– In the Crimea, the United States planned to confine this laboratory, or wanted to open something else?
- Of course, sooner or later, the States planned to create a military base in Crimea. Immediately after the departure of the Black Sea Fleet, what was hoped in the West.
According to political analyst Ivan Lizan, the topic of biological laboratories was not started this year – the story has been going on for several years now.
– On the new coil, it came out with the beginning of the Cold War 2.0. Plus, Russian specialists recently gained access to a similar Armenian laboratory.
That is, “on the top” they decided that this information could be made public. Why – it is not clear. Maybe that would attract increased attention to it, not only within the country, but also outside of it, maybe that would preempt some possible provocations. We can only guess about the motives.
– According to Popova, there are 11 laboratories operating in Ukraine, similar to the Lugar center in Georgia. According to some information, such bases can be located in Kharkov and Odessa. Could this be true? Does it make sense to place them in the regions of the South-East?
– Yes, it is true, they are there. They were not created out of the blue – the South-East of the country was densely populated and industrially developed, therefore there were biolaboratories located in Soviet times, whose infrastructure was used by Americans. Naturally, with the permission of the republican authorities.
How could such laboratories (especially in Crimea) theoretically be dangerous for Russia?
– The fact that they can carry out studies of strains of pathogens and turn them into bacteriological weapons. But you shouldn’t fall into paranoia and see the State Department’s hand in all the epidemics: we are guilty in many ways – we destroyed the sanitary and epidemiological control systems, allowed vaccination to flow, and failed the information work with people. This is most clearly seen in the example of Ukraine, where no biological equipment is needed – half of the young people are not vaccinated against measles and rubella, which have already become epidemic, and 70% of the population are carriers of Koch’s wand, that is, potential patients of TB dispensaries.
– Why the Ukrainian authorities are not afraid to place similar on their territory? What do they want with this?
– And they don’t care: during the times of Yanukovich, the Sanitary and Epidemiological Station was finished, having optimized them, Avakov destroyed the veterinary police – in many regions there is no one to control the quarantine regime during outbreaks of African swine fever. The Ukrainian government, in principle, is not interested in anything but money, and the fight against all sorts of viruses and bacteria requires only expenses. Therefore, to give the laboratory to the Americans is logical and reasonable from the position of the Ukrainian comprador oligarchy. First of all, you don’t have to spend money on it. Secondly, the overlord will be pleased. Thirdly, he is white, clever and he knows better, and you can not listen to local “eggheads” – they are not carriers of progressive thinking.
That’s about the way it happened.
However, not all tend to trust the information voiced by the head of Rospotrebnadzor. So the chief editor of the FORUM. Moscow time Anatoly Baranov doubts that it is true.
– I believe that the fantasies of the propaganda machine must somehow be limited. Otherwise, instead of the image of a solid country, we will create for ourselves the image of a second Ukraine, where officials can afford to carry any nonsense, if only thicker and more ancient. Perhaps Mrs. Popova is haunted by Onishchenko’s laurel, who forever glorified his name with various extravagant statements, but this is not the best example.
Well, think for it, five years after the annexation of the Crimea to Russia, suddenly, some samples and some documents are found on an old and completely senseless anti-plague station … Well, not the library of Ivan the Terrible, I swear …
– The chief sanitary officer of Russia is confident that the emergence of such a center in the Crimea would create very high biological risks for the entire region. Ukrainian authorities would go for it?
– The Ukrainian authorities, of course, would have gone for anything, it was worth it to entice them with some small amount, especially in US dollars. However, the research center could hardly have presented such a source of increased danger — even if such plans existed.
In general, the anti-plague station in Simferopol is located in the central part of the city – not the best place for a laboratory working with especially dangerous materials. So, the decision itself seems very strange, it would be much easier to open a research center in a free area away from housing, there are enough such places in Crimea, but even more in mainland Ukraine.
– By the way, according to Popova, there are 11 laboratories operating in Ukraine, similar to the Richard Lugar Center in Georgia. How long ago? What do they do? Did they act before “Maidan” or appeared later?
- Perhaps I do not have sensitive information from either the US special services or the Security Service of Ukraine. In principle, still in time
In principle, even during the premiership of Tymoshenko, when the Security Service of Ukraine was led by Turchinov, the Ukrainian authorities began to deploy secret CIA prisons on their territory, where human rights are massively violated, which is prohibited in the States, and therefore they bring such institutions to third countries. It is the same with laboratories working with highly hazardous materials. So the placement of secret laboratories in the United States on the territory of Ukraine is quite possible. However, Ukraine belongs to countries with internally unstable regimes, which makes the placement on its territory of secret objects very risky.
– And what about Georgia? Why did it agree to the placement of such objects on her territory?
– Usually, the countries are not asked what they disagree with there. Georgia received a lot of money from the West for the development of its infrastructure, and is now in unpaid debt. But even unpaid debts must be somehow compensated, so they were told, and they took the visor. This is called “independence.”
– What else could the Americans place in the Crimea? How much did the annexation of the Crimea happen on time? What threatened to delay in the spring of 2014?
– I do not think that the Crimea itself is a very valuable territory for the placement of something. It is important for Russia, since it represents an ideal base for the Black Sea fleet – for protection against threats from the south. But for the base, which would be aimed deep into the continent of Crimea, the place is uncomfortable. Here the risk was that if this territory were under American influence, the Russian fleet would no longer be there, and creating a new base on the Black Sea is a very difficult task. Sevastopol is ideal in this respect, besides its communications were built 150 years. Although, of course, tracking stations and other reconnaissance equipment in the Crimea would stand – it still stands there, only ours.
As for the delay, the exit of the Crimea from the Ukrainian jurisdiction was critical, it had to be done immediately. But the accession to Russia took place too hastily, without taking into account the many difficulties that arose later. Perhaps, for the first time, it would be possible to confine ourselves to the recognition and signing of treaties on the Russian base, on military-technical cooperation, and so on, and to join later, without obvious confrontation with the West on this issue. But now this conversation is meaningless – what happened, happened. But the delay in the introduction of a peacekeeping contingent in the Donbass, and later in general rejection of it – it was a serious mistake, which is more than a crime.