“WHO will win the blame game?”. From print to the broadcast and social media, news outlets pounced upon this phrase as soon as reports about what had happened to MH17 began to emerge. It is not difficult to see why, the manner in which those accused of being culpable have been deflecting blame from themselves. It is so blatant it almost resembles a competition. But this is not a game, and given the amount of grieving involved, it is difficult to see how anyone could justify there being a winner in this situation.
A diabolical combination of decisions and errors is needed to synchronise the order for events to unfold the way that they did. Radar signals picked up by satellites have determined that the plane was almost certainly brought down by a surface-to-air missile that originated from within pro-Russian rebel held territory. But while the people who ordered it to be fired may have significantly more blood on their hands, the Ukrainian intelligence officers, who apparently had knowledge of the rebels possessing the equipment required to shoot down a commercial jet three days before the incident took place, may not be entirely blameless.
Blame doesn’t have to lie with one group. Responsibility can and should be shared. The degree may vary, and certain units almost definitely played a more significant role than others but piling responsibility onto one party only is counterproductive. Blame has to be proportionately allocated to everyone involved in the disaster so that measures can be adopted to prevent a recurrence.
If the International Civil Aviation Organisation refuses to accept its mistake in raising the altitude at which planes were allowed to fly over the Ukraine from 26,000 feet to 32,000 feet, rather than banning flights from the area altogether, it compromises the implementation of the necessary changes related to flying over war zones.
If the Ukrainian army and the pro-Russian rebels continue to shell civilian areas, it is hard to envision a time at which the mere sight of a plane flying overhead does not bring about the urge to shoot it down. And if indeed the rebels were responsible for shooting down MH17, it will be pivotal that Russia concedes that it made a mistake in supplying them with technical assistance because only then will the international community be able to put enough pressure on them to grant the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe sufficient access to the wreckage.
The sheer number of groups involved means that there are bound to be conflicting reports, and it has become difficult to separate genuine confusion from blatant lies. Since the incident, we heard from a rebel spokesman that one of the two black boxes had been recovered, while at the same time a regional governor adviser stated that both were still missing. We have heard from Ukrainian officials that the rebels intend to send the black boxes to Moscow for inspection, but just yesterday they were handed over to the Malaysian authorities.
We have also been told that the rebels couldn’t possibly possess the weapons needed to shoot it down, which would have made sense if Russian TV hadn’t announced that the pro-Russian insurgents had captured anti-aircraft missiles from a Ukrainian base three weeks ago. Or if the Donetsk People’s Republic hadn’t posted pictures of the captured weapon on social media.
The world today isn’t the most inspiring place and, combined with the atrocities that are taking place in Gaza, tuning into the news is an exercise in depression. While what happened to MH17 was, in all likelihood, a mistake rather than a targeted strike against a civilian aircraft, it was a horrific, life-changing, dreadful mistake.
The allocation of blame is so important. It’s what is needed for closure and justice. And, it’s needed because understanding the truth of how it happened is the first in a series of steps towards preventing a similar scenario in the future.
Sheena Sidhu,Kuala Lumpur