Translated by Ollie Richardson & Angelina Siard
How the SBU wants to make Poroshenko the guarantor of stability…
On May 31st there was a hearing of the Shevchenkovsky district court of Kiev, during which the citizen of Ukraine Boris German [Herman in Ukrainian – ed] was arrested, suspected of organising an attempt to assassinate the Russian journalist Arkady Babchenko, for two months without the right to bail. In the process of ironing out the details of the story of the murder, which was staged in the spirit of cheap theater, both the plan of the provocation and its purpose start to rise to the surface.
It is obvious that an employee of the SBU, which tried to push the citizen of Ukraine Boris German to “organise” the murder of Babchenko, acted as the “client from Moscow”. The provocation came under the threat of failure because German informed this same SBU about the proposal to murder Babchenko. So then there was need for an “employee of counterintelligence”, who, in order to force the person involved to nevertheless commit illegal actions, invented a story about a special operation within the framework of which German was allegedly asked to observe the actions of the “client from Moscow”.
Subsequently the person from the SBU who came to German with the proposal to cooperate disappeared, but German as proof of his narrative cites the data of a specific curator from the SBU and his phone number. Against the background of this proof, the SBU disowns German, and the court arrests the latter for two months.
Thus, Kiev’s Security Service dragged German into a provocative game via deception, then “abandoned” him, and now brings him before a criminal article.
According to the technology of implementation, this provocation is reminiscent of the “Ruban-Savchenko case” in March, when the SBU also reported about the exposure of an “anti-State plot”. Back then the SBU provoked Nadezhda Savchenko to discuss the possibilities of a coup d’etat and deceitfully pushed Ruban into transportating weapons from the territory of the DPR/LPR to Ukraine. Caring about “saving the country from the corrupt authorities” served as a pretext, and the major of the 8th regiment of special troops of the UAF Pavel Balov – who appeared to be the non-staff SBU informant, and also disappeared from the horizon after the arrest of persons involved in this hastily cooked up case – became a provoker.
It is possible to understand the motives of such provocations by looking at the policy of the Kiev regime slightly more widely.
Of course, the SBU intercepted the general algorithm of information special operations of the West against Russia (Skripal’s “poisoning”, the “chemical attack” in the Syrian Douma) and tries to the best of the abilities of their employees to represent something similar. Like with the “poisoned Skripal”, the “murdered Babchenko” had to feed a new anti-Russia wave, especially as the British had already became exhausted by then.
However, the provocation with Babchenko, as well as the “Ruban-Savchenko case”, solves internal tasks for the Kiev regime too. The purpose of both provocations is by hook or by crook to rally Ukrainian society round Poroshenko as a certain guarantor of stability, which is possible only against the background of chronic instability that is warmed up by the Ukrainian special services. The peak of these exercises of the SBU has to fall on the presidential elections; so then “arguments” for the intimidation of those who can prevent Poroshenko’s victory in the 2019 will be found.
To keep society in a condition of mobilisation via an escalation in Donbass has already become impossible, and any escalation has a limit, beyond which it is necessary to start a real war. For Poroshenko it is impossible to make this war victorious by definition, and the head of the Kiev regime very well understands it.
And to change the narrative from “the Russian threat in Donbass” to “the Russian anti-Ukrainian plots” gives a picture that is convenient for the regime: even though the number of “plots” continues to increase, the special services successfully work. At first there is an exposed “anti-State plot”, now there is an exposed “order of Russian special services”; and in parallel facts about the participation in “plots” of potential competitors of Petro Poroshenko are being collected.
War against “Russian plots”, judging by the scope of the staged performances, will give propaganda material up to the end of the second round of elections. Especially as the list of the potential victims of performances inexplicably expanded from the initial 3 people to 30, and now already even to 47. And not everyone will get off so easily as Babchenko did. As a result, the propaganda picture of the world for voters won’t essentially change, and the main competitors of Poroshenko will be shown what awaits them if they disagree with the “guarantor” being re-elected.
Thus, concerning “Ruban-Savchenko case”, the subject line with the participation of the leader of “Fatherland” Yulia Tymoshenko in “Savchenko’s plot” is postponed for later. And in the recent provocation the mention of the “Rozumna sila” party and the head of the committee of the Rada on safety and defense Pashinsky (“People’s Front”), who allegedly are possible recipients of “Russian money”, is symptomatic. “Rozumna sila” is a little-known party, but it also can take away from Boyko’s “Opposition Bloc” several percent, having disrupted Poroshenko’s re-election. Here the best of all is to discredit the party via “ties to Russia”. And mentioning Pashinsky brings the plot with Babchenko also in the fighting plane for control over financial streams in the military-industrial complex and in the private weapons business. Pashinsky, who acts in the interests of Turchynov and “People’s Front” (PF), is one of curators of the Ukrainian war industry (earlier he headed the supervisory board of the “Ukroboronprom“ holding). In April, 2018 he together with Turchynov’s deputy Gladkovsky (the old business partner of Poroshenko) became involved in a scandal with corruption schemes of purchasing military equipment and arms abroad for resale to the UAF at speculative prices. Discrediting Pashinsky’s can pursue a double aim: to push PF aside from influencing the profitable military-industrial complex business in the interests of the business group of Poroshenko and to create a compromising evidence for blackmail to achieve the implementation by “People’s Front” of the demands to support Poroshenko during elections. Pashinsky isn’t the first person against who such compromising evidence was collected.
“The weapon aspect” was also present in the choice of the subject of the provocation – Boris German. German is the executive director of the non-state Ukrainian-German arms manufacturer JV Shmaiser, and also has a long lawsuit with several other shareholders of the joint venture. It is interesting that the SBU joined the intra-corporate conflict on the side of the opponents of German. German’s apartment and factory over the last half of a year were repeatedly searched, as a result of which the person involved had to share $70,000 with the staff of the SBU.
In general, the personal participation of the Ukrainian president in provocations, the weak care of the SBU about the plausibility of the staged performances, and the fact that the potential competitors of Poroshenko must absolutely be among the suspects demonstrates that the “guarantor of the constitution” is ready to hold onto power by directly frightening opponents, and as the elections come closer the fight in Kiev’s “terrarium of co-thinkers” will become aggravated.
Copyright © 2022. All Rights Reserved.