Kam Raslan’s Talking Edge

(Reprinted from The Edge – Options pullout, 15 September 2014 issue)

Dear Kam,
There are many theories about what happened to flight MH17. They must be true because they’re on the Internet. All I know is that we’re not being told everything.
In The Dark

Malaysians are no less susceptible to conspiracy theories than anyone else. The combined tragedies of MH370 and MH17 have given rise to numerous conspiracy theories and in most of them, the dastardly Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) has a starring role. But I get a sense (and I might be wrong) that Malaysians have not really jumped into the conspiracy theories surrounding MH17. Perhaps when a disaster strikes to home, the frivolous entertainment of a conspiracy theory is suddenly in bad taste. But where do these conspiracy theories come from and how come so many of us refuse to believe anything that smacks of the official version and would rather believe incredibly complicated stories instead?

Dutch investigators have released a preliminary report on MH17. According to their analysis of in-flight data, there was nothing technically wrong with the plane during the flight. Cockpit voice recordings indicate that the pilots did not see anything untoward either inside or outside the plane in its final moments. The plane suddenly disappeared from the screens of air traffic controllers in Ukraine and Russia. MH17’s end was sudden and total and the Dutch investigators say the plane was hit by numerous “high energy objects”. This preliminary report does not apportion blame. That will come later after further investigations.

If the report is to be believed, and I see no reason why it shouldn’t, then it would rule out a bomb inside the plane, technical failure and pilot error. So what delivered these “high energy objects”? MH17 was flying at 33,000ft, which is far too high for a shoulder-fired anti-aircraft weapon known as MANPADS. The most likely explanation is that the objects were shrapnel from a sophisticated surface to air missile (SAM) fired from Ukraine or Russia. The least likely explanation is that the objects were a combination of machine gun bullets and missiles fired by one or two Ukrainian SU-25 jet fighters.

Now we get into the realm of conspiracy theories and it’s interesting to see where this one came from. A day after the disaster, the Russian military said a Ukrainian SU-25 was in the air at the same time as MH17. They asked the reasonable question, what was it doing there? An early eyewitness saw the wreckage of MH17 and thought the holes looked like they were caused by machine gun bullets. This eyewitness was a member of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), so his words must surely carry some weight. Then, a former member of the German air force in an article in a German newspaper asserted that the holes in the wreckage showed evidence of both entrance and exit marks on the same side. If true, then the plane could not have been hit solely by a missile on one side but by a combination of missiles and machine guns from different sides. He’s German, ex-air force; he must know what he’s talking about. Clearly, we’re being lied to again. The US government, CIA, NATO and their lackeys in the mainstream media have tried to sell us the story that the plane was destroyed by a pro-Russian separatist SAM but in reality it was shot down by a Ukrainian SU-25. And a conspiracy theory is born.

Unfortunately, an SU-25 cannot fly that high. The air is so thin at 33,000ft that its engines would stop working. The SU-25 is a ground attack aircraft designed to fly low. The OSCE eyewitness was no doubt sincere but was he qualified enough to know what he was looking at? In the same interview he stated, “We don’t have those trained eyes to pick that up now, but there are experts here who would be able to.” Clearly, he did not believe himself to be one of those experts. The OSCE monitors war zones but it also monitors democratisation, environmental activities, gender equality, and so on. The OSCE is not staffed exclusively by military experts and this particular member is a journalist (according to its website). The ex-air force expert turns out to be an ex-member of the East German Air Force and the newspaper used to be the official paper of the SED, the party that ruled communist East Germany. It’s a newspaper that is as likely to support the Putin line (Putin used to run the KGB in East Germany) as the Arsenal Football Club newsletter will support Arsenal Football Club.

This particular conspiracy theory simply doesn’t stand up to scrutiny, but it still has its believers. Conspiracy theorists rail against the big shadowy organisations. It’s the little guy, the truth-seeker against the dangerous all-seeing, all-knowing machines like the CIA. It’s David versus Goliath (even if these Davids quote “experts” from the Russian military, the OSCE and the German air force). But I think it’s based on a fundamental misunderstanding of Goliath. Goliaths want to give the impression that they are all-seeing and all-knowing, that they can achieve anything, that they understand everything, that they can protect you or destroy you, and that they never have to explain anything. If the little guy fearfully believes that Goliath is invincibly powerful, then he will become self-policing. If the little guy thinks he is fighting Goliath by concocting fanciful conspiracy theories, then he is merely doing Goliath’s work by reinforcing its image as all-powerful. Either way, the little guy is essentially worshipping Goliath and either way, reinforcing his own belief that he is nothing but a little guy.

Organisations want to give the impression that they are in complete control but they are organised chaos where incompetence, self-seeking and ad hoc reacting are more probably the norm. All too often, people either don’t understand the information in front of them or they choose the stories that fit their pre-disposition. Uncannily, targets are always achieved and sycophants get that promotion. Organisations are made up of humans with human failings faced with unpredictable outside forces, chance and unexpected error. But they spend an inordinate amount of effort trying to persuade others that they are completely competent and in full control of the future. And if unpaid outsiders are willing to enhance their reputations for them, then they’re very happy.

Reprinted with the kind permission of