voice-over: this is bbc news. we'll have the headlines and all the main news stories for you at the top of the hour, straight after this programme. welcome to hardtalk. i'm stephen sackur. ina in a world awash with information and disinformation who and what can we trust, facts, data points, original open sources, all powerful weapons in this war and that is

why my guest today, christo grozev, bases his investigative journalism in digital detective work. he is the lead russian investigator for bellingcat and the cause of cereal embarrassment to the kremlin with his revelations about the poisoning of alexei navalny and other russian military and intelligence operations. he says he follows the facts wherever they lead but what is his motivation? christo grozev, in washington, dc, welcome to hardtalk. thank ou for dc, welcome to hardtalk. thank you for having —

dc, welcome to hardtalk. thank you for having me _ dc, welcome to hardtalk. thank you for having me on _ dc, welcome to hardtalk. thank you for having me on hardtalk. l you for having me on hardtalk. it is a pleasure. alexei navalny is famously described you once as just a bulgarian nerd with a laptop. since he said that, you become thejoint winner of an off guard, you are in the international limelight as an investigative journalist —— academy award. does this all make yourjob harder? hat make yourjob harder? not necessarily, _ make yourjob harder? not necessarily, i— make yourjob harder? not necessarily, i was - make yourjob harder? iirrt necessarily, i was oblivious of any attention before all of these awards and i'm oblivious of it now. i like to work from cafes so i get a lot more people approaching me for a selfie but that is about the only disruption.— selfie but that is about the only disruption. you to until recently were _ only disruption. you to until recently were based - only disruption. you to until recently were based in - only disruption. you to until l recently were based in vienna but you're talking to me from the united states. did you move away from vienna because you do not feel safe there? in away from vienna because you do not feel safe there?— not feel safe there? in fact, that is what _ not feel safe there? in fact, that is what happened, - not feel safe there? in fact, - that is what happened, although i didn't physically move away, i didn't physically move away, i was in the united states to

help promote the film, the documentary about alexei navalny and i was advised not to return to vienna at the beginning ofjanuary to return to vienna at the beginning of january because of serious and imminent concerns about my safety so fortunately i am stuck in the united states. ~ , ., i am stuck in the united states. , states. when you say stuck in the united — states. when you say stuck in the united states _ states. when you say stuck in the united states people - states. when you say stuck in the united states people be l the united states people be interested to know, because you are a figure spent a lot of time particularly focused on what russia is up to and it obviously is interesting to people where you are based. are you now officially based in the united states?— united states? well i don't know if it's _ united states? well i don't know if it's official - united states? well i don't know if it's official or - know if it's official or unofficial but i am spending 100% of my time in the united states. and that is sad because it is away from family and home but it doesn't matter where i work from, as i said i work from cafes and hotel lobbies so i can continue working from here regardless of where officially i am based. before we aet officially i am based. before we get into _ officially i am based. before we get into the _ officially i am based. before we get into the detail - officially i am based. before we get into the detail of - officially i am based. before we get into the detail of all| we get into the detail of all the different investigations in the different investigations in the work you have done looking

at russia and some of its covid operations and military operations, if we can let's get to the origin story of bellingcat. you with bellingcat. you with bellingcat. bellingcat really first emerged as an investigative force, looking at what was happening in the conflict in syria in the period around 2013— 2014. you focus your attention on russia. why are you with bellingcat and has bellingcat fundamentally shifted its main focus of attention?— shifted its main focus of attention? ~ , ., ., attention? well, you are right. the founder — attention? well, you are right. the founder of _ attention? well, you are right. the founder of bellingcat - attention? well, you are right. the founder of bellingcat eliot | the founder of bellingcat eliot higgins, he did start his blogging platform initially because of his acute interest in the details of open source investigations of the war in yemen and syria by 2014 when he formalised bellingcat as the bellingcat platform with this

particular name, i believe the first version of bellingcat looked at as bellingcat was a shooting down of mh—17 the malaysia airline in 2014. so there was attention by bellingcat proper by the warren ukraine from the official start of bellingcat. i was blogging independently at the same time covering the same topics are mostly interested in disinformation and the type of information and that was part of myjournalism background. of my journalism background. and of myjournalism background. and eliot higgins asked me to contribute a couple of articles for bellingcat, which i did and then i discovered more and more there was a wide gap in the understanding of what russia's, not only russia's, but in this case security services were doing internationally and only small snippets of this information is made public by intelligence services of the west but there is much much more that would be of interest and author in the interest of

public safely to be disclosed so i darted digging into that —— safety and that resulted in a long sequence of operations into the clandestine operations of russia. ., ~' of russia. right now i think it is fair to say _ of russia. right now i think it is fair to say your _ of russia. right now i think it is fair to say your key - of russia. right now i think it is fair to say your key focus . is fair to say your key focus is fair to say your key focus is to delve deeper into what is happening with russia's military operations in ukraine. why do you believe you can glean different and better information than the various investigation is from international courts on the ground investigating alleged war crimes?— ground investigating alleged warcrimes? , ., ., �* war crimes? first of all, we're not doing _ war crimes? first of all, we're not doing anything _ war crimes? first of all, we're not doing anything better. - war crimes? first of all, we're not doing anything better. wej not doing anything better. we doing things differently and to a different scale. i will talk about some of the things i personally do but also my colleagues have done at bellingcat from a particular bellingcat from a particular bellingcat that is only focused on gathering open source evidence and potential war crimes and we don't call them

that yet because i have to be qualified and research by an internationaljudicial body but we are calling them civilian harm incidents. that is a large—scale process of scraping data, validating particular photographs that may appear on twitter or telegram of facebook, preserving them in such a way that there is a chain of custody trail because thatis chain of custody trail because that is what future courts will want to have. many people are doing this sort of gathering evidence and compiling it and comparing brief but bellingcat has a tradition in testing judicially whether this evidence can hold up in court. and in particular we know how to preserve the chain of evidence, and that is what bellingcat is doing somewhat differently. bellingcat is doing somewhat differently-— differently. one fascinating exam - le differently. one fascinating example of— differently. one fascinating example of what _ differently. one fascinating example of what you - differently. one fascinating example of what you have l differently. one fascinating - example of what you have done, he spent a lot of time trying to identify the 30 or more military engineers, i think

they are described as, the people who are responsible for the launching of cruise missiles, some of which we know from verified reporting have hit civilian targets in ukraine. you have gone public identifying some of these military engineers. 0n identifying some of these military engineers. on what basis? you tell me exactly how confident we can be in your evidence. confident we can be in your evidence-— confident we can be in your evidence. �* ., , ., , evidence. again, we try to be transoarent — evidence. again, we try to be transparent in _ evidence. again, we try to be transparent in what _ evidence. again, we try to be transparent in what we - evidence. again, we try to be transparent in what we know| transparent in what we know what we do not know. in this particular case was started by using a mathematical model of correlations to try to find out if any particular entity in the ministry of defence makes particular communication, has particular communication, has particular communication, has particular communication peaks at the time of hits by the cruise missiles, the so—called position cruise missiles by russia. that gave us some initial hypothesis of who this unit may be. furthermore, the

people that had worked in this unit had particular training for missile and rocket engineering at universities in russia with a military focus. then what we did is we got, i got, a lot of the phone records, the meta data of some of the key people in this unit and we found that they were communicating with one another, particularly on the eve of very massive strikes on ukrainian infrastructure and some hospitals and kindergartens were also hit along the way. and then essentially i confirmed that all of these people, one by one, and i have to say first of all i confronted and they did not even denied that's what they do but he said he was not authorised to the answers to the questions i'm asking. it was relatively traditional journalism except it started with a data point and

hypothesis based on mathematics.- hypothesis based on mathematics. what is fascinating _ mathematics. what is fascinating about - mathematics. what is fascinating about thatj mathematics. what is - fascinating about that stories you rely so heavily on the deepest of deep dives into the electronic trails and the data trails. are you of a mind to say that today when so many of us are sceptical about so much information we receive because it cannot always verify it, are you saying you believed in data more than human intelligence? do you think the data dominates all now? ~ .. do you think the data dominates all now? ~ ~ ., ., all now? well, i think data should be _ all now? well, i think data should be taken _ all now? well, i think data should be taken seriously| all now? well, i think data i should be taken seriously and it wasn't always taken seriously byjournalism as a profession. i think there is room for traditional journalism that is. based but also room for independent database journalism. what i like about data is that you do not have sources who have a bias, all have may be a conspiratorial view of their surroundings. data cannot mislead you, well

it can if you misinterpreted it, but it cannot consciously lead you down a rabbit whole. right, right, but also christo grozev you have said at times over recent months that you have deep sources inside the russian security services. i am a little confused. i.e. using human intelligence or not? human intel is a useful way of providing context for the puzzle because you are building the puzzle based on data, bits and pieces and then sometimes you don't understand why something happens and then it is very useful to rely on forces that you can trust. but i would never start an investigation based on a tip from a source just because of the biased. from a source 'ust because of the biased.— the biased. typically, do you ritht the biased. typically, do you right now — the biased. typically, do you right now as _ the biased. typically, do you right now as we _ the biased. typically, do you right now as we speak - the biased. typically, do you right now as we speak to - the biased. typically, do you. right now as we speak to each other, have several sources, for example, inside the fsb or maybe inside the wagner private military cooperation who you are talking to about what is happening on the ground? i have

been open _ happening on the ground? i have been open on — happening on the ground? i have been open on social— happening on the ground? i have been open on social media - happening on the ground? i have been open on social media that l been open on social media that i do have sources in wagner and this is a result of previous investigations right to contact many and talking relationship met late at night where we may be on different sides of this particular wall but sometimes there is a reason for them to share and overshadow.- share and overshadow. let's talk about — share and overshadow. let's talk about another _ share and overshadow. let's talk about another method l share and overshadow. let's talk about another method and thatis talk about another method and that is a controversial one and that is a controversial one and thatis that is a controversial one and that is making payments to third parties, to acquire information which violates russian privacy laws which you know have been acquired illegally. you are paying for an illegal product, aren't you? do you have any qualms about that? ., �* , , ., ~ that? yeah, let's first make something _ that? yeah, let's first make something clear, _ that? yeah, let's first make something clear, that - something clear, that bellingcat has never paid for that product. i'm a volunteer for bellingcat and i have been for bellingcat and i have been for most of the time that i paid out of my own pocket and i have set my own boundaries and rules about when that is acceptable. they are very

strict. 0ne acceptable. they are very strict. one of the things that must happen before i decide to pay for data, is lame, i must have a strong supported hypothesis that there is a government perpetrated crime that i am investigating and it's notjust any crime but a government mandated crime... that is a suspicion, a hunch because the whole point is you are conducting an investigation. you are essentially, some would say very arrogantly, assuming the right to violate the law in pursuit of your journalistic investigation and you are doing it in a way that violates personal prophecies. you access everything from flight manifests, to driver license details, from individuals, i dare say even health records of individuals in russia because the truth is in russia all of it is for sale if you have enough money. but there is an ethical problem here because surely, those on different sides of the ideological fence from you can say look at

christo grozev, he is idolised in the west as this investigative journalist of the highest moral standing. he basically does the stuff we are going to do it as well!- going to do it as well! again, i'm transparent _ going to do it as well! again, i'm transparent about what l going to do it as well! again, i'm transparent about what i | i'm transparent about what i do. i have never misled the audience about how i do it and i'm also open about my standards and when i do it and have to have a strong hypothesis based on open sourced data, publicly available data, that there is a government crime that would otherwise remain uninvestigated unless he crossed the boundary and getting government data that would never share it with law enforcement. it's a gap in the legal system i'm trying to bridge in this way. it was contested in court in germany when a german court looked at my data in the case of the assassination of an asylum seeker in germany in 2019 and the court said, considered whether the breach of privacy laws is overridden by the public interest and the court decided, yes, there is no problem, no conflict here. there is a privacy law and

there is an overriding public interest when you talk about government mandated legislation. we talk about government mandated assassinations.- government mandated assassinations. ., ., ., assassinations. how far do you believe the _ assassinations. how far do you believe the overriding - assassinations. how far do you believe the overriding interest| believe the overriding interest will lay and allow you to take. for example, would you and your team undertake hacking yourselves?— team undertake hacking ourselves? t, �* t, yourselves? no. again, there would be _ yourselves? no. again, there would be the _ yourselves? no. again, there would be the exceptional - yourselves? no. again, there| would be the exceptional case when the hack would be on a fake identity email account when this person does not exist, it's a spy. this maybe sort of a borderline case but we would never actively start hacking any personal email acts —— accounts. hacking any personal email acts -- accounts-— -- accounts. you have never hacked in — -- accounts. you have never hacked in na _ -- accounts. you have never hacked in na way. _ -- accounts. you have never hacked in na way. we - -- accounts. you have never hacked in na way. we have l -- accounts. you have never- hacked in na way. we have used hacked in na way. we have used hacked material— hacked in na way. we have used hacked material and _ hacked in na way. we have used hacked material and pre-hacked hacked material and pre—hacked and made publicly available to us and otherjournalists but we have not hacked ourselves, and certainly bellingcat hadn't. at, certainly bellingcat hadn't. a final thought on this sort of digital detective work. what we live in right now is an era where ai, artificial intelligence, is hang —— changing many of the rules and changing many of the rules and changing the game in a sense

when it comes to digital capacities. there's also, of course, the rise of deep fakes, and we know that some of the stuff we see online on our social media platforms, which looks extremely convincing and compelling, is nothing but fake material. are you sure that with your focus on electronic investigative journalism, you are not going to enter a world where you are going to be increasingly at risk of being deceived?— increasingly at risk of being deceived? ., ., , , , deceived? no, absolutely, but this has always _ deceived? no, absolutely, but this has always been - deceived? no, absolutely, but this has always been a - deceived? no, absolutely, but| this has always been a problem with data because data can be just as false as words. and that's why you have to apply a particular trait in obtaining data. the source of the data should never know who you are, why you're looking for this particular data and you have to match it both horizontally and vertically, horizontally with other sources of data that corroborate this. and vertically, with previous

released data. so we have to see the same person in a database that was leaked in 2008 as you find it in current data otherwise this person was just added or invented or deleted — 2018. just added or invented or deleted - 2018.— just added or invented or deleted - 2018. you've been declared _ deleted - 2018. you've been declared by _ deleted - 2018. you've been declared by now— deleted - 2018. you've been declared by now as - deleted - 2018. you've been declared by now as a - deleted - 2018. you've beenj declared by now as a wanted man. and they, in essence, paint you as a puppet and a stooge of the west. would you acknowledge that and bellingcat over the years have made some decisions, particularly about where you take money from, that actually play into that russian narrative?— narrative? well, i mean, bellingcat _ narrative? well, i mean, bellingcat has _ narrative? well, i mean, bellingcat has been - narrative? well, i mean, - bellingcat has been primarily funded through — about 30% of fees that are charged of people that bellingcat trains and the rest is donations, and the donations at this point in time and for the last couple of years have been only from private foundations and private... private foundations and private. . ._ private foundations and private. . . private... yes. that's an important _ private... yes. that's an important little - private... yes. that's an important little caveat i private... yes. that's an l important little caveat you just made. you have received over the years significant

funding from the national endowment from democracy in washington dc which is pretty much funded by the us congress, by federal government money. i know you've stopped taking that money now but would you acknowledge it was a mistake from the very get go to take that us federal money? i would not see that _ that us federal money? i would not see that as _ that us federal money? i would not see that as a _ that us federal money? i would not see that as a mistake. - that us federal money? i would not see that as a mistake. i - not see that as a mistake. i was not in any executive position at the time, but i still think taking money from any deed to provide countries to countries where otherwise journalists would remain untrained in open—source investigations, as long as you have internal rules that make you independent from any funder, which bellingcat does have,is funder, which bellingcat does have, is not an ethical dilemma at all. , ., have, is not an ethical dilemma at all. ,, _ have, is not an ethical dilemma atall. �* at all. -- you say you're independent. _ at all. -- you say you're independent. i- at all. -- you say you're independent. i know - at all. -- you say you're i independent. i know you're at all. -- you say you're - independent. i know you're not the boss of bellingcat but why does bellingcat still take money from the european union, for example? the money from the european union, for example?— money from the european union, for example? the european union foundations _ for example? the european union foundations are _ for example? the european union foundations are very _ foundations are very transparent about how they fund. they have auctions, they

have procedures and bellingcat participates in those, and again — i mean, it's a transparent organisation which has its own annual report. there is extremely granular. it shows where money comes from and how it is spent. as long as you don't have any —— have any problem with saying, "i will investigate my funders and nothing can stop me from that", then i don't see an ethical problem. then i don't see an ethical problem-— then i don't see an ethical problem. cia officials have been quoted _ problem. cia officials have been quoted in _ problem. cia officials have been quoted in the - problem. cia officials have been quoted in the press l problem. cia officials havel been quoted in the press as saying they absolute love what you do. it was organise the to read the comments of a british foreign office official, tom burge, who said that "bellingcat can, when it conducts its investigations, basically come up with information that governments want out there but would never want out there but would never want to sign up and to" and tom says "unaffiliated analysts are harder to smear". is there a sort of symbiotic relationship

between you and the ciaa —— cia, mi6 in the uk? between you and the ciaa -- cm, mig in the uk?- between you and the ciaa -- cia, m16 in the uk? cia, mi6 in the uk? well, it's u- cia, m16 in the uk? well, it's u- for cm, mig in the uk? well, it's up for them _ cia, mi6 in the uk? well, it's up for them to _ cia, mi6 in the uk? well, it's up for them to answer- cia, m16 in the uk? well, it's up for them to answer this i up for them to answer this question? some have opined, but i know of the exact opposite where intelligence services including m15 or 6 have been very unhappy at the pace with which we discover things and make them public because they would prefer in many cases to keep things off of the public view, in particular also with the skripal investigations. we were, i believe, iad both m15 and mi6 in discovering many of the members of the team that was after the assassination of the skripals. we made everything public and we must have embarrassed them, some people, at intelligence services. so i'm not sure they're always happy with the fact that we have been very open and publish things as soon as we find them. it’s open and publish things as soon as we find them.— as we find them. it's 'ust that hetthgeet-s * as we find them. it's 'ust that bellingcat's motto, _ as we find them. it's 'ust that bellingcat's motto, lb as we find them. it'sjust that bellingcat's motto, i checked| bellingcat's motto, i checked back to the early days with eliot higgins, the megawatt

faux was idea verify and amplify. it's interesting but... the organisation does so much work deep dive investigations into what russia is up to, covert intelligence, its military operations. you do so little on what the united states might be doing, for example, covertly in latin america or what is —— what israel might be doing with its intelligence and secret services. saudi arabia in yemen. why do you focus so much of your time, staff, energy on russia? , ., ., ., ., russia? first of all, all of the alternative _ russia? first of all, all of the alternative topics - russia? first of all, all of the alternative topics you russia? first of all, all of- the alternative topics you have just mentioned have been covered and addressed. barely, mr grozev- _ covered and addressed. barely, mr grozev. it _ covered and addressed. barely, mr grozev. it was _ covered and addressed. barely, mr grozev. it was a _ covered and addressed. barely, mr grozev. it was a matter - covered and addressed. barely, mr grozev. it was a matter of i mr grozev. it was a matter of personal choice of the investigators. this is an organisation that gives independence to its researchers and there's two factors at play here. one is the personal interest of the researchers and, second, the fact that you might consider that a lot of

the crime today, cross national, government—mandated crime does come from a couple of bad actors that don't lap to be the united states this year or decade. a lot of people watching this might wonder whether that element, absolute focus on russias —— is justified and why shh it that so many of your staff have permit interests, which is all about investigating putin and russia rather than anything else? ~ ., ., russia rather than anything else? . ., ., �* , russia rather than anything else? . . ., �*, ., else? well, again it's a function _ else? well, again it's a function of _ else? well, again it's a function of our - else? well, again it's a - function of our backgrounds. i myself worked in russia. i love russia. i have spent enough time to believe that i understand russian sources and russian information space, and that's what i do. i've been very successful in making interesting investigations. but again a lot of my colleagues focus on their passion and that includes what israel is doing with human rights and we have published some very, very unpleasant investigations for the israeli establishment. we

have published investigations into far—right groups operating into far—right groups operating in ukraine. many people in ukraine are very unhappy with bell for that. so you don't please everybody. at, bell for that. so you don't please everybody.- please everybody. a final thought- _ please everybody. a final thought. as _ please everybody. a final thought. as a _ please everybody. a final thought. as a journalist l please everybody. a final thought. as a journalist i | please everybody. a final - thought. as a journalist i find fascinating your work and your attempt to provide a different level of information to the general public, and it's all about data and it's all about detective work on an electronic level. but, it seems in recent months you've covered a lot of your analysis with opinion. for example, just recently you opined a bomb attack which killed a person in st petersburg was, you said, aimed at "a legitimate target". if you're seeking the that comes with data—driven analysis, why are you indullabling in so much opinion? i are you indullabling in so much o-inion? .. �* are you indullabling in so much otinion? .. �* , opinion? i think i've being misquoted _ opinion? i think i've being misquoted here _ opinion? i think i've being misquoted here because l opinion? i think i've being i misquoted here because that opinion? i think i've being - misquoted here because that was an, analytical opinion. iwas trying to prove that ukraine might have been behind this

because the prevailing opinion of experts on this day was this could not have been a ukrainian operation because they had no motive. i described analytically in my opinion ukraine would have considered that a legislate target because it's not simply a journalist but an illegal fighter from their point of view therefore ukraine might have been behind this attempt or assassination. grozev we have run out of time sadly but i really appreciate your time. thank you very much for being on hardtalk. hello there. stormy weather is expected to continue through tonight and into wednesday. and that's because we've got

this powerfuljet stream up above that weather system, developing it very rapidly in the past 24 hours, giving those severe gales, unusually windy weather, a lot of rain to go with it. it means the conditions on the roads have been pretty atrocious. and now, we've got cold airtucking in, around that low pressure across scotland, so turning progressively to snow, several centimetres over the hills here and even the showers further south following the rain band could be a little bit wintry. it's certainly going to be a chilly end to the night under the clearer skies further south, within a degree or two of freezing. but really, that's not the story. the story is these powerful winds once again battering many western and southern areas during the day. we're expecting gusts up to, if not above, 70 miles an hour, which will cause disruption, bringing down the odd tree. 50 miles an hour inland is really quite unusual. and, given that it's already been very windy through tuesday, we're going to see some very large waves around the south—west approaches, through the channel,

into the english channel as well. and that could overtop the coastlines as well. so, some dangerous conditions. it also looks on that north—westerly to be a very windy end to the morning, start to the afternoon, across northern ireland. and we will keep very strong winds around that band of rain across the northern isles. so nowhere really exempt. and there'll be a lot of showers after the bright start. those showers rattling in really quite cloudy and wet for much of the day. potentially northern ireland, northern and western scotland. still that snow risk on the hills. perhaps as high as 12 in the south. but really we will notice a cooler feel, those showers rushing in, becoming frequent with hail and with thunder and still around into thursday, but fewer in number potentially. that low pressure is with us in the north sea. it stays put actually through thursday into friday. but you can already see friday's rain is due in. some uncertainty on that. but temperatures might recover just a little bit more on thursday, given a bit more sunshine. but it might be then that as we go into friday, we get the next area of low pressure pushing more rain in, with some fairly strong winds.

it doesn't look as windy as the current stormy conditions. and perhaps starting to settle down as we get into the latter part of the weekend. and in fact, next week, there's the hint that we might see the first 20, 21 of the year. but between now and then, a lot of nasty weather to come.

me $z/star me tfeed. live from london, this is bbc news. i'm sally bundock with the headlines. at least 50 people are killed in central myanmar after an air strike by the military. president biden arrives in belfast to mark the 25th anniversary of the historic good friday peace agreement. the pentagon says it's taking the leak of classified us documents about the war in ukraine extremely seriously. we will continue to investigate and turn over every rock until we find the source of this and the extent of it. and a pair of trainers worn by the us basketball superstar, michaeljordan, sells at auction, for a record, $2.2 million.