Air Terrorism in Russia’s “Hybrid” Policy

Yuriy Radkovets

In March this year the European High Level Working Group submitted to the European Commission (the actual EU government) a new report on the risks of civilian aircraft flying over the areas of armed conflicts.

The document is based on the experience of the tragic events of the disaster of the Malaysia Airlines Flight MH 17 Boeing 777-200 passenger plane, which was shot down July 17, 2014 by the Russian Armed Forces’ anti-aircraft missile system (SAM) “Buk” in Ukraine’s airspace over the occupied Donbas.

 the Malaysia Airlines Flight MH 17 Boeing 777-200The plane was flying from Amsterdam-Schiphol Airport (Netherlands) to Kuala Lumpur (Malaysia). There were 283 passengers and 15 crewmembers on board. Not a single person survived, and the dead’s things were plundered by looters from among Russian terrorists, mercenaries and their local collaborators.

The results of the investigation of the tragedy by the Security Council of the Netherlands were published October 13, 2015 and fully expose the Russian Federation as the obvious culprit of the inhuman act of air terrorism. Despite Russia’s attempts to shift the responsibility to Ukraine (including by putting forward a version that the MN 17 was shot down by a Ukrainian SU-25), the document clearly confirms the destruction of the aircraft by the Russian missile SAM “Buk”.

At this, attention is drawn to other cases of use in the same area of ​​Ukraine of Russian anti-aircraft missiles, capable of destroying civilian aircrafts at cruising altitude. Thus, in the same context with the tragedy of the Malaysian Boeing, it is reported that on 14 July 2014, three days before the accident with Flight MH 17, in Luhansk region a transport aircraft of the Ukrainian Air Force AN-26 flying at an altitude of 6.5 km, and on July 16 — aircraft Su-25 at an altitude of 6.2 km were shot down.

SAM “Buk”Besides, the moment when the Russian SAM “Buk” was launched, there were no military aircrafts within the radius of 30 km. At the same time, according to additional information, means of radar control noticed three civilian aircrafts, which could also be brought down in the airspace of Ukraine. This fact strongly supports the version of a number of leading international experts of Russia’s mistaken shelling the Malaysian Boeing, instead of which it was going to bring down its own Russian plane of the Flight Moscow — Rostov-on-Don.

In that very inhuman and cynical way Russia intended to get a “legitimate and well-founded reason” for bringing its troops into eastern Ukraine under the pretext of “preventing barbaric actions of Ukrainian Nationalists” and “to stabilize the situation in the conflict zone”. The real challenge of the Kremlin was obstruction of the Ukrainian antiterrorist operation in Donetsk and Luhansk regions, which had actually reached its goals.

April 6 this year the Netherlands held a referendum on the ratification of the Association Agreement and free trade zone between Ukraine and the European Union, which Russia so actively opposes. According to the Russian media, the majority of the Dutch, who took part in the referendum voted against ratification precisely because they “like Moscow”.

But about what “likes” can one talk after the European Union’s actual recognition of the fact of Russia’s deliberate destruction of a civil passenger aircraft Boeing 777-200 flight MH 17, killing all 298 people (283 passengers and 15 crew members), including 193 citizens of the Netherlands?

Especially because the case of the Boeing 777-200 flight MH 17 was not the first fact of Russia’s air terrorism. Moscow has repeatedly resorted to a similar terrorist practice in its political interests.

Evidence of this is the circumstances of the crash of President of Poland L. Kaczynski’s plane Tu-154 flight PLF 101 April 10, 2010 near Smolensk.

Polish President Kaczynski's plane Tu-154 flight PLF 101Polish President Kaczynski’s plane Tu-154 flight PLF 101 was flying from Warsaw to Smolensk. On board was the Polish military and political elite — the government’s delegation, which was flying to Katyn to participate in the mourning events dedicated to the memory of thousands of Polish officers who were in the Soviet concentration camps after the annexation by the Soviet Union of the eastern regions of the territory of pre-war Poland, and shot dead by the NKVD in 1940 (specifically, in the commemoration of the 70th anniversary of the massacre of Polish officers in Katyn).

 

Note:
Special attention should be paid to the fact that, on V. Putin’s personal opinion (at that moment!), the events in Katyn could be J. Stalin’s revenge for the death in Polish captivity of 32 thousand soldiers of the Red Army, which was defeated in the Soviet-Polish military operation in 1920, and which was led by J. Stalin himself (as of today — Putin’s idol!).

 

As a result of the crash of the Tu-154 landing at Smolensk North Airport (one of the oldest airfields in Russia), were killed all the eight crew members and all the 88 passengers, including the Polish President and his wife, the last President of the Republic in exile Ryszard Kaczorowski and almost all the leadership of the Armed Forces of the country.

According to Moscow, the possible causes of the disaster were as follows: the crew’s refusal to fulfill the commands of the towerman; malfunction of the aircraft or bad weather conditions at the site of its intended landing. However, careful analysis of these assumptions shows them as completely biased, designed to hide the real situation.

Frankly false were the Russian investigative authorities’ statements about the alleged “…unauthorized landing of Tu-154 at Smolensk North Airport contrary to the prohibition of it by the towermen”. No experienced pilot, let alone with the president of the country on board, would resort to such an adventure. The pilots of L. Kaczynski’s plane (the elite of Poland’s Air Forces) also strictly followed the instructions. The pilots of the presidential plane TU-154 were prepared more than enough, including having flown more than 200 hours on the plane that crashed. At the same time, they had a heightened sense of responsibility towards their passengers. For example, in August 2008, this crew refused to land the plane with L. Kaczynski at the airport of Tbilisi during the Russian military aggression against Georgia. Then it almost cost the pilots their careers, but they fulfilled their duty to the end, and landed in Baku. With this in mind, they could not break the basic rules of air traffic, one of which would be unauthorized landing at the airport, especially in the fog.

By the way, speaking about the Russian version of the bad weather. Somehow, it did not prevent from landing the Yak-40 with Polish journalists that landed less than an hour before the crash of L. Kaczynski’s Tu-145.

Not less doubtful sounds a version of the Russian side about the breakdown of the Tu-154. Yes, it did have a life of about 20 years, which is typical for most aircrafts of Russia’s own civil aviation. But, less than a year before the crash, the Polish President’s plane had gone through thorough overhaul in Samara, where, in fact, it was built anew.

All this allowed the Polish and other independent experts to make a well-founded conclusion about quite different — namely, political causes of the crash of the Polish Tu-154 near Smolensk, which had to remove L. Kaczynski as a strong politician, leading a clear and consistent policy on Poland’s integration into NATO and the EU and strongly defending the national (Polish) interests contrary to Russia.

That is why Russia made a bid for the then Prime Minister of Poland Donald Tusk, building his policy on convergence (as it seemed to his political opponents) with Moscow. “Evidence” of his policy was a joint visit of the heads of governments of Russia (at that time) V. Putin and D. Tusk to the same Katyn and through the same Smolensk North airfield on April 7, 2010, i.e., just on the eve of the tragedy with L. Kaczynski.

Here lies the main intrigue of everything that was associated with L. Kaczynski’s death in the plane crash near Smolensk. According to experts who know the real state of affairs at Smolensk North Airport, it was not fit to support flights of civil aviation planes because it did not have the necessary air navigation equipment and was designed for absolutely different purposes.

Thus, until October 2009, at the airport had been stationed the Military Transport Aviation Regiment of the Russian Air Force. After its disbanding, the airfield was hardly exploited and largely lost the ability to perform its core functions. In particular, even the navigation and electronic equipment that was available at the airfield, worked with considerable disruptions, which did not allow to ensure safe landing of aircrafts.

With this in mind, April 7, 2010, in order to ensure the above-mentioned joint visit of V. Putin and D. Tusk, at Smolensk North Airfield was deployed an additional group of air communicators for the reception of civil aircrafts, as well as a mobile inner marker beacon. Somehow, none of this was done April 10 during the arrival of L. Kaczynski’s plane, and that, according to experts, led to his tragic death.

According to the decision of the Polish Parliament, March 7, 2016 Poland’s Special Commission resumed the investigation of the crash of the presidential plane TU-154, which is of particular importance due to the threat of military confrontation between Russia and the West (especially the threat of Russia’s aggression against Poland and the Baltic states) after the beginning of its aggression against Ukraine. At this, Poland’s Defence Minister Anton Macierewicz called the crash of Tu-154 April 10, 2010 near Smolensk — a terrorist act.

Tu-154 of “Siberia” airlines, Flight SBI 1812 from Tel Aviv to NovosibirskHowever, according to independent Russian and Western experts, physical destruction of Poland’s President Kaczynski was not the only act of Russia’s air terrorism. A number of circumstances show Moscow’s direct involvement in the disaster that happened over the Black Sea October 4, 2001 to the Russian passenger plane Tu-154 of “Siberia” airlines, Flight SBI 1812 from Tel Aviv to Novosibirsk. 66 passengers and 12 crewmembers were killed then.

According to the standard version, including the conclusion of the Interstate Aviation Committee (IAC — the executive body of the 11 States of the former Soviet Union /Commonwealth of Independent States/ on the delegated state functions and powers in the sphere of civil aviation and airspace use), the plane was accidentally shot down at 11 thousand meters by Ukrainian anti-aircraft missile system S-200 during military trainings held in the Crimea.

At first glance, the version looked reliable, which allowed Moscow to launch a powerful media campaign to discredit Ukraine. At this, the reason for this campaign, more than ever, by the way, coincided with Ukraine’s announcing about its course of integration into NATO and the EU.

Everything would seem simple, if it weren’t, again, for some facts that help look at the situation quite differently. In particular, in the Crimea the trainings at the beginning of October 2001 were conducted not by Ukraine alone, but together with Russia, and in the Russian Opuk training field near Feodosiya, with the participation of observers from seven other countries of the former USSR.

In fulfilling combat tasks were involved ground-based air defense missile systems S-300, S-200, S-125, “Buk” and “Kub” and a number of combat ships of the Black Sea Fleet, equipped with a marine version of “Osa” anti-aircraft missile systems. The shooting was carried out at the plane-target Tu-143, codenamed “Reys”. In total more than 20 anti-aircraft missiles of different types were launched.

The joint Commander of the trainings was Chief of the Russian Air Force General Anatoliy Kornukov, who took the final decision to launch anti-aircraft missiles. He was also responsible for their undermining — in case of missing the target.

On the same day, immediately after studying the circumstances of the incident, Chief of the Russian Air Force General Anatoliy Kornukov rejected the version that the Tu-154 plane that crashed over the Black Sea, could have been hit by a missile of the Ukrainian air defense system. According to him, he could see the flight of all the targets, the work of SAMs and fighters, as he was watching missile launches visually and using a radar controls. That’s why he categorically rejected the version of Tu-154’s being hit by a Ukrainian missile.

By the way, in the future he has not changed his point of view, including after the publication of the results of investigation of all (four!) special commissions to investigate the causes of the disaster, and for this he was dismissed in January 2002 from the ranks of the Russian Armed Forces into reserve because he “… had reached the age limit /60/ of being in the military service”. Other — “parquet generals and sycophants” around Putin had their time limit of service prolonged by five or more years.

In the press of that time there was widely spread a version that A. Kornukov’s time term of service would also be prolonged by two or three years (the Russian Federation’s President has the power to do this), but this did not happen and A. Kornukov was discharged because of his persistent denial of the fact of the Russian passenger aircraft Tu-154 (Flight SBI 1812 from Tel-Aviv to Novosibirsk) on the 4th of October 2001 being downed by a Ukrainian missile “ground-to-air”. According to the objective control, the aircraft of the Flight SBI 1812 disappeared from radar screens at 13:45 Moscow time at about 280 km south of Novorossiysk. The crash of Tu-154 was watched from the AN-24 of “Armenian Airlines”. Immediately after the incident, a number of Russian media flatly reported about the destruction of the aircraft flight Tel Aviv — Novosibirsk by Ukrainian S-200. In the future, the flow of messages grew exponentially, resembling a well-planned and pre-prepared information campaign.

S-200In particular, they reported about the Ukrainian air defence trainings, launching a Ukrainian S-200, characteristic holes in the remains of the aircraft (by the way, sunk in deep waters in the Black Sea), and even about finding the missile body with the corresponding serial numbers. At this, the fact of Russian air defence systems’ participation in the trainings, was never mentioned at all.

However, during the investigation of the accident, were found out a number of nuances, refuting Russia’s version of events. As shown by the recording of automatic registration systems, the radar radiation guiding Ukrainian S-200 was terminated at 13:42. In turn, according to the Russian radar center “Gelendzhik”, 30 seconds before the explosion of the aircraft, a missile of the S-200 system was located at a distance of more than 50 kilometers from the crash site.

So, a Ukrainian missile could not be guided to the target on the final trajectory of its flight, let alone reach the Tu-154 within the specified time. Missiles of S-200 are guided to the target only by a ground radar signal (had been turned off for three minutes before the crash), and also have a speed of 700-1200 m/s, which would have enabled it to fly no more than 36 out of the above-mentioned 50 km. As a result — the Ukrainian missile air defence system either was not targeted at the Tu-154 at all, or hit the target Tu-143 “Reys”.

S-300Somewhat different was the case with the Russian S-300, which also participated in exercises at a distance of about 10 km from the Ukrainian S-200. In particular, in contrast to the old system S-200, a missile S-300 has a semi-active homing head, which allows it to direct to a target without the light from the ground. Given this, it could have easily “take” on the support the Tu-154 of “Siberia” airlines, after the Ukrainian missile had hit the target Tu-143 “Flight.”

But that’s not all. There are more strange facts. Thus, the crew of the Russian Tu-154 refused to follow the instructions of the Ukrainian Air Traffic Control Center in Simferopol and independently changed the flight route supposedly to save time. As a result, the plane entered the area of ​​the possible passage of anti-aircraft missiles. Besides, during the preflight preparation of the aircraft in Novosibirsk airport, was recorded the fact of unauthorized work on the board of one of the engineers of the ground staff, who disappeared from the investigation on the same day. What it was and who it was is still unknown.

In general, these circumstances may be evidence of the Russian Federation’s well-prepared provocation against Ukraine, which became the forerunner of future acts of Moscow’s air terrorism.

Boeing 747-230V of South Korean airline “Korean Air Lines”The first of such actions can probably be considered the Moscow’s destruction, September 1, 1983 in the region of Sakhalin Island of a passenger liner Boeing 747-230V of South Korean airline “Korean Air Lines”, which was performing Flight KE 007 New York — Anchorage — Seoul. The aircraft was shot down by a Soviet fighter Su-15 under the pretext of violation of the airspace of the Soviet Union. 23 crewmembers and 246 passengers were killed.

According to the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), the reason for the plane’s entering the Soviet airspace was the error of its autopilot. Nevertheless, Moscow still justifies its actions by “suppression of the reconnaissance aircraft flying over the military objects in the Far East of the USSR”. At this, it puts forward all sorts of speculations — from the “passenger Boeing US being a cover for a spy plane RC-135” to the alleged “total absence of the passengers on the plane of Flight KE 007, which was the spy plane”.

All this once again convincingly shows Moscow’s purposeful leading the “hybrid” policy — air terrorism policy, which was inherited by Russia from the former Soviet Union. At the same time, pursuing its own political interests, the Kremlin thinks nothing of mass killing of innocent people, its own citizens included.

Thus, just as a result of the above mentioned actions of Russia, about 750 people were killed. September 30, 2015 the Russian Air Force arrived in Syria. And within that month alone, Russian bombing of the so-called “positions of Islamic terrorists” killed nearly 900 civilians. On average, the same number of civilians would lose their lives within a month during the Nazi bombing of Leningrad in 1941-1944.

It seems that despite all the jingoistic rattle and rhetoric around “spiritual bonds”, the Russian leadership is completely devoid of historical memory. A regrettable fact. Especially because the rest of the world remembers everything.

 

Схожі публікації