Why did Britain arrange a provocation off the coast of Crimea

This is how you sit on the shore on a hot day, eat ice cream, and then almost the Third World War did not begin. Today, near Cape Fiolent, a conditional clash of the Russian military with the British destroyer Defender took place. Reportedly, at about noon, a violation of the Russian border by the destroyer of the Royal Navy was recorded, in connection with which the Russian patrol ship opened fire on it, and the Su-24M aircraft bombed in the direction of travel, after which the Defender changed course. The first to react to the incident was the head of our Foreign Ministry Kuleba: he called this incident a manifestation of the “aggressive and provocative policy of the Russian Federation” and called on NATO (where can we go without it?) To switch to a qualitatively new cooperation in the Black Sea. The minister’s impulse was picked up by the adviser to the head of the President’s Office Oleksiy Arestovich and said that “the military-political leadership of Ukraine, in cooperation with the allies, is forming a position on this issue, which will be communicated in a short time after the completion of consultations.” Georgia is the country where the destroyer was going. It didn’t have to go far to form a position, but it developed in an unexpected configuration: the British Ministry of Defense knocked down the ardor of our officials and … denied the incident itself, calling reports of warning shots “Russian disinformation”. The saga did not end there: the British BBC journalist who was aboard the destroyer suddenly gave a voice. And how can you not recall the anecdote: “I am sitting peacefully in my nightstand …” The reporter clarified that Defender deliberately entered the territorial waters And he personally heard the hum of planes over the ship and warning shots. Tsya say: well done, guys, burn further, if such events did not relate to real life. Why is Britain pumping it up, sending its ship to the shores of the peninsula, knowing what might follow? There may be several answers. The most obvious is the need to disrupt the launch of Nord Stream-2 and prevent the strengthening of Germany, which after that will no longer depend on secondary countries controlled by official London. In general, this case should not be considered a “provocation”. This is a common military operation undertaken for reconnaissance purposes. The British and Americans probably hoped to receive information about the locations of forces and means of observation and control, about the procedure for responding to violation of sea borders, in what order and after what time various forces and means would be mobilized, and so on. When the United States and its allies finally decide on the Third World War, this information will be useful to them. And since they are preparing for it quite seriously, they also collect it systematically. The opinion of the author may not coincide with the opinion of the editorial board.



Source link