Why did the Times publish an article about a Novorossia dirty bomb?
August 3rd, 2015
Chairman of the Parliament of Novorossia
Translated by Kristina Rus
News from the "Times" that Donetsk militia is engaged in the creation of a "dirty bomb" in cooperation with Russian scientists is not good.
I would not hurry to treat it as a typical nonsense, which is constantly written about Donbass.
Of course, it is impossible to seriously discuss this story in the way its portrayed in the West.
But the fact is that when someone wants to commit a crime — he must first create an alibi. Or, in our case, to create the background information that would blame the enemy.
In other words, if the Times - and perhaps with help of Ukrainian and Western intelligence agencies - publishes leaks about a "bomb", that means Kiev is contemplating a big provocation with its curators.
Sanctions didn't help to "defeat" Russia.
And a Boeing tribunal did not work out.
And a UAF attack would have ended in defeat under the current circumstances.
Which means that Kiev needs a disaster with the greatest possible number of victims on the despised territory to make Donbass the area of international disaster, and this time to force Russia to agree to enter their "peacekeeping troops" or any other form of pressure, chosen by America and its satellites.
Hence the talk about a "dirty bomb".
But I write this not to blame Kiev.
We know what these people are capable of — after Odessa, after the bombing of cities, after torture and murder. We have no illusions.
And so now it's time to ask not Ukraine, but Russia.
The official position of Russia - and People's Republics — is that we need the implementation of the Minsk agreements.
But the Minsk agreement is not working or not working as we would like.
And even if all the critics will forget about their claims about this agreement, and agree that such a compromise is necessary, the agreements still do not work or work poorly.
Moreover, the Kiev government already stated a hundred times that they will not work. They say, first you surrender and abandon your weapons, "and we will hang you later" - and no special status for Donbass until then.
But is there an adequate response from Russia?
What to do if Minsk doesn't work?
Do you have a plan in case that Minsk does not work?
Currently, Russia offers to just wait until the Kiev gangsters come to their senses or go bankrupt, and then...
But how long to wait is unclear.
The "first" Minsk of last September was replaced by the "second", it's been almost a year since the signing of the agreements, but there is no progress in achieving peace.
And this means that a large region, with millions of people - is "suspended".
It left Ukraine, but didn't come to Russia, and is living in expectation.
And now let us ask ourselves.
Can you think of a more convenient place for bloody provocation than the territory with unclear status, and where an endless war is supposed to end, but in practice is constantly exploding with new attacks and fighting?
Who benefits from this endless waiting — "revolutionary" Ukraine, which has nothing to lose, and which is ready for the most radical attacks to prolong its existence, or stable Russia that wants, on the contrary, to quickly end a dangerous stand-off?
I'm afraid we may have to bitterly regret the fact that Donbass has become a platform for global political bargaining and a no man's land for an indefinite period of time.
Because we know who may strike a sudden blow on peaceful citizens.
And we know who will have to answer for the consequences of this strike.
And, as they say, God willing that my fears are in vain.
Link to the article in the Times: