translation from Russian by Seva
How could Russia in just 20 years,
without wars or other perturbations,
rise from a semi-colony
to an acknowledged world leader,
equal among the top ones?
Kitchen "strategists", who sincerely believe that massive nuclear strike is the universal solution to any international problem (even the hottest one, close to military confrontation), are unhappy about the moderate position of the Russian leadership in the crisis with Turkey.
However, they deem insufficient even
direct participation of the Russian military in
the Syrian conflict. They are also dissatisfied with the
Moscow's activities on
the Ukrainian front.
How did it happen that all of a sudden Russia started not just actively stand up to the world hegemonic power, but successfully win against it on all fronts?
An anti-oligarch rebellion was brewing in the country. It was fighting an endless and hopeless war with Chechens that spilled over to Dagestan.
National security was supported only by
nukes, as to conduct any serious operation even within its own
borders, the army did have neither trained personnel nor modern
equipment, fleet could not sail, and aviation could not fly.
The key question is not who is a better
economist, Glaziev or Kudrin, and whether it would
have been possible to allocate even more resources to social
In reality, the U.S. in the 1990s or 2000s started installing puppet regimes on the post-Soviet space, including Moscow, which was considered as one of several capitals of dismembered Russia.
As early as in 1996, Evgeny Primakov
became the Foreign Minister, who, in addition to turning the
government plane around over the Atlantic upon learning about the
U.S. aggression against Yugoslavia, turned around the Russian
foreign policy, which after that never followed the U.S. course.
He was succeeded in 2004 by the current
foreign minister Sergey Lavrov, under whose leadership
diplomacy accumulated enough resources to switch from positional
defense to decisive offence.
"Kozyrevshchina" (the word is derived from the name of Andrei Kozyrev, the Foreign minister in 1990-1996; the word means "acting like Kozyrev", i.e. in a subservient manner against one's own interests - translator's note) never caught on in the Foreign Ministry because it did not fit.
Russia is at the bottom of the pit
economically, but the default of 1998 is still ahead. The USA
totally disregards the international law replacing it with its
arbitrary actions. NATO and the EU are getting ready to move to the
Any deviation from the
Washington-approved line, any attempt to pursue an independent
foreign policy would lead to economic strangulation and subsequent
internal destabilization - at that time the country lives on Western
The last rearguard battle given by the loosing compradors was an attempt at a revolution in 2011 at Bolotnaya square.
What would have happened if they had
made their move in 2000, when they had an overwhelming advantage?
Finally, Russia needed allies...
It was necessary, without retreating on key issues, to consolidate the influence of Russia in post-Soviet states, ally itself with other governments resisting the U.S., strengthen them, if possible, all the while creating an illusion in Washington that Russia is weak and ready for strategic concessions.
For example, if Russia opposes another instance of Western adventurism, it is "bluffing to save face", the Russian elites are totally dependent on the West because,
However, the myths of,
...are essentially gone.
Only marginals believe in them, who are
not really incapable, but are too afraid to acknowledge the reality.
Let us evaluate the situation based on
real capabilities, rather than wishful thinking.
The Ukrainian elite, in all its actions,
has always been and still is anti-Russian. The difference is
that the ideologically nationalistic (gradually becoming Nazi) elite
was openly russophobic, whereas the economic (comprador, oligarchic)
elite was simply pro-Western, but did not object to lucrative links
They also were the once who tried to
convince the world that they are better for Euro-integration than
After all, Yanukovich and his fellows in the Party of Regions, while they had absolute power (2010-2013), supported Nazis financially, informationally, and politically.
They led them from marginal niche to
mainstream politics in order to have a convenient opponent in the
presidential elections in 2015, while suppressing any pro-Russian
informational activity (not to mention a political one).
The U.S. would, quite naturally, see it
as transition of Russia to direct confrontation, and would have
redoubled its efforts to destabilize Russia and support pro-Western
elites all over the post-Soviet space.
Even when (not by Moscow's choice) this
happened 2013, Russia needed almost two years to mobilize its
resources in order to give a strong response in Syria. The
Syrian elite, in contrast to the Ukrainian one, from the very
beginning (in 2011-2012) rejected the option of compromising with
...whereas reorientation towards Russia
was the only way to stabilize the situation and save the country as
well as the position of the elite itself.
The U.S. has managed to switch Ukraine from the multi-directional mode into the mode of anti-Russian battering ram only by 2013, having spent enormous amount of time and resources and having acquired a regime with huge internal contradictions incapable of existing independently (without growing American support).
Instead of using Ukrainian resources for
their benefit, the U.S. is forced to spend their own resources to
prolong the agony of the Ukrainian statehood destroyed by the coup.
The Ukrainian elite turned out to be totally inadequate, incapable of strategic thinking, of evaluating real risks and advantages, but living and acting under the influence of two myths.
In the situation of choice between
orientation on Russia and survival, or siding with the West and
dying, the Ukrainian elite chose death.
By focusing on contradictions between
Washington and the EU, Russia managed to burden the West with
The EU economy simply could not support
it. In its turn, the U.S. was not ready to accept Kiev exclusively
on its own payroll.
Even Warsaw, which used to be the main
"advocate" of Kiev in the EU, openly (although semi-officially)
hints at the possibility of dividing Ukraine, having lost the faith
in the ability of the Kiev authorities to keep the country together.
Former governor of the
Donetsk region (appointed by the
Nazi regime) and oligarch Sergey Taruta states that his
country has eight months to exist. Oligarch Dmitry Firtash
(who had a reputation of the Ukrainian "king maker") predicts
disintegration as early as in the spring.
Achieved in a tough confrontation with the block of most powerful, militarily and economically, countries, while starting from a much weaker position and with the most peculiar allies, not all of which were or are happy about growing Russian power.
A comprehensive study would take many
Their efforts do not tolerate fuss or
publicity, but without blood and victims yield results comparable to
those achieved by multi-million armies in many years.