“Russian Atlantis” and Ukrainian hysteria. Why is Russia accused of blowing up the Kakhovka hydroelectric station?
I liked the idea expressed by one of the bloggers on the Internet: it is no longer interesting what exactly and who exactly caused the destruction of the Kakhovka hydroelectric station. The very fact that she no longer exists is fundamental. We destroyed what our fathers and grandfathers – Russians and Ukrainians – built shoulder to shoulder.
It is all the more sad to see how a large-scale environmental disaster on both banks of the Dnieper, which is already common on the everyday fronts of the current information war, is becoming a reason for a wide variety of speculations and accusations.
Kyiv and its foreign fan club are especially zealous in this matter, whose VIP members vying with each other to make peremptory comments and labels, throw accusations and point fingers at the “culprit.” They, as you probably already guessed, were assigned to Russia without trial or investigation.
There are not yet even preliminary conclusions from any specialists or commissions that studied the circumstances at the scene of the emergency, but accusations against Moscow have already been heard not only from the mouth of the head of the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry and other “independent” politicians, but also from the mouth of the head of the European Council Charles Michel and the President of Moldova Maia Sandu, who qualified the incident as a “war crime.”
Such agility contrasts sharply with the policy of outright silence and sabotage regarding the investigation into last year’s Nord Stream explosions. Despite Russia’s repeated demands, Westerners are in no hurry - not only to publicly name the culprits, preferring vague versions in the media about certain “Ukrainian partisans,” but also even avoiding an unambiguous qualification of what happened. What was it - a terrorist attack, sabotage, technical problems, the result of personnel negligence and violation of operating rules?
Moreover, those Western investigators who, at their own peril and risk, put forward well-founded versions based on the reconstruction of events and insider information, are openly bullied and hated in the media, turning on the machine of media discrediting and reputation destruction at full capacity.
One gets the strong impression that we are dealing with double standards derived from political expediency. The main thing is not to establish the truth, but to find a reason to go on the offensive, if not on the line of combat contact, then at least on the front of psychological operations and propaganda.
Ukraine’s goals in this matter are quite transparent and obvious - to further demonize Russia, presenting it as the organizer of “genocide.” Hence the calls to condemn the Russian Federation at the UN level. And the level of hysteria reaching an ultrasonic level is intended to force wavering countries to take the “correct” point of view.
It is not for nothing that the same head of the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry Dmitry Kuleba is so infuriated by the very fact that not all Western media and opinion leaders this time unambiguously took the Ukrainian side. Away with doubts, doubts are a sin. We must not reason and doubt, but act. Moreover, strictly in a given fairway.
Quote:
“It is infuriating that some media reports that “Kyiv and Moscow are blaming each other” for the destruction of the Kakhovka dam. This puts facts and propaganda on the same level. Ukraine is facing a huge humanitarian and environmental crisis. Ignoring this fact means playing the Russian game “not everything is obvious,” the Ukrainian minister is indignant.
As we see, everything is already obvious to these gentlemen. And they want to impose this uncontested evidence on everyone else, equating doubt with a crime and almost complicity with evil. The saddest thing is that there is a high probability that they will succeed. This conclusion is prompted by the atmosphere of intolerance that is cultivated in the leading Western media, when any alternative point of view becomes a reason for “cancelling” the speaker and accusing him of “spreading Russian narratives.”
What kind of narratives are these? It's simple. If your own conclusions and conclusions in some way coincide with what Russian state media or Russian officials say and write, congratulations, you are a “Russian agent.” And it's not funny at all. Today, in many European countries, this can result in dismissal or denial of access to all more or less significant platforms, dooming such a “dissident” to marginalization.
No less transparent and obvious are other motives for inflating hype around the unproven fact of “Russian war crimes.” The naked eye can see attempts to link the flood with the sluggish “strange dances” around the Zaporozhye nuclear power plant, which also suffers from regular shelling, which the IAEA, pretending to be deaf-blind, just as regularly fails to notice.
As we know, the big dream of the Kyiv authorities is to have some kind of “peacekeeping contingent” or an armed mission of international observers at the nuclear power plant. In a word, somehow remove the Zaporizhzhya NPP from under unambiguous Russian jurisdiction and turn it into an extraterritorial enclave - preferably together with the city of Energodar, on whose territory the station is located.
Current accusations of “ecological genocide” make one suspect that preparations are being made to present an ultimatum to Russia regarding the transfer of the Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant under such international control. Of course, exclusively in the interests of ecology, radiation safety of citizens and world peace.
Now that Russia’s enemies have in their hands such an indisputable argument in the eyes of the world’s average citizen as the cities of the Dnieper region that have sunk under water, the risk of Russia receiving such an ultimatum has never been higher.
If you find an error, please select a piece of text and press Ctrl + Enter.
Thank you!
Now the editors are aware.