Disgruntled
Vostok battalion ex-commander, one of Akhmetov's boys in DNR whom
Strelkov purged when he returned to Donetsk from Slavyansk for a plot
to surrender Donetsk to Kiev in return for a PoR oligarch-governed
Donbass, now goes to Western press with claims NAF had BUK, might have
come from Russia. Ratstink all over this.
---Mark
Sleboda
Retweeted by Robin Westenra
@seemorerocks Rebel commander Khodakovsky tells Russian media he said nothing about the Buk system in interview http://ria.ru/world/20140723/1017273394.html …"
Ukraine
rebel commander acknowledges fighters had BUK missile
A
powerful Ukrainian rebel leader has confirmed that pro-Russian
separatists had an anti-aircraft missile of the type Washington says
was used to shoot down Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 and it
could have originated in Russia.
26
January, 2013
In
an interview with Reuters, Alexander Khodakovsky, commander of the
Vostok Battalion, acknowledged for the first time since the airliner
was brought down in eastern Ukraine on
Thursday that the rebels did possess the BUK missile system and said
it could have been sent back subsequently to remove proof of its
presence.
Before
the Malaysian plane was shot down, rebels had boasted of obtaining
the BUK missiles, which can shoot down airliners at cruising height.
But since the disaster the separatists' main group, the
self-proclaimed People’s Republic of Donetsk, has repeatedly denied
ever having possessed such weapons.
Since
the airliner crashed with the loss of all 298 on
board,
the most contentious issue has been who fired the missile that
brought the jet down in an area where government forces are fighting
pro-Russian rebels.
Khodakovsky
accused the Kiev authorities for provoking what may have been the
missile strike that destroyed the doomed airliner, saying Kiev had
deliberately launched air strikes in the area, knowing the missiles
were in place.
"I
knew that a BUK came from Luhansk. At the time I was told that a BUK
from Luhansk was coming under the flag of the LNR," he said,
referring to the Luhansk People’s Republic, the main rebel group
operating in Luhansk, one of two rebel provinces along with Donetsk,
the province where the crash took place.
"That
BUK I know about. I heard about it. I think they sent it back.
Because I found out about it at exactly the moment that I found out
that this tragedy had taken place. They probably sent it back in
order to remove proof of its presence," Khodakovsky told Reuters
on Tuesday.
"The
question is this: Ukraine received timely evidence that the
volunteers have this technology, through the fault of Russia.
It not only did nothing to protect security, but provoked the use of
this type of weapon against a plane that was flying with
peaceful civilians," he said.
"They
knew that this BUK existed; that the BUK was heading for
Snezhnoye," he said, referring to a village 10 km (six miles)
west of the crash site. "They knew that it would be deployed
there, and provoked the use of this BUK by starting an air strike on
a target they didn’t need, that their planes hadn’t touched for a
week."
"And
that day, they were intensively flying, and exactly at the moment of
the shooting, at the moment the civilian plane flew overhead, they
launched air strikes. Even if there was a BUK, and even if the BUK
was used, Ukraine did everything to ensure that a
civilianaircraft was
shot down."
Eileen
Lainez, a Pentagon spokeswoman, said Khodakovsky's remarks confirmed
what U.S. officials had long been saying, that "Russian-backed
separatists have received arms, training and support from Russia."
But
she dismissed the rebel leader's efforts to blame the Kiev government
for the downing of the airliner, calling it "another attempt to
try to muddy the water and move the focus from facts."
Washington
believes that pro-Russian separatists most likely shot down the
airliner "by mistake," not realising it was a civilian
passenger flight,
U.S. intelligence officials said.
The
officials said the "most plausible explanation" for the
destruction of the plane was that the separatists fired a
Russian-made SA-11 - also known as a BUK - missile at it after
mistaking it for another kind of aircraft.
"While
we may not yet know who actually fired the missile, we have assessed
that it was an SA-11 and that it came from a Russian-backed
separatist-controlled area," Lainez said. U.S. President Barack
Obama's administration
has said it is convinced the airliner was brought down by an SA-11
ground-to-air missile fired from territory in eastern Ukraine
controlled by pro-Russian separatists.
Other
separatist leaders have said they did not bring the Malaysian plane
down. Russia has denied involvement.
Khodakovsky
is a former head of the "Alpha" anti-terrorism unit of the
security service in Donetsk, and one of the few major rebel
commanders in Donetsk who actually hails from Ukraine rather than
Russia.
There
has been friction in the past between him and rebel leaders from
outside the region, such as Igor Strelkov, the Muscovite who has
declared himself commander of all rebel forces in Donetsk province.
Khodakovsky
said his unit had never possessed BUKs, but they may have been used
by rebels from other units.
"The
fact is, this is a theatre of military activity occupied by our,
let’s say, partners in the rebel movement, with which our
cooperation is somewhat conditional," he said.
"What
resources our partners have, we cannot be entirely certain. Was there
(a BUK)? Wasn’t there? If there was proof that there was, then
there can be no question."
Khodakovsky
said it was widely known that rebels had obtained BUKs from Ukrainian
forces in the past, including three captured at a checkpoint in April
and another captured near the airport in Donetsk. He said none of the
BUKs captured from Ukrainian forces were operational.
While
he said he could not be certain where the BUK system operating on
rebel territory at the time of the air crash had come from, he said
it may have come from Russia.
"I’m
not going to say Russia gave these things or didn’t give them.
Russia could have offered this BUK under some entirely local
initiative. I want a BUK, and if someone offered me one, I wouldn’t
turn it down. But I wouldn’t use it against something that did not
threaten me. I would use it only under circumstances when there was
an air attack on my positions, to protect people’s lives."
He
added: "I am an interested party. I am a ‘terrorist’, a
‘separatist’, a volunteer ... In any event, I am required to
promote the side I represent, even if I might think otherwise, say
otherwise or have an alternative view. This causes real discomfort to
my soul."
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.