… As Reports say China deploys cruise missiles on South China Sea outposts

The UK will use a series of international summits this year to call for a comprehensive strategy to combat Russian disinformation and urge a rethink over traditional diplomatic dialogue with Moscow, following the Kremlin’s aggressive campaign of denials over the use of chemical weapons in the UK and Syria.

British diplomats plan to use four major summits this year – the G7, the G20, Nato and the European Union – to try to deepen the alliance against Russia hastily built by the Foreign Office after the poisoning of the former Russian double agent Sergei Skripal in Salisbury in March.

“The foreign secretary regards Russia’s response to Douma and Salisbury as a turning point and thinks there is international support to do more,” a Whitehall official said. “The areas the UK are most likely to pursue are countering Russian disinformation and finding a mechanism to enforce accountability for the use of chemical weapons.”

Former Foreign Office officials admit that an institutional reluctance to call out Russia once permeated British diplomatic thinking, but say that after the poisoning of Skripal and his daughter, Yulia, that attitude is evaporating.

A cross-party alliance in parliament has developed which sees the question of Russian corruption no longer through the prism of finance, but instead as a security and foreign policy threat, requiring fresh sanctions even if this causes short-term economic damage to the UK.

Ministers want to pursue a broad Russian containment strategy at the coming summits covering cybersecurity, Nato’s military posture, sanctions against Vladimir Putin’s oligarchs and a more comprehensive approach to Russian disinformation.

It is argued that votes by MPs this week over public registers of beneficial share ownership in Britain’s overseas territories and the introduction of Magnitsky-style sanctions belatedly gives the UK greater moral credibility to urge wavering countries to join an international alliance.

James Nixey, the head of the Russia and Eurasia programme at the thinktank Chatham House, said: “It’s hard to persuade even your closest allies to take tangible measures with impact if we’re not prepared to sacrifice some of the Russian investment in our own country and stick to a point of principle. Government statements on this have been either ambiguous or all over the place.”

In making its case to foreign ministries, the UK is arguing that Russian denials over Salisbury and Douma reveal a state uninterested in cooperating to reach a common understanding of the truth, but instead using both episodes to try systematically to divide western electorates and sow doubt.

Alicia Kearns, who ran the Foreign Office’s strategic counter-terrorism communications in Syria and Iraq, argues that Russia is seen as nearly unique in its willingness to conceal the truth.

“When we are dealing with most malign states or even terror groups, an element of truth is expected to increase the efficacy of their disinformation, but with Russia there is no commitment, or adherence, to the truth,” she told the Guardian. “For instance for the first 10 days that Russia was inside Syria, it insisted through a large propaganda campaign that its planes were only bombing Islamic State’s positions, and it was categorically not true.”

Russia’s critics say in case after case – the downing of Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 in 2014, the role of official Russian forces inside Ukraine, the murder of the former Russian spy Alexander Litvinenko on UK soil, the Syrian government’s repeated use of chemical weapons, the covert disruption in the western Balkans and repeated cyber-attacks – the west finds itself arguing with Russia not just about ideology, or interests, but Moscow’s simple denial, or questioning, of what the western governments perceive as unchallengeable facts.

In the meantime, China has installed cruise missiles and surface-to-air missile systems on three of its outposts in the disputed waters of the South China Sea, according to reports.

The US news network CNBC reported that the YJ-12B cruise missiles could target ships within a radius of 295 nautical miles and the HQ-9B long-range surface-to-air missiles could strike within 160 miles, citing sources with knowledge of US intelligence reports.

The move, if confirmed, would mark the first Chinese missile deployments in the Spratly islands, where several Asian countries including Vietnam and Taiwan have rival claims.

CNBC quoted unnamed sources as saying that according to US intelligence assessments, the missiles had been moved to Fiery Cross Reef, Subi Reef and Mischief Reef within the past 30 days.

China has made no mention of any missile deployments but says its military facilities in the Spratlys are purely defensive, and that it can do what it likes on its own territory.

Greg Poling, a South China Sea expert at Washington’s Center for Strategic and International Studies thinktank, said deploying missiles on the outposts would be important.

“These would be the first missiles in the Spratlys, either surface to air, or anti-ship,” he said.

He added that such deployments were expected as China built missile shelters on the reefs last year and already deployed such missile systems on Woody Island further to the north.

Poling said it would be another step on China’s road to dominating the South China Sea, a key global trade route.

“Before this, if you were one of the other claimants … you knew that China was monitoring your every move. Now you will know that you’re operating inside Chinese missile range. That’s a pretty strong, if implicit, threat,” he said.

Last month, US Admiral Philip Davidson, nominated to head US Pacific command, said China’s “forward operating bases” in the South China Sea appeared complete.

“The only thing lacking are the deployed forces,” he said. Once these were added, “China will be able to extend its influence thousands of miles to the south and project power deep into Oceania”.

The White House warned China would face “consequences” for its military buildup in contested waters.

“We’re well aware of China’s militarisation of the South China Sea,” said press secretary Sarah Sanders.

“We’ve raised concerns directly with the Chinese about this and there will be near-term and long-term consequences.”

Sanders did not say what the consequences would be.

Beijing reasserted its right to build “defence” facilities in the disputed region, but declined to confirm reports it had installed new missiles on artificial islands it had built.

Beijing sees the area as key to pushing its defenses beyond China’s coast and securing oil supply routes.

Washington and other western countries have insisted disputes must be settled legally and freedom of navigation be respected.

Guardian UK