Thread by @benimmo

I mentioned the Kremlin's standard response technique of dismiss, distort, distract, dismay.

Quite a few of the elements are here, in the latest Russian MFA responses to the OPCW / GRU hacking story.

mid.ru/en/foreign_pol…

Dismiss: insult the critics. Plenty of that in the statement.

"Anti-Russian spy mania."
"Strong paranoia." (Not just "paranoia", you'll note.)
"Absurd anti-Russian attacks."

Interestingly, they didn't use the word "Russophobia" in this one, though it's been the bulwark of Kremlin defences since 2014.

Distort: there's the claim that "any Russian citizen with a mobile device is perceived to be a spy."

Actually, the accusation was that they had a car boot full of hacking gear.

Distorting the accusation makes it a lot easier to attack.

There's also the snarky, "as if it is necessary to be near the target of an attack to get it."

Which ignores the point, per the US indictment, that the on-the-spot hacking was attempted when remote hacking failed.

(Source: justice.gov/opa/pr/us-char…)

There's less distraction in the Ministry statements than I would have expected.

Lots of pro-Kremlin trolls have taken the line, "but the NSA," though.

Even one gem on chemical attacks, too.

Finally, Deputy Foreign Minister Ryabkov came out with this startling mention of "nuclear powers" and a "dangerous path."

The nuclear reference seems pretty egregious in a discussion on hacking. Dismaying tactic?

Source: mid.ru/en/foreign_pol…