Forum: politics.stackexchange.com
Tags: <russian-federation><espionage><assassinations><gru>
Title: What would the Kremlin stand to gain from killing the ex-spy Sergey Skripal?
Question: What would the Kremlin stand to gain from assassinating the ex-spy  Sergey Skripal , now critically ill after being  poisoned on  March 4th 2018  with a nerve agent ?

Answers:
sents: text: Skripal was a double-agent who used to work for the Russian secret service GRU but defected to the UK intelligence service MI6.
text: He was arrested by the Russians in 2004.
text: In 2010, he was officially pardoned and exiled to the UK as part of a prisoners exchange.
text: So he is unlikely to still possess any not yet revealed intelligence which still has any value.
text: Still, assassinating him sends a clear message to any other would-be defectors in the Russian secret services: "Do not defect!
text: Other countries can not protect you from us.
text: Even if you somehow manage to get an official pardon, we will still be out there to get you.
text: And we will also get your family."
answer_details: author: politics.stackexchange.com/users/3135/Philipp
score: 102
sents: text: In addition to @Philipp's answer: Poisoned Russian spy Sergei Skripal was close to {an unnamed} consultant who was linked to the Trump dossier —
text: The Telegraph
text: If the above allegation is true, it could be that Skripal was somehow related to the Collusion, and the poisoning of him could be just a revenge for his betrayal.
text: Since the recent events are developing rapidly, we probably can't answer a single reason .
text: It can also be a combination of several factors.
answer_details: author: politics.stackexchange.com/users/2984/bytebuster for Long Usernames
score: 44
sents: text: I have the feeling Russia has more to lose than to gain.
text: After deploying an obvious trace by using a chemical weapon, it faces penalties by the EU, approved by the USA and further separation from the west (which the USA pushed since years).
text: On the "what Russia gains" side we have a demonstration of power, by elimination of an insignificant spy.
text: Maybe there is also some deterrence in case other spies decide to change the sides.
text: However, deterrence can be achieved with more subtile ways too.
answer_details: author: politics.stackexchange.com/users/None/
score: 8
sents: text: While all the secrets he knew about would already have been transferred in 2010, he would still pose a potential danger via his personal relationships with his former colleagues and their family members and friends.
text: While this is pure speculation, it is possible that Mi6 had tried to use Skripal to recruit new spies and that the Russians had found that out.
answer_details: author: politics.stackexchange.com/users/4235/Count Iblis
score: 3
sents: text: Russia gains nothing.
text: Whatever knowledge the spy had, has been transferred by now.
text: "Sending a message to potential defectors" is not needed at all.
text: A potential defector would be well informed enough - just by being a spy - to know that no place in the world is safe (the Mossad proved that long ago when going after Nazis all over the world).
text: The fact that many defectors don't even try to hide their whereabouts after a couple of years is evidence that defectors know they will never be safe.
text: On the other hand, various anti-Russia groups gain something by this poisoning: being able to point fingers at Russia.
answer_details: author: politics.stackexchange.com/users/8912/Sjoerd
score: 1

Summary of the answers:
Russia may have more to lose than to gain.
Russia will have more to lose than gain.