為馬航遇難者致哀！得知遇難者中還有我們的同胞，更感哀痛。不清楚此次空難究竟如何發生，不知道究竟是哪方打下飛機的，不抱預設立場，不摻和圍繞這個問題 的口水爭吵，靜候調查結果。但我相信飛機被擊中的地方應該不是目前發現殘骸地點的上空，因為這架飛機是在萬米高空從西向東高速飛行，若被導彈擊落，由於慣 性作用，殘骸不會是垂直落地，而是會呈拋物線從西向東拋出一段距離後落地。因此，飛機被擊中的地方至少應該是在飛機殘骸落地處往西幾十公裏上空。
這場空難最大的潛在影響應該是對東烏克蘭戰局的影響，因為這架飛機出事時機相當湊巧，正值烏克蘭政府軍戰局不利之際，第24摩步旅、第72摩步旅、第79空中機動旅三個旅的有生力量被東烏克蘭民兵合圍而無法衝出，這場空難引起的政治軍事連鎖反應是否會導致東烏克蘭戰局逆轉？值得關注。
說起來，東烏克蘭的戰爭雖然是同根同源的斯拉夫兩兄弟兄弟鬩牆之爭，但比以色列-巴勒斯坦之爭更符合男人的標準，因為這裏發生的不是人體炸彈、綁架殺害平民少年之類的恐怖襲擊，而是像模像樣、光明正大的運動戰。7月上旬烏克蘭政府軍節節深入的“勝利”轉眼之間就變成了悲劇，看樣子更像是中了東烏克蘭民兵誘敵深入、分割包圍之計：
烏克蘭政府軍大舉插入俄烏邊境地帶，本意是想切斷東烏克蘭民兵與俄羅斯的聯係，把他們口裏的“叛軍”包餃子；結果形成一字長蛇陣，反而被民兵很方便地分割合圍，各個擊破。7月11日，東烏克蘭民兵火箭炮群一次擊毀烏克蘭軍隊第24摩步旅30輛坦克裝甲車，擊落烏軍兩架戰機，充分體現了這支隊伍的裝備與戰鬥力不可低估；俄羅斯開放邊境，又深合“圍師必闕”之道，讓被圍烏克蘭部隊士無鬥誌，隻想逃入俄羅斯保命。於是，我們看到烏克蘭政府軍第72摩步旅被擊斃數百人；第24摩步旅來自烏克蘭反俄情緒最濃烈、衛國戰爭時與納粹合作最緊密的利沃夫，旅長帕夫留科上校已於17日丟下部隊落荒而逃，失去領導的烏克蘭士兵成群結隊逃往俄羅斯請求收容，上百名烏克蘭傷兵已被俄羅斯醫院救治；……
烏克蘭政府軍公布的戰損數據顯示，7月9日至15日，烏克蘭軍隊損失1600人左右，而這個數字多半經過壓縮，因為在7月11日那場東烏克蘭民兵火箭炮群一舉消滅政府軍30輛坦克、裝甲車的戰鬥中，烏克蘭政府宣布的死亡數字居然隻有23人。關於被合圍的烏克蘭政府軍總兵力，東烏克蘭民兵一開始宣布的是5000人，但這個數字對於三個旅而言未免太少。雖然不了解烏克蘭軍隊旅的具體編製，但知道我軍機械化步兵旅大約四千人上下，少則3600餘人，多則四五千。考慮到我軍與蘇軍頗有淵源，烏克蘭政府軍更直接脫胎於蘇軍，若烏克蘭政府軍編製與此相似，則被合圍的三個旅兵力最高估計可達1萬—1.5萬，有消息稱這些部隊占到烏克蘭政府軍機動兵力的1/3之多（尚待進一步考證）。進入7月以來，烏克蘭政府軍一直努力企圖合圍宣布脫離烏克蘭的盧甘斯克州首府盧甘斯克市，但始終未能得手；烏克蘭政府軍第51旅企圖從亞速海濱海港口馬裏烏波爾方向出擊，打破包圍圈，解救第72旅，也受阻於半途；……
在這種情況下，馬航空難是否會導致東烏克蘭戰局逆轉突變？我們拭目以待。須知，此前已經不止一次發生過這種葫蘆提突發事件引起的戰爭逆轉。在二戰之後歐洲最大戰爭——波黑戰爭中，塞族武裝本來占盡優勢，結果，1994年2月5日， 一發炮彈落在薩拉熱窩“馬爾卡萊”集貿市場，市場內平民傷亡慘重，加上電視媒體鋪天蓋地的報道渲染，北約順水推舟以此為由對塞族武裝發動轟炸，波黑戰局就 此逆轉。問題是這枚炮彈雖然改變了波黑戰局走勢，後來的國際調查卻並未找出這枚改變戰局走勢的炮彈來路，甚至發現這枚炮彈不可能是從塞軍陣地上射出的。那 麽，這枚薩拉熱窩炮彈究竟是怎麽回事？難道是精心策劃？如果是這樣，那又是誰有動機也有能力策劃這種事情？策劃者如願以償，承受無妄之災代價的又是 誰？……
看著這一切，陡然想起了元人張養浩那首《山坡羊·潼關懷古》——“峰巒如聚，波濤如怒，山河表裏潼關路。望西都，意躊躕。傷心秦漢經行處，宮闕萬間都做了土。興，百姓苦！亡，百姓苦！”
哎！我們不預設立場，不凡事都往“陰謀論”上扯，但在這個世界上陰謀是確確實實存在的；多個心眼，至少有助於自我保護。有一點可以確定，在存在陰謀的世界上，其它條件相同，大國機構、國民比小國機構、國民享有更好的保護，因為陰謀者都期望以最小的麻煩達成自己的目的。
（梅新育，信筆寫於2014.7.19晚，僅代表個人意見）
附錄：
俄羅斯國防部副部長長安東諾夫7月19日就馬航客機被擊落一事，向基輔提出了“十問”：
1. 為什麽基輔如此迅速斷定是烏克蘭東部勢力擊落客機的？依據何在？
2. 基輔能否向世人公布在衝突區內使用“山毛櫸”導彈的全部細節，最重要的是為什麽基輔要在東部部署這種型號的導彈，如果東部勢力沒有飛機？
3. 為什麽基輔在組建國際調查委員會一事上無所作為？這個調查委員會到底何時進入工作狀態？
4. 烏軍方是否準備向國際專家公布其空對空和地對空導彈的所有數據？
5. 為什麽烏空管部門允許客機從基輔確定的反恐行動地區上空通過？為何基輔不關閉這個區域的領空？
6. 為什麽基輔在沒有國際代表參與的情況下就開始研究烏克蘭空管人員與MH17機組的通話記錄？
7. 烏克蘭是否吸取了上次烏方在黑海上空擊毀俄圖154客機的教訓？
8. 為什麽基輔在客機墜毀半小時內就分布了東部勢力與俄軍方勾結擊落客機的電話錄音？
9. 為什麽烏軍方隱瞞兩架軍機在MH17被擊落空域附近出現的消息？
10. 為什麽馬航墜機附近，烏邊防空軍的5個連預警雷達開機的時間恰好在馬航客機墜落前15分鍾？
俄羅斯24小時英文電視頻道“今日俄羅斯”網站鏈接及原文：
http://rt.com/news/173976-mh17-crash-questions-ukraine/
Malaysia MH17 crash: 10 questions Russia wants Ukraine to answer
Published time: July 18, 2014 20:59
Some Western states and Kiev rushed to find Russian involvement in the MH17 crash having no evidence to back their claims, Russia’s Deputy Defense Minister told RT. He invited Ukraine to answer 10 questions to prove their commitment to an impartial probe.
Speaking to RT, Russia’s Deputy Defense Minister Anatoly Antonov has criticized Western countries for jumping to conclusions just “24 hours after the crash” while there is no evidence.
“They try to show to the whole world that we are responsible for the crash. It is very strange that without any evidence my colleagues from western media would like to find somebody who is responsible for the crash,” Antonov said. “It seems to me that this is part of information warfare which has been started against the Russian Federation and armed forces.”
READ MORE: Unverified tape released by Kiev presented as ‘proof’ E. Ukraine militia downed MH17
Instead of using the incident as the pretext for groundlessly blaming one of the sides, the catastrophe over Ukrainian sky should be used as a possibility to restart cooperation to “prevent such tragedies in the future.”
“As for me, I don’t want to use this opportunity to blame anybody. I would just like to raise few questions for my colleagues from the armed forces of Ukraine,” Antonov said. “I hope they try to answer the questions, it will be a good opportunity for us to realize where we are, whether there is a possibility for us to restart cooperation and to find who is really responsible for the tragedy.”
“Answers for these questions could help us find an opportunity to prevent such tragedies in the future,” the Deputy Defense Minister said.
TEN QUESTIONS FOR THE UKRAINIAN AUTHORITIES
1. Immediately after the tragedy, the Ukrainian authorities, naturally, blamed it on the self-defense forces. What are these accusations based on?
2. Can Kiev explain in detail how it uses Buk missile launchers in the conflict zone? And why were these systems deployed there in the first place, seeing as the self-defense forces don’t have any planes?
3. Why are the Ukrainian authorities not doing anything to set up an international commission? When will such a commission begin its work?
4. Would the Ukrainian Armed Forces be willing to let international investigators see the inventory of their air-to-air and surface-to-air missiles, including those used in SAM launchers?
5. Will the international commission have access to tracking data from reliable sources regarding the movements of Ukrainian warplanes on the day of the tragedy?
6. Why did Ukrainian air traffic controllers allow the plane to deviate from the regular route to the north, towards “the anti-terrorist operation zone”?
7. Why was airspace over the warzone not closed for civilian flights, especially since the area was not entirely covered by radar navigation systems?
8. How can official Kiev comment on reports in the social media, allegedly by a Spanish air traffic controller who works in Ukraine, that there were two Ukrainian military planes flying alongside the Boeing 777 over Ukrainian territory?
9. Why did Ukraine’s Security Service start working with the recordings of communications between Ukrainian air traffic controllers and the Boeing crew and with the data storage systems from Ukrainian radars without waiting for international investigators?
10. What lessons has Ukraine learned from a similar incident in 2001, when a Russian Tu-154 crashed into the Black Sea? Back then, the Ukrainian authorities denied any involvement on the part of Ukraine’s Armed Forces until irrefutable evidence proved official Kiev to be guilty.
