Alternative Media and the MH17 JIT ReversalUlson Gunnar Malaysia had made it clear it was immensely displeased with its inexplicable exclusion from JIT formed after the downing of MH17 over eastern Ukraine. Including NATO members (Belgium and the Netherlands), a de facto NATO collaborator (Australia) and a potential culprit in the air disaster (Ukraine), Malaysias exclusion looked to be a part of an ongoing cover-up amid a larger attempt to use the disaster to frame Russia and advance NATOs agenda in Eastern Europe. The conflict amid which MH17 was shot down is perceived to be a proxy conflict between NATO and Russia. That the investigation includes exclusively pro-NATO members or NATO members themselves, both the conduct of the investigation and any conceivable outcome would be highly suspect. Malaysia, the only nation directly affected by the disaster and perceived of being beyond the direct influence of NATO, would have provided a much needed counterbalance. Now that it has become a member of JIT, analysts must vigilantly watch to ensure it is allowed full access to evidence and equal participatory standings. While Malaysias inclusion provides hope that JIT will now be unable to pursue a political agenda with impunity, the possibility is high that NATO will simply cite Malaysias inclusion in JIT to legitimize its actions, no matter how biased the conduct of JITs investigation may be or how skewed its outcome, even if Malaysia raises protests over both. Alternative Medias Role in JIT Reversal The diminishing primacy of the Wests powerful global media monopoly may be partially why Malaysia was finally included in JIT. Had there been no alternatives to this monopoly, including networks rising up in developing nations and among BRICS, as well as the more decentralized alternative media of citizen journalists, Malaysias protests simply would have been tuned out and other issues put forward to cover up the glaringly compromised nature of JITs original members and their methodology. It was also revealed that JIT had arranged agreements among members to bar the release of certain information when deemed necessary. With Malaysia excluded from JIT, any number of relevant or incriminating pieces of evidence could have already been purged from the investigation while other pieces of evidence fabricated to take their place. The alternative media played a crucial role in bringing this suspicious arrangement to the publics attention. In all, large and growing outrage over what was clearly a politically motivated investigation was given a platform by the alternative media to reach a wider general public. Unable to ignore obvious misconduct in the investigation and a glaring lack of objectivity and impartiality because of this fact, may have forced NATO to include Malaysia despite the obvious restraints it would put on its attempt to whitewash theinvestigation. What Malaysia Must Do Now Malaysia must ask the questions and demand the evidence required to determine whether or not evidence was destroyed or switched during its absence in JIT, then ensure an impartial, objective investigation is pursued to determine the cause of MH17s fateful crash and who was responsible. It must ensure it is included in all matters of the investigation and that pro-NATO members are unable to pursue avenues unilaterally without Malaysias knowledge and input. Inconsistencies and findings Malaysia may publish that run contradictory to NATOs conclusions and innuendos must also be brought to the publics attention via the alternative media, considering much of MH17s investigation has either been spun or covered up entirely by the Wests media monopolies. Had NATO truly been sure of Russias culpability in MH17s downing, carrying out a quick, transparent, and inclusive investigation none could question would have been at the forefront of NATOs agenda. Instead, a shadowy investigation carried out by a stacked Joint Investigation Team, excluding a nation effected directly by the disaster for no apparent reason besides its residing beyond NATOs direct sphere of influence reeks of a cover up or at best, an attempt to spin an uncertain chain of events into a politically and strategically favorable outcome. For JITs original members not to have vocally protested this suspicious behavior and multiple conflicts of interest, illustrate that much of JITs work regardless of Malaysias inclusion in the process lacks the legitimacy of a truly objective and impartial process. That NATO cannot conduct the investigation in a transparent manner and has resorted to multiple attempts to imply Russian culpability before presenting concrete evidence suggests there is either no evidence to implicate Russia at this time, or there exists evidence that directly contradict NATOs claims. Regardless, it will be up to the alternative media to provide the necessary checks and balances the Western media should, but wont provide itself. Independent analysts must continue examining the ongoing investigation and reporting inconsistencies in both methods and outcomes. By stopping NATO from exploiting tragedy to advance its own agenda amid the MH17 case, future disasters may see a speedy, objective investigation and perhaps, may not occur at all. Ulson Gunnar, a New York-based geopolitical analyst and writer especially for the online magazine New Eastern Outlook, where this first appeared. 