Monday, January 17, 2005
previous entry | main | next entry | TrackBack (2)
Behind the scenes in Ukraine
Back on November 25th, at the beginning of Ukraine's Orange Revolution, I blogged the following:
In the New York Times, C.J. Chivers has a riveting behind-the-scenes look at Ukraine's security services during the election campaign, suggesting that in the case of Ukraine, it was a combination of options (2) and (3). Here's one key moment:
Read the whole thing.
This is too weird. The prime suspect in Yuschenko's poisoning was subsequently put in charge of his security???
...Mr. Yushchenko requested more security for his campaign. General Smeshko agreed to provide him eight specialists from the elite Alpha counterterrorism unit - a highly unusual step - and to arrange former S.B.U. members to guard the campaign.
"I don't want this factor [i.e. his poisoning] to influence the election in some way — either as a plus or a minus," Yushchenko said in Russian as he left the clinic and headed back to Kiev. "This question will require a great deal of time and serious investigation. Let us do it after the election — today is not the moment."
So will he bury the investigation, now that Smeshko was so helpful?posted by: Carl on 01.17.05 at 10:26 PM [permalink]
"So will he bury the investigation, now that Smeshko was so helpful?"
On Friday's WSJ, there was also another article (sorry, no links) about the role of SBU (Ukraine's successor to KGB) in the uprising. The colonel in charge literally ran circles around his Interior Ministry (bakcers of Yanukovich) opponents legally and sometimes illegally. The protestors knew of draft order by Interior Ministry to send in troops to crack down before Interior's own troop.posted by: BigFire on 01.17.05 at 10:26 PM [permalink]
Gen. Smeshko might not have been aware that his cook was the assassin, I doubt the General prepared the food with his own hands.posted by: Ted B. on 01.17.05 at 10:26 PM [permalink]
Current thinking is that dioxin poisoning takes several days to work. So it wouldn't have been the cook. (Though it might have been the thief, his wifer or her lover.)posted by: Doug on 01.17.05 at 10:26 PM [permalink]
Post a Comment: