Hasty conclusions about the involvement of terrorists to the collapse of the Russian airliner in the Sinai Peninsula, announced by the leaders of Britain and the USA demonstrate a unworthy interest in the politicization of the disaster, says the columnist, American Analyst Finian Cunningham.
Just a few days after the crash of the British Prime Minister Cameron D. said That the cause most likely was who was in the cabin explosive devices, notes the Analyst. Anyway, he pays attention, London does not explain why thinks it's likely.
As for the U.S., they initially considered a version with a bomb is unlikely, but then took the position of the UK. Five days after the tragedy, the head of Obama's already talked about her " high probability ".
Cunningham believes the natural reaction of Russia and Egypt, which are considered inappropriate insinuatsii at this early stage of the investigation. Continues the study of the wreckage, and the deciphering of the flight recorders has only just begun. At this stage, says the maker, I must keep calm, clear the mind, what can be said about the UK.
If London has a secret information about the involvement of terrorists, for what reason he will not share this information with the Russian government, without attracting attention, asks the columnist. According to him, Britain could stop for a while commercial flights to Egypt, making a low-key message about the fact, because it is caused by security measures, and not as if her theory about terrorists has already been proved.
The analyst compares the conclusions of the West in the situation with the A321 with the crash of the Malaysian Boeing in Ukraine in July 2014. Then Britain and the US were also quick to name the reasons of what happened and to blame the Russian Federation or of the militia.
The success of the Russian hostilities in the Syrian Arab Republic and the leading role in the organization of the negotiation process between the government of Bashar al-Assad and the constitutional opposition has complicated the task of the West is regime change, writes Cunningham. In these conditions, according to his vision, the political background of the British and American statements made at the highest level, it seems obvious, though despicable, considering how many innocent lives were claimed by the disaster.