Operation Boeing: Scenario Change
The plan of the Americans failed and it is good. Europe stubbornly refuses to impose real sanctions against Moscow, to break relations and is not at all eager to "put" its economy under the United States, so that Washington could save it from "evil Russian terrorists." A new scenario for the development of the crisis has now taken shape. This scenario is very different from what we were prepared by American puppeteers.
The tragedy of Boeing revealed several very interesting aspects, which for the most part were either ignored or went unnoticed by most commentators. Myopia regarding important facts is evil.
To begin with, the Americans dropped the Malaysian aircraft. Why not European? Why not Ukrainian? Why not yours?
“They didn’t find theirs, and the dead Americans would not leave Washington the freedom to maneuver.”
- Ukrainian shoot down did not make sense. On the dead ukrov civilized white Europeans do not care.
- It was possible to bring down a European plane, but then we would have to deal with European air and insurance companies that would greatly interfere with the manipulation of the results of the investigation, and European countries that everyone understands could be very nervous.
In this context, they chose the ideal goal - the Malaysian Boeing, and they chose it for the second time in a row.
For context, you need to understand the following: Malaysia for China is the same as Belarus for Russia. I greatly simplify, of course, but the words "friend", "satellite", etc., poorly describe the type of relationship that exists between China and Malaysia. A few talking details: about a quarter of the population of Malaysia is Chinese, and they are so-called. "dominant minority", i.e. possess disproportionately significant economic and political power. In megacities, there are a lot of Chinese, sometimes the majority. The dominant political force in the country sits on the "lee" from the Chinese, the relatives of the prime minister / ministers work in branches or "strategic partners" of Chinese banks. Malaysia often breaks ASEAN anti-Chinese initiatives and the like. In general, this is the only country for which China has made an exception in its aggressive territorial policy: in fact, it has been recognized as the right to extract gas from the disputed territories and even sell it to Beijing. As it is easy to guess, such gifts are made only to very close friends.
When the first Boeing "disappeared" - it was an obvious spit in the face of China, which took it very, very painfully, at the level of "I know who did, but I can not prove." Therefore, so frantically looking for debris and crates. Searched, but not found.
When the second Boeing was dropped, it was no longer just spitting, but a serious demonstration of aggressive intentions.
The result was not long in coming.
Malaysian Prime Minister reprimanded those who want to get a geopolitical benefit on the blood. The delegation that arrived in the DPR, specially organized the process as an actual interstate visit.
After the Security Council meeting, Putin delivered a very rich and very important speech, which could seem like "pathetic babble" only to couch experts, for whom the heroes of American militants are the highest example of political eloquence.
One of the important quotes:
“Of course, there is no direct military threat to the sovereignty or integrity of our country, a guarantee to that, above all, a strategic balance of forces in the world”
Translated: "We are not alone"
We are really not alone. When the Chinese press spoke against the "politicization" of the tragedy, it could be attributed to a gesture of politeness. When the Minister of Foreign Affairs of China, who firmly stated that it was impossible to allow "artificial politicization", took hold personally, it became clear that the process went beyond the framework of diplomatic ping-pong between Washington and Moscow: all the major players of the planet were involved in the process.
It is easy to see that the intensity of American actions to use a fallen Boeing has dropped dramatically. A possible scenario that explains this behavior is, I think, the “Lukyanenko script” I wrote about here, but now one important, additional element has appeared.
It is worth asking: why did the Americans actually not "blinded" some kind of "radio interception" (now everyone believes that they can listen to anyone), who would confirm the version that Beech of militia was shot down by a Boeing on a team from Moscow or Lugansk ? Such a fake would be difficult to refute, especially if accompanied by other “evidence” and an attack through the media. What stopped? It may have stopped the presence of "trumps" in Russia, but another option is possible. Iosif Diskin, Deputy Chairman of the Scientific and Expert Council of the All-Russian Center for the Study of Public Opinion, Open Joint-Stock Company, outlined this scenario in prime time of Channel One.
I quote in the presentation of V. Tretyakov (http://v-tretyakov.livejournal.com/1266295.html):
"So, according to his American sources:
1. The operation was not developed in Ukraine, but implemented through a chain of representatives of the current Ukrainian government.
2. In secret from Poroshenko, so that he 1) did not interfere; 2) to be sincerely indignant when they report to him that the Russians had shot down a passenger Boeing.
3. The operation succeeded only in part of the defeat of Boeing, and the rest failed.
4. The State Department said that after a day, American intelligence will bring all the evidence.
5. After one day, this did not happen, because specific people from American intelligence refused to falsify the facts, asking the question: if everything turns out, then who will be responsible for this? They did not receive a clear answer to their question. And then they refused. Moreover, in the fall in the US, congressional elections and scouts were afraid that the Republicans, the Democrats, would blame intelligence not for hiding the truth about who shot down a passenger plane (no one cares), but that "they misled the top leadership of the United States and thereby damaged the national interests of America." And for this in the US, you can not only positions ... There is no joke with it, once caught ...
6. So there was information from the three anonymous representatives of the US intelligence: there is no evidence against Russia.
7. If Poroshenko (until the fall of his Americans will cover) does not conquer the South-East, then the Americans will merge him, putting the responsibility for the downed Boeing on him. As Diskin put it, “they can send him to The Hague” ....
I would not pay special attention to this scenario if it were not for one serious "but." Diskin, in addition to working at VTsIOM and all sorts of associations / organizations, is a member of the Management Board of OJSC All-Russian Bank for Regional Development (also known as Rosneft Bank) - that is, he is a “team mate” with Igor Sechin and Dominic Shtros-Kan. This team really can have very good sources in the USA, at least among those structures from which Rosneft bought Morgan Stanley’s oil business.
Conclusions for today:
1. The provocation failed
2. Europe "put" under the United States failed. Almost any sanctions, besides blocking energy exports to the EU, will benefit us (I will touch on this topic separately in a future article)
3. China firmly positions itself on our side of the barricades, of course, based on our interests. It is very good that China sees its interests in Russia's support.
4. There is every chance that if in the near future the Kiev junta does not achieve serious success, then it will simply be merged.
Information