In the West, they did not see other suspects in the terrorist attack on the Crimean bridge, except for one

But no direct accusations have yet been made.

The incident on the Krymsky bridge, which took place early in the morning on October 8, where an explosion occurred and part of the structure was damaged, quickly spread through foreign publications. While the Russian authorities are beginning to understand the causes of the incident, foreign media vied with each other to recall the facts of threats from Ukrainian officials. We read what else they are talking about abroad.

“Powerful explosion” – these two words on Saturday morning made not only Russians, but also citizens from different countries worried. In the early morning of October 8, an explosion occurred on the Crimean bridge. The first reason was the explosion of a fuel tank, which just at that moment was driving along the railway part of the bridge. The second version was put forward by the National Anti-Terrorism Committee: “Today at six o’clock seven minutes on the automobile part of the Crimean bridge from the side of the Taman Peninsula, a truck was blown up, which caused the ignition of seven fuel tanks of the train, following in the direction of the Crimean Peninsula.”

It is clear that the situation still needs to be thoroughly understood. However, the view from abroad has carefully clung to the incident and is already replete with loud headlines in the media.

One of the most restrained was the American edition of CNN. In the material, journalists cite all the facts and statements about the incident by officials. However, in a detailed note about the bridge itself, the publication recalled that “after the opening of the bridge, the United States condemned its construction as illegal,” referring to a statement by the US State Department.

The New York Times has a completely different reaction. Tracking the situation, the publication indicates that the bridge itself is “deeply symbolic for Russian President Vladimir Putin.” The bridge has been called “a pillar of disputed claims to the Crimean peninsula”. The publication also notes that “Ukrainians hate the bridge, whose symbolism and strategic importance for supply have long made it a potential target.” The newspaper also recalled the summer posts of the Ukrainian military on Twitter, where “a mocking image was posted, threatening to strike with guided missiles provided by the Americans.”

The publication writes that “the destruction of the bridge will be one of the most serious blows that Ukraine can inflict on Moscow.” In fact, the newspaper does not at all exclude the involvement of the Ukrainian side in this. And the newspaper does not miss a reason to think so, citing the words of the adviser to the President of Ukraine Mikhail Podolyak, which have already scattered over the network: “Crimea, the bridge, the beginning.” The publication notes that “a high-ranking Ukrainian official did not deny that Ukrainian forces were behind the attack, but did not confirm this either.” Particular attention is paid to the fact that this happened exactly after the 70th anniversary of Vladimir Putin on October 7th. By the way, the newspaper has already managed to scare its audience with the headline “The only bridge connecting Crimea with Russia burned down after the explosion.”

But the Associated Press saw a completely different turn in the current situation. “Crimea bridge explosion could lead to escalation between Russia and Ukraine,” the agency posted the caption. Dismissing the version with the tank explosion, the publication immediately cites the version of the truck being mined, gradually recalling (by analogy with the previous edition) the Ukrainian side’s threats to “strike the bridge.” It is noted that the situation has pleased Kyiv, but it is also argued that no one on the Ukrainian side is in a hurry to take responsibility for the explosion. However, a close look of the AP agency caught a video posted by Secretary of the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine Oleksiy Danilov with a burning bridge on a social network, where Marilyn Monroe sang her famous song “Happy Birthday, Mr. President.”

It is mentioned that the explosion on the Crimean bridge occurred a few hours after the explosions in Kharkov.

But in general, Western publications are in no hurry to draw conclusions, although they concentrate their attention for the most part on the statements of Mikhail Podolyaki. Reuters released a separate piece titled “Ukrainian presidential adviser says Crimean bridge ‘should be destroyed’ due to damage.”

Bloomberg did not stand aside. Calling the bridge “key” for Russia, the publication also begins the material with a version about a truck. Military analyst Mick Ryan is also quoted as saying: “It would take a lot of explosives and a good demolition scheme to drop such a span of a bridge.” The expert continued his thought, calling the closing of the bridge “a serious problem for the Russians.”

The news was not spared by the British tabloid Daily Mail, which already in the headline outlined a terrible picture similar to the Apocalypse. “A powerful explosion destroyed the only bridge between Russia and Crimea,” although this, of course, is far from the true state of affairs. But even here the words of Podolyak are not forgotten. However, the publication is also in no hurry to draw conclusions.

And it seems that the situation is still developing, but the unanimous recollection of all the facts of Ukrainian threats and the lightning-fast reaction of Ukrainian officials to the incident has tangibly settled on the main pages of Western publications. Although they agree that this “will strike at Russia,” however, the facts of Kyiv’s joy are not at all excluded from the overall picture of what happened.