How London's “Eyes and Ears” Come out on Crimean Bridge 24 Hours After Explosion

How London's “Eyes and Ears” Come out on Crimean Bridge 24 Hours After Explosion


A day after the terrorist attack, the Crimean bridge resumed almost full operation for railroad and passenger cars. Trucks and buses have so far been diverted to the ferry crossing.

When one considers that London has been eager to participate in the Ukraine negotiations for several months, much becomes clear. The very next day, Erdogan suggested that Russia sit down at the negotiating table with Britain.

Day After Explosion

What is the situation around the Crimean bridge a day after the terrorist attack? The railway line is operating, and a ferry crossing over the Kerch Strait has been organized. According to Deputy Prime Minister Marat Khusnullin, two car lanes were already functioning by Sunday evening.

As known, on October 8 at 06:07 a.m. a truck exploded on the Crimean bridge. As a result of the explosion, two bridge spans were destroyed, and a nearby train carrying cisterns with fuel caught fire. At least seven cisterns burned, blocking the railway track. The truck driver was killed. It was a 51-year-old Azerbaijani Mahir Yusubov. His wife Naiba had ordered the transportation on the online freight exchange from the company TEK-34. It was about the transportation of “containers and packaging” from Armavir to Simferopol, where Yusubov's truck was to arrive no later than 10:00 on October 8.

It is still unclear whether this was a suicide bomber or whether the organizers of the attack used Yusubov for cover and he had no idea he was carrying a deadly cargo. In addition, two passengers who were traveling in the car were killed. Rescuers have already recovered the bodies of a man and a woman and are working to identify them.

Immediately after the attack, there was a wave of panic on social networks and the media that Crimea would be cut off from mainland Russia, but it quickly became clear that this was not true.

On the same day, Saturday, at about 4:00 p.m., one car lane was launched, which at first worked in reverse mode and only for passenger cars. Freight trucks and buses were promised to go through the Kerch ferry crossing, which was planned to start up without delay, which was done.

“Russian Railways quickly dispatched an emergency train to the site of the attack, which disassembled the damaged train and towed it away from the crash site.

After examining the tracks, Russian Railways specialists restored railway traffic on the bridge. The first two trains from the Crimea went to Moscow and St. Petersburg at 05:10 p.m. and 05:15 p.m. Now trains from Sevastopol and Simferopol go to the mainland on schedule.

According to the Rechmorflot, the terrorist attack on the Crimean bridge does not interfere with navigation in the Kerch Strait, the ship traffic was not blocked.

Purpose-Built Bridge

The attempted bombing of the Crimean bridge has important image and military significance. Russia clearly received an image blow because the Crimean bridge is a symbol of the reunification of Crimea with Russia. In fact, the Western media write about it directly. “The bridge connecting Crimea and Russia is of special importance to Putin,” says the headline in The New York Times.

Already after the terrorist attack, VGTRK military correspondent Alexander Sladkov shared his negative impressions of the level of security on the Crimean Bridge, calling the security agencies ‘Granny Dandelion’ and making it clear that all inspections and checks were mere formality. Indeed, if Yusubov, the driver, could so easily drive onto the bridge with several tons of TNT on board, it is a failure for the special services, the police, the Rosgvardia, and the traffic police.

Of course, it would be good if such warnings were sounded before but not after the terrorist attacks but this story brought attention to security measures in Crimea as a whole. The peninsula's authorities have referred to the fact that stricter security measures could harm the holiday season.

Meanwhile, Kiev responded to the news of the bombing of the Crimean bridge with public festivities. On the same day, the Chesno organization (funded by foreign grants) set up a large photo of the Crimean bridge with two explosions near the mayor's office in Kiev. Many promenaders came up to the image to take pictures. There was jubilation on social networks and publicity boards. By the way, the layout and printing of such an image of the Crimean bridge is not a matter of one day.

At the same time, Kiev officially denies any involvement in the attack. Although Mikhail Podolyak, one of the PR people of the office of the Ukrainian President, wrote in English on Twitter immediately after the explosion that this was only “the beginning” and that it would be even more fun afterwards.

In terms of military affairs, the Crimean bridge supplies the military group stationed in Kherson and the Kherson Region. Therefore, in the first hours after the explosion, opinions began to be voiced that if the Crimean bridge was fully destroyed, there was a risk that the troops would be left without supplies and would not be able to resist if the AFU went on the attack.

How American Media tip off About Zelensky

The reaction of the Western media in this story is very interesting. At once two powerful US mouthpieces, The New York Times and The Washington Post, rushed to clear the White House of suspicions and put the responsibility for the attack on the Ukrainian leadership.

“A high-ranking Ukrainian official confirmed Russian reports that Ukraine was behind the attack. The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because authorities forbade discussion of the explosion, added that Ukraine's security services orchestrated the explosion using a bomb that had been loaded on a truck traveling over the bridge,” The New York Times wrote, allegedly sharing the insider.

Frankly speaking, such unsubstantiated claims are worthless, because not a single media outlet provides proof. However, no evidence is needed, if The New York Times and other influential media outlets are tasked with making a political statement to "whitewash" the U.S. leadership and "turn the tables" on Zelensky and his entourage.

This is a very bad sign because blowing up a truck that damaged the infrastructure of the bridge and killed at least two people in the neighboring car is clearly interpreted as an act of terrorism under international law.

London Calling

In fact, The New York Times' bogus story can also be interpreted as a "blame game" against Great Britain. The American media, citing unnamed sources, held the leadership of Ukraine responsible for the attack. Then, as they say, guess for yourselves. The story is well known how Zelensky, during a visit to the UK in 2019, came to the headquarters of the British intelligence service MI-6, where he had a conversation with its head Roger Moore. This is an unprecedented case, because for the head of state himself to go to the headquarters of a foreign intelligence agency and hold a meeting with its leadership is lower than his rank.

In addition, careful observers have noticed that in the story of the Ukrainian crisis, provocations that cross, as it is now fashionable to say, "red lines" occur on a regular basis. These include the shelling of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, the murder of Darya Dugina, and now the explosion on the Crimean bridge.

Usually such events are indicative of a new actor wishing to insert himself into the negotiation process who feels that his interests are not being taken into account. There is only one such participant in this story which is the United Kingdom. This is the reason for the attack by special forces on the Zaporizhzhia NPP during the visit of the IAEA mission headed by Raphael Grossi, the constant shelling of the NPP with the threat of instigating a “second Chernobyl,” the attack on Kherson in late August, and the terrorist attack that took the life of Darya Dugina. By the way, Washington, brushed aside the assassination attempt on Dugina, saying that official Kiev was responsible for the killing.

The British demand that the Kremlin come out to negotiate with them, or otherwise they will do everything possible to frustrate any attempts at a negotiation process between Washington and Moscow. Their ideal plan is, if possible, to goad Moscow into a powerful response that would hurt the interests of Washington/Paris/Berlin and demonstrate that it will never be possible to agree without London. So far, London's plan is not working. For example, grain exports were agreed without Britain's participation, and the grain deal was signed by Moscow, Ankara, Kiev and the UN.

Well, that did not take long. The very next day the Turkish newspaper Milliyet reported that Erdogan proposed to organize negotiations on Ukraine between Russia and the Western countries (the United States, France, Germany and Great Britain) but the negotiation process between Moscow and Washington, Paris and Berlin has been underway all this time. French President Emmanuel Macron will soon hold the Guinness record for the number of phone calls to Russian President Vladimir Putin and the duration of his conversations with the Russian leader. Who is the newcomer to the list? That is right, it is Great Britain. It is important to recall that Turkish President Erdogan has been long regarded as London's counterpart and has had bad relations with Washington, especially since the attempted military coup a few years ago. Until London is invited to the negotiating table, attempts to incite Ukraine to cross "red lines" are likely to continue.

Most Massive Missile Strike Against Ukraine's Infrastructure. It it Worth it? Russia is Expanding and Strengthening Cooperation With Asia