I quote:
According to them the fragment directly belongs to the pay load of a 9M317 BUK missile, the modern version of the BUK 1-2 system. Expert Nicolas De Larrinaga: "From the hour-glass form we can gather all the characteristics of an impact of a 9N314 warhead fragment. This fits perfectly."
According to Wikepedia among others this missile is the SA-17, the improved version of the Buk-M1, which is only used by Russian armed forces.
"From the hour-glass form....." right, looking at the shape, distorted, it is positively identified as coming from one particular model of rocket? nonsense.
To count as anything approaching proof, they would have to eliminate all the other similar rockets it could have come from., Numerous fragmenting missiles were made with similar H shape fragments.
ALL news site "proofs" from The Netherlands have all been aimed at "proving" that it could only have been something currently Russian.
The area was bombarded with mortars and assorted rocketry and missiles for several months between July 17 and mid-November when Akkermans picked up the pieces -- oddly, for a photographer who'd taken 600+ detailed images of the debris, this time WITHOUT photographing them. The Ukrainian Army itself held BUK exercises in the general area on July 16, in response to their own claims two days earlier that one of their planes had been shot down by a Russian fighter.
In any case, the results here will be political, not scientific, and the final report has again been put off, this time until October. Remember Ukraine is in a position to veto any report it does not agree with; whether they do so or not will depend on who the government is around that time, a situation which today is in flux with internal power struggles.