While I would take any new reports about the
hijacking of the Arctic Sea with a heaping barrelful of salt, some of the latest theories are at least interesting. In an i
nterview with Time this week, the European Union's rapporteur on piracy said Israeli intelligence likely intercepted the ship, which was carrying a secret shipment weapons to the Middle East:
[H]e says only a shipment of missiles could account for Russia's
bizarre behavior throughout the monthlong saga. "There is the idea that
there were missiles aboard, and one can't explain this situation in any
other way," he says. "As a sailor with years of experience, I can tell
you that the official versions are not realistic."
Kouts says an Israeli interception of the cargo is the most likely
explanation. But this theory, which some Russian analysts put forward
in the days after the Arctic Sea
was rescued and which Kouts agreed with in his interview with TIME, has
been vehemently denied by Russia's envoy to NATO, Dmitri Rogozin, who
says Kouts should stop "running his mouth."
The theory is supported by the fact that Israeli President Shimon Peres made a surpsie visit to Moscow the day after the ship was rescued.
Not so fast say repoters from Israel's YNet, who find the admiral's theory implausable. According to their anonymous sources, the Arctic Sea made a stop in Kaliningrad -- a Russian military outpost popular with arms dealers -- before picking up its stated cargo of timber in Finland:
Sources say the Arctic Sea docked in
Kaliningrad in June to undergo various repairs. The same sources say a
deal was previously struck between Russian and Middle Eastern
businessmen, agreeing on the sale of some of the S-300 missiles located
at the port.
Some sources claim the Russian military's
weapons industry was implicated in the deal and transferred a number of
new missiles, including the X-500, to the port to be included in the
sale. However the Kremlin was uninvolved, and apparently the deal was
carried out in secret between businessmen from the private sector.
After the deal was executed, an intelligence agency whose identity
so far remains unexposed learned of the ship's departure with the
weapons in tow towards Algeria, a country located on a regularly used
route for the transfer of weapons to Iran and Syria. The intelligence agency then transferred an anonymous tip to the Russian authorities, according to the investigation.
According to Russian sources the
"hijackers", who in actuality were Russian intelligence officers,
remained on the ship and reported to their superiors that they had
found the missiles on board. On August 12 Russia announced it had sent
naval officers to rescue the vessel and its crew.
The sources say the period of time between the hijacking and
the Russian rescue mission was due to the Kremlin's desire to capture
the ship away from the eyes of the media, in order to avoid an
embarrassing incident that may have harmed its relations with Iran and
Algeria.
Again, I'm not endorsing any of these theories, but the story just gets more fascinating.
Ricky LOPEZ/AFP/Getty Images
Read More
(1)
HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE