The Russian embassy in Australia made on April 16 2019 this statement (statement in english here) on the website of the embassy. The statement is about the investigation on MH17. As with other statements by Kremlin on MH17 made in the past, it has many lies. In total I counted 10 lies and multiple nonsense statements.
Our country made every effort to ensure that the UN Security Council (UNSC) as soon as possible adopted resolution 2166, which enshrines the requirement for such proceedings.
UN Security Council resolution 2166 was authored by Australia. Only after some text changes Russia agreed with the resolution. The effort on the resolution was by Australia, not Russia.
Russia fails to mention it had used its veto for a resolution for a United Nations international tribunal on MH17. It was the only nation at the 15-member UN Security Council to oppose the move, triggering widespread condemnation. “In order to avoid the risk of politicizing justice, it is best to set up the tribunal before deciding what the circumstances of the crash were,” the Dutch government said. A trial under Dutch law is now being prepared. Russia might then criticize that a Dutch judge is not impartial.
Unfortunately, the activities of the Joint Investigation Team (JIT) do not correspond to the letter and spirit of the resolution. The investigation is being conducted without recognizing the key role of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO).
Kremlin is confused here. There are two investigations on MH17. One was done by the Dutch Safety Board (DSB) which investigated the cause of the crash. The DSB followed the ICAO guidelines for an aviation crash investigation.
The second investigation is a criminal investigation to establish who was responsible for the downing and was the motive was. This investigation is done by the Joint Investigation Team. ICAO has nothing to do with a criminal investigation.
There are a lot of questions about the work of the JIT. First, Russia was categorically denied membership in the JIT.
That is very understandable! Right from day 1 it was pointed out by the United States a missile was launched from an area under control by Russia backed separatists. So Russia is a clear suspect. In not a single criminal investigation the suspect is part of the investigation team.
A number of presented evidence by the JIT against Russia turned out to be nothing more than fakes mounted by the Ukrainian special services.
Russia has not been able to convince anyone that JIT evidence is fake. While the origin of most video’s and photos made in Ukraine is not known it is extremely likely these were made by common people who just saw the BUK TELAR passing by. Many people in Ukraine have for example a dashboard camera installed in their car and carry a mobile phone. Also, a clear connection between videos and photos made of the BUK TELAR while in Russia and video/photos of the BUK in Ukraine was made. The images in Russia were made weeks before the downing of MH17. How could the Ukraine special service know this BUK TELAR would be involved in the downing before before the downing took place?
Secondly, why does the work of the group rely on dubious data from social networks, unverified open sources, and cooperation with pseudo-investigators from the Bellingcat agency known for their fake stuffing?
JIT does not rely on the work of Bellingcat. JIT came to the same conclussions as Bellingcat. Data from social media networks is not dubious . Bellingcat is not known for fake stuff. This claim by Kremlin was never proven.
At the same time, the primary raw radar observation data provided by the Russian side, containing specific information about the crash, are being thrown off the threshold? This information is of critical importance – they can not be changed or forged.
Russia provided raw radar data to the JIT only two years and three months after MH17 was shot down. The radar data was not in the ASTERIX- format which is commonly used in investigations. The manual was in Russian language and Russia did not provide any translation. The radar data of a second radarstation which Russia confirmed also detected MH17 was never handed over.
The data is not disregarded by JIT. It was added to the file. Radar data can be changed or forged especially in two years of time. The data does not have any integrity checks.
Thirdly, why is Ukraine’s refusal to provide data of its radar stations to be taken for granted? It is reliably known that on the day of the tragedy, the Ukrainian radar stations were working with increased intensity
Ukraine stated it does not have primary radar data available. The civilian air traffic control service UKSATSE only have secondary radar available. It is NOT reliably known that Ukraine radar stations were working.
Where is the data of objective control from the Ukrainian control tower in Dnepropetrovsk, containing full information about the movement of flight MH-17, as well as records of negotiations of its employees?
There is no Ukraine control tower in Dnepropetrovsk. It is a common error made by people who have no clue they are talking about. Air traffic control services are provided in a building being almost never a control tower. Only traffic at the ground of an airport or just before landing and after takeoff are controled by staff located in a tower.
The ATC-conversation between ATC and MH17 was made public by DSB.
Why did not the investigators interrogate any of the Ukrainian dispatchers on duty that day?
DSB did indeed not talk to the air traffic controller who was responsible for MH17. DSB stated this was not relevant to establish the cause of the crash. However JIT stated it did talk to the air traffic controller.
What is the reason why the Ukrainian side does not provide information on confirmed air defense activity, negotiations of servicemen, data on the presence and expenditure of missiles?
Russia does not know what kind of information is provided to JIT by Ukraine. There is no public evidence of any Ukraine air defense system being capable at July 17 2014 to shot down MH17
At a briefing on May 24, 2018, representatives of the JIT demonstrated a fragment of a 9M38 missile, which allegedly shot down a Boeing. It is well known that missiles of this type were fully decommissioned in Russia until 2011 and disposed of.
Finally, why have Kiev not been charged in connection with the criminal decision not to close the skies over the combat zone for flights of civil aviation contrary to the requirements of ICAO?
There are no requirements by ICAO providing conditions for closing of the airspace. Each country is autonomous in deciding to close the airspace.
I would also like to know for what reason the investigation did not adequately respond to the statement by the US representatives that they have satellite images from the STSS spacecraft, allegedly confirming the version of the launch of the rocket by the Donbass militia. Why are these materials not yet published?
In January 2016 Dutch Minister van der Steur informed the parliament that US handed over information to the Dutch Military Intelligence Bureau (MIVD). For obvious reasons this material was not published. First because evidence is never made public before the start of the trial. Secondly because it is classified information.
Russia remains committed to UN Security Council Resolution 2166 and remains ready to assist the investigation in order to establish the truth and bring the perpetrators to justice.
Russia failed to provide radar data of the Buturinskoe radar station. Russia failed to provide details to JIT about the whereabouts of the BUK TELAR.
The Dutch Public Prosecution Service press report mentioned the failure of Russia to hand over radardata in this PDF.
“In reaction to this latest request, in August 2017 the Russian Federation provided a data set from UstDonetsk radar station. No data from the Buturinskoe radar station were provided. The data that were provided relate to radar images of 17 July 2014 during a limited period (16.02 hours – 16.32 hours local time).”
Fred Westerbeke, head of JIT, told at the JIT pressconference in May 2018 that JIT had asked a couple of weeks ago to Russia about the whereabouts of the specific BUK which belonged to the 53rd anti-aircraft brigade. Russia did not respond. Earlier, in October 2014 JIT requested Russia to hand over all relevant information. The anwers by Westerbeke can be heared here.
Russia was requested in October 2014 to hand over relevant information about BUKs. They did not. Russia is not cooperating. At July 18, 2018 the G7 urged Russia to cooperate with JIT.by