“Hide the failure on the fronts”: political scientist Dudchak called the motive for the terrorist attack on the Crimean bridge
[ad_1]
Drones could have been launched from a ship sailing from Georgian Poti towards the Bosphorus or back
Statements by representatives of the Kyiv regime and data from the Ukrainian media point to the unequivocal guilt of Kyiv in the terrorist attack on the Crimean bridge on Monday night.
On the eve of the tragedy, on Sunday evening, the Commander-in-Chief of the Ground Forces of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, Colonel-General Alexander Syrsky, in Telegram wished the Ukrainians “good night”, and promised the Russians a “lullaby”, thereby hinting at the next actions against Russia.
The odious Rada deputy Aleksey Goncharenko, known for his outrageous Russophobia and participation in the burning of the Odessa House of Trade Unions on May 2, 2014, called the attack a “victory for Ukraine.” For the murder of two peaceful Russian citizens, Goncharenko calls for rewarding all those involved.
The Main Intelligence Directorate of the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine, headed by Kirill Budanov, commented, not without a hint, on the strikes on the bridge piers. A spokesman for the department, Yusov, quoted his boss as saying that the Crimean Bridge was supposedly “an extra structure.”
Advisor to the head of the Zelensky Office, Mikhail Podolyak, also mocked the tragedy. In social networks, he called the Crimean bridge “a short-lived structure.” The speaker of the Ukrainian Operational Command “South” Natalya Gumenyuk, as if not agreeing with her colleagues, stubbornly but unconvincingly tried to justify herself and again shift all the blame for what had happened to Russia.
Political scientist Alexander Dudchak, in an interview with MK, said that the Kyiv regime had specific motives for committing a terrorist attack.
“The failure on the fronts, which cannot be hidden, as well as the shame felt by Ukraine in general and Zelensky in particular after the NATO summit, required a distraction. A terrorist act is a terrible tragedy, two lives were taken, and one was maimed. They are proud of it.”
According to the political scientist, the representatives of Kyiv are experiencing a “split political personality”.
“On the one hand, they are trying to blame Russia for everything, as if this is a provocation,” Dudchak notes. On the other hand, they demand rewards for those who did it. The SBU states that all these facts will be reported allegedly after the victory. Rather, they will tell all this to the prosecutor and military investigators at the tribunal.
The expert believes that access to Nikolaev and Odessa would cut off Ukraine’s access to the Black Sea and help get rid of terrorist threats in Crimea. “Only this can save us from the danger of such terrorist acts. As long as Ukraine has the physical ability to attack the bridge, the danger will remain,” Dudchak concluded.
Political scientist Andrei Suzdaltsev recalled that “earlier, the Kyiv regime was hit by NATO’s decision not to name the terms for inviting Ukraine to the Alliance. Erdogan’s promises to extend the grain deal did not come true either. Then at night, in retaliation, they sent these drones, ”Suzdaltsev believes.
The circumstances of the attack and how Russia might respond to it remain interesting questions, the MK source said.
“Air defense works fine there, everyone was waiting for missiles, but there were none. Instead, underwater drones were sent at night, which are difficult to catch. There is a version that, under the cover of a security corridor, they could have been launched by a dry cargo ship sailing from the port of Odessa. But the cargo ship would not make a detour and go towards the peninsula. But a ship that could go from the Georgian Poti towards the Bosphorus, or vice versa, could. This is where the investigation should be. Then measures will be determined,” the political scientist concluded.
Newspaper headline:
Highly motivated terrorist attack
[ad_2]
Source link
