Monday, July 21, 2014

Why Putin's Russian Allies Downed An Airliner Over Ukraine

By Douglas V. Gibbs

In the heat of war between Russia and Ukraine, a Malaysia Airlines flight on its way to Amsterdam traveled near the border between the warring nations.  298 souls were on board the flight when the plane suddenly fell from the sky, allegedly shot down by Russian Rebels, with Russian anti-air missiles, in Ukraine.

The dead rained from the sky, all of them falling in terror to the ground. . . a group of victims that included 23 Americans.

Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko said Ukraine's military was not responsible for the reported attack, which he called an “act of terror."

"We do not exclude that this plane was shot down, and we stress that the Armed Forces of Ukraine did not take action against any airborne targets," Poroshenko said, according to the Associated Press. "We are sure that those who are guilty in this tragedy will be held responsible."

The falling aircraft slammed into the Earth near a village called Hrabovo in the Donetsk region, an area that has seen recent clashes between Ukrainian forces and pro-Russia separatist rebels.

Russian government officials have challenged the accusation that Putin's administration had anything to do with the downing of the flight.  Russia's Defense Ministry has asked the United States for assistance in proving Russia's innocence by producing satellite images of the tragedy - since a U.S. satellite just so happened to be monitoring the area at the time.

U.S. sources declare that they have satellite images that confirm the missile that struck the airliner was launched by the rebels loyal to Russia.  The images have not been revealed as of yet.

Russia asserts that the plane was not knocked out of the sky by a Russian missile.  According to Russian officials, a Ukrainian fighter jet tracked the airliner, even though Ukrainian officials have insisted there were no military aircraft nearby.

As for the accusation that Russian separatists used an SA-11 Buk anti-aircraft missile system, known as "Gadfly" in NATO, which had been supplied to the rebels by the Russian government, Russian officials have denied supplying the Russian Rebels in Ukraine with anti-aircraft missile systems, much less any other weapons.

Vladimir Putin has insisted, in light of the propaganda war that has emerged during the fighting between Ukraine and Russian rebels, that the destruction of the Malaysian airliner not be used for political ends.

At a presentation by Russian officials, the officers revealed that the Malaysian airliner was one of three civilian aircraft in the skies over eastern Ukraine at the time.

Putin stated that it is time for Ukraine to take responsibility for its actions, while Andriy Lysenko, a spokesman for the Ukraine Security Council has continually asserted, "There is evidence that the missile which struck the plane was fired by terrorists, who received arms and specialists from the Russian Federation."

As for the bodies of the dead, clean-up has been a grisly undertaking. The bodies of almost 200 of the victims of the MH17 plane disaster were seen decaying for a fourth day in a refrigerated train.
 Since the bodies of all of the 298 victims fell from 33,000 feet after their plane was struck by a surface-to-air missile, they were left in the open in sweltering heat for three days before being gathered up in bags, bundled on to trucks and driven away.

There have been some accusations that the rebels are holding up the return of the bodies to their homes unnecessarily.

The United States insists that evidence supports the claim that the airliner was down by Russian missiles used by the rebels siding with Russia in Ukraine.  President Barack Obama says that world opinion is on the side of the United States in regards to their assessment.  Secretary of State John Kerry cited the downing of the Malaysian airliner as all the more reason for countries in Europe to join the United States in expanding sanctions against Russia, even at some peril to their own economies, in order to further fuel an effort to break Putin’s support for pro-Russian Ukrainian separatists.

“We are trying to encourage our European friends to realize this is a wake-up call,” Kerry said on “Fox News Sunday,” invoking a phrase used last week by Obama.
Previously resistant members, such as Italy, are shifting in the direction of supporting sanctions.

Though U.S. officials see Russian refusal to cooperate as a losing battle for Putin, it is clear that Putin has his own ideas regarding options of defiance, including sending Russian forces into eastern Ukraine, as he did in Crimea; reducing natural gas supplies to Europe; and undermining international negotiations seeking to curtail Iran’s nuclear program.

But why would anyone shoot down the airliner in the first place, and why would that flight consider being near the region in the first place?

Though the conflict is not a declared war, and without a formal declaration of war the airspace remains open, it is baffling that any flight of any kind would fly over the area.  Surely, news of the conflict is known worldwide, and surely it is understood that presence in the region could in turn pose a danger to any flights.

As for the finger pointing, Russians see Ukraine's fingerprints all over the tragedy, while the more popular belief of Russian supported rebels using Russian anti-aircraft systems shooting down the flight is held by The West.  According to Samantha Power, President Obama’s ambassador to the United Nations, the White House has not ruled out technical assistance by Russian personnel.

Did Russia have a motive for shooting down the airliner?  Did Ukraine have a motive?  Could it be that the rebels did in fact shoot down the airliner, without fully understanding that it was not a Ukrainian war plane, and without any influence or assistance from the Russian government?

If the Ukrainian government was able to shoot down the plane, and was able to point the blame for the incident on Russia, it would be a valuable tool in gaining international support for their battle against the separatists.

If the Separatists were able to shoot down the plane, and got the blame for the incident to be placed upon Ukraine, it would be a valuable tool in gaining international support for their battle against Ukrainian forces.

But what about Russia?  What would be a motive for them?  They have already been painted as the aggressor, and the agitator, in the battle for eastern Ukraine.  Regardless of who, or how, the plane was shot down, the fact that Putin is involved in the first place in the region would immediately be considered as among the reasons for the downing of the flight.  In other words, no matter who shot down the airliner, Russia would receive some of the blame.  How could that be good?

The premise from which we ask these questions are not exactly in line with what is going on.  As Americans, we tend to view these situations with American eyes.  We operate from a position of believing that Putin wants international approval, or that he is worried about the world perceiving him as a bad guy.  We forget who he is, and what we are dealing with.

Vladimir Putin is an old hardliner from the days of the Soviet Union.  It is all about muscle, the perception of fear and power, and underhanded techniques... if necessary.

Putin does not care if the White House is asserting that he is guilty because the weapons are Russian, and somehow made their way to rebels in Ukraine loyal to Moscow.  It doesn't even matter to him if international opinion believes he had control of those weapons once they got into the hands of the separatists.  None of that is his concern.

It is outrageous that any airline would dare fly over a known war zone.  It is unthinkable to believe that the officials at Malaysia Airlines did not consider that losing yet another flight while the world is watching was possible.  The plane was a target, and it being shot down was a likely consequence for flying over a known political hot zone.

Was Vladimir Putin glad this happened, or did his rebels see it as an opportunity to create an international political firestorm that brought the world on the brink of a world war?

A plane flew over a battle zone near the Russia-Ukraine border.  Separatists, loyal to Moscow, using Russian anti-aircraft missile systems delivered to them by Russia, surely with the blessing of Vladimir Putin, observed that an unknown aircraft was flying over their area.  It could be a bomber, or Ukraine fighter jet, as far as the rebels were concerned.  Better safe than sorry, so they shot the plane out of the sky, with or without assistance by Russian technicians.  There was no political forethought, nor an attempt to create a political firestorm.  The incident happened, and now fingers are being pointed.

The rebels shot the plane out of the sky for no other reason than that they are in a war, and believed it could be a hostile intruder.

I am not letting the rebels off the hook, or letting Putin off the hook, for that matter.  I am just laying out what happened.  The political earthquake that is happening afterward, however, is being taken totally out of context.

Putin is responding to the accusations, and he is trying to take a stronger position in order to make President Barack Obama look foolish.  The Russian president knows he has nothing to worry about.  The Democrats do not believe in peace through strength.  The West will threaten sanctions, and Putin will push a little harder.  The West will threaten action that will never transpire, and Putin will push a little harder.  The West will send ambassadors to Russia, asking for an agreement for "peace in our time," and Putin will comply, then renege on it, and push a little harder.  The old communist hardliner is not worried about retaliation from his enemies, and he is not worried about who gets blamed for what happened to the Malaysian airliner flying over Ukraine.  Putin views this all as a chess game, and while Barack Obama, and the other international leftists, move pawns around in a defensive manner in the hopes of keeping the Russians on their side of the game board, Putin is maneuvering his knights, bishops and queen so that if the opportunity arises, he can strike quickly.

In the end, this is a game to Putin, and he believes he has the upper hand.
at

No comments:

Post a Comment