“Massacre in Bucha”: who needs it and why

"It was done by the one who benefits from it" - this is the Roman maxim that investigators have been guided by since then and to our time

0
799

FULL DISCLOSURE: Sourced from Russian State-Controlled Media

MOSCOW, 8 april 2022, RUSSTRAT Institute.

Shocking news about the death of civilians in the Ukrainian town of Bucha near Kiev has caused a storm of public outrage in many countries. The Ukrainian authorities have accused Russia of war crimes and genocide of civilians. Russia initiated a discussion of the problem in the UN Security Council, but the British presidency blocked this process.

Documented facts indicate that on March 30, Russian servicemen left Bucha. After that, a special forces unit of the Ukrainian police entered the city and published on April 2 a video of the passage of city streets and conversations with local residents.

Prior to that, on March 31, a video of a joyful appeal to fellow citizens about “liberation” was published by Bucha’s Mayor Anatoly Fedoruk. Both videos don’t contain footage or other information about mass killings, rapes, and other war crimes, there are not many corpses on the roads and mass graves – all this appears in the videos and photographs later.

Ukrainian and Western publications, including TV channels and tabloids, reported how the UAF units that entered the city found “hundreds of tortured and murdered residents”. Those involved in the informational support of the “massacre” preferred to not recall the shelling of the city by the Ukrainian military during the “occupation” and after the withdrawal of Russian troops

Western and Ukrainian media unequivocally state the version of Kiev. The “Bucha massacre” in their interpretation, as well as Vladimir Zelensky and other Ukrainian officials, is unequivocally a “crime of the Russian military”.

The Times and other Western publications draw analogies with the war in Yugoslavia. In particular, with Srebrenica, where the Serbs allegedly subjected thousands of local Muslims to genocide (mass murder). Naturally, the Western version of the story in Srebrenica was taken as a basis at that time, and not the Serbian version and a number of independent experts and journalists.

The Russian version is stated in the messages and comments of the Ministry of Defence, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and the Kremlin press service. In the Ministry of Defence publication of the Russian Federation on April 3, it was stated that the reports of the “Kiev regime” about the events “in the city of Bucha, Kiev region, are another provocation”.

“During the time this settlement was under the control of the Russian armed forces, not a single local resident suffered from any violent actions. 452 tons of humanitarian aid were delivered and issued to civilians by Russian servicemen in the settlements of the Kiev region,” the Russian Defence Ministry said in a publication.

It is also noted that “the southern outskirts of the city, including residential areas, were shelled by Ukrainian troops around the clock from large-caliber artillery, tanks and multiple rocket launchers”. It was particularly noted that “all Russian units completely withdrew from Bucha on March 30, the day after the face-to-face round of negotiations between Russia and Ukraine in Turkey.”

“The fact that all the bodies of people whose images were published by the Kiev regime, after at least four days, have not become rigid, do not have characteristic postmortem lividity and there is in coagulated blood in the wounds, is of particular concern,” stated the Ministry of Defence of Russia. “All this irrefutably confirms that the photos and video frames from Bucha are another stagings of the Kiev regime for the Western media, as it was in Mariupol with the maternity hospital, as well as in other cities.”

On the same day, April 3, the Russian Foreign Ministry made a number of statements on the incident in Bucha.

The first deputy permanent representative of the Russian Federation to the UN, Dmitry Polyansky, said that Russia “will bring out the inveterate Ukrainian provocateurs and their Western patrons into the open”. In the same message of the ministerial Telegram channel, he explained how Moscow plans to do this: “In light of the blatant provocation of Ukrainian radicals in Bucha, Russia demanded the convening of a meeting of the UN Security Council in the afternoon of Monday, April 4.”

After that, also on April 3, the official representative of the Russian Foreign Ministry, Mariya Zakharova, made a statement on the same topic, stating: “The meaning of the Kiev regime’s new crime is the disruption of peace talks and the escalation of violence.”

Statements that the interpretation of the situation around Bucha by Russia’s enemies is “staging”, “fake” and “provocation” containing “signs of forgery” were made by Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, press secretary of the Russian President Dmitry Peskov and other officials. Doubts about the version of Kiev and Western colleagues were expressed by Russian military commanders, in particular, reporter and head of the WarGonzo project Semyon Pegov, located in the southeast of the conflict zone.

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres called for an independent investigation into the events in Bucha, knowing that Britain is blocking such an initiative by Russia in the UN Security Council. Probably due to the fact that Russia was the initiator. Without reference to the Russian initiative, the idea of an international investigation was supported by the US, Germany and several other states and international organizations – that is, all those who have now clearly accused Russia of crimes against humanity and even genocide.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine called on all interested parties, including the Hague International Criminal Tribunal, to come to Bucha and work with the evidence, which in the message of the Ukrainian side is categorically called testifying to the crime of the Russian military. The very wording of the invitation indicates that the culprit has been identified and the authority of international organizations is needed for the purely formal side of the resolved issue.

A publication on the website of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine presents the statement of Minister Dmitry Kuleba on April 3 on the air of the British Times UK radio: “I call on the International Criminal Court and international organizations to send their missions to Bucha and other liberated cities and villages of the Kiev region in order to collect all evidence of war crimes of the Russians as thoroughly as possible in cooperation with Ukrainian law enforcement officers.”

The appeals of the Minister of Foreign Affairs and other representatives of Kiev to the Hague Tribunal are designed for maximum effect. The most striking milestone in the activities of this court (tribunal) was the condemnation of Serbian military and political leaders who tried to save Yugoslavia in the face of external aggression.

The civil war in the federal Balkan state from the point of view of the West was the fault of Serbia with the collective responsibility of the Serbian people. Therefore, the NATO intervention was aimed at supporting all the separatists who took up arms against official Belgrade and carried out ethnic cleansing.

The war of the Western coalition in Yugoslavia, which is also noteworthy, was not officially called a war, but a special operation – as in many other cases of military aggression against sovereign states. When Russia launched a special operation in Ukraine, legally formalizing it according to the templates of Western “friends and partners”, it caused the shock, which was replaced by indignation and denial in the spirit of the State Department’s “you don’t understand, this is different”.

Moscow denies its involvement in the war crimes in Bucha, especially the accusations of genocide. The Serbs also denied involvement in the shelling of the Sarajevo market Markale, and also denied the genocide of civilians in Srebrenica – recognizing the massacre of prisoners of resistance and ethnic cleansing. The Iraqis denied that they had chemical weapons, on which US official Colin Powell insisted with his famous test tube with fake filler, which he shook at the UN Security Council in February 2003, justifying the need for a “special operation” in Iraq.

Later it turned out that not only civilians were buried in Srebrenica, and not only those killed by the Serbian military. Later it turned out that the market in Markale had not been fired at by Serbs with mortars, but by “Muslims” from a catapult or something similar in order to present the Serbian army under the command of Ratko Mladic in the same light in which Dmitry Kuleba and Vladimir Zelensky present Russian servicemen.

Later it turned out that in January 1991, armed Lithuanian nationalists shot fellow-citizens near the Vilnius television Center and took the corpses from the morgues of the entire then Lithuanian Soviet Socialist Republic in order to present themselves as victims of “Soviet aggression”.

“It was important to provoke a Western voter to tell their parliament: look what they are doing!”, Audrus Butkevicius, a participant in the armed confrontation in Vilnius, former Director-General of the Department of Defence, and a member of the interim Lithuanian Defence Department, admitted later.

All this happened later, when the Lithuanian dissident Algirdas Paleckis was convicted for the words “their own shot at their own”, and doubts about the official myth of the “Soviet occupation” were equated to a criminal offense. Later, after the United States and its NATO allies bombed Belgrade and half of Serbia with depleted uranium ammunition. Later, when the same allies conducted their military special operations, hanged Saddam Hussein, massacred Muammar Gaddafi, and killed Slobodan Milosevic. The West then gained time by using fabricated accusations to justify its actions.

The current leadership of Ukraine, desperate to solve its problem by military-political methods, may have the same goal. Staged videos of brutal reprisals against “separatists” and prisoners of war did not bring the desired effect, although since 2014 Ukrainian directors and actors have achieved recognized mastery in this genre. Now documented evidence against the “defenders” of civil fellow citizens who allegedly went through the torture of Russian prisoners of war, has been added to the videos of burying alive, fractures of the cervical vertebrae and other traditions of Banderist bandits.

The white bandages on the corpses in Bucha, the non-dried blood on them, numerous statements about rapes and much more need to be checked by forensic experts, confirmed by direct evidence, and so on. All this is a long and difficult process, to which the parties to the conflict quite reasonably and fairly want to involve a third party. However, such a desire is seen only in words.

In fact, the perpetrators have already been appointed – both by Kiev and its Western patrons. None of them really wants an investigation. Vladimir Zelensky and Dmitry Kuleba, Liz Truss and Joseph Biden have already decided everything. They have already called the Russian servicemen guilty. The media controlled by them have already established a motive for the investigators – “hatred of Ukrainians”. They don’t want to wait, they use the moment of inflated hysteria for their own purposes.

The Third Reich was in the same desperate situation in 1945 when the office of Joseph Goebbels resorted to similar techniques. Then it was also important for the Nazi regime to mix its atrocities in the occupied territories and in its concentration camps. And the current Kiev leadership faces the same task.

The Ukrainian Armed Forces have long lost their military initiative, they are in dire need of new supplies of weapons, ammunition, fuel, and much more to continue resistance in cities turned into fortified areas with a human shield of peaceful fellow citizens. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine needs to strengthen its negotiating positions.

All this cannot be achieved without the formation of public opinion at home and abroad, without the total mobilization of anything and everything, without burning bridges. Therefore, there is a reason to look at the motives of Kiev in the new episode of the conflict.

“It was done by the one who benefits from it”, this is the Roman maxim that investigators have been guided by since then and to our time. The “Bucha massacre”, which is not yet a “massacre”, but the sudden discovery of hundreds of corpses, is beneficial to Kiev.

Moscow does not benefit from it at all, from any point of view. Otherwise, the Russian special operation on February 24, 2022, would have begun the way the Great Patriotic War was started on June 22, 1941, by the German idols of the current Ukrainian “Azov” and other “Untermensch” (from the point of view of the racial theory of the Third Reich). The “patriots” who came out with flags would be greeted with machine-gun bursts, the central squares would be filled with corpses hung on gallows or something similar.

Russia initially demonstrated a desire to enlist the loyalty of civilians in Ukraine, so the mass murder of civilians is not at all what corresponds to the plan of the special operation. In any case, this does not correspond to the original practice. Mass distribution of humanitarian aid is not combined with mass terror.

However, these conclusions are also just assumptions. If the time and other opportunities for independent international expertise in Bucha, Irpen, and other cities still appear, then the objective truth will become known. However, the logic of war will allow us to doubt the realization of such opportunities.

In advance, in the situation around Bucha, it is possible to state the following: either a monstrous mass murder has been revealed to the world or an equally monstrous falsification. It is also appropriate to note that human nature has remained unchanged, and the brutalities of war awaken a monster in it. The masses are still manipulated and subject to herd instinct. Politicians are still immoral, and the laws and customs of war are still a good wish.

Source: RUSSTRAT

SOURCERusstrat.ru

ATTENTION READERS
Due to the nature of independent content, VT cannot guarantee content validity.
We ask you to Read Our Content Policy so a clear comprehension of VT's independent non-censored media is understood and given its proper place in the world of news, opinion and media.

All content is owned by author exclusively. Expressed opinions are NOT necessarily the views of VT, other authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners or technicians. Some content may be satirical in nature. All images within are full responsibility of author and NOT VT.

About VT - Read Full Policy Notice - Comment Policy