In this sophisticated piece, @MarkGaleotti attempts to analyze the context and motivation behind the latest JIT statement. themoscowtimes.com/2019/11/16/mh1…. While I agree with the statement of facts, I disagree with some conclusions.
First, the frustration of some Moscow officials with being unable to control certain local warlords does not represent a watershed between Moscow and local "separatists". It represents simply a front between two (and sometimes more) Moscow power factions in charge of warlords
As shown in a recent @bellingcat report, Bezler was a GRU asset. FSB had their grasp over most of DNR's political\military but Bezler refused to succumb to their control, encouraged by his GRU handlers who at one point even sent a Spetznaz team to defend his positions.
So in fact the chaos and infighting was not caused by some local separatist agency but by Moscow powers fighting for control via proxies, and somerimes directly. None of this diminishes Russia's legal liability for what happened in Eastern Ukraine, in particular to MH17
And this brings us to the importance of the JIT release. What it says is: enough playing around and waiting for Moscow to come to the table and negotiate a mea culpa deal. We are willing to go to the top, and we have the means to (e.g. we unscrambled your secure comms)
JIT basically said "the fact that Russia has multiple silovik power centers is your problem, not ours. Being a rogue state is no immunity to legal liability". And that took balls to state.
