The outcome of the criminal MH17 trial, that has just started in the Netherlands, is quite likely predetermined. It is based on the conclusions of the Joint Investigation Team, whose operation has raised a lot of questions through the years. […] Will this trial be just? According to the experts, one can not consider the investigation objective or professional, based on the methods and quality of work done by the JIT. For example, Russia was not allowed to be a part of the investigation group. Ukraine was included and had all opportunities to influence the course of the investigation. […] The JIT has built all of its conclusions by ineptly combining dubious data from the social networks
The US views a nuclear conflict as a feasible political option and is creating the conditions for it to happen. Washington is not only modernising its nuclear arsenal but is significantly increasing the probability that its nuclear weapons will be used. Particularly concerning is the US’s increasing deployment of low-yield nuclear weapons, which will lower the threshold for their use.
Recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative that US and NATO policies are bringing the world closer to nuclear war, and that the US is deliberately lowering the threshold for the use of nuclear weapons and intentionally increasing the risk of nuclear conflict. Closely related disinformation narratives claim that the US nuclear weapons doctrine adopted in 2018 is “sheer lunacy” and that the new US nuclear strategy is based on the principle of a “nuclear first strike” and has abandoned the principle of deterrence No evidence is provided that the US considers nuclear war a “feasible political option”, that it is lowering the threshold for nuclear weapons use, or that it is “creating the conditions” for a nuclear conflict to take place. The current US nuclear strategy is detailed in the Nuclear Posture Review [NPR], issued by the Department of Defence in February 2018. This states that the US would consider the use of nuclear weapons only under “extreme circumstances” to defend the vital interests of the US, its allies and partners. It defines “extreme circumstances,” as both nuclear attacks and “significant non-nuclear strategic attacks” against “U.S., allied or partner civilian populations or infrastructure, and attacks on U.S. or allied nuclear forces, their command and control, or warning and attack assessment capabilities”. The NPR also stresses that deterrence continues to be the central principle of US strategy: it states that “the highest US nuclear policy and strategy priority is to deter potential adversaries from nuclear attack of any scale”, and that US nuclear forces play a critical role in “deterring nuclear and non-nuclear attack”. Read a previous case claiming that NATO no longer considers the use of nuclear weapons as an extreme measure.