On October 4, 2001, 16 years ago, Ukraine shot down a Russian passenger plane Tu-154M of Siberia Airlines, flying from Tel Aviv to Novosibirsk, over the Black Sea. Everyone on board died.
The catastrophe over the Black Sea, which was forgotten over the years, as a result of which 78 people died on the Tel Aviv-Novosibirsk flight, has not yet found its logical conclusion. Having admitted its guilt, Ukraine did not pay compensation Russian airline"Siberia" in the amount of $15 million, limited to payments of $200,000 for each dead Israeli and Russian. Shot down, shot down, but we will not answer in full - this is in the style of the current policy of Kyiv.
Scheduled flight SBI1812 on the route Tel Aviv - Novosibirsk, operated on the morning of October 4, 2001 from David Ben Gurion Airport to Tolmachevo Airport, was interrupted after 1 hour and 45 minutes of flight. The liner was at an altitude of 11 thousand meters and was about to start descending at the airport in Sochi, where intermediate refueling was to take place. Before landing in Russian resort town there were about 200 kilometers left when the crew recorded the fact that their aircraft had hit the missile’s sight and managed to send several signals on the air with an alarm button. It was no longer possible to deviate from the damaging effect of a missile rushing to intercept - the pilots only had time to notice that they were being attacked.
As you know, it was at this time that Ukrainian air defense exercises were held on the territory of Cape Opuk in Crimea, which were attended, among other things, by foreign observers. Shooting at training air targets was carried out, including from the S-200V complexes, the missile of which mistakenly hit a civilian ship.
“Malignant intent in the downed Tu-154 over the Black Sea in 2001 is difficult to assume, rather it was not,” says military expert Vladislav Shurygin. - Then there was no such amount of negativity in the minds of Ukrainian citizens in relation to the Russians. Moreover, it was international flight, on board the aircraft were mostly Israeli citizens and Ukraine would not risk running into such a major scandal that it could not get out of. The reason seems to be different - by that time, graduates of specialized military schools had not entered the Air Defense Forces of Ukraine for ten years, and many of the current officers either quit or left for Russia. Most likely, the operator of the S-200V complex was simply not professionally trained enough, plus he was under psychological pressure from high authorities, who demanded to show skill in the eyes of foreign observers. All this could lead to the fact that instead of the training target, which was 60 kilometers away, the operator aimed the missile at a target that was 250-300 kilometers away - he mixed it up! The main thing was to make the launch faster and show the dashing of the Ukrainian PVEs. The result is known."
After the catastrophe, Kyiv immediately went into "non-consciousness" and for a long time denied participation in the tragedy of its rocket.
“Tragedies when a civilian aircraft becomes a victim of the military (for various reasons) are not so rare,” says media consultant Alexander Zimovsky. - In such cases, there is an iron rule: deny everything. In addition, the great powers can afford one more liberties. Justify the destruction of a civilian aircraft by recognizing it as a military incident. This is how Americans behave. Remember the Iranian Airbus that was shot down by a missile from the American cruiser Vincennes?
Then 290 people died, the commander of the ship received an order.
Ukraine, as a third-rate country, cannot afford such a luxury. Therefore, in the case of the destruction of the Tu-154 over the Black Sea in 2001, Kyiv went into complete "unconsciousness". I am well aware of all the circumstances of the tragedy, because in 2001 our television company reported that a Ukrainian air defense system had shot down a passenger plane during firing in Crimea. I myself curated this special news release, and conducted fact-checking based on data from American tracking and warning systems. They immediately and without hesitation pointed to the Ukrainian origin of the rocket that shot down the plane that took off from Tel Aviv.
In the future, the Ukrainian generals and officials went into denial. But then, in the first few hours, out of fear, almost all those involved on the Ukrainian side did not dispute the incident in any way. The command of the Armed Forces of Ukraine recognized both the fact of the exercises, and the very conduct of firing in the indicated area, and the loss of control over the fired missile by the combat crew of the air defense system. And even the command of the Minister of Defense Kuzmuk to the commander of the air defense system, who expressed doubts about the captured target, was even preserved in Ukrainian military folklore: "Knock him down on x..!"
. Two weeks later, Kuzmuk was removed from his post.
On that fateful day, at the Opuk training ground, a show was staged for President Kuchma. The Minister of Defense of Ukraine, General of the Army Kuzmuk, conducted himself, with him were the Commander-in-Chief of the Air Defense of Ukraine, Colonel General Vladimir Tkachev and his deputy for combat training, Lieutenant General Vladimir Dyakov, commander of the 49th Ukrainian Corps, Lieutenant General Kalinyuk. Kuchma was saved only by the fact that he “fell ill” the day before (this often happened to him), and did not arrive at the training ground. However, he never denied either the incident itself or Ukraine's guilt in what happened. Even if with an indispensable clause about the accident of the tragedy.
Then, following the results of an official investigation of the tragedy in the sky over the Black Sea, many high-ranking military personnel who, even if indirectly, were resigned Russian aircraft. At the same time, none of them was put on trial - everyone got off with a censure. Moreover, all this time Ukraine has been putting forward and is putting forward versions of its non-involvement in the incident and, despite the results of the investigations, is “pushing through” the version of an internal explosion on board a civil aircraft. And today, on the next anniversary, no one in Kyiv remembers that terrible tragedy - such "accuracy" of Ukrainian air defense is clearly not held in high esteem today.
P.S.
The Commission of the Interstate Aviation Committee (IAC), after examining the wreckage, came to the conclusion that the liner was "unintentionally hit" by an S-200 Surface-to-Air anti-aircraft missile launched by the Ukrainian air defense forces, which were conducting military exercises that day at Cape Opuk in Crimea. It was assumed that the operator of the anti-aircraft complex, having discovered several objects in the sky, did not begin to determine the distance to the target and "highlighted" (to determine the rocket) a more powerful object, which turned out to be the Tu-154. And the training target at that time was at a closer distance, but less noticeable than the plane.
Five minutes after the plane was shot down, this was reported via open communications of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Then the Americans immediately shared information about the launch of the rocket.
At the same time, the Minister of Defense of Ukraine, at first, Oleksandr Kuzmuk, said that on October 4, the exercises of the air defense forces did not take place. And the press service of the Ukrainian Navy reported that the exercises were nevertheless carried out, but they began after the plane crash, which turned out to be a lie.
On October 9, a representative of the commission for the investigation of the disaster stated: an analysis of the holes in the fuselage showed that the aircraft could have been hit by a missile from the S-200 air defense system, since the size and shape of the holes are consistent with the shrapnel of the high-explosive fragmentation warhead of the missile of this particular complex .
On October 10, 2001, President of Ukraine Leonid Kuchma answered journalists' questions about the causes of the plane crash
- Look what's going on around the world, in Europe? We are not the first and not the last, there is no need to make a tragedy out of this. Mistakes happen everywhere, and not only on this scale, but on a much larger, planetary scale. If we do not lower ourselves below the civilized level, everything will be fine. And if we pour a bucket of dirt on ourselves, then you are welcome.
The death of a passenger Boeing over the Donbass in the summer of 2014 was far from the first case of the destruction of a passenger airliner by means of air defense. The most notorious of these disasters were the downing of a South Korean Boeing, shot down by a Soviet fighter over the Tatar Strait in 1983, and the destruction by the US military of an Iranian A-300 airliner over Persian Gulf in 1988.
In the shadow of these cases, there remains the tragedy that happened at a time when the Cold War was forgotten, and a new round of confrontation was yet to come.
In the autumn of 2001, immediately after the September 11 attacks, the world seemed to rally in a single impulse to fight international terrorism. The events that unfolded in the skies over the Black Sea on October 4, 2001 were also initially perceived as an attack by extremists. However, as was later established, they had a completely different nature.
On the morning of October 4, 2001, a Tu-154M took off from David Ben-Gurion International Airport in Israel with tail number RA-85693. The plane, which belonged to the Russian airline Siberia, was operating flight SBI 1812 on the Tel Aviv-Novosibirsk route. On board were 66 passengers and 12 crew members.
The flight went smoothly until 13:45 Moscow time. At that moment, the Tu-154 disappeared from the radar screens. The plane was at an altitude of 11,000 meters, about 200 kilometers southwest of Sochi.
Almost immediately, the dispatchers received a message from the Armavia An-24 located in the same area. The pilot reported that he had observed a bright flash at a higher flight level.
“There is no reason not to trust the Ukrainian side”
After that, there was practically no doubt that a catastrophe had occurred. Rescue ships came out to the place of the alleged crash in the Black Sea, as well as planes of the Ministry of Defense and the Federal Border Service.
On the surface of the water found the wreckage of the Tu-154 and the body dead people. At the same time, most of the aircraft structures, as well as the remains of the dead, went to the bottom.
In the place where the Russian plane crashed, the depth of the Black Sea exceeds 2000 meters, and the bottom is heavily silted. In the future, this fact will play an important role in this story.
By the time of the Tu-154 crash, less than a month had passed since the terrorist attack on New York. In addition, the plane was flying from Tel Aviv, so the version of the bomb on board immediately arose.
Unlike the story that happened in 2014, in 2001 the United States did not seek to classify the data it had about the disaster.
Thanks to the leak of this information in the media, within a few hours, US television companies reported sensational information: the Russian airliner was apparently shot down by a missile from the Ukrainian S-200 air defense system, launched during military exercises.
Initially, the Russian side, relying on information received from Kyiv, denied such a possibility.
“Firstly, all the necessary services in Ukraine were informed in advance. Secondly, the weapons that were used at that time, according to tactical and technical data, could not reach the air corridors in which our aircraft was located ... In any case, there is no reason not to trust the Ukrainian side, ”said on the day of the disaster Russian President Vladimir Putin.
"Where did you go?!"
The Ministry of Defense of Ukraine, in turn, confirmed that training firing of anti-aircraft systems was indeed carried out at the firing range at Cape Opuk, during which 23 missiles were fired. The exercises were attended by representatives of Russia and other states. It was confirmed that the S-200 complex was also used, however, it was argued that it could not hit the Tu-154 of Siberia Airlines in any way.
However, on October 5 Prime Minister of Ukraine Anatoly Kinakh stated that the version of the rocket hitting the plane "has the right to exist."
Israeli experts also worked together with Russian specialists. Particular attention was drawn to the data recorded by the center's tape recorder. automated control air traffic "Strela".
At 13:45 the tape recorder recorded a signal corresponding to the exit of the crew to external communication accompanied by an emotional outcry. Over the next seconds, the external communication button was pressed several more times, due to which noise and screams on board were recorded. It was also possible to make out the phrase “Where did it go ?!”, which was shouted by one of the pilots.
On October 9, a representative of the commission for the investigation of the disaster stated: an analysis of the holes in the fuselage showed that the aircraft could have been hit by a missile from the S-200 air defense system, since the size and shape of the holes are consistent with the shrapnel of the high-explosive fragmentation warhead of the missile of this particular complex .
"We are not the first and not the last"
By this time, the rescuers reported that it was unlikely that it would be possible to raise the main part of the fuselage from the bottom - at the silted bottom at a depth of two kilometers, visibility was almost zero, and it was almost impossible to carry out work.
October 10 Deputy Prosecutor General Sergei Fridinsky stated that a forensic examination of the bodies recovered from the water showed that all the victims died from barotrauma. This meant that the liner rapidly collapsed at high altitude. The presence of carbon monoxide in the blood of the dead indicated that a fire had broken out on board.
The totality of the facts left no doubt - the Tu-154 was destroyed by an anti-aircraft missile.
On the same day, journalists asked President of Ukraine Leonid Kuchma, whether he agrees with the conclusions of Russian experts. The President replied that he would accept the conclusions that the joint working group would finally approve.
Kuchma did not stop there and uttered the words that went down in history: “Look what is happening around the world, in Europe ... we are not the first and not the last, there is no need to make a tragedy out of this. Mistakes happen everywhere, and not only on this scale, but on a much larger, planetary scale. If we do not lower ourselves below the civilized level, everything will be fine. And if we pour a bucket of dirt on ourselves, then you are welcome.
The words of the President of Ukraine caused, to put it mildly, misunderstanding. The press service of the Israeli Prime Minister circulated the following response: “When the victim is not a representative of your people, then it is probably possible to make such academic conclusions. 78 people died, most of them Israelis - for us this is the greatest tragedy.”
Wrong "backlight"
The final conclusion of the Interstate Aviation Committee stated that the plane was inadvertently shot down by a Ukrainian S-200 anti-aircraft missile launched during military exercises in Crimea.
The S-200 anti-aircraft missile system uses a semi-active guidance system, when a powerful ground-based radar ("target illumination") serves as a source of radiation and the missile is guided by the signal reflected from the target.
During the exercises on October 4, 2001, the Ty-154 aircraft accidentally ended up in the center of the intended firing sector of the training target and had a radial speed close to it, as a result of which it was detected by the S-200 system radar and taken as a training target.
The operator of the S-200 complex, who worked in the presence of high-ranking officers from several countries, got nervous and, instead of an inconspicuous training target, “highlighted” the passenger Tu-154. At the same time, the airliner ended up in a zone that was not declared prohibited during firing and in which the S-200 missile, due to its characteristics, could hit the target.
In twenty days Minister of Defense of Ukraine Oleksandr Kuzmuk was retired. A number of Ukrainian generals and colonels were dismissed from service or demoted in ranks, but the official linking of these personnel decisions to death Russian airliner did not have.
Unlike the investigation into the downing of the MH-17 flight over the Donbass, the investigation into the Tu-154 crash over the Black Sea did not need to show “cartoons” and dubious photos from the Internet as evidence. According to experts, the data collected was enough to win the case against Ukraine in the international court.
Compensation without admission of guilt
However, at that time, the top leadership of Russia felt that the matter should be settled amicably. Moreover, Ukraine expressed an open desire for this.
On December 26, 2003, Russia and Ukraine signed an agreement "On the Settlement of Claims", according to which 7.8 million dollars were transferred to pay the relatives of the dead Russian passengers. Ukraine signed a similar agreement with Israel, to which 7.5 million dollars were paid.
Compensation was paid ex gratia, that is, without recognition of legal liability. Thus, Israel and Russia agreed that Ukraine would save face by not admitting guilt for the destruction of the Tu-154 officially.
In September 2004, the General Prosecutor's Office of Ukraine closed the criminal case on the fact of the crash, since the investigation did not establish objective data that would reliably indicate that the Tu-154 was shot down by an S-200 missile launched during the exercises of the Ukrainian air defense forces.
The tactics of the Ukrainian side is as follows - since the main part of the aircraft remained at the bottom of the Black Sea, then the fact of the destruction of the aircraft by a Ukrainian air defense missile cannot be considered proven. And it’s too late to make claims to Ukraine at the state level - the issue was resolved “amicably” back in 2003.
It's Putin's fault
Such interstate agreements did not suit many relatives of the victims. Some considered the compensation insufficient, while others generally believed that it was not about money, but about punishing the guilty.
Especially for such persistent ones, the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine ordered an examination in 2008, which declared the conclusions of the IAC untenable. According to Ukrainian experts, the S-200 complex could not shoot down the Tu-154. Experts did not rule out that the source of damage to the aircraft could be located both outside and inside the liner, in particular, it could be an explosive device placed "between the ceiling of the inner part of the aircraft" and its outer shell.
On the basis of this conclusion, in 2011 the Kyiv Economic Court rejected a $15 million lawsuit filed by Siberia Airlines against the Ministry of Defense and the State Treasury of Ukraine.
But that's not all. In the early 2010s, “investigations” appeared in the Ukrainian media, the authors of which claimed that an air defense error had taken place, but the culprits were not Ukrainian, but Russian military.
Especially actively this version began to be exaggerated after February 2014, and especially after the death of the Boeing over the Donbass.
According to this version, the Tu-154 was allegedly shot down by the S-300 complex, which belonged to the Russian army. After that, according to supporters of this theory, Russian President Vladimir Putin secretly agreed with the head of Ukraine, Leonid Kuchma, that the Ukrainian side would “take the blame” for certain financial preferences.
Adherents of this version rely on the decision of the Ukrainian courts, which is based on the conclusions of Ukrainian experts.
All this could have been avoided if Russia in the early 2000s had no illusions about maintaining good-neighborly relations with Ukraine, for the sake of which, in fact, the agreement “On the Settlement of Claims” was concluded in 2003. But what's done is done.
Most of those who lost their loved ones on October 4, 2001 cannot come to their graves - the bottom of the Black Sea has become a resting place for passengers and crew members of the Tu-154. And Ukrainian “experts”, journalists and politicians have been mocking the memory of the dead for a decade and a half. But, on the advice of President Kuchma - "do not make a tragedy out of this."
Putin and the Kremlin organized crime group are also obliged to be punished for the downed Tu 154. Former Communist Party organizer L. Kuchma is silent about this a lot. But, the truth will still break into the world when Mordor falls.:And the Tu-154 plane in 2001 was shot down by the Russians with the S-300 complexThere is a worldwide preparation for the International Tribunal. Russian Federation not the first time to try to avoid responsibility for the downed passenger planes. To lie, to dissemble, to dodge - it's so painfully familiar. October 4, 2001 Russian air defense missile S-300 shot down a passenger Tu-154. We will reveal this secret in the article Mikhail Prytula NUіNA only what was hushed up. Only verified information from court cases. Enjoy!
Let me remind you that on October 4, 2001 at 09:49-50 GMT in the Black Sea, an aircraft of Siberia Airlines, onboard RA-85693, flight SBI1812, en route from Tel Aviv to Novosibirsk, was shot down. According to the conclusion Russian The Interstate Aviation Committee (IAC), at an altitude of 11 thousand meters, the plane was unintentionally shot down by a Ukrainian S-200 anti-aircraft missile. All 66 passengers and 12 crew members died." Everything else is shrouded in mystery.
Now you will see the reader that the Tu-154 plane was most likely shot down by the Russians, but why Ukraine took it upon itself politically - this should be asked from Kuchma and Kuzmuk. Subsequently, the courts did not legally confirm that the plane was shot down by a Ukrainian missile. The question of which missile shot down the plane is still open.
We will only talk about facts, both those that are in the materials of court cases, and those that are not there for some reason. But, as they say, the presence of the presence of the absence of presence is also a fact.
On October 4, 2001, in the Crimea, from the range of the 31st research center of the Black Sea Fleet of the Russian Federation, firing exercises were carried out. Those. near Cape Opuk.
Launched 23 missiles. Different. The Russians were shooting, ours were shooting too. Ground-based anti-aircraft missile systems S-200, S-300, S-125, complexes Buk, Kub, Ukrainian ships frigate "Sagaydachny" and corvette "Lutsk", as well as the ship of the Black Sea Fleet of the Russian Federation "Inquisitive" were used.
It's all out of the picture for some reason. Like the words of Putin HIMSELF that the plane could not have been shot down by a Ukrainian missile. These words of the intelligence officer, spoken immediately after the incident, are known to me, as a counterintelligence officer, under the name "moment of truth." When a person is not lying.
Subsequently, a political decision was made that the rocket was Ukrainian and the IAC approved this political decision.
The courts have repeatedly considered the claims of relatives and the Russian airline Siberia itself against Ukraine, and all the courts, after examining the evidence, refused to admit that the plane was shot down by a Ukrainian missile, for the simple reason that the Ukrainian missile could not do it, which was confirmed by the relevant examinations.
But no one ever considered the question of what kind of missile shot down the plane.
All the ships and launchers participating in the exercises were not officially examined. This is not the case in the materials of court decisions.
But what is there is the Conclusion of the Kyiv Research Institute of Forensic Examinations. Since I once served as an operative of the Special Department of the KGB of the USSR and served a part of the air defense system, with the S-300, S-200 and S-75 systems, incl. with nuclear warheads, then I fully agree with this conclusion.
First, the rocket that hit the plane exploded on top of the plane, at a height of about 15 meters, one and a half meters to the left of the middle of the rear passenger compartment. You know, on top!! Above the plane! By the way, no one saw the top of the plane. (See paragraph 1, 17 of the Expert Visnovka of the KNDI Ship Expertise, below)
Do you know what kind of missile attacks the plane from above? S-300. And who fired the S-300 missile? The S-300 missile was fired at the same time by air defense units of the Russian Federation. At the same time as ours.
And how fast is the S-300 rocket flying? 2000 m / s, i.e. one and a half times faster than the S-200 rocket, and the S-300 can fly 50 km in 30 seconds, which coincides with the data on the Gelendzhik radar detection of an object 50 km from the Tu-154 in 30 seconds before the disaster (see paragraph 5 of the Expert Visnovka of the KNDI Ship Expertise)
Guidance S-300 - semi-active - i.e. the missile, having captured the target, goes to it by itself, it does not need a target illumination locator, but the S-200 rocket needs such a locator, if the target illumination locator is turned off, the 5V28 missile will go to a height of self-destruction (see paragraph 8 of the Expert Visnovka of the KNDI Ship Expertise)
Therefore, it's time to go interview Kuzmuk, who was wrongly credited with the downing passenger aircraft. He didn't and couldn't do it.
The entire investigation of the IAC went in one direction - to prove the guilt of Ukraine. But who actually did it - no one was looking. After all, relatives of the dead believe Putin.
Examination of the Kyiv Research Institute of Forensic Examinations (original in Ukrainian can be read at the link. Ed.)
The main purpose of the appointment of this expertise by the court was to examine by expert means the possibility of impression on 04.10.2001. complex S-200V, located in the area of Feodosia in 09. year. 41 min. 20 sec.
Decision of the Economic Court. Kyiv to completely reject the claim was based, in particular, on the results of the expertise of the Kyiv Research Institute of Forensic Expertise. The court invited the parties to submit their proposals on issues to be resolved during the examination, and taking this into account, the following questions were put to the decision of the experts by the court (with a brief overview of the result of the examination):
1. If we assume that the Tu-154M aircraft was shot down by a 5V28 missile of the S-200V anti-aircraft missile system, then there may be a point of undermining the warhead 5B14Sh of the 5V28 missile of the S-200V anti-aircraft missile system at a height of 15 m above the aircraft body and 1 5 m to the left of the central part of the rear passenger compartment, as indicated in the conclusions of the Russian Interstate Aviation Committee?
The point of detonation of the warhead of the S-200V air defense missile system could not occupy the place indicated in the conclusions of the IAC.
2. How were located in airspace On October 4, 2001, the Tu-154M aircraft of Siberia Airlines JSC, AN-24 of Armenian Airlines and Airbus, which was flying on the Tbilisi-London route, at the time the S-200V air defense system began firing, according to photographic control of radar stations who monitored the airspace in the exercise area and outside the closed zone?
At the time of the launch of the S-200V air defense missile system at the target, the Tu-154M aircraft was at a distance of more than 270 km at an azimuth of 155 ° relative to the command site of the test site. The target was at a distance of 38 km under an azimuth of 145 ° relative to the CP of the range.
3. Is it possible to determine the direction and flight path of the 5V28 rocket based on the materials of photo control of radar stations that conducted airspace observations in the area of the exercises and outside the closed zone on October 4, 2001, and in the materials of objective control of the Gelendzhik radar, if so, then the direction of flight missiles?
There are no data in the RLC control materials that would help to fully determine the flight path of the 5V28 missile from the moment it was launched until the moment it was liquidated. There is also no data that would confirm the location of the rocket near the aircraft at the time of its crash.
4. Corresponds to the data of objective control recorded on the photo tables of radar stations, which conducted on October 4, 2001 observations of airspace in the area of the exercises and outside the closed zone and in the materials of objective control of the Gelendzhik radar, the conclusions of the Russian Interstate Aviation Committee on the destruction of the Tu-154M aircraft belonging to the plaintiff, missile 5V28 ZRK S-200V air defense units of the Armed Forces of Ukraine?
No, they don't.
5. According to the objective control data of the Gelendzhik radar, on October 4, 2001, an unknown object was observed in the airspace, which was moving towards the Tu-154M aircraft belonging to the plaintiff, at a distance of 49.9 km 30 seconds before the aircraft was hit. If we assume that the unknown object was a 5V28 missile of the S-200V air defense system of the Ukrainian air defense units, then could the missile be indicated in 30 seconds according to its performance characteristics to overcome the distance to the aircraft for 49.9 km and hit it?
The 5V28 missile, according to its performance characteristics, could not overcome the distance to the aircraft for 49.9 km in 30 seconds and hit it.
6. What conclusions can be drawn from the results of the analysis of the possible flight path of the 5V28 missile and its compliance with the conclusions of the Interstate Aviation Committee; possible miss values when aiming a missile at the Tu-154M aircraft and the conditions for the operation of the 5V28 missile's radio control unit?
The flight path of the 5V28 missile given in the materials of the IAC does not fully comply with the principles of operation of the S-200V air defense system. And the modeling method used by the IAC experts is not justified.
7. On October 4, 2001, before live firing, the S-200V anti-aircraft missile system and the 5V28 missile were technically serviceable, and was it possible, due to their technical condition, to conduct live firing with the named complex and missile?
Thus, the technical condition of the S-200V air defense system and the 5V28 missile made it possible to carry out live firing at the Reis target.
8. What was the range of detection and tracking by radio equipment S-200V and other radio equipment involved during the exercises on October 4, 2001 of an aerial target - an unmanned aircraft BP-3 "Reis", Tu-154M aircraft belonging to the plaintiff, AN-24 "Armenian airlines" and "Airbus", following the route "Tbilisi-London", at the time of the launch of the 5V28 rocket?
The radio equipment of the S-200V air defense system detected and escorted only the VR-3 "Reis" target and did not detect or escort other aircraft. The Tu-154M aircraft was 270 km away and only the P-14 radar station of the radio engineering battalion in Kerch was observed.
Considering that the VR-3 “Reis” target was destroyed by the S-300PS air defense system 11 km from the S-200V air defense system (12 hours 42 minutes), it was not physically possible to accompany it with S-200V radio equipment in the future, therefore The radiation signal of the ROC was stopped at 12 noon. 42 min. 20 s.
9. Were there opportunities in the radio equipment of the S-200V air defense system, other radio equipment involved in the exercises of 04.10.2001, Recognition of the nationality of the air target VR-3 "Flight", Tu-154M, AN-24 aircraft?
The Tu-154M aircraft was equipped with outdated Kremniy-2M state affiliation identification equipment. According to the control data, there was no “I am mine” signal from the Tu-154M aircraft along the entire route of its flight to the point of disaster.
If the Tu-154M aircraft had responded to the request, then the Start command would have been blocked and the missile would not have been launched.
10. The conclusions of Russian specialists are confirmed that the radar tracking of the Tu-154M aircraft was carried out by the radar of the S-200V anti-aircraft missile system until the missile warhead was blown up, the total flight time of the missile was 220 seconds, during which it covered a distance of about 240 kilometers to the point of destruction aircraft?
With radar tracking by the Russian Orthodox Church of the Tu-154M aircraft and guidance of the 5V28 missile, the trajectory of the missile would differ significantly from the trajectory given in the materials of the IAC. The materials of the case do not confirm the radar tracking of the Tu-154M aircraft by means of the S-200V air defense system.
11. What is the maximum allowable launch range of the 5V28 missile of the S-200V anti-aircraft missile system against the VR-3 Reis unmanned target, Tu-154M, AN-24 aircraft?
In order to carry out the shelling of the Tu-154M aircraft by the S-200V air defense system at a distance of 240 km, the launch range should be 290 km. At the same time, at the time of the missile launch, the Tu-154M aircraft was 270 km away and in a different angular direction than the target.
12. Was it possible on 04.11.2001 by the radio equipment of the S-200V anti-aircraft missile system, according to their tactical and technical characteristics, to simultaneously identify and accompany the VR-3 “Reis” airborne unmanned target, Tu-154M, AN-24 aircraft?
No, the radio equipment of the S-200V air defense system does not allow you to simultaneously identify and track all three of these targets.
13. Does the launch time of the 5V28 missile correspond to the trajectory of the 5V28 missile flight in the event of a Tu-154M aircraft crash and is determined by the commission of the Interstate Aviation Committee according to the objective control data indicated in the investigation materials provided by the IAC commission?
Rocket launch 5V28: 12 hours 41 minutes. 20 s. Kyiv time (9 hours 41 minutes 20 seconds UTC). In the materials of the IAC, discrepancies were revealed at a certain point in time of the crash of the Tu-154M aircraft. The probable time of the crash of the Tu-154M aircraft may be 09:00. 49 min. — 9 h. 50 min. UTC. The results of the examination showed that the flight path of the 5V28 missile given in the materials of the IAC generally contradicts the real principles of the operation of the S-200V air defense system when the missile is aimed at the target.
14. Is there any evidence indicating that the aircraft crash occurred as a result of the damaging factors of the combat 5B14Sh missile 5V28?
See paragraphs. 16, 17.
15. Can radar tracking of the Tu-154M aircraft by the radar of the S-200V anti-aircraft missile system and missile guidance to the target until the warhead is detonated in the event of a power outage of the ROC, and is there evidence in the materials of the Interstate Aviation Committee confirming the fact that the ROC was turned on ?
When the power of the ROC was turned off, it was impossible to escort the Tu-154M aircraft, and it was also impossible to aim the missile at the target and trigger its radio control. There is no evidence of the work of the ROC on radiation until the moment of the crash of the Tu-154M aircraft in the materials of the IAC.
16. What could have led to the Tu-154M crash?
17. Where was the source of influence on the Tu-154M aircraft of the Tel Aviv-Novosibirsk flight with tail number RA-85693 (inside or outside of such an aircraft), which resulted in the crash of such an aircraft on 04.10.2001?
The crash of the Tu-154M aircraft occurred due to the action on its parts in the direction from above the middle of numerous solid objects that had a circular cross section with a diameter of about 10 mm and had significant kinetic energy. Belonging to a specific explosive device striking elements can not be established due to the lack of appropriate identifying features. Due to the absence of the upper outer part of the airframe of the aircraft, it is also impossible to establish the specific location of the source of influence on the elements of destruction.
What do we know about the crash over the Black Sea on October 4, 2001 - this is a “severe plane crash that occurred on October 4, 2001. Tu-154M crashed over the Black Sea ( registration number RA-85693, factory 91A866) of Siberia Airlines, operating flight SBI1812 en route Tel Aviv - Novosibirsk. According to the conclusion of the Interstate Aviation Committee (IAC), at an altitude of 11,000 meters, the plane was unintentionally shot down by a Ukrainian S-200 anti-aircraft missile fired into the air as part of military exercises held on the Crimean peninsula. All 66 passengers and 12 crew members died."
Here's everything we know about this disaster. It seems that everything is simple and clear Ukrainian air defense during the exercises, which was attended by the President of Ukraine Kuchma, shot down a Russian plane. It turns out that not everything is so simple in the events of that tragic day. If you dig a little into the history of the issue, it turns out that the Russian and Ukrainian military conducted training firing at the range of the 31st Research Center of the Black Sea Fleet of the Russian Federation (http://sevastopol.su/author_page.php?id=21997&parent=1034) on Cape Opuk: in the presence of delegations from 7 states.
Ground-based anti-aircraft missile systems S-200, S-300, S-125, complexes Buk, Kub, Ukrainian ships frigate "Sagaydachny" and corvette "Lutsk", as well as the ship of the Black Sea Fleet of the Russian Federation "Inquisitive", equipped with anti-aircraft missile systems " Wasp", took part in firing at the Tu-143 unmanned reconnaissance aircraft, known as the "Flight" target. A total of 23 missiles were fired at targets. Flight SBI1812 departed from international airport named after David Ben-Gurion at 8:00 UTC (10:00 Israel time). At 09:39 UTC, the aircraft entered the area of responsibility No. 7 of the North Caucasian Center for Automated Air Traffic Control (ACC ATC) "Strela" and the crew informed the controller about the passage of the obligatory ODIRA reporting point.
The flight was carried out at an altitude of 11,100 meters within the B-145 international airway, which was not subject to any restrictions, including temporary ones that were in effect during the exercise of the Russian and Ukrainian air defense forces. At 09:45 UTC (13:45 Moscow time), the tape recorder of the Strela ATC SCC recorded a sound signal corresponding to the crew's access to external communication, accompanied by an emotional scream. Subsequently, within 45 seconds, several more signals were recorded from pressing the onboard VHF radio button by the crew members, followed by noises and screams of the crew members (including the phrase “...where did it go (o) ...”), indicating a sudden the occurrence of an emergency on board the aircraft.
Almost simultaneously with the first press, the controller noted the disappearance of the aircraft tag from the radar screens. The plane at that time was at an altitude of 11 kilometers, about 200 kilometers southwest of the city of Sochi. At the same time, the crew of the An-24 aircraft of Armenian Airlines, located in the same area, reported a flash over it. The coordinates of the approximate crash site were determined at 42°11′ s. sh. 37°37′ E which is about 280 kilometers from Novorossiysk. For the layman, everything seems obvious at first glance, but it turns out not everything is so simple.................
During the investigation, the following facts were established.
1. At 13:42 Moscow time, the radiation of the radar equipment of the S-200V complex of the Ukrainian air defense was stopped.
2. According to the control data of the Russian radar station "Gelendzhik" dated October 4, 2001, a 5V28 ZRK S 200V missile was observed in the airspace 30 seconds before the explosion at a distance of 50 km from the crash site.
3. The report states that the Tu-143 "Reis" target was destroyed three minutes before the Tu-154 crash by fire from the Russian S-300 PS air defense system, located 11 km from the Ukrainian S-200V air defense system.
And here everything turns out to be clear, one has only to look at the performance characteristics of the missiles of the S-200 and S-300 air defense systems.
The first thing that catches your eye is that the missile of the Ukrainian S-200 air defense system technically could not overcome the distance of 50 km to the Tu-154 aircraft in 30 seconds. (http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D1-200) Rocket flight speed: 700-1200 m/s, depending on range......
That is, the maximum distance where the missile of the Ukrainian S-200 air defense system could fly in 30 seconds is 36 km. Let me remind you that the distance from the Ukrainian S-200 missile to the Tu-154 30 seconds before the explosion was 50 km. And then other design differences pop up S-200 air defense systems used by Ukrainian air defense and S-300 air defense systems used by Russian air defense. The S-200 air defense system uses a passive missile targeting system, and the S-300 air defense system uses a semi-active missile targeting system.
This means that the S-200 air defense missile of the Ukrainian air defense could hit the aircraft only if the ground-based radar illuminated the target, and as established by the investigation, Ukrainian radar equipment was turned off three minutes before the explosion. That is, it turns out that the missile of the Ukrainian S-200 air defense system was not aimed at the target or it had already hit the Tu-143 Reis target. And the S-300 air defense missile has a more modern semi-active guidance system that allows the missile itself to aim at the target without using illumination from the Earth.
Through a brief analysis, it can be assumed that the Tu-154 aircraft of the AK Sibir was shot down by a Russian air defense S-300 missile, which captured the aircraft as a target after the Ukrainian S-200 SAM system shot down the target. Against the backdrop of such a confusing story, it is also very strange that the investigation of this plane crash was not carried out by the ICAO international commission, but by a commission of representatives from Russia and Ukraine led by Secretary of the Russian Security Council Vladimir Rushailo.
It feels like the killers were investigating a murder that they themselves committed ..................
An indirect recognition that Ukraine was not involved in the death of the aircraft AK "Siberia" is the speech of Vladimir Putin immediately after the crash on the evening of October 4, 2001 (http://www.newsru.com/russia/04Oct2001/tu154_pu.html) . Vladimir Putin said that the Ukrainian air defense forces could not shoot down the Russian Tu-154 aircraft that crashed on Thursday in the Black Sea during the exercises.
"Firstly, all the necessary services in Ukraine were informed in advance .......... Secondly, the weapons that were used in At that time, according to tactical and technical data, it could not reach the air corridors in which our aircraft was located," Putin said.
Another question arises: “Why did Kuchma eventually admit that the Ukrainian air defense shot down the plane? .............. I have only one answer to him - Kuchma received good money for admitting guilt for Putin . Do not forget that Putin in 2001 just got away with the scandal with the nuclear submarine "Kursk", ...... and then there is a loud scandal with the death of Israeli citizens.
So I had to persuade Kuchma and his military to take responsibility for the dead people. Indirect evidence of this is the fact that the court of Ukraine confirmed the innocence of the military in the crash of the Tu-154 in 2001.////
The International Aviation Committee, which is based in Moscow, directly blamed Ukraine for the plane crash.
- Comrade General, I wish you good health.
Good evening.
Alexander Ivanovich, I will read you a dry summary, I think it will tell you a lot: on October 4, 2001, a Tu-154 aircraft flying on a Tel- Aviv - Novosibirsk with 74 passengers and crew on board. The Russians claim that Ukrainians shot down the plane. However, I know there is another point of view. Do you know her?
We have an interesting start. I wonder what the sequel will be. But I'm ready for it. A great human tragedy really happened 16 years ago on October 4th. I'll tell you how it was. Planned exercises of the Air Defense Forces of Ukraine and Air force which are regularly held every two years. And, as a rule, the commanders of the air defense and air forces of all neighboring states, including Russia, were invited. At the final stage of firing, the commander of the Air Defense Forces and the Russian Air Force, Colonel-General Kornukov, announced the tragedy that occurred over Sea of Azov. Naturally, all those present expressed their condolences. Nobody knew then what had happened.
- Did he say what kind of tragedy?
That the plane went missing...
- ... disappeared ...
- ... the plane crashed over the Sea of \u200b\u200bAzov. By evening it turned out that over Cherny. And, of course, we were the first to react, because the exercises were held here. I flew to Cape Opuk and demanded a selection of all the launches that were made at that moment. In terms of time and capabilities, only one complex was suitable - the S-200, which theoretically could reach the aircraft, because in practice it shoots at targets at a distance of 70 kilometers. But the place of the plane's death has not yet been established, so the very wording "was shot down by a missile" is not entirely accurate. We checked everything and opened a criminal case, as did the Russian Prosecutor General's Office. However, the first excitement was under the article "terrorism". And then they began to search for the wreckage. Why is the exact location of the plane crash not determined? Because they were carried away by the current for a long distance. But some fragments have been raised rescue equipment Ministry of Emergency Situations of the Russian Federation. Although the most interesting began later. On the 12-13th day after the crash, the International Aviation Committee, which is in Moscow, directly blamed Ukraine for the plane crash. Compare: a Malaysian Boeing was shot down three years ago, and there are still no final investigation materials. Despite the fact that the wreckage of this aircraft ended up on the ground, and there - at a depth of 2000 meters. And on the 12th day, Ukraine was blamed for the disaster! The Russian Federation referred the criminal case to the Prosecutor General's Office of Ukraine, which launched a very thorough investigation. And this is where the inconsistencies began. First, of the wreckage that was found, not a single fragment of the aircraft's outer skin was damaged, and quite a few were found. Including the nose of the aircraft, where they simply had to be, but they were absent. However, on the internal parts of the aircraft, between the first and second cabins, there were damages ...
- ... the explosion was from the inside?
The International Aviation Committee went on to say that the explosion occurred 18 meters above the aircraft's tail. How they determined this, we do not know. This class of missiles, a type of complexes, does not shoot after, but in advance. Fragments of a projectile and combat submunitions were found. Unfortunately, in the bodies of the dead. We have done all kinds of analysis. Here is a new inconsistency: they did not coincide with each other. And spectral analysis showed that they do not belong to the warhead of the rocket. Because we dismantled the shells that were made in the same workshop with the previous and subsequent numbers in relation to the one fired, and they did not coincide with each other. The remnants of the explosive used in the warhead were also absent on these submunitions. But there was a conventional explosive, which is used for pipe bombs.
- Conclusion: this plane was shot down not by Ukraine?
Still not the whole conclusion!
- ... yeah! ..
We took water samples from a large area at the crash site. Rocket fuel was obliged to stay there, it could not go anywhere, but it was not there. There was aviation fuel, but no rocket fuel. What is a rocket? Yes, this is a set of elementary pipes. Not a single rocket fragment was found in the sea. There were parts of the plane, but there were no rockets. The investigation continued for 10 years, because people died, and there should be no errors in the investigation. The case was closed. Then the Russian side (Sibir Airlines) demanded compensation from us in the economic court, and the case was brought up again. But all the investigators came to the conclusion that there is no evidence that the plane was shot down by a missile!
- So, the plane was not shot down by a Ukrainian missile?
The plane was not shot down by a Ukrainian missile.
What happened to him, in your opinion? Some kind of internal explosion, a terrorist attack?
Judging by all the studies, including those that we conducted abroad (some of which cannot be confirmed), the plane was blown up from the inside. It was carefully prepared. The timing is good! We are 20 days...
- ... announced ...
- ... yes, they sent information to Munich that we were closing the area, so that they would tell everyone that from such and such a time, to the nearest minute, rocket firing would be carried out in such and such a direction ...
- …all clear…
But the behavior of the plane was strange, he deviated from the course, he should not have flown there at all!
Do you think the purpose of this terrorist attack, if it was such (and we are inclined to this), was to frame Ukraine?
I don't think so. As a concomitant - perhaps, I do not exclude this. But the cause of this catastrophe, in my opinion, must be sought among the passengers of that aircraft.
- Did you have a lot of scars on your heart after this tragedy?
The trial in this case lasted 10 years. But from the first day I independently made the decision to resign. Nobody removed me from office. I just understood the responsibility, and how this situation will affect the image of the country. Moreover, Ukraine was then in a difficult internal and external political situation. And I considered it my duty not just to ask, but to demand the president's resignation in order to minimize problems. Of course, you can’t close your mouth to anyone, everyone has their own opinion, but I think that I succeeded to some extent.
There were no tactical nuclear weapons on the territory of Ukraine
Leonid Makarovich Kravchuk, who made the historic decision to give Ukraine away from nuclear weapons, repeatedly explained to me why this had to be done. Do you think it was necessary to give Ukraine nuclear weapons?
You know it was inevitable. Just an inevitability. I am surprised, Dmitry Ilyich, to listen to those numerous "experts" who know what nuclear weapons are. Yes, this is not a secret for Ukraine, we took part in its development, we have enough scientists in this field. But let's see what we had? It was not in service, but was kept from strategic offensive weapons. These are intercontinental ballistic missiles, strategic aviation systems with cruise missiles and front-line aviation. I want to say right away (few people know about this) that there were no tactical nuclear weapons on the territory of Ukraine. It was taken out even before the collapse of the Soviet Union. If you cut off a man's head, what will the legs and arms do? Nothing. It's about the same. The control of these weapons comes from a single center.
- From Moscow?
Yes. And in place - execution in automatic mode ...
- ... and point ...
All codes are there. If someone disagrees and says that we ourselves could, we have many scientists, I will answer no! When a weapon is developed, a control system is also created. Well, if we, like North Korea, had thrown all the power of the country into the creation of nuclear weapons (although we didn’t have such money), maybe in 15-20-30 years we would have created something. But by that time, we would no longer have nuclear weapons physically. Because in 1997, every conceivable...
-… deadlines…
- …storage is over. And just in case, each warhead, when they were on alert, was checked and tested from time to time ...
- ... specialists from Moscow ...
- ... five research institutes that were located at different points, I will not say where exactly ...
- …In Russian federation?
Including in the Russian Federation.
NATO is a distant prospect for a warring country
- Do you think Ukraine should join NATO?
I want to remind you that Ukraine has been making such attempts for a long time. In 1997, in Madrid, we signed the Charter for a Distinctive Partnership with NATO. Well, it's a straight line. Even those who are in NATO today (our former colleagues in the Warsaw Pact) did not have such a privilege. It has long been written in the foundations of foreign policy that our strategic goal is Euro-Atlantic integration while maintaining normal relations with Russia.
Does that mean you have to join?
I believe that the first stage, which should last no more than two or three years in our situation, is to reach the standards of the Alliance as much as possible. As for NATO, this is a distant prospect for a country at war, so let's focus on its standards, and then we will become very close to it.
Alexander Ivanovich, tell me, who, in your opinion, was the best president of Ukraine in all the years of independence? I ask this question to many of my guests...
- (thinking). You asked a very direct question, but I need to be correct (smiles), because I served under four supreme commanders. (thinking). Leonid Makarovich Kravchuk accomplished not just a life, but an unsurpassed civil feat. He almost completely gave himself, making a decision and participating in the creation of an independent Ukraine. He risked everything...
- …Certainly…
- ... family, name, not to mention life. No one else has committed actions of this magnitude in our country, and given its significance, they will not do so. The president of progress is Leonid Danilovich Kuchma. And I will focus on him, because under his presidency it was clear where we were going. He is often accused of being multi-vector. So listen, was it really bad for Ukraine at that moment?
- ... the only way out ...
To be understandable to all neighbors, near and far, is a normal phenomenon...
- ... I left my grandmother, I left my grandfather ...
It was the best decision for that moment, until the country rises. And Leonid Danilovich did everything to make smoke come out of the factory chimney. After him, this was no longer the case. I think so.
- The question is even more difficult: who was the best Minister of Defense in Ukraine for all the years of independence?
- ... you were a minister twice ...
- ... in six governments, by the way. I have very great respect for Konstantin Morozov.
- First Minister?
Yes. He is an intellectual, an exceptionally decent, demanding general. And I can imagine what a titanic work he did at the start of the creation of the Armed Forces.
You were the Minister of Defense of Ukraine twice. Longer than you, I calculated, no one has held this post in the country. Recently, in this studio, in the same chair, Sergei Pashinsky was sitting. And that for almost 26 years of independence, all defense ministers have been plundering the army and thereby reducing its combat readiness. You too?
Pashinsky sat in this chair, and I would listen to what he would say if he sat in the chair of the Minister of Defense for at least a few days. He would not in-si-deeds, but in-se-deeds. The Minister of Defense has nothing to do with the things that he so cheerfully declared. Listen, well, the people's deputy is allowed by the status law to grind anything, and he is not responsible for it. So, the Minister of Defense does not deal with these issues. And what Pashinsky accuses of is impossible for any minister of this department. In Ukraine, there is a fairly strict procedure and approach to the management of all property of the Ministry of Defense. Naturally, during my time (considering how many years I held this post), some types of weapons were reduced. However, let me tell you about what Pashinsky does not know. I heard he has a secretary on the committee, I don't remember his last name, but he also likes to talk. So, let's see: the fighter aviation fleet consisted of Su-27, MiG-29, MiG-23, Su-17B, Yak-28 and MiG-21 in storage. Bomber aviation: Tu-160, Tu-95, Tu-22, Tu-22M3. Front: Su-24, Su-25. Plus naval aviation, four types of helicopters and tanks. Main battle tanks: T-80 of two modifications (one was produced in Leningrad, the other - in Kharkov), T-64 - in Ukraine, T-72 - in Chelyabinsk, and at storage bases - T-62 and T-55 with corresponding dates manufacturing. The same in the Navy - seven different air defense systems. So what to do with all this? Therefore, the general staff ...
- ... makes a decision ...
- ... yes, on the basis of the State Program for the Construction and Development of the Armed Forces for the period up to 2005. I led the development team. And this is the only state program that has been implemented. But it was no longer I who witnessed this, but Anatoly Stepanovich Gritsenko, who became Minister of Defense during the debriefing. And this program clearly outlines all the needs of the army in accordance with the specified period. Everything else - to the government, to the resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers, and then they sort it out.
The occupation of Crimea began a few years before the actual events
How could it happen that under Yanukovych, Salamatin, who is close to Russia, and Lebedev, a citizen of the Russian Federation in general, were ministers of defense? What was it?
These gentlemen were in the Verkhovna Rada for two convocations. Who could know that they are citizens of Russia?!
- Is Salamatin also a citizen of Russia?
As far as I understand, yes.
- ... yeah, that is, both ...
Is it just them! The head of the SBU was a citizen of Russia!
- ... Yakimenko, yes ...
But how was this information to be known? And they were with us for a long time and it is not clear for what purposes. In Ukraine, I think, a narrow circle of people knew about it. And everything else was not known to us.
I will ask you a very important question: imagine that at the time of the seizure of Crimea by Russia, you are the Minister of Defense of Ukraine. Your actions?
Well, I already heard some commanders-in-chief in this studio - they waved their saber, drove planes, troops were withdrawn. But it does nothing but sadness. First, I will say unequivocally: at the time when I was the Minister of Defense, it was impossible!
- Impossible?
No! And no one could look askance towards Ukraine. And it wasn't just me. Until a certain point...
- …Interesting…
- ...because the Armed Forces were powerful enough. Yes, they were underfunded and very seriously, but the spirit, and training, and the state of technology did not give a chance to a possible aggressor. And then, the country's economy was different, it could work for the war. One army is not able to fight.
- Well, "little green men" appeared in the Crimea. You are the Minister of Defense. Your actions?
So not quite "little green men" took Crimea.
- …It's clear...
I was already there on March 3rd...
- …in Crimea?..
Yes. And - in the form. Openly, by regular plane, with one assistant...
- ...Wow!
Starting from the first appearance of these "little men" in the Council of Ministers and in the Supreme Council of the Crimea, I called every evening every unit commander (and they all knew me well and respected me), and they informed me what was going on with them. I proposed to the Verkhovna Rada and the Cabinet of Ministers to organize immediate field meetings ...
- ... in Simferopol? ..
Certainly. Unfortunately, neither the Rada nor the Cabinet of Ministers responded. True, later, but also in March, the then Deputy Prime Minister Vitaly Yarema made an attempt to fly to the Crimea. He invited me and Tenyukh with him. But we only got as far as Boryspil. Neither Belbek, nor any other airfield received us, everything was closed. And on March 3, I freely traveled from Simferopol airport to Perevalnoye, where the ground-based naval defense brigade, our main military force, was concentrated, and all the commanders of the Crimean units gathered there, knowing that I would fly ...
- …Wow!
So there was a picture: I stopped the car, got out. Around - a ring of "green men" with weapons, snipers. Then - a dense ring of Cossacks with Russian banners. And then - the locals form an even tighter ring around our military unit. That is, the local population and the Cossacks were covered ...
- ... like a shield ...
- ... the troops that came. There were not many of them, our brigade would have torn them to pieces.
- What did the unit commanders tell you? Were they ready?
Yes, I met not only with unit commanders and soldiers, but also with local residents and Cossacks.
- What did they say?
The first question was mine. I asked about what tasks were assigned to them by the Minister of Defense, the Chief of the General Staff, the commander of the types of troops? Everyone answered, and there were 28 or 32, I don’t remember ...
- ... unit commanders? ..
Yes. "Get out!", - that's how they answered. Well, they "trimmed". And I want to say that they "treated" for more than three weeks, and this gave us the opportunity to begin partial mobilization in Ukraine. They fettered the Russian troops, and at that time we began to turn around. And it played a role. As for the readiness of the troops, the entire brigade, numbering about 2,000 people, stood on the parade ground.
- But not enough?
This is just one team...
- … not enough?
2000 people for a brigade is enough. They sang the anthem of Ukraine, and the Russians with the Cossacks listened to 50 meters away. This is the brigade, which then, for the most part, went over to the side of the Russian Federation ...
- ... but that's the point!
But at that moment she sang the anthem of Ukraine.
Fine. Sergei Pashinsky told me, and I agree with this, that the betrayal was so widespread in the army, and in the SBU, and in the police that there was no one to fight. Is that so, tell me?
A very delicate special operation was carried out by the Russian Federation. Not only the Crimeans, but also our servicemen were told that they were abandoned there, that Ukraine had abandoned them...
- ... and we will give you everything ...
It wasn't even the main thing. In addition, the leadership of the Ministry of Defense and the Armed Forces made a big mistake, which I spoke about a few months before the events at a scientific and practical conference at the General Staff and just using the example of this brigade. The troops there were 80% staffed by Crimeans. And this, of course, played a role. But the occupation of Crimea did not begin in February or January, but several years before the actual events. Look, they combed all the SBU, all the police, made the Yenakiyevo branch completely. What information could come from there? And from whom? Combed and military units. We won't know the whole truth anytime soon.
- That is, it was prepared in advance?
Yes. And in January, the Cossacks already came to rest ...
- …good time for relax…
- ... bikers came to have fun in the winter. For you to know: at the Olympics in Sochi, 40,000 selected special forces stood on the passes and provided security. And as soon as it ended, they were immediately transferred, because the distance is small ...
- …Interesting…
- ... to the already prepared base in the Crimea. But the cunning was not even in this, but in the fact that the Russians did this when Ukraine was in the most difficult internal political and economic situation, at the moment when it was weakened, there was still practically no power, passions were raging.
One short question and short answer: you are the secretary of defense. In the Crimea begins a mess. Would you throw the "little green men" and Russian Cossacks out of Crimea, yes or no?
- (Thinks for a long time). War (long pause) far from the epitome of glory. This is organized murder, cruelty, robbery and violence, from which the elderly, women and children suffer first of all ...
- …That's why?..
Do you know who said it?
- …No…
British General Gordon. I congratulate you on such a namesake. To throw out the "green men" ...
- ... it was necessary to kill them a little ...
- ... it was necessary to put half of the population of Crimea.
- …like this…
The military is not capable of this.
So you wouldn't do it?
I wouldn't let that happen, but that's a different matter.
Malaysian Boeing over the Donbas was shot down by the Buk-M1 missile system, which belongs to the Russian Federation
- Was it necessary to introduce martial law in Ukraine in 2014?
June 17, 2014 I people's deputy Ukraine submitted a letter to the president with his proposals and a clear statement of the situation. After all, I was constantly at the front and saw how it developed. By the way, I did not raise the issue of canceling the ATO, but I proposed changing the law "On the fight against terrorism" in order to entrust control to the operational headquarters (this is exactly what is being proposed now) and transfer the operation to the military category.
- So you said that then?
Yes. Then it was easy to do, but no decisions were made. A month later, without receiving a response, I wrote to the head of the Verkhovna Rada, Oleksandr Turchynov, in writing. Because I've seen a change of scenery. Our troops have already been shot by Russian artillery in the area of the concentration point in Zelenodolsk on the border with the Russian Federation. And many of our servicemen died, who simply camped, hoping that no one would violate the border. They were cynically shot. This is a completely different turn. I made a proposal to submit to the Verkhovna Rada the issue of introducing martial law throughout Ukraine.
- What did they answer you?
And they answered, by the way, positively. Then, at a closed session of the Verkhovna Rada, they voted for it, but with one caveat: with a clear aggravation of the situation. After that we had Ilovaisk.
- Who shot down the MalaysianBoeingover the Donbass, you know?
Missile complex "Buk-M1", which belongs to the Russian Federation. This has been clearly stated...
- ... that is, the Russian Federation shot him down?
- Can Russia now arrange a full-scale invasion of the territory of Ukraine?
- (thinking). I don't rule it out. And here's why: we often say the phrase "hybrid war", but no one has yet figured out what it is. There is a political aspect. We are experiencing it. We strive to be understood in the European Union and America. We are supported. Sanctions included. Russia is working against us. There is an informational, economic component that we feel ourselves. And there is - the military. And here is an interesting hybrid. If at first we were dealing with gangs, some groups, then in three years (which we, in general, provided to that side), the following happened: the Russian Federation hired local men and women and put them into operation, creating the 1st and 2nd Army Corps. And this should not be underestimated, they are equipped, armed and provided as standard corps and are now organizationally part of the 8th Combined Arms Guards Army of the Southern Military District. At the tactical level, all commanders are Russians.
- ... Russians ...
And now there are no others. Look, for three years, 17-20-year-old guys from Donbass voluntarily (although one can still say how voluntarily) went to study at higher military educational institutions of the Russian Federation. And they return already quite seriously trained officers ...
- ... plus retirees ...
Sergeants and soldiers are trained in the training centers of the Russian Federation. And plus those that you mentioned - previously served. That is, it is impossible to underestimate and say that they are unorganized. Yes, there are gangs. By the way, out of 10 well-known private military companies, seven are walking around Donbass. All those gunfights that keep happening...
- ... led by Wagner, right? ..
Over the years, they have studied all of our defenses from space, from air and earth to atoms. You see, all the attacks are effective. They shoot in depth, and we are only dealing with the front line. Therefore, they cannot be underestimated.
Is the Russian army generally combat-ready? Are they good, strong troops? Because some experts (perhaps they are not quite specialized) say that Russian nuclear weapons are rusty - missiles will not take off. That everyone is poorly trained, and the best are fighting in the Donbass. What is the state of the Russian army today?
First, Russia's top political leadership drew conclusions from the 2008 Russo-Georgian war. And now they have unprecedented funding for the army, an unprecedented transfer of the military-industrial complex to a closed cycle of production and reform. In addition, the Russian Ministry of Defense changed the leadership of the armed forces. This issue was approached carefully and seriously, mainly those who had gone through Chechnya were appointed to the highest positions. As a result, today the Russian Federation has (I'll name the figure for experts) 58% of the latest (not new), but the latest technology. And first of all, it is aviation, the nuclear triad and the navy. Secondly, the staffing of the armed forces of the Russian Federation today is 93%. And this is also unprecedented. Will there be a war against us or not? Are they preparing?.. You know, after all, the 1st Tank Army was still recreated and formed in the suburbs. And she was gone for a long time, the last time she was involved in the group of Soviet troops in Germany in the 80th year. In addition, the 20th Army has been deployed in Voronezh, the 8th Guards Army has been recreated in the Southern District...
- ... and then there is Belarus ...
- ... the 49th Army was created in reserve. As for Belarus...
- ... teachings ...
- ... yes, every year. And look, the exercises take place in August-September, but for some reason now the engineering units of the 1st and 20th armies are located along the Dnieper and are training there. For some reason, pontoons are laid out on the Seversky Donets. 40 minutes - and they will block the Seversky Donets. But I will say right away that you can beat us, but never win!
- ... you can not win ...
Never! With this thought, they can say goodbye.
- Lose a lot of people, right?
And here is an interesting point. War is always loss. But nations must direct their actions to minimize them. This is what Napoleon said. Near our border, 500 aircraft have been trained at base airfields of various depths. The only option that can be used by the Russian Federation in a full-scale invasion (but can you imagine what an international resonance it will be?!) is aviation and missile forces. By the way, the entire territory of Ukraine is shot through by means of the armed forces of the Russian Federation without violating borders. All, can you imagine? But imagine, I repeat once again, what kind of resonance will there be in the world? Europe in general will howl! We have 2 million internally displaced people, and if a large-scale war starts, then, according to my calculations, 6-8 million people will go to the EU countries, in the next four, at least.
Ivanov and Shoigu pushed Putin into a military adventure in Ukraine
Alexander Ivanovich, we have six or seven minutes left, we are on the air. I have a few more questions, so I propose to continue the conversation in semi-blitz mode and answer a little shorter. According to my information (from sources in Western intelligence), two people, two of his closest associates, pushed Putin into the war with Ukraine: the then head of the presidential administration and former defense minister, your colleague Sergei Borisovich Ivanov, and the current defense minister Shoigu, whom you probably know. When Putin realized what was happening, he dismissed Ivanov, and Shoigu is now hanging by a thread, especially in light of the latest incident with Oliver Stone's film about Putin, when Russian President showed the American director alleged Russian air strikes on Syria, but it turned out that these were American air strikes on Afghanistan. And it was Shoigu who gave him these materials. Tell me, is it really so, in your opinion?
I was not present at the transfer of this video, unfortunately (smiles). Indeed, Shoigu is very close to Putin. But he did not fly alone, because it was a failure of the Foreign Intelligence Service and the Main Intelligence Directorate of the General Staff of Russia. The fact that Putin was given unreliable information that Ukraine would fall, but, on the contrary, it rose, and strong young patriots stood up, women began to knit camouflage nets, children began to draw pictures, and everyone went to fight, knowing that they were going to die This is what he didn't expect!
- That is, Putin was pushed to an adventure?
Certainly.
- And he understood it?
Putin is a shrewd and experienced man.
- Quick questions - short answers. Is the Ukrainian army combat-ready today?
For this, a lot of work still needs to be done. And not only the army, but the whole country.
- Are there many traitors recruited by the Russians in the Ukrainian army today?
I do not rule it out, because from time to time court decisions appear in the press on cases of sovereignty.
- Corruption in the Ukrainian army today is great?
I do not know this, but I believe that tough measures are being taken to prevent it.
- Crimea and Donbass will return to Ukraine, in your opinion?
I believe in it. But for this, Ukraine needs to be an example for Crimea and Donbass.
In Russia, you probably have many friends with whom you served, in particular, in the Soviet army. Can you find a common language with them?
No. I had friends with whom I was related by blood, fought, studied and served, and they are all quite high-ranking officials, but on February 28, 2014, I called them for the last time. And on March 3, there was an appeal directly from the Crimea, from Perevalnoye through the press (which for some reason gathered very quickly) to Defense Minister Shoigu and Chief of the General Staff Gerasimov. After that, for more than three years I did not have and cannot have a single conversation or phone call with them.
- Do you miss them?
Some I really appreciated and respected.
Are you fond of memoirs and historical literature. What books have made the greatest impression on you?
There are memoirs, but there are theoretical developments, and so on. I will quickly list. Of course, Sun Tzu is a Chinese strategist who lived in the 6th century BC. Today, charters can be written according to his works. Roman general Marius. His developments in the structure of the army are used all over the world now. Next - General Clausewitz, our Sagaidachny. You read his letters, correspondence - this is an amazing commander. Also Triandafilov, Shaposhnikov, Zhukov. The only thing is that it was impossible to read Zhukov, Konev and Rokossovsky before - everything is permeated with party spirit. Next - Rommel, the Americans Bradley and Patton. And the book of lieutenant colonel de Gaulle of 1934 made the greatest impression on me!
- Was Zhukov great? Yes or no?
Undoubtedly.
You are a general of the Ukrainian army. Your father was a major general, he finished the war in Germany, as part of the Soviet army. What is Victory Day for you, and when do you celebrate it?
For me, this is a holy day. My parents went through the whole war together, liberated Ukraine, participated in the Korsun-Shevchenko operation. His father was the commander of a reconnaissance battalion, and his mother was a doctor with him. They liberated Zvenigorodka, where they got married. 30 years lived together. My grandfather served in the same battalion as a soldier. Therefore, no one will convince me of anything and will not break me.
- What date do you celebrate Victory Day?
9th May! And this is for the rest of your life. And I'm going to the Walk of Fame, to the Museum of the Great Patriotic War and food, as on June 22, to the Bukrinsky bridgehead, where, according to various sources, up to 200,000 of our soldiers are lying. Read Churchill's six-volume "Second World War". He gives an assessment of the Soviet Union, the Red Army, the role of the Soviet soldier (at that time - a Red Army soldier) in the great victory.
Alexander Ivanovich, I want to thank you for a sincere, good, honest interview and shake your hand not only as an army general, former defense minister, but also as an honest soldier. Thank you.
Thank you, Dmitry Ilyich.
VIDEO
Video: 112 Ukraine / YouTube
Recorded by Victoria Dobrovolskaya
