I only learned about this article today, although it was published back in August 2025...
This is a presentation of an article by Alan Moore, published on August 6, 2025 in Open Magazine, bringing new evidence and questions to the investigation of the MH17 flight over Donbass. As a bonus, the article indirectly points out the reason of Mark Rutte's stunning carrier in NATO.
************
'Fresh evidence surfaces in Malaysian MH17 crash that killed 298 people in 2014'
/By Alan Moore,
August 6, 2025/
Revelations by Oleg Pulatov, who was acquitted of all charges due to lack of evidence, raises new doubts about the Dutch investigation.When the Malaysian Airlines plane was shot down on July 17, 2014, I was in Voronezh, Russia. A week earlier I'd been in Europe and while sitting in my Viennese hotel watched various news channels reporting on the mess that was Donbass. It was personal for me. I'd been in Kiev in January 2014 and seen first-hand the nastier elements looking for reasons to be violent. Living in Voronezh I'd met refugees from Ukraine from April 2014 and by the time schools had started back on September 1, the initial trickle of human misery became a steady river. Yet MH17 terrified me, just the idea of flying and being shot down accidentally did affect my travel plans for a decade. It returned to my life when I was contacted by a man desperate to have his story heard.
Oleg Pulatov knew me as a sports journalist and one who was rather blunt about the scourge of corruption. From uncovering doping scandals to athlete abuse, match-fixing to financial funny business, he liked my work but was no fan of mine. Especially my "attack", as he put it, on neo-Nazi elements within football fan groups in Ukraine in 2011 and 2012. Something I'd written about and cooperated with the BBC on exposing. The man, with family roots in the Donbass, didn't take kindly to my blunt take on football hooligans and their nefarious activities, explaining that these were common criminals without ideology. Yet when he reached out last month about a potential story, there was a different vibe. He wanted to meet in person, something that made me wonder – why? And who is the man who'd criticised my writing in the past?
Who is Oleg Pulatov? Born in Ulyanovsk (Russia), he was educated in Ukraine where his family come from. He was a military man his whole life, seeing combat in a number of theatres and was semi-retired when he objected to Kiev's bombing of civilians in the Donbass. He joined the breakaway Donetsk People's Republic (DPR) defence force, being elevated from Lieutenant Colonel to Colonel. In July 2014 he was Deputy Head of the DPR's Intelligence Directorate's Special Operations Department and commanded a group of forces on the Snezhnoye-Marinovka frontline.
Due to his rank and position, he answered for the area where the aircraft came down. He arrived on the scene of the tragedy and immediately set up a 'sanitary zone' around the crash site. Oleg was one of four men later charged by a Dutch court with shooting down the airliner and the only one acquitted in November 2022. His voice was silenced in the process, which is not only his point of view.
As one lawyer from Eindhoven told me over the phone: "Given what he had to say, he was acquitted in the hope that he'd shut his mouth." Oleg wanted to speak at his trial, he went unheard, 11 years after the tragedy, he needed to tell everything.
The Story Begins Oleg reached out to me on social media and asked if we could speak. Thinking it was related to sports, especially anti-doping, I accepted. Previously he'd given me information on the trafficking of illegal substances used by athletes from labs in Ukraine and Moldova. To be on the safe side, I brought along a couple of friends to the rendezvous in Ulyanovsk. Upon meeting at a cafe, he clarified that our meeting was related to MH17. My friends blanched, but stayed put. I'd known Oleg was quite senior in the DPR military, though not of his connection to the area where the plane was brought down. Our previous interaction was sport, just that.
"When I arrived, the scene was like other conflict zones I'd experienced, but different. There were foreign media already there which was surprising in the extreme. Also, marauders* (looters). There were police wearing old Ukrainian uniforms and I realised I'd to quickly set up a cordon," he said, as we sat at a table in the Newtown area of the city. I'd asked if I could record our conversation, he readily agreed. "I've nothing to hide, never have had."
"My men went to work and we sealed off the area, asking the media to leave. It struck me as very strange how they were even in that location. That area of the front was too quiet for international journalists and we'd no media there in any number. Yet even before our rapid reaction group got there, they were already filming. Almost like they knew in advance, as physically or logically it would be impossible otherwise."
"We caught marauders on the site, who had located the black box and had it in the boot of their car. I remember so clearly. A green VAZ, built in 2001 or 2002, was searched at Grabovo and the black box recorders recovered. I took personal control of it and physically handed it to the official authority who passed it fully intact and uncorrupted to the international authorities."
It seems odd that not only were there foreign media on the site, but how did the looters get there and find the black box?
"I can't say, only that they were not local and they knew what they were looking for," he replied. I asked him to clarify, the media or the looters. "Both."
I contacted foreign journalists who were in the warzone at that time, none were on the crash site that day, though had heard rumours of correspondents being transported across from the Ukraine side of the frontline. Nobody who was there would confirm or deny this. The looters, however, disappeared back across into Ukrainian-held territory.
Oleg compiled a report on the operation, filed it and then noticed a change in media coverage. As a military man and knowing the front, with the equipment used, he thought it odd that there would be a suggestion that Russia or DPR troops had any part in shooting down the aircraft. The immediate story was that Russian-backed rebels did it, there was no other variation offered by Kiev and western media. Being a military man and officer, he privately argued that they needed to make their case to the world's media, but nobody wanted to listen. Then a case was brought against him and three others.
Assigned Guilt The Dutch Safety Board (DSB) and Dutch-led Joint Investigation Team (JIT) deemed the plane had been shot down by a single missile fired from a Buk 9M38. A missile system Associated Press (AP) journalists claim they saw in rebel-held territory hours before the crash – even though no evidence of this was ever produced.
Ukraine's Defence Ministry claimed that a truck carrying a Buk launcher was seen heading to the Russian border after the incident with one of its four missiles missing — something that could not be verified then or now. A single anonymous witness (M58) presented by Ukraine's Secret Service (SBU) said they saw the truck arrive, a loud bang, then leave with one missile gone. When the witness' evidence was questioned, the court said they could be trusted as inconsistencies in their story could be that his memory was "simply failing him".
"When the court said that taking stock of everything gave 'very strong evidence' that three of the men were guilty and one not, I simply realised this was the strangest court process I'd ever seen," one journalist from a Dutch TV station told me.
Nonetheless, the Dutch investigators 'found' the missile system had arrived in the area on the day of the crash and left right after the shooting. A Dutch lawyer from the firm who defended Oleg said, "Imagine going into court accused of a shooting murder. There is no weapon, no shell casings, no photos, videos, no records and no motivation (even accidental) to shoot the victim. Yet the court agree with conclusions taken before any investigation began."
Indeed, even the Wikipedia entry can't hide the 'coincidence' that the Dutch findings "were consistent with earlier claims by American and German intelligence sources". Of course, they were consistent when evidence was excluded, especially that of the man with most to tell and most to lose.
Oleg's Questions Four main points of interest that Oleg researched, studied and observed, were prevented from inclusion in the Dutch-led investigation.
1. Since there was no corruption to the flight recorder when handed over from Moscow, how did 15 minutes disappear at the end of the recording? Given the speed the aircraft was traveling at and the direction, the distance from last known point to that of impact is substantial.
2. The rocket system (Buk 9M38) held responsible for the missile, is not capable of such a 'result'. From the location investigators claim it was fired, it simply couldn't reach the altitude at the trajectory proposed.
3. 15 minutes before MH17 disappeared from the radar, it was redirected, due to a thunder cloud, close to a major Ukrainian military base in Poltava. One with a layered air defence system, none of which was accounted for by the investigation.
4. If the plane were struck by a rocket fired from the alleged location, the debris zone would have been located in a totally different space.
Oleg's questions about the marauders and foreign journalists we agreed to put aside as there is no direct link to any intelligence service or outfit that can be proven. Mentioned, but not included were the Ukrainian fighter jets in operation in the area as we agreed to stick to provable facts.
He did note that when leaving for a secure location with the flight recorders in his Mitsubishi Pajero jeep, he encountered a Ukrainian BMP-1. An amphibious tracked infantry fighting vehicle that then operated with other military vehicles. That jarred with him, since the zone had been free of Ukrainian military. He mentioned in his situation report which was forwarded, unredacted, to the Dutch investigators. A report that would have meant his guilt for shooting down the plane would never be in doubt. A report that, had it been included, would have brought peace to the families of those who lost loved ones in the tragedy and a proper investigation take place.
Answering the Questions I asked the Dutch Public Prosecution Service for an interview, none of those involved in the investigation or Oleg's trial would go on the record. I sent the four questions asked by Oleg, nobody responded. I sent the list to a scientist and former US intelligence analyst popularly known as "CK" for his opinion on questions 2 and 4. He proposed that if the Buk were indeed fired from a field in the Pervomaysky area, it would not have been able to reach the Boeing 777 where it was allegedly hit. He also questioned how the debris field was located where it was.
"Physically, speaking of physics, because I've seen explanations of weather and such with wind blowing bodies to their final resting areas. No, it would, the debris, have fallen in a different direction." He added, "I'd ask the Dutch just that, if the rocket came from this location, how did it hit the plane and how did the wreckage end up where it was. The chances are below miniscule."
The issue over the missing recording bothers Oleg. It bothered a lot of people who covered the trial and one of his own lawyers had the request to have it brought forward as exculpatory evidence denied. This was denied along with a request for records from the Ukrainian military as to their activities that day.
In 2020, when Oleg's lawyers filed a petition for a re-investigation of alternative scenarios for the MH17 crash, even the Dutch prosecutor agreed to two of the three alternatives. The court, however, refused. They refused to accept that anything other than a Russian Buk shot down the plane. This disturbed Oleg. It disturbed his team. He felt like he was being shafted and barred from presenting a full defence. He was the only one of the four who participated in the process, which was roundly condemned as a political show trial in Russian media.
Fresh evidence surfaces in Malaysian MH17 crash that killed 298 people in 2014
Alan Moore
Last Updated:
August 6, 2025, 16:15 IST
Share
Revelations by Oleg Pulatov, who was acquitted of all charges due to lack of evidence, raises new doubts about the Dutch investigation
Fresh evidence surfaces in Malaysian MH17 crash that killed 298 people in 2014
Pulatov during the court hearing
When the Malaysian Airlines plane was shot down on July 17, 2014, I was in Voronezh, Russia. A week earlier I'd been in Europe and while sitting in my Viennese hotel watched various news channels reporting on the mess that was Donbass. It was personal for me. I'd been in Kiev in January 2014 and seen first-hand the nastier elements looking for reasons to be violent. Living in Voronezh I'd met refugees from Ukraine from April 2014 and by the time schools had started back on September 1, the initial trickle of human misery became a steady river. Yet MH17 terrified me, just the idea of flying and being shot down accidentally did affect my travel plans for a decade. It returned to my life when I was contacted by a man desperate to have his story heard.
Sign up for Open Magazine's ad-free experience
Enjoy uninterrupted access to premium content and insights.
Go Ad-Free
Oleg Pulatov knew me as a sports journalist and one who was rather blunt about the scourge of corruption. From uncovering doping scandals to athlete abuse, match-fixing to financial funny business, he liked my work but was no fan of mine. Especially my "attack", as he put it, on neo-Nazi elements within football fan groups in Ukraine in 2011 and 2012. Something I'd written about and cooperated with the BBC on exposing. The man, with family roots in the Donbass, didn't take kindly to my blunt take on football hooligans and their nefarious activities, explaining that these were common criminals without ideology. Yet when he reached out last month about a potential story, there was a different vibe. He wanted to meet in person, something that made me wonder – why? And who is the man who'd criticised my writing in the past?
open magazine cover
Open Magazine Latest Edition is Out Now!
Modi Rearms the Party: 2029 On His Mind
23 Jan 2026 - Vol 04 | Issue 55
Trump controls the future | An unequal fight against pollution
Read Now
Who is Oleg Pulatov?
Born in Ulyanovsk (Russia), he was educated in Ukraine where his family come from. He was a military man his whole life, seeing combat in a number of theatres and was semi-retired when he objected to Kiev's bombing of civilians in the Donbass. He joined the breakaway Donetsk People's Republic (DPR) defence force, being elevated from Lieutenant Colonel to Colonel. In July 2014 he was Deputy Head of the DPR's Intelligence Directorate's Special Operations Department and commanded a group of forces on the Snezhnoye-Marinovka frontline.
Due to his rank and position, he answered for the area where the aircraft came down. He arrived on the scene of the tragedy and immediately set up a 'sanitary zone' around the crash site. Oleg was one of four men later charged by a Dutch court with shooting down the airliner and the only one acquitted in November 2022. His voice was silenced in the process, which is not only his point of view.
Recommended Stories
Palestine recognised by a section of the West is a small Bantustan: Ilan Pappé
Palestine recognised by a section of the West is a small Bantustan: Ilan Pappé
Mohanlal: Emperor of Mollywood
Mohanlal: Emperor of Mollywood
In Search of the Goddess
Ousmane Dembélé: Breaking Great
Mithun Manhas Emerges As Surprise Choice For BCCI President
As one lawyer from Eindhoven told me over the phone: "Given what he had to say, he was acquitted in the hope that he'd shut his mouth." Oleg wanted to speak at his trial, he went unheard, 11 years after the tragedy, he needed to tell everything.
Oleg reached out to me on social media and asked if we could speak. Thinking it was related to sports, especially anti-doping, I accepted. Previously he'd given me information on the trafficking of illegal substances used by athletes from labs in Ukraine and Moldova. To be on the safe side, I brought along a couple of friends to the rendezvous in Ulyanovsk. Upon meeting at a cafe, he clarified that our meeting was related to MH17. My friends blanched, but stayed put. I'd known Oleg was quite senior in the DPR military, though not of his connection to the area where the plane was brought down. Our previous interaction was sport, just that.
"When I arrived, the scene was like other conflict zones I'd experienced, but different. There were foreign media already there which was surprising in the extreme. Also, marauders* (looters). There were police wearing old Ukrainian uniforms and I realised I'd to quickly set up a cordon," he said, as we sat at a table in the Newtown area of the city. I'd asked if I could record our conversation, he readily agreed. "I've nothing to hide, never have had."
"My men went to work and we sealed off the area, asking the media to leave. It struck me as very strange how they were even in that location. That area of the front was too quiet for international journalists and we'd no media there in any number. Yet even before our rapid reaction group got there, they were already filming. Almost like they knew in advance, as physically or logically it would be impossible otherwise."
More from the author
Alan Moore
Alan Moore
From 'Red Dawn' to 'Orange Dawn': Trump’s Dangerous Cold War Reboot
Everything You Want to Know about India’s Doping Paradox
When politics hijacked the beautiful game in Dublin
‘Churchill is responsible for the Cold War’ – How Sports Diplomacy Was Killed in 1945
"We caught marauders on the site, who had located the black box and had it in the boot of their car. I remember so clearly. A green VAZ, built in 2001 or 2002, was searched at Grabovo and the black box recorders recovered. I took personal control of it and physically handed it to the official authority who passed it fully intact and uncorrupted to the international authorities."
It seems odd that not only were there foreign media on the site, but how did the looters get there and find the black box?
"I can't say, only that they were not local and they knew what they were looking for," he replied. I asked him to clarify, the media or the looters. "Both."
I contacted foreign journalists who were in the warzone at that time, none were on the crash site that day, though had heard rumours of correspondents being transported across from the Ukraine side of the frontline. Nobody who was there would confirm or deny this. The looters, however, disappeared back across into Ukrainian-held territory.
Oleg compiled a report on the operation, filed it and then noticed a change in media coverage. As a military man and knowing the front, with the equipment used, he thought it odd that there would be a suggestion that Russia or DPR troops had any part in shooting down the aircraft. The immediate story was that Russian-backed rebels did it, there was no other variation offered by Kiev and western media. Being a military man and officer, he privately argued that they needed to make their case to the world's media, but nobody wanted to listen. Then a case was brought against him and three others.
Trending Stories
1
Explained: What Happens During India’s Budget Session?
2
ICE, Gun Laws and Accountability: Inside The Alex Pretti Shooting
3
‘Heart-Rending’: Baramati Loses Its Tallest Leader as Leaders Grieve Ajit Pawar’s Death
4
Ajit Pawar Dies In Plane Crash
Assigned Guilt
The Dutch Safety Board (DSB) and Dutch-led Joint Investigation Team (JIT) deemed the plane had been shot down by a single missile fired from a Buk 9M38. A missile system Associated Press (AP) journalists claim they saw in rebel-held territory hours before the crash – even though no evidence of this was ever produced.
Ukraine's Defence Ministry claimed that a truck carrying a Buk launcher was seen heading to the Russian border after the incident with one of its four missiles missing — something that could not be verified then or now. A single anonymous witness (M58) presented by Ukraine's Secret Service (SBU) said they saw the truck arrive, a loud bang, then leave with one missile gone. When the witness' evidence was questioned, the court said they could be trusted as inconsistencies in their story could be that his memory was "simply failing him".
"When the court said that taking stock of everything gave 'very strong evidence' that three of the men were guilty and one not, I simply realised this was the strangest court process I'd ever seen," one journalist from a Dutch TV station told me.
Pulatov with the author
Pulatov with the author
Nonetheless, the Dutch investigators 'found' the missile system had arrived in the area on the day of the crash and left right after the shooting. A Dutch lawyer from the firm who defended Oleg said, "Imagine going into court accused of a shooting murder. There is no weapon, no shell casings, no photos, videos, no records and no motivation (even accidental) to shoot the victim. Yet the court agree with conclusions taken before any investigation began."
Indeed, even the Wikipedia entry can't hide the 'coincidence' that the Dutch findings "were consistent with earlier claims by American and German intelligence sources". Of course, they were consistent when evidence was excluded, especially that of the man with most to tell and most to lose.
Four main points of interest that Oleg researched, studied and observed, were prevented from inclusion in the Dutch-led investigation.
Since there was no corruption to the flight recorder when handed over from Moscow, how did 15 minutes disappear at the end of the recording? Given the speed the aircraft was traveling at and the direction, the distance from last known point to that of impact is substantial.
The rocket system (Buk 9M38) held responsible for the missile, is not capable of such a 'result'. From the location investigators claim it was fired, it simply couldn't reach the altitude at the trajectory proposed.
15 minutes before MH17 disappeared from the radar, it was redirected, due to a thunder cloud, close to a major Ukrainian military base in Poltava. One with a layered air defence system, none of which was accounted for by the investigation.
If the plane were struck by a rocket fired from the alleged location, the debris zone would have been located in a totally different space.
ADVERTISEMENT
Oleg's questions about the marauders and foreign journalists we agreed to put aside as there is no direct link to any intelligence service or outfit that can be proven. Mentioned, but not included were the Ukrainian fighter jets in operation in the area as we agreed to stick to provable facts.
He did note that when leaving for a secure location with the flight recorders in his Mitsubishi Pajero jeep, he encountered a Ukrainian BMP-1. An amphibious tracked infantry fighting vehicle that then operated with other military vehicles. That jarred with him, since the zone had been free of Ukrainian military. He mentioned in his situation report which was forwarded, unredacted, to the Dutch investigators. A report that would have meant his guilt for shooting down the plane would never be in doubt. A report that, had it been included, would have brought peace to the families of those who lost loved ones in the tragedy and a proper investigation take place.
I asked the Dutch Public Prosecution Service for an interview, none of those involved in the investigation or Oleg's trial would go on the record. I sent the four questions asked by Oleg, nobody responded. I sent the list to a scientist and former US intelligence analyst popularly known as "CK" for his opinion on questions 2 and 4. He proposed that if the Buk were indeed fired from a field in the Pervomaysky area, it would not have been able to reach the Boeing 777 where it was allegedly hit. He also questioned how the debris field was located where it was.
Oleg Pulatov while in military service as a colonel in the Donetsk People's Republic's defence force
Oleg Pulatov while in military service as a colonel in the Donetsk People's Republic's defence force
"Physically, speaking of physics, because I've seen explanations of weather and such with wind blowing bodies to their final resting areas. No, it would, the debris, have fallen in a different direction." He added, "I'd ask the Dutch just that, if the rocket came from this location, how did it hit the plane and how did the wreckage end up where it was. The chances are below miniscule."
The issue over the missing recording bothers Oleg. It bothered a lot of people who covered the trial and one of his own lawyers had the request to have it brought forward as exculpatory evidence denied. This was denied along with a request for records from the Ukrainian military as to their activities that day.
In 2020, when Oleg's lawyers filed a petition for a re-investigation of alternative scenarios for the MH17 crash, even the Dutch prosecutor agreed to two of the three alternatives. The court, however, refused. They refused to accept that anything other than a Russian Buk shot down the plane. This disturbed Oleg. It disturbed his team. He felt like he was being shafted and barred from presenting a full defence. He was the only one of the four who participated in the process, which was roundly condemned as a political show trial in Russian media.
"I answered everything, I was ready to answer more. I was branded with something I was not guilty of. First (I wanted) to defend myself and then bring the truth. The Hague (court) blocked this," he told me as we walked from the cafe to the Volga River.
"Was the truth told in Amsterdam?" Oleg responded to my question with an emphatic "No!". He expressed contempt for The Netherlands PM at the time, Mark Rutte. The current NATO General Secretary was widely reported to have taken a 'hands on' approach to the MH17 investigation and to have personally ordered a crackdown on reporters and outlets questioning the Dutch-led investigation.
The TV reporter who covered the trial from 2020 to its conclusion in November 2022 said that even victims' families felt cheated. Media, they said, were only publishing the reactions of those who felt there was "full and clear verdict given" and that "all factors had been accounted for", yet didn't platform those who were uneasy with the amount of evidence not brought into the case.
Evidence like that which was confiscated from Dutch reporters in 2017 upon their arrival in Amsterdam. Oleg didn't know about this, however I do as I know one of the reporters involved personally. Stefan Beck had 'no dog in the fight' and was eager to know what happened on July 17, 2014 as both a journalist and academic. He had been in Donbass and carried out extensive interviews, surveys and investigations, only to have his and colleague Michel Spekkers' materials taken away by Dutch police.
Apparently, the evidence was included in the investigation, like that sent from Russia from 2014 onwards. The investigation which, until Autumn 2024, has cost the Dutch taxpayer over €160 million. A lot of money to support a conclusion that was decided upon in the immediate aftermath of the tragedy.
I asked a British journalist, who reported on the events at the time and who interviewed dozens of witnesses on the ground in the years following the crash, why there was no real discussion on a range of reasons for the tragedy? He said, "It was taken that the stories put out by the SBU were the reason. When we asked questions, we were told that there was no other reason." He criticised Russia for not being more aggressive in a defence of Oleg and the other three defendants.
Explaining that, "Even when I was there, not a single local verified the firing of a Buk on that day, not just the presence of a system. DPR soldiers were in disbelief that anyone believed they were responsible. From sources on the Ukraine side, they were sceptical as to whether Russia was involved. It was the first time I encountered that. Both sides, who I was engaging with then, in united disbelief of what was being reported."
A journalist from a major international network who bravely reported from areas bombarded by Ukraine's military and associated paramilitary groups told of the MH17 shooting down: "The truth, if it actually can be determined, is not what people think. I'd like to blame Russia, but I've seen and heard nothing to convince me."
Last Word to Oleg "I have been in many war zones and in Donetsk and Lugansk. I was compelled to join the fight when I saw innocent people killed….I saw many aftermaths of bombings. But this, this." He paused, we'd already discussed this briefly off the record and he was visibly upset now. "It was like nothing I'd seen before." He could still see the site, still smell the site. He insisted, again, that they did not fire a missile at the plane.
"I can only say, beyond any doubt, we didn't shoot it. And those people, fooled by Rutte, the families [of victims] need to get answers. I went to court to prove my innocence. I was prevented from speaking fully, now I want everyone to hear my voice."
In a proper court of criminal law, guilt needs to be found beyond doubt for a conviction. The court proceedings which ended on November 17, 2022, left doubts and evidence behind in the push to prove the decision taken eight years and four months earlier when 298 people had just been killed.
"The Hague Court did not tell the truth. They know this, Rutte knows this, I just want the families to know it wasn't us. To have investigators find out what really happened."
Maybe the court and investigators can answer his questions, or someone can explain why looters were trying to take the flight recorders into Ukraine?
