Russian FSB guard attacked U.S. diplomat outside Moscow embassy

https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1484w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2016/06/28/Editorial-Opinion/Images/2013-05-14T151913Z_01_MOS44_RTRIDSP_3_RUSSIA-USA-DETENTION-1.jpg?uuid=Grjgtj2JEeaAvNBnEf0hJQ

In 2013, U.S. diplomat Ryan C. Fogel was briefly detained by the Russian security services and then ordered to leave the country . (Handout/Reuters)

 

In the early morning of June 6, a uniformed Russian Federal Security Service (FSB) guard stationed outside the U.S. Embassy in Moscow attacked and beat up a U.S. diplomat who was trying to enter the compound, according to four U.S. officials who were briefed on the incident.

This previously unreported attack occurred just steps from the entrance to the U.S. Embassy complex, which is located in the Presnensky District in Moscow’s city center. After being tackled by the FSB guard, the diplomat suffered a broken shoulder, among other injuries. He was eventually able to enter the embassy and was then flown out of Russia to receive urgent medical attention, administration officials confirmed to me. He remains outside of Russia.

The attack caused a diplomatic episode behind the scenes that has not surfaced until now. The State Department in Washington called in Russian Ambassador Sergey I. Kislyak to complain about the incident, an administration official said. Continue reading

Ankara’s move to Chinese air systems appals NATO allies

Ankara leans toward selecting Chinese long-range anti-missile and air defense systems while NATO allies look shocked by the possibility of the decision

Turkey’s western allies look puzzled by a looming decision by Ankara to select Chinese long-range anti-missile and air defense systems which they think cannot be integrated into the NATO-sponsored early warning architecture currently deployed on Turkish soil.

“That would certainly leave many of us speechless,” said one senior diplomat from a NATO country. “Turkey has every right to choose its own air defense system but we do not quite understand the logic of opting for a Chinese system with no interoperability with the existing [NATO] assets.” Continue reading