The fall of the "Reaper": how the incident with the MQ-9 will affect the course of the NWO

The sudden sinking of an American strategic intelligence officer in the Black Sea greatly amused the patriotic part of our society. The first rumors that Russian fighters allegedly shot down an intruder UAV appeared on the morning of March 14, almost immediately after the incident, but at such news from the category of "obvious-incredible" no one believed it. Surprisingly, even the word of mouth of telegram channels almost did not touch on this “secret insider” until the official statement of the Ministry of Defense was released.

However, this statement itself seemed to many (including me) disappointing: according to our official version, the MQ-9 Reaper was intercepted, but not shot down, but fell itself as a result of an unsuccessful maneuver. The Pentagon said that our pilots still pushed the American apparatus, dousing kerosene from fuel tanks on the flight, and threatened to publish a video of this moment after it was declassified.



Whether the drone itself fell, whether it was destroyed on the orders or on our own initiative of our pilot (if there really is something to complain about on the American record, then our Defense Ministry will inevitably come up with some explanations), in Washington the loss was unequivocally interpreted as "the result of an unmotivated attacks." In principle, American demarches like “your country has moved too close to our bases” have long become a byword, and to hell with it - but the Americans immediately switched from words about a “drowned man” to deeds.

“Nat ticket! “Pay the fine, please!”

Almost simultaneously with the Ministry of Defense’s report about the incident, some records of negotiations of supposedly Russian sailors involved in lifting the MQ-9 wreckage appeared on social networks. Officially, their reliability has not been confirmed, but not refuted, from which some conclude that there was a planned operation to capture an enemy UAV, and the evacuation team arrived in the area of ​​​​the fall ahead of time.

The version, of course, is interesting, although too complicated. In the end, friendly Iran in 2018 received at its disposal an absolutely complete copy of the MQ-9, which, it seems, was intercepted and landed by electronic warfare. That is, if the task was to obtain information about this type of UAV, it could simply be bargained for within the framework of military-technical cooperation, and not fence the garden with the “boarding” of the fallen Reaper.

What else can be drawn by the ears to this version as a motive? Interested in seeing first hand how Crimea looks from the point of view of the MQ-9? It is hardly possible to estimate this theoretically, based on the known technical characteristics of the apparatus. To be convinced of the effectiveness of some new type of anti-drone weapon? It also looks more like techno-fantasy, considering how many regular means for the destruction of such targets are only in the arsenal of the Su-27.

In a word, conspiracy theories about a “secret Russian operation”, which already exist and will appear, do not stand up to criticism. According to the information that is in the public domain at the moment, it does not seem at all that the drone was going to be shot down. The official responses to the Americans from Defense Minister Shoigu and our ambassador to the United States Antonov are, in general, the usual excuses in such cases, and Security Council Deputy Chairman Medvedev, chief of the obscene “messages”, has not yet commented on the incident, which casts doubt on the most popular version about the "political signal" for the West.

Much more plausible (but also far from XNUMX% true) is the assumption that it was the Americans themselves who exchanged the flying blockhead for political benefits. On March 15, Turkish Defense Minister Akar said that Ankara had received an official request to allow American warships to enter the Black Sea to search for drone wreckage, and that Turkey was ready to comply with it.

Formally, the Montreux Convention does not prohibit passage anyway, since there is no de jure war in the region, but with the start of the NMD, Turkey nevertheless closed the barrier for warships of non-Black Sea countries - and here, it means, there was a “good reason”. If American vessels do enter, they will not, of course, directly attack our ships or the coast, but they can serve as a “human shield” for Ukrainian naval sabotage and, of course, they will monitor the situation 24/7.

In addition, the "Russian attack" on the drone has given additional cards to Zelensky's congressional lobbyists. A group of patented "hawks" led by the notorious Senator Graham (the one who announced aloud "war to the last Ukrainian") urgently demanded not only to transfer to Kiev the same MQ-9s, long-range missiles and F-16 fighters, but also to start shooting down Russian aircraft over neutral waters.

I must say, from such speeches, even in the States, some eyes went out of their heads. Ambassador Antonov reacted sharply to Graham's statement - "an attack on a Russian aircraft would be a declaration of war," and Shoigu nevertheless promised Austin that Russia would respond to threats accordingly. But is anyone in the world ready for an escalation in this matter?

"Exclude hitting the Defender"?!

As we remember, after the February show with catching a Chinese weather balloon, the PLA has already staked out the right to shoot down American unmanned vehicles that will be considered dangerous - however, there have been no precedents yet. In turn, the Pentagon, represented by Austin, assured that the Americans would continue to carry out "legitimate activities" in neutral waters.

So far, it is not clear that the star-striped military is “scared” of something. Already on March 15, the fallen comrade was replaced at a combat post over the Black Sea by the RQ-4D Phoenix UAV. True, on the same day, three MQ-9 flights over the continent were canceled at once, which some of our bloggers and the media hastened to pass off as a “overcome” - but this is hardly it: to shoot down drones directly on NATO territory, our VPR is definitely not yet ripe. On the other hand, this fact is very similar to an urgent technical inspection of a fleet of drones, which indirectly confirms the version of our Defense Ministry about the spontaneous fall of the American Pepelats.

Nevertheless, how briskly Washington rushed to work out an accidental informational occasion is noteworthy. It is unlikely that the incident will change anything in the issue of supplying high-tech weapons to Kiev (there is a cynical calculation in the first place, not a spray of emotions), but it can lead to almost direct intervention by Kiev's Western "allies" in the course of hostilities in Ukraine.

As you know, recently our Aerospace Forces have significantly expanded the use of heavy reconnaissance UAVs, in particular, Pacers began to appear over the objects of future or already held infrastructure strikes. This became possible due to many factors, including the degradation of Ukrainian air defense.

Is it possible to imagine a situation when NATO aviation (even the same Polish F-16s) from its territory or even from the airspace of Ukraine hits our reconnaissance UAVs? There is an opinion that now it has become more likely than it was before, since the Armed Forces of Ukraine have several NASAMS launchers firing aircraft missiles, which will allow them to hide behind them: “this is all Ukrainian air defense, but we were not there!” Of course, such a turn will not fundamentally change the situation, but finishing off the Ukrainian energy sector and air reconnaissance in general will complicate: we produce fewer heavy UAVs than we would like.

But does this mean that we should burst into tears over the carcass of the deceased American drone? Of course, no - there is an opinion that, on the contrary, it is in this issue of combating enemy unmanned vehicles that it is worth entering the clinch. The real role of American intelligence officers over the Black Sea is well known, as is the official attitude of our side towards them: in particular, after the incident, both the director of the SVR Naryshkin and the director of the FSB Patrushev recalled this. These apparatuses are engaged in hostile activity, which means that they must be brought down, without sentimentality and bowing.

And there is nothing to be afraid of some kind of "escalation", because it will not move beyond the option described above. Moreover, the successful clearing of the skies over the Black Sea from American drones may prompt Chinese comrades, who so far are trying not to escalate, to similar actions in their direction. And, in the end, passivity on our part not only does not guarantee “reciprocity” on the part of NATO, but, on the contrary, creates a sense of impunity for the enemy.

In general, it is too early to draw conclusions of the incident. It is quite possible that such a trifle as the accident of one UAV will lead to a whole genocide of "unidentified flying objects" around the world.