As we wait for the results of the official investigation, it’s time to use logic and reason. The question that we can ask now, in the absence of direct evidence, is the following:
Who benefited from downing of the Malaysian airliner in this place and at that particular time?
There are several aspects of this question that need to be addressed separately:
Strategic advantage was definitely achieved by the Kiev regime and its Western sponsors. A small and limited civil war was suddenly internationalized and, with international victims, achieved a status of a global conflict. Almost immediately, the UN Security Council became involved and, through it, the division lines and legal involvement in this conflict expanded internationally. The pro-Russian forces in SE Ukraine should now say, “OK, you can investigate the incident but this does not give you the right to interfere with our internal conflict. This is our conflict; this is none of your business.”
Tactical advantage was also achieved by the Kiev regime. The Ukrainian army was lured into a position where they were practically surrounded near the Russian border by the pro-Russian militias. Only ceasefire could allow these units to regroup, relocate, and be saved. After the MH17 incident, military operations around that area were frozen. The element of surprise achieved through regrouping of the pro-Russian units, was lost. The movement of Ukrainian emergency services and international investigators further disrupted the successful offensive of the pro-Russian forces.
Political advantage for the Kiev regime is being manufactured worldwide in the aftermath of the MH17 incident. Until July 17, the world’s public opinion heavily leaned towards condemning the Kiev regime. Picture and videos of the massacres and atrocities committed by the Maidan clique were all over the internet. It looked like the Ukrainian army were the bad guys indiscriminately bombing cities, villages and civilians, and the pro-Russian militias were the good guys defending their villages, towns, and families. This clear picture is now being disturbed by an attempt to present the pro-Russian militias as “terrorists” who blow innocent civilians off of the sky. Kiev’s repeated attempts to provide a pretext for international military intervention in Ukraine have been, one more time, revived.
Public relations advantage (propaganda) tends to benefit Kiev, as well. Even before the investigation began and any real evidence was made available, international mainstream media unanimously condemned Russia and Putin, and, by extension, the pro-Russian militias. This unanimous chorus of lies, insinuations, and assumptions created an impression that there was a strong consensus as to who is to be blamed for the incident. Western public opinion is affected by this impression of international consensus, especially because western main stream media are silent about the position taken by Russia and the pro-Russian Ukrainians in this matter. People in the West are given only one side of the story.
Economic advantage is obviously benefiting the US and, to a lesser degree, the EU, as the MH17 incident provides a new pretext to further extend economic sanctions against Russia, in hope that this will contribute to the collapse of Russian economy and social unrests that will follow under the direction of Western NGOs and the American Embassy.
Forensic advantage has just slipped away from Russia and the pro-Russian fighters, who now have lost control over the evidence and the investigation process. Ukraine has passed the evidence to the Malaysian investigators, and they, in turn, passed it to the UK and Dutch for analysis and conclusions – both supporters of the Kiev regime and both fierce enemies of Russia. There will be no way to know, if the evidence was not tempered with.
American geopolitical advantage – This incident can be exploited to target Russia with more sanctions and negative propaganda.
Israel’s geopolitical advantage – the MH17 incident switched the main focus of the world mainstream media from Israel’s war crimes in Gaza to Ukraine.
On the other hand, it is worth noting that neither Russia nor the pro-Russian Ukrainians had anything to gain by shooting down the MH17 civilian airliner. Consequently, there exists a strong possibility that the downing of the Malaysian airliner MH17 was a false-flag operation conducted by the Kiev regime and other enemies of Russia.
FINAL NOTE: In light of the above points, the investigation is irrelevant. It is unlikely that conclusions of this highly politicized investigation will satisfy and be accepted by all parties involved in this conflict. Another solution must be found. Who shot down the plane is irrelevant. Where wood is being chopped, chips are flying in all directions. The pro-Russian militants had valid reason to defend themselves from Ukrainian military planes bombing their positions, their towns and their villages. The Kiev regime ran military missions over the area in question.
What counts is this: The Ukrainian regime has not recognized the independence of the Donetsk Republic. This means that they continue to assume all administrative functions in that territory. One of these functions was a responsibility to warn all airlines passing through this territory and to close the airspace to civilian traffic over the areas of active military operations. Kiev has not done this. Consequently, they are responsible for their own neglect and the resulting incident. The Malaysian airline and the pilot also share some responsibility for flying over the war zone. (This assuming that navigational signals were not altered and there was no remote take over of the plane’s autopilot.)
This would be the only objective outcome of an impartial investigation in this matter.