rock-bottom. The new reports follow threats last week from Putin’s government of “consequences” in retaliation for Britain supplying drones to Ukraine that have been used to hit targets deep inside Russian territory. After news of the British drones emerged, the Russian embassy to the UK posted a statement from Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov, warning: “We have the right to regard the announced involvement of British forces in strikes against Russia as participation in the war, with all the consequences that entails.” A spokesman for the Russian embassy said Kelin had made “considerable efforts to preserve contacts and channels of communication” and accused the British government of choosing a “path of confrontation” with Moscow. He said the Kremlin had not yet put forward a replacement candidate and the embassy would be headed by the charge d’affairs in the meantime. Andrey Kelin served as Russia’s ambassador to the UK from 2019 until last month (Photo: Hasan Tosun/Anadolu Agency/Getty Images)* ‘The Russians are trying to spook us’ Two current ambassadors from Western allies in London, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the Russian withdrawal was aimed at putting pressure on the UK to scale back support to Ukraine. One ambassador told The i Paper the move was a “demonstrative step with an aim of getting some people in the UK to say that we are worried about losing some channels and we should scale back our support to Ukraine”. Another ambassador said: “It’s a commonly accepted diplomatic practice [and a] strong gesture to make the host country understand that they are very unhappy with government policy towards them. This always means a deteriorating relationship. In Russia’s case this might be pure optics since the relations level is anyway at the lowest point. It also could be just a temporary gap until the new one is appointed and sent over here.” “I think the Russians are trying to spook us,” said Edward Lucas, a writer and consultant specialising in European and transatlantic security and expert in Russian foreign and security policy. “We should see these threats as first and foremost a sort of psychological operation or mind game,” Lucas told The i Paper. “They’re trying to say, ‘don’t poke the bear, oh my goodness, the bear’s angry better not poke the bear again’. We’ve seen this many times since the start of the Ukraine war.” Instead of bowing to Russian pressure Britain and Nato partners should step up sanctions on Russian money and influence, said Lucas. ‘Loathsome’ Kelin’s withdrawal could permanently downgrade ties The former British defence attaché in Moscow John Foreman called Kelin “loathsome”, and wondered whether the delay in nominating a replacement as ambassador could “permanently downgrade” the relationship between the two nations. The Russian embassy in London responded to media reports about the gap in the appointment of an ambassador to the UK saying it rejected any implications that “Russia intends to downgrade diplomatic relations between our two countries”. Diplomatic relations between the UK and Russia have deteriorated over the course of the war with both countries reducing staffing in their respective embassies and expelling each other’s diplomats. But not having an ambassador in place is not unprecedented, and experts highlight longstanding procedures for countries with strained relations to talk to each other through more junior embassy staff or even through the United Nations. Ambassador Kelin has served in the Russian foreign service since the Soviet era and had been a staunch defender of Putin’s war in Ukraine, publicly rejecting findings linking Russian spies with the killing of the opposition leader Alexei Navalny in 2024 and the death of Dawn Sturgess in the Salisbury poison attack in 2018. The first ambassador who spoke to The i Paper was dismissive of Kelin’s impact in London during recent years. “I don’t think his withdrawal has any effect,” the ambassador said. “When was the last proper meeting he had with either a cabinet member or top civil servant in London, not counting the times he was reprimanded at the Foreign Office for some heinous Russian war crime?” John Lough, head of foreign policy at the New Eurasian Strategies Centre think-tank, agreed that Kelin’s time in London was ineffective in getting Moscow’s message across. “He was virtually invisible and was unable to put a message across. His successor will be expected to communicate better with UK audiences,” Lough told The i Paper. But any successor will have their work cut out to rebuild any sort of trust, said Lough. “An ambassador doesn’t make policy, their job is to implement it and report to Moscow on progress and opportunities. The Kremlin is happy for now to try to isolate the UK and to present it at home as Russia’s main enemy. So there is no scope for an ambassador to build relations.” The Russian frigate Admiral Grigorovich is monitored by the Royal Navy’s RFA Tideforce The Admiral Grigorovich reportedly fired warning shots at a UK-registered yacht in June, while sailing in the English Channel (Photo: MoD Crown Copyright via Getty Images) ‘Moscow is getting bolder on a monthly basis’ The diplomatic posturing and increasing threats come after a summer of heightened tensions at sea and in the air between London and Moscow, and as the Russian President comes under increasing pressure at home with ordinary Russians suffering as a result of long-range Ukrainian strikes on commercial and industrial infrastructure. In June a Russian warship fired shots at a British yacht in the English Channel days after Royal Marine commandos seized a sanctioned Russian oil tanker, and in July Royal Air Force fighter jets intercepted a Russian plane attempting to track the aircraft carrier HMS Prince of Wales. In the face of Russian warnings, Prime Minister Andy Burnham has said his government would keep supporting Ukraine “100 per cent”. Analysts argue that the UK and its partners need to challenge Russian intimidation. Lucas said: “The Russians are trying to intimidate us, and of course the best response to that is not to be intimidated. We should focus on the main thing, which is supporting Ukraine. And there’s plenty we could be doing on that as sanctions are still way, way below what they should be,” he explained. Keir Giles, associate fellow of the Russia and Eurasia programme at the think-tank Chatham House and author of Who Will Defend Europe?, took an even tougher line. “We’ve already seen a pattern of steady escalation of war-like actions against European countries from Russia, because there haven’t been adequate costs or consequences imposed on Russia in response,” Giles outlined when speaking to The i Paper. Giles said Britain and other members of Nato should be more assertive in pushing back against Putin’s intimidation tactics. “We see bolder and more aggressive actions from Moscow on a monthly basis and the longer you leave it to set boundaries for Russian hostile actions, the more dangerous it becomes.” Giles said we should stop using terminology such as “hybrid” or “grey-zone” tactics and be clearer about the nature of the threat Russia posed. “As long as Western governments say that what is happening is ‘hybrid’ or ‘sub- threshold’ or ‘grey zone’ or any of the other adjectives that are applied to warfare, that is a shortcut to saying, well, we don’t really know what to do about it. “These are hostile actions. These are warlike actions and it should be admitted what is happening. Deterring Russia from escalating further is what keeps the situation stable. It’s unstable precisely because there hasn’t been a concerted effort to demonstrate to Russia that this is a dangerous course of action that must stop.”