Back
Automatically translated version. May contain inaccuracies compared to the original.
Tkach says that the Austrians accused him of spying on behalf of Ukrainian military intelligence, and of participation in a criminal organization.
The suspicion seems absurd, but there is a nuance: in June Tkach filmed Yermolaev in Monaco just before the assassination carried out by an agent of a Ukrainian special service.
That is, the Austrians could base their suspicions on this — “under the cover of journalistic investigation, he came to prepare/cover an attempt on Kravchenko/Firtash/Komarnytskyi.” Nonsense, it seems, but…
Tkach still has not said who put him onto Yermolaev and why he filmed him before the explosion.
In the attempt on Yermolaev, the police and the SBU accused precisely military intelligence. For Tatarov and Poklad it’s logical to pin it on the HUR (in practice — Budanov).
Interestingly, Austria also detained two other Ukrainians and identifies them as HUR spies.
I can’t understand how the Austrians identified them specifically as HUR operatives, and not, for example, the SVR, or the border guards’ intelligence (MVS)… Why does Tkach say they accused him of spying specifically in the interests of Ukrainian military intelligence, and not NABU — they also monitor subjects abroad and even exfiltrate some (the Boholiubov case).
Why HUR specifically, Mykhailo?
Perpetrators of the attack on Yermolaev: Reut (HUR) and Zhykovych (SBU). By the way, Zhykovych gave an interview to the BBC yesterday and also accused the HUR. Why not his own SBU superiors?) And how did the BBC get into an SBU prison at all?
— blogger Volodymyr Bondarenko
Subscribe: Bankova Mail
Follow us on X
Top on the site
Telegram publication