Considering the relative lull which seems to be taking place in the Ukraine, this might be a good time to look at the impact which the dramatic developments in the Ukraine have had upon the internal political scene in Russia and what that, in turn, could mean for the international (dis)order. In order to do that, I would like to begin by a short summary of a thesis which I have already mentioned in the past (for a discussion please see here, here, here and here):
Setting the Russian part of the stage
First, some bullet-style reminders on topics previously covered on this blog:
- There is no real Parliamentary opposition in Russia. Oh, not at all because “Putin is a dictator” or because “Russia is not a democracy”, but simply because Putin has brilliantly managed to either co-opt or defang any opposition. How? By using his personal authority and charisma to promote an agenda which the other parties could not openly oppose. Formally, opposition parties do, of course, still exist, but they completely lack credibility. This might eventually change with the new Law on Political Parties.
- The only “hard” opposition to Putin in modern Russia are the various openly pro-US individuals (Nemtov, Novodvorskaia, etc) and their associated movements and parties. At best, they represent something in the range of 5% (max!) of the population.
- Putin did a “judo move” on his real opponents (more about them later) by using the strongly “presidential Constitution” adopted in 1993 to basically concentrate all the power in his hands.
- The *real* “opposition” to Putin and his project can only be found *inside* the Kremlin, the “United Russia” party and some influential figures. I refer to this real opposition as the “Atlantic Integrationists” (AI) because their key aim is to integrate Russia into the AngloZionist worldwide power structure.
- The *real* power base of Putin is in the Russian people themselves who support him personally, the All-Russian People’s Front, and in the group which I call the “Eurasian Sovereignists” (ES) whose primary aims is to develop a new, multi-polar, world order, to to break free from the current AngloZionist controlled international financial system, to re-orient as much of the former USSR as possible towards an integration with the East, and to develop of the Russian North.
If I wanted to simplify things further, I would say that in 1999 the AI and the ES jointly made the push to put Putin into power to replace Eltsin. The AI (roughly representing the interests of big money and big business) wanted a rather gray and dull bureaucrat like Putin (or so they thought!) to assure continuity and not rock the boat too much after Eltsin’s departure. The ES (roughly representing the interests of a certain elite of the former KGB, especially, its First Chief Directorate) and Putin himself, brilliantly used the power given to him by the 1993 Constitution (adopted under Eltsin and the AI!) to slowly but surely change the course of Russia from a total submission to, and colonization by, the USA to a process which Putin and his supporters call “sovereignization” i.e. national liberation. A long tug-of-war ensued, mainly behind the scenes, but with regular visible flare-ups such as the open clash between Putin and Medvedev on Iran and Libya or the sacking of Kudrin by Medvedev (the two had been set on a collision course by Putin, of course). As a last over-simplification I would say that Medvedev represents the Atlantic Integrationists and Putin the Eurasian Sovereignists.
Again, I have very much over-simplified all of the above to keep this short, but if any of this is new to you, please do go and read the four previous articles I mention above, including the comments.
Setting the Ukrainian part of the stage
Until this winter the biggest difference between Russia and the Ukraine was that in Russia Putin had basically destroyed to old oligarchy, which was US and Israeli controlled, and replaced it by a new one, which was either supportive of the Kremlin or neutral. Putin’s message to the Russian oligarchy was simple: “you can be rich, but don’t compromise the welfare of the Russian nation or try to enter the political struggle”. For those who might wonder why Putin did not eliminate the Russian oligarchy as a class, I would restate here that everything which Putin did since 1999 until now was always a compromise between his ES and the still very powerful AS. Putin could simply not directly challenge this very powerful, well-connected and wealthy group, so he had to proceed slowly and with caution, step by step.
In contrast to Russia, in the Ukraine the oligarchs realized what I would call “the Khodorkovsky Dream” – they basically bought everything: the entire economy, the totality of the mass-media, the Parliament and, of course, the Presidency. For the past 22 years, the Ukraine has been basically enslaved by a number of oligarchs who made a simple deal with the West: you support us, and we support you. As a result, the western leaders and the corporate media did “not notice” that all the Ukrainian politicians were corrupt to the bone, including Ianukovich and Tymoshenko, that – unlike in Russia, contrary to the AngloZionist propaganda – political disagreements in the Ukraine were often settled by assassinations, that the Ukrainian plutocracy was literally sucking the Ukraine dry of its wealth. Eventually, even the amazingly rich Ukraine ran out of resources and wealth to pillage and the crisis became obvious for all to see.
Besides the pillaging of resources and wealth, another major “achievement” of the Ukrainian oligarchs was the total subordination of the state and its instruments to their needs: for them the state itself became and instrument of power and influence. For example, the Ukrainian security service SBU (ex-KGB) spent all its time and resources involved in the internal power struggles between the various oligarchs and their power bases and, as a result, the SBU has not caught one single foreign spy in 22 years! To make things worse, the SBU was basically run from the local station of the US CIA. This wholesale destruction of the state apparatus itself played a key role in the events this winter and is still a central factor in the situation on the ground: for all practical purposes, there is no “Ukrainian state”.
The Eurobureaucrats and Uncle Sam come waltzing in
It is against the background of this total collapse of the Ukraine as a state and a nation that the EU decided to make its move: it offered the Ukraine an association with the EU. Uncle Sam loved the idea, especially since it included a political chapter to conduct the Ukraine’s foreign and security policy in agreement with the EU. This notion of a EU-run Ukraine also appealed to the USA which basically believed that the Ukraine was the key to Russia’s putative imperial ambitions (see here for details). Besides, the White House knew that if the Ukraine was run by the EU, and the EU run by the USA (which it has always been), then the Ukraine would be run from the USA. So the West began dangling a big carrot in front of the Ukrainian people: “make a “civilizational choice” and join the EU and become rich, wealthy, happy and healthy; as for Russia – it has nothing to say in this, the Ukraine is a sovereign state”. For millions of impoverished and exploited Ukrainians, this was a dream come true: not only would they become wealthy and happy as the Europeans supposedly are (only in propaganda reports, but nevermind), they would finally get rid of the corrupted clique in power. As for the Ukrainian oligarchs – they loved it too: they would get to continue exploiting the Ukraine and its people as long as they maintained an anti-Russian stance (which was easy enough – the Ukrainian oligarchs were literally terrified of Putin and, even more so, of the notion of a “Ukrainian Putin”).
The big explosion
There is a saying which says that if your head is in the sand, your butt is in the air and, indeed, reality came back to bite the Ukrainians in the butt with exquisite vengeance: the country was broke, ruined, just weeks away from a default and the only place were money could be found to prevent the final collapse was Russia. The Russians, however, put a condition on their help: no association agreement with the EU because Russia could not have a open market with the Ukraine while the Ukraine would open its market to EU goods and services (this was no “Machiavellian ploy” by Putin, but a basic and obvious necessity understandable to anybody with an “Economics 101” course under the belt). At this point, Yanukovich suddenly made a 180 turn which sincerely baffled many Ukrainians, turned to Moscow for help and all hell broke loose: outraged Ukrainians took to the street and wanted to know why their dream of prosperity was denied to them. The USA also panicked – if Russia was allowed to rescue the Ukraine it would inevitably control it – “you paid for it, you own it” says the US logic. So the USA threw in its biggest weapon: the “Ukrainian Taliban” aka the “Right Sector”, the Freedom Party (ex Social-Nationalist Party) and its assorted neo-Nazi thugs. The sudden appearance of bona fide Banderites and other neo-Nazis scared the Russian speakers so badly that while the freaks in the new revolutionary regime in Kiev were busying themselves with banning Russian as an official language or de-criminializing Nazi propaganda, Crimea seceded and most of the Ukraine entered a period of complete chaos and lawlessness.
We all know what happened since, so there is no need to cover it again, and we can now look at these events from the point of view of Russian internal politics and their likely global impact.
The view from Moscow
The first thing to say here is that Putin’s popularity with the Russian public has soared to new heights: it currently stands at 71.6% and that even though there has been little progress on the anti-corruption front, no progress at all in the much needed reform of the judicial system and with a Russian economy going through some difficult times. Still, regardless of many unsolved problems facing Russia – Putin is currently simply impossible to attack as he has positioned himself as the man who saved Crimea and, possible, even Russia (more about that below).
The second dramatic effect of the events in the Ukraine is that is has further polarized the Russia society. I am not saying that this is fair, but the fact is that Russian politicians now have two choices. They can position themselves either as:
1) True Russian patriots who support Putin, support the reintegration of Crimea, support the Russian policy of standing up to the West or,
2) Russian “liberals”, who are russophobic, bought and paid for by the US, who are nothing more than a 5th column (Putin used this term), pro-capitalist, pro-NATO and even pro-Nazi (remember, the West does now openly support Nazis in the Ukraine!).
Needless to say, all the Russian politicians scrambled over each other to show that they firmly belonged to Group One. Even Sergei Mironov, the head of the “Just Russia” Party and last “real” opposition leader inside the Duma, took the lead in helping Crimea (which got him on the US and EU sanctions list). Those who failed to do so are now dead meat.
The most credible of them all, Alexei Navalnyi, the only opposition leader not associated with the Eltsin regime of the 1990s, wrote an article in the NYT entitled “How to punish Putin” in which he went as far as to make a list of names the US should punish. In the current political mood in Russia, this is nothing short of a political suicide and Navalnyi’s political career is now ended. He might as well emigrate to the London or the USA.
But the biggest result of the crisis in the Ukraine was to put Russia and the USA on an open collision course. Seen from Russia this is what the West has done:
1) organized an illegal armed insurgency
2) overthrown a legitimate (if corrupt) government
3) supported neo-Nazis
4) put anti-Russian policies over democratic values
5) put anti-Russian policies over the right of self-determination
6) refused to recognize the will of the Russian people in the Crimea
7) refused to recognized the will of the Russian-speakers in the Ukraine
8) sanctioned Russia symbolically only because it could not do more
9) failed to intervene militarily only because it feared Russia’s military might
10) strong-armed the world at the UN to condemn Russia
Against this background – what chance do the Atlantic Integrationists to get any support for their policies? None, of course. Not only that, but the sanctions used by the West have made it possible for Putin to do that which he could not have done before: scare Russians away from western banks (either into off-shores or into Russian banks), create a Russian SWIFT-like inter-bank pay system, shift more efforts into exporting gas to China and the rest of Asia, reduce the Russian participation in US-run bodies such as the G8 or NATO, force Russia to deploy more powerful military capabilities on its western borders (Iskanders in Kaliningrad, Tu-22M3s in Crimea), reduce Russian tourism abroad and send it to Russian regions and last, but not least, further reduce the Russian use of the US dollar. All this is a dream come true for economists like Glazyev or politicians like Rogozin who have lobbied hard for such measures since many years but whose advice Putin had to ignore lest the Atlantic Integrationists strike back. But now there is even some serious talk in Russia about withdrawing from many key military treaties (strategic nuclear, conventional, nuclear verification, etc.) or even the WTO (unlikely).
It now has become extremely easy for Putin to fire anybody on the grounds that this person is not effectively implementing the President’s decisions. Now everybody knows that and every single Atlantic Integrationist now runs the risk of being summarily dismissed. In truth, it must be said that Barak Obama has helped Putin immensely and that thanks for the truly insane US policy on the Ukraine the position of the (generally pro-US) Atlantic Integrationists has been undermined for many years to come.
A joke told for the first time on Russian TV by, of all people, the spokesman of the Russian Investigative Committee (a “Russian FBI” one could say), not exactly somebody noted for his humor, has become particularly popular these days. It goes like this:
Barack Obama boycotted the Olympics and did not attend the games in Sochi – and we brilliantly won and the Olympics and Para-Olympics. Thank you, Comrade Obama!
Obama then strongly supported extremists Kiev junta – and we miraculously regained Crimea. Thank you, Comrade Obama!
Obama imposed sanctions on our oligarchs – and now their money is not in the West but in Russia. Thank you, Comrade Obama!
Now, if we may, we have more wish: we would like to win the World Soccer Cup…
Jokes aside, there is much truth to this joke – the more the USA is trying to maximize the stakes and beat back Russia, the stronger Russia becomes and the stronger Putin becomes in Russia.
As for the poor few pro-US activists left in Russia, they are truly in a desperate situation: for years they had to fight off accusations of being associated with the horrors of the Eltsin regime in the 1990s and now, to this terrible legacy, they can add the new burden of having to fight off accusations of being “pro-Banderastan”. Frankly, they all might as well all pack and leave for the West, as in Russia they are finished.
What does that mean for the rest of the world?
I have often described the covert struggle between the Atlantic Integrationists and the Eurasian Sovereignists as “internal” or “behind the scenes”, which was mainly true until now. The events in the Ukraine have now changed this and the kind of issues the “Eurasian Sovereignists” have been only alluding to in more or less oblique terms are now openly discussed on Russian TV: how to coexist with a hysterically russophobic and openly pro-Nazi West, how to decrease the Russian participation in, and dependence upon, the AngloZionist controlled international financial system, what kind of measures to take to make sure that the US and NATO will never have a viable military option, how to deal with the “internal 5th column” inside Russia so as to avoid a “Maidan in Moscow”, how to deal with the kind of US-sponsored subversive organizations (such as NED, Carnegie, etc.) who still operate in Russia, how to make sure that any rabidly anti-Russian government in Kiev is not allowed to survive economically and socially, etc. I would call that the “Nuland stance” but applied not to the EU, but to the USA. Does that mean a new Cold War?
Yes, you betcha it does!
But I would immediately stress here that this new Cold War is entirely, 100%, the creation of the USA and that all Russia has now done is accept the new reality it is operating in. Neither Putin nor anybody else in Russia wanted this new Cold War, but it has been unilaterally imposed upon them by the US and its EU colonies for the past 20 years or more. Think of this: the true main reason why the US and EU are not imposing any meaningful sanctions on Russia is that they have already done so in the past and that there is nothing left to impose short of sanctions which will hurt the West as much, or even more, than Russia. The same goes for the so-called “international image of Russia”. Has anybody forgotten all the idiotic canards systematically and mantrically promoted by the Western corporate media about Russia before the crisis in the Ukraine? Here is a quick reminder taken from my past article on this topic:
- Berezovsky as a “persecuted” businessman
- Politkovskaya “murdered by KGB goons”
- Khodorkovsky jailed for his love of “liberty”
- Russia’s “aggression” against Georgia
- The Russian “genocidal” wars against the Chechen people
- “Pussy Riot” as “prisoners of conscience”
- Litvineko “murdered by Putin”Russian homosexuals “persecuted” and “mistreated” by the state
- Magnitsky and the subsequent “Magnitsky law”
- Snowden as a “traitor hiding in Russia”
- The “stolen elections” to the Duma and the Presidency
- The “White Revolution” on the Bolotnaya square
- The “new Sakharov” – Alexei Navalnyi
- Russia’s “support for Assad”, the (Chemical) “Butcher of Damascus”
- The Russian constant “intervention” in Ukrainian affairs
- The “complete control” of the Kremlin over the Russian media
I would say that this list is already long enough and that nobody in Russia needs to worry that anything the Kremlin does from now on will make it worse. Short of waging war on Russia it they did on Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bosnia, Croatia, Kosovo, Libya or Syria – the USA has pretty “maxed out” its anti-Russian policies, and the fact is they don’t amount to much.
So what do you call a little bit of something bad, but not enough to really hurt you. Nietzsche would call it a power boost. Modern medicine calls it an immunization. The choice of words does not matter, only the actual phenomenon does: the US and EU did inflict a considerable amount of pain on Russia, but not enough to break it and, as a direct consequence of that, Russia has received a powerful “anti-AngloZionist immunization” which will make it far stronger than it was.
And that is good news for everybody.
For better or for worse, Russia is objectively the undisputed leader of the world resistance to the AngloZionist Empire. Yes, the Chinese economy is much bigger, but China’s military is not, and China is heavily dependent on Russia for energy, weapons and high-tech. I do think that China will inevitably take the lead in the struggle against the AngoZionist Empire, but this is still not the case today: China needs more time. Iran is most definitely the oldest and first country to dare to openly defy the AngloZionists (along with Cuba and the DPRK, but those are really weak), but Iran’s ambitions are primarily regional (which, by the way, is a sign of wisdom on the part of the Iranian leadership). As for Hezbollah it is, in my opinion, the moral leader of the worldwide Resistance, not only by its truly phenomenal military achievements, but primarily by its willingness to stand completely alone, if needed. But being a moral beacon does not mean being able to globally challenge the Empire. Russia, China, Iran and Hezbollah form what I would call, to paraphrase Dubya, the “Axis of Resistance to Empire” and Russia plays the key role inside this informal but strong alliance.
The other place where “it” is happening is, of course, Latin America, but the recent vote at the UN has clearly shown that Bolivia, Venezuela, Nicaragua and Cuba are the only ones who already dare openly defy the US hegemony (and the regime in Venezuela is currently fighting for its survival). Thus, while Latin America has a huge potential, but it is far from being realized, at least at this point in time.
Conclusion
A New Cold war has been in the making since the very day the previous Cold War officially ended. Thus, we can only welcome the new reality introduced by the crisis in the Ukraine: Russia has now openly accepted the US challenge and all the pretenses of some kind of US-Russian strategic partnership are long gone. As for the EU, its role has been so shameful and disgraceful that Russia will treat it exactly as it deserves to be: a thoroughly submissive US protectorate with no policy or opinion of its own. Now that the pretense of “partnership” is finally being dropped, we can expect a much more assertive, if not confrontational, Russia on the international scene. Of course, I don’t mean that Putin will start banging his shoe at the UN like (allegedly) Krushchev did, nor will Putin threaten to “bury” the West – Putin, Lavrov and Churkin are real statesmen and diplomats, and they will remain impeccably courteous – but you can expect many more “no” votes at the UN and many “we are so sorry” on many bilateral issues.
The big beneficiary of this new Cold War will be Iran, of course, but also China. Not only will Iran and China probably get the weapons they have been wanting so badly (S-300 and Su-35 respectively), China will get some very sweet deals on Russian energy prices (the Chinese are definitely smart enough to use this new situation without overplaying their hand – they will do it “just right”). Syria and Hezbollah will get more money, more weapons and more political support. Countries aspiring to eventually become members of the “Axis of Resistance to Empire” will get more financial and political aid (Cuba, Nicaragua, Bolivia and, especially, Venezuela need all the help they can get) as will more or less pragmatic countries who did not fully sell out to the USA (the BRICS of course, but also smaller countries such as Argentina, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and all the others who abstained at the infamous UN vote recently). One should also not underestimate the assistance China can render to these countries or all the benefits these countries can reap from cooperating with the other BRICS countries.
As for the EU, it will get the gas it pays for, and it will have to deal with the economic aftershocks of its involvement in the Ukrainian crisis: it will have to keep the Ukrainian economy afloat, barely above the waterline at best, and it will have to deal with the inevitable flood of economic refugees and it will have the dubious pleasure of having to deal with the thorny problem “Ukrainian Taliban” now running loose in their self-styled Banderastan. The EU will have to deal with all that under the high auspices of a USA which barely hides its contempt for Europe or, as was the case with Nuland, does not even bother hiding it any more. As for Uncle Sam – what he can’t get, he burns down and that is what he will end up doing with the rump-Ukraine aka “Banderastan”: turn it into a larger Kosovo – a big pain for all its neighbors, but a place the US military machine can use as it wishes. Unlike Kosovo, however, rump-Ukraine will eventually fall apart, one way or another, but the fiction of a functioning state can be maintained for a long while, especially if there is a consensus in the plutocracies which run the West that form matters much more than substance and that as long as the appearance of a unitary Ukrainian state are there, all is well. Frankly, and no offense intended to any Ukie nationalist reading this, Uncle Sam has much bigger fish to fry than to deal with the problems of a “Kosovo v2” in Central Europe.
The trends I sketched out above are, of course, just general trends. There will be some “zigs” and some “zags” in this process, but barring some major and unforeseen event, this is where, I think, we are heading. Sure, there will be a Presidential election held in grotesque conditions, a completely corrupted oligarch like Poroshenko will buy himself a victory, while the US-backed regime in Kiev and the “Ukrainian Taliban” settle scores and murder each other. Russia will most likely not intervene militarily, unless the situation becomes really crazy, some form of US-Russian agreement is more likely, and the eastern Ukraine will try to find a way to make some money with Russia. The Crimea will see an unprecedented economic boom which will attract a lot of attention in the rump-Ukraine which will be desperate to get some small portion of the financial windfall enjoyed by Crimea. As they say “money talks”.
As for Obama, he will go down in history as the worst US President ever. Except the next one, of course.
The Saker
I disagree completely. Peace was about to break out in the world.
Now, today, there are *two* articles in the New York Times about “modern Russian military equipment”.
The arms manufacturers (Eisenhower’s “military industrialist complex”) were seeing their profits begin to collapse.
Along comes Putin and saves the day. All is well.
And the best of it, by far the best of it: not a shot needs to be fired. No annoying coffins returning from the front. All American politicians have to do is scream and yell about “the Russian threat” and they can have all the taxpayer money they want.
Hillary Clinton compared Putin to Hitler. Need I say more.
Then it will lead to more problems in the long run, especially with the state their economy is in right now. Internal problems will grow even further, and Russia have time on it’s side. I’m sorry, English is not my main language, i would’ve expressed my thoughts more in-depth.
I’ve been thinking about your comments about the opposition in light of my conversations with people in Moscow last winter. There is definitely a westernizing group. Sergei Guriev, whom I like and respect is part of it. As you know, he had to leave Russia in haste last spring. But his outfit is being colonized by neo-con (not even neo-liberal) economists from George Mason University, and a lot of the young economists think the only way they can get ahead is by publishing in a prestigious American economic journal. So much for the Atlanticists. I was impressed with Medvedev, but didn’t get a chance to spend enough time with him really to get a bead on him.
On the other hand, I spent a lot of time with liberals who really do fear Putin’s authoritarianism because they came up under Brezhnev. Many are Academicians and there’s no way I can second-guess their judgment. I think for them the aberration of the US and its aggressiveness is a real heartbreak. They had hoped for so much, and we worked so hard to make it happen, and it is not going to happen.
kruschev banging his shoe at the UN in 1960
http://www.101gold.com/files/2012/10/khruschev.jpg
Thanks for the essay, Saker. Sounds like you’re feeling better.
It is interesting that the people leading Russia right now seem to be all very capable people. Contrast them with the junk in the same political leadership roles in the west and the difference couldn’t be more extreme. I don’t think the west has anyone even as high as a mediocre level of capability in a leadership position.
вот так
“But I would immediately stress here that this new Cold War is entirely, 100%, the creation of the USA and that all Russia has now done is accept the new reality it is operating in. “
Just like the last one.
In the mid-1980s, Michael Mcguire did some basic research on Soviet threat perceptions in the period after WWII. Initially, Stalin believed that since the main threat to the USSR would come from a revived Germany in 15-20 years, he wished to maintain “The Grand Alliance” that had defeated the Axis.
However, by 1946, the Anglosphere had concluded that the main threat to them was the USSR, though you can see glimmerings of this perception as early as 1943 in the records of the (British) “Post-Hostilities Planning” committee. Truman’s sharp repudiation of Roosevelt’s agreements with Stalin, dragging Churchill along to a degree, forced Stalin to reciprocate this hostility, though he was reluctant.
For those who want to know more, this time on Ukrainian history in a nutshell:
http://tarpley.net/audio/WCR-20140329.mp3
Webster G. Tarpley, Ph.D.
TARPLEY.net – World Crisis Radio
March 29, 2014
To you Saker.
“As for Obama, he will go down in history as the worst US President ever.”
Specific Schadenfreude. Did you say it from the Russian point of view or the US point of view?
@anonymous:Hillary Clinton compared Putin to Hitler.
Actually, I think a much more apt comparison would be to compare Hillary to Hitler, especially in terms of delusion-fed aggression.
@knut: I think for them the aberration of the US and its aggressiveness is a real heartbreak. They had hoped for so much, and we worked so hard to make it happen, and it is not going to happen.
True, but if they had studied the history of Russia a little more carefully, they would have noticed that liberals have *always* been a disaster for Russia. As for Putin’s “authoritarianism” it is entirely based on *their* “liberal” Constitution which *they* adopted for themselves and *their* hero – Eltsin. Can’t say that I am now sorry for them.
@Anonymous:kruschev banging his shoe at the UN in 1960
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoe-banging_incident
@вот так: It is interesting that the people leading Russia right now seem to be all very capable people. Contrast them with the junk in the same political leadership roles in the west and the difference couldn’t be more extreme
True, but it used to be the other way around. Soviet leaders like Krushchev, Gorbachev and Eltsin were both a horror and an embarrassment to Russia, whereas the West had Kennedy, de Gaulle and Mitterrand. What is true, I think, is that to have Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping and Ali Khamenei and Hassan Nasrallah all at the same time is really a blessing in these most dangerous times, especially when the Western leaders are such non-entities (lots of power with very little judgment make for a dangerous combination).
Cheers,
The Saker
While China is quietly supporting Russia, South Korea and Japan will obviously fall into line (for now) with America.
However instead of going into direct opposition like the previous Cold War, head-to-head & toe-to-toe with America/NATO, the world IS already more multipolar.
China, Iran and Syria/Lebanon make strategic sense for Russia to support. But Bolivia, Venezeula, Cuba and Nicaragua are laughingstocks of countries and separated by immense oceans. And to even mention to the DPRK? I think that is one mistake the USSR and China would like to undo.
In the First Cold War, America did represent inspirational values such as democracy, liberty and freedom. Hence for the peoples of Germany, Korea, Japan, Turkey and yes even China, they threw in their lot with America and prospered.
In this second Cold War, I hope Russia will continue becoming more truly free-market compared to the crony-capitalist rent-seeking economy of America. I hope that Russia stands for individual privacy and rights, and protects people such as Edward Snowden.
If Russia can be a true symbol of freedom and liberty, then I feel it will be its greatest asset in convincing the other powers in the world such as Germany, Turkey, South Korea and Japan, to join with Russia, China, Iran, Syria/Lebanon in making Eurasia stronger and more prosperous.
@Anonymous
“…convincing the other powers in the world such as Germany, Turkey, South Korea and Japan,…”
No way. Germany paid for the changes in Ukraine though several “foundations”, they admitted it (journalists at least), what’s Mrs Merkel playing in with Mr Putin – tipping press what she said to HE Mr Putin during phone conversations, why they play openly German investors against Mrs Merkel?
Turkey with Prime Minister Mr Tayyip Erdogan and his court of idiots dream 25/7 (yes 25! hours a day) about the Turkey being the only regional superpower promised them by Mr Obama.
South Korea and Japan will not be able to decide by themselves – they are in the US mighty grip. Just as Crimea was “to be or not to be” for Russians, so are the two countries for the so called Pacific “pivoting” policies of the US.
Saker:
Uma coisa muito engraçada:
“Memorando interno da NASA que explica o cessar de comunicação com a Rússia:
Caros colegas,
Dada violação contínua da Rússia da soberania da Ucrânia e da integridade territorial, até nova ordem, o governo dos EUA determinou que todos os contatos da NASA com representantes do Governo russo estão suspensos, a menos que a atividade tenha sido especificamente exceção. Esta suspensão inclui viagem NASA para a Rússia e as visitas de representantes do governo russo para instalações da NASA, reuniões bilaterais, e-mail e teleconferências ou videoconferências. No presente momento, apenas as atividades da Estação Espacial Internacional operacionais foram exceção. Além disso, as reuniões multilaterais realizadas fora da Rússia, que podem incluir a participação da Rússia não está excluída em virtude da presente orientação. Se desejar, o nosso escritório irá ajudar na comunicação com entidades russas em relação a esta suspensão das atividades. Questões específicas relativas à implementação desta orientação pode ser direcionado para a Sra. Meredith McKay, 202.358.1240 ou meredith.mckay @ nasa.gov, em nosso escritório.”
A Estação Espacial (está fora porque é de interesse deles (como sempre)).
Putin poderia fazer duas coisas que seriam hilárias:
1- Tomar posse da Estação Espacial visto que há mais astronatas russos que norte-americanos (que façam uma votação como na Criméia) e, mandar os norte americanos descerem de para-quedas.
2- Trazer de volta as naves Soyuz que estão acopladas na Estação Espacial (deixando os astronautas norte-americanos lá, eles que se virem para buscar seu pessoal)
Kkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk!
Alexandre.
Excellent summary Saker. I am not as confident as you that things will work out well for Syria and Venezuela. The US must feel that things are not working out well with Russia and that might lead to more aggressive actions elsewhere.
Venezuela is vulnerable and there is very little Russia could do to help if the US decided to escalate its involvement in overthrowing current government. If we reasserted gun boat diplomacy this would send a strong message to rest of Latin America not to defy US.
With respect to Syria the US has even more incentive to prevent Assad from winning his war. At the least we can expect the US to increase its support for the rebels to at least extend the war if not win it. We might even engage in some really stupid act like a no fly zone. How would Russia react to that?
Excellent exposition, and optimistic. Me, not so much. The USA has been diabolical and endlessly aggressive since its beginning. From the time of the first settlers the inherent drive, motivated by the genocidal adventures of the Israelites in Canaan (most, thankfully, fictional, but illustrating a deep genocidal urge, which, in regard to the horrors of the Nazi Judeocide, becomes even more tragic because ironic)was to exterminate the indigenous and ‘redeem’ some ‘lebensraum’ in the West. From that time on the US impulse has been, like the cancer that it mimics, relentlessly expansionist. And once they totally subdue this planet, it’s on into the Cosmos. Imagine how many extra-terrestrial ‘Injuns’ they could slaughter then.
There is only one ‘Cold War’ which in fact never ended. And it wasn’t too ‘cold’ in Indonesia, Indochina, Korea, Thailand, Burma, Guatemala, El Salvador, Chile, Nicaragua and on and on it goes. The USA contacted the Nazis as soon as it was plain that they had failed to destroy the Soviet, and the likes of Gehlen, the Nazi intelligence chief, went over to the Empire readily. Indeed Gehlen like Bandera (even Mengele for some years) lived openly in West Germany, working for their new masters. And the US, the Western powers and the Vatican established ‘rat-lines’ that helped thousands of fascist butchers escape justice, whereupon they got to work murdering peasants and trade unionists in the Third World, all for good old Uncle Satan.
As many others have noted, the Western discourse peddled by the Groupthinkers of the Western brainwashing apparatus, is an ‘upside down world’. Up is down, left is right, and, most starkly, good is evil. The first resort of the Empire in all cases is murder, destruction, aggression. This is a policy of maximal aggression, always. And target the children if you get a chance, for, amongst other motivations, some obscure but diabolical psychopathological reason. The Imperial elite are creatures who luxuriate in the power to commit maximum evil, and get away with it, then screech about their ‘moral values’. Samantha Powers is, in my opinion, the latest, most grotesquely extreme, example of the type. In regard to that observation one need only look at the tidal waves of child molestation and abuse that have been exposed in recent years in the West, much committed by ‘religious’ perverts, much, naturally, commercialised, and much, tragically, that infiltrated Eastern Europe after ‘Liberation’.
In my opinion, in order to survive, maybe, Russia must abrogate every disarmament treaty. Sitting back simply invites the sneak first-strike that is US strategy, openly stated, and of which the phony ‘missile defence’ system is an integral, indeed the crucial part. Undermine US dollar hegemony, enter Treaties of mutual self-defence with China and Iran and anyone interested in surviving US attentions. Expel all the Fifth Columnists to their ‘spiritual’ home in the West, and all Western propaganda presstitutes. Even then, Imperial bloodlust impels them to more aggression, more so as the Western neo-feudal economic system nears its death-throes. And even then, there is the ecological crisis to contend with, which will probably render all these machinations futile and pointless.
Theodore Svedberg said…
“How would Russia react to that?”
And how Russia did react to her more advanced weapon deliveries to Syria being bombed and destroyed by Israel Air Force, for three times at least?
BTW Until BRICS will start talk one voice, vote the same way there’s no chance for Russia to play effectively against Empire. It seams to me the US intel agencies are working hard on BIS countries. In other words I see no mortar for the bricks (for example – China lacks at least 10-20 modern ICBM nuke submarines, etc).
@Theodore Svedberg:And how Russia did react to her more advanced weapon deliveries to Syria being bombed and destroyed by Israel Air Force, for three times at least?
By the only reasonable option: offering to supply more. Surely you did not expect Russia to bomb Israel in retaliation for an Israeli attack on Syria?
China lacks at least 10-20 modern ICBM nuke submarines, etc).
Nah, these are not war winners. What China needs is better C3I, a more modern Air Force, more satellites, a few good nuclear attack submarines, more diesel-electric ones – stuff that threatens the USN. They are working on it, hard. So all is well on that front.
Until BRICS will start talk one voice, vote the same way there’s no chance for Russia to play effectively against Empire
Russia just did, and without any BRICS help. That is what I meant when I wrote that Russia is the de-facto resistance to empire leader – it has “full spectrum” resistance capabilities, by itself.
Cheers,
The Saker
Saker,
A great round-up of recent events, their background and their meanings. Thanks
Saker, I’m glad to see you’re feeling better – I hope you’re now ‘flu-bug free. A thought provoking article, as usual. Can I point out your freudian slip may be showing? There’s a small typo you might want to correct – I guess “shit more efforts into exporting gas to China’ should read “shift more efforts….” although the original is funnier.
Thanks for your analytical summary. I was always puzzled as to why Peter the Great demanded his Looking West policy, when the expansion was all to the East and South, and the histories I’ve read never even asked the question.
As for who started the Cold War, the USA had already instituted policies in Occupied Italy in 1943 that became templates as the USA escalated the Cold War (Kolko, Politics of War). Coincidental with that policy was FDR’s firing “Dr. New-Deal” and hiring “Dr. Win-The-War”. Then after his death, in 1947 (which would have been during his 4th term) we have the National Security Act that established the terrorist CIA. So, my scholarship informs me that FDR is responsible for starting the Cold War and rapidly building up the terroristic capacity of the US Empire. And in my view, the Cold War never ended; only the rhetoric changed, not the policies.
I recently reread WA William’s American Russian Relations, 1781-1947, and must conclude that the USA’s imperialists have become even more aggressive than their 19th century counterparts, which makes them very dangerous.
Russia has always championed itself as Eurasian through policies related to Peter’s. But, IMO, its true destiny lies in Asia, as current events are showing.
And it should be very clear now that when the USA or its Propaganda System denounces something, you can be certain it mirrors something it’s done.
i would like to make some comments about the situation in europe- especially on the situation in germany and austria.
european politicians are us-puppets, no doubt about that- at least on any national or international level. after all, europe is under total survaillance from us secret services- with germany probalby as the main focus.
the german media – state tv as well as all private media is also completely under control of the us. there are some interesting analysis on how those “transatlantic” networks work and how journalists with focus on foreign policy are “embedded” in “thinktanks” and “istitutes”, but the grip is really tight and i don’t see any chance that this will change. the situation in austria is the same.
all german speaking msm made a furious campaign against russia and putin. pussy riot all over the place, sotchi toilets, and so on. (austria was different on its coverage on sotchi, it was far less political, but that was before ukraine- after all, austrian companies build a lot of the infra structure).
the events in ukraine were described as fed by whatever PR-company managed the “revolution” in ukraine, no public dissent at all. with the exception of the left (die linke) who spoke out against the inclusion of fascists. but they are not part of the transatlantic “community” anyways.
but the comment sections on ALL newspapers were furious about the discription of the events, the ridiculous coverage by the press, and the idiocy of german policy – not only because of the unseen hypocracy, but also because it was seen as beeing against the best interests of the country – and europe.
the media seemed alarmed, and doubled down on propaganda. they even published articles asking themselves on how they failed (like: did we write to much about this NSA thing?, why are our readers so stupid? how does the russian propaganda work?, my friends are americans!).
this, of course, also did not went well and produced even more ridicule.
an ex MP (and influential advisor of the schmidt government) wrote that this extent of agitation, lies and propaganda was unthinkable to him until now.
also: all living former chancelors (schmidt, kohl, schröder) made public statements that they understand russias position and that this crap about sanctions has to end. generally, it seemd to me, that former politicians- that don’t have to fear that some smear campaign ruins their career, spoke out very much against this cold war rethoric. so did some CEOs.
i think that there is a devide in the german (as well as the austrian) economic elite – with the “industrialists” (notably those who also work closely with unions) opposing any of this cold war crap. the media is raging against them- a highlight is an interview with the CEO of Siemens in german state TV (by its main anchor, a journalist educated in the us, that made his career in the “Rundfunk im amerikanischen Sektor”) that was accuaretely described by posted comments as “Volksgerichtsfernsehen” (like the infamous public trials of the german “People’s Court” of the Nazis).
i am not sure on how this will end, but i definitely don’t see a clear victory for the hardcore transatlantics, even if the media was out in full force in their support.
i am also not realy sure on what people accually support this cold war stance, because i don’t know anyone who does.
The Saker,
“…it has “full spectrum” resistance capabilities, by itself.”
I’m not so sure.
You may “resist” but you have the strategy to go out from the stance relatively unscathed. You must have “backers” in this world to whom you may trust (sort of).
Ditching dollars for oil will require agreements, accords and cooperation with anti-Empire zone.
On the other hand if Brazil and RSA votes “softly” they send messages to smaller countries – “not yet”. But where the vulnerable countries should search for hope for now?
A propos Israel.
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/world/2009-08/19/content_8589955.htm
“If it wasn’t for Iranian missiles, maybe one of the thorny questions between Russia and the US will disappear, the bases that the United States is building in Poland and the Czech (Republic),” Peres said in a reference to the previous US administration’s plans to build missile defense sites in Eastern Europe. (Third paragraph from the end.)
It is said that it was Mr Peres who promised Mr Medvedev in Sochi to convince Mr Oabama to drop the shield not only in Poland but in Eastern Europe as well. And soon Mr Obama declared the move leaving Europe Eastern policy in the hands of Russia and Germany alone.
Let’s assume the USA is the only Israeli colony on the world (a joke but true to the core). Who would you talk to/destroy first to gain advantage during ultimate confrontation?
Perhaps sort of ultimate ultimatum to a proper political decision center would calm down Zionists’ hot heads in the USA?
BTW. Where is/was the dense anti-aircraft shield Syria build few years ago? Why IAF is able to penetrate Syrian air defenses at ease?
Does the IAF have so powerful ECM devices capable to suppress all Russian AA weapons or do they know all the codes for Syrian SAMs and AAAs?
A few weeks back I made a “little” list of the countries the US has, erm, disrupted one way or another. I’ve been adding to it but I’m sure I’ve missed a few. Would anyone like to make any additions?
Afghanistan, Albania, Angola, Argentina, Australia, Azerbaijan, Bolivia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Brazil, Bulgaria, Cambodia, Central African Republic, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Croatia, Cuba, Czech Republic, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethopia, France, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Indonesia, Iraq, Iran, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, N. Korea, S. Korea, Laos, Lebanon, Libya, Macedonia, Malaysia, Mali, Marshall Islands, Mexico, Moldova, Montenegro, Mozambique, Myanmar, Nicaragua, Panama, Pakistan, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Puerto Rico, Romania, Samoa, Saudi Arabia, Serbia, Slovakia, Somalia, South Africa, South Sudan, Spain, Sudan, Syria, Thailand, Turkey, Russia, South Korea, Sudan, Syria, Ukraine, Uruguay, Venezuela, Vietnam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zaire
Great article, Saker.
I just want to comment on WHY it is not in Russia’s interest to join the EU. Ever.
If Russia were to join, it would instantly be the largest country in Europe. In a few decades, it would be the richest and most powerful country, and Europe would be an appendage of Russia, not the other way around. The Eurocrats know this, of course; the only way they would allow Russia to join the EU is if they could guarantee that the country stays poor and relatively powerless.
(This may have been the fundamental goal of Yeltin’s oligarches: to so thoroughly loot Russia that the country would be desperate to join the EU under any conditions (much as the Ukraine is now). As surely as the sun rises in the east, the unconditional takeover by the Europeans would keep the Russian people poor forever.)
So it will never be in Russia’s interest to join the EU. I think Putin sees that.
(20,000 tons)
I cant shake a thought that might be wrong. The whole circus in Ukraine is a continuation of the war lost in Russia by the Jewish Mafyia. Would it be likely that Yanukovich was about to take some measure against corruption and the “oligarchs” panicked? An allusion of Putin about the dealings of Kolomoisky and Abramovich might send us in the right direction. Remember Berezovski vs Abramovich and the “suicide” of the first after he threatened to reveal things to Putin in exchange for his pardon. It might be that the “things” were enormous.
THE NEW YORKER
March 4, 2014
Putin, Tilting at History
Posted by John Cassidy
“I understand the people on Maidan who are calling for radical change rather than some cosmetic remodelling of power. Why are they demanding this? Because they have grown used to seeing one set of thieves being replaced by another As an example, Putin cited Igor Kolomoisky, a Ukrainian billionaire who has just been named the governor of Dnipropetrovsk province, in south-central Ukraine, by the new interim government in Kiev. “This is a unique crook,” Putin said. And now this crook is appointed governor of Dnepropetrovsk. No wonder the people are dissatisfied.”…
It is hard to imagine Barack Obama, who delivered a measured rebuke to Putin’s claims later on Tuesday, calling a prominent citizen of a neighboring country a crook, or referring to an American billionaire as an oligarch. But that is part of Putin’s appeal to ordinary Russians, particularly those who are older and less educated: he speaks the language of the common people, and appears to share their concerns and their prejudices”.
http://blogs.ft.com/beyond-brics/2014/03/03/ukraine-oligarch-putin-is-a-schizophrenic-of-short-stature/#ixzz2xmDv9ItA
Speaking for the first time since taking over as Dnipropetrovsk governor, the Ukrainian businessman of Jewish roots first took a sharp shot at toppled Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovich, before quickly turning towards Putin.
Kolomoisky, known as one of Ukraine’s most tight-lipped oligarchs, broke his habitual silence saying: “I will say it undiplomatically.”
“We had our own big schizophrenic,” he said referring to Yanukovich, a tall man who towers over Putin.
“But there,” he said, giggling and referring to Russisa, “is a schizophrenic of short stature.”
Kolomoisky, who is known for his sense of humour, went on: “He is completely inadequate. He has completely lost his mind. His messianic drive to recreate the Russian empire of 1913 or the USSR of 1991 could plunge the world into catastrophe.”
WizOz
Thanks for this brilliant post, Dear Saker.
I do feel the need to be optimistic and confident especially referring to Syria and Venezuela, besides Ukraine: the main confrontation countries nowadays.
Regards
M.
I am having difficulty reconciling point 4 in your opening paragraph with this I got from Wikipaedia
Quote
United Russia (Russian: Еди́ная Росси́я; Yedinaya Rossiya) is the current ruling centrist party in Russia. It is the largest party in the country, currently holding 238 (or 52.89%) of the 450 seats in the State Duma. The party was founded in December 2001 through a merger of the Unity and Fatherland-All Russia parties. Ideologically, it self-identifies as a “Russian conservative” party, and it supports the policies of the current presidential administration. The party’s association with President and former Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, who is a former party leader, has been the key to its success, and there is also evidence that the electorate credits the party (in addition to Putin) for improvements in the economy. Although the party’s popularity has declined from its peak of 64.4% in the 2007 Duma elections to 49.32% in the 2011 elections, it remains by far the most popular party in the country, ahead of the Communist Party (at 19.19%). Dmitry Medvedev, Russia’s current prime minister and former president, has been the leader of United Russia since 26 May 2012 and of United Russia in the State Duma since 24 September 2011.
Unquote
Can you provide some explanation? Thanks.
@anonymous:Can you provide some explanation? Thanks.
Can you provide some question? Thanks!
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/syrias-assad-praises-putin-changing-world-order-1443092
@karlof1
> Russia has always championed itself as Eurasian through policies related to Peter’s. But, IMO, its true destiny lies in Asia, as current events are showing.
The history and culture of (European) Russia looks very European to me, maybe more European than Europe itself. Education (languages), Music, etc. They seem to have not a lot in common with China. Maybe that is why Russia, up to Putin until recently, very aware of their history and culture, tried to mend ties with Europe. And I hope Putin won’t react as emotional as Saker seems to suggest and shut the door to Europe, but let them know they are always welcome – if and when they come to their senses (after finally smelling the American rat).
Germany, despite Merkel, might be forced to sniff across the Atlantic, for pure economical reasons. So not all is lost. And this very wrecked economy is the glimmer of hope that I have in all this. As long as America was strong and could simply “marshall out” money to everyone strategically important, all was fine. That has changed, and when business push comes to energy shove, Merkel, who clings to the chancellory, will do what has to be done business wise. And if the US will then force her to show her true colors, (even) she might vocalise her opposition to the anti-Putin politics. Not on principled grounds, and maybe not very convincingly, but after all: It’s the economy, cupid.
Honk
@M.
> I do feel the need to be optimistic and confident especially referring to Syria and Venezuela
Well, short term, all might be rosy. Except for the very countries you mention: Venezuela could turn very autocratic, as how do you expect Maduro to solve these issue? And Syria might turn very bloody, once the rebels (or was it spelt “repels”?) get heavier arms.
But medium term, I wonder if there isn’t some truth to this one doomsday scenario, which goes as follows. There’s a bunch of very influential (read: filthy rich) people that are desperate and trying to pit the world against the most potent countries that threaten to dispel the myth that “there’s no alternative (to this so-called capitalism which makes you rabble as poor as you deserve to be, and makes us chosen few stinkin rich)”.
Insanity? Yes! But: They’ve done it before.
And honestly, would you allow Putin and Chavez to take away all you hard-stolen wealth? No, you wouldn’t!
Honk
So why did the West pull off the putsch when they could have waited and won an election? For that matter, why allow the radicals to radicalize the Russian-speaking areas?
As the first poster pointed out, there is the smell of the military-industrial complex in the US looking into the abyss of a Congress needing to cut money, and, voila, a new Cold War. An extra two hundred billion might be spent due to this “new Hitler”.
Paul
Dear Saker,
thank you for yet another very insightful essay.
As you say, there is not much the US can do to “punish” Russia, short of war.
But what if they fully realize that as well and see the only way to “stop” Russia is to bomb it or something like that?
What do you think is the possibility of that? I know my question may sound very silly and I know we are talking about nuclear powers. But still. The level of rabid Russophobia, pure hatred and vitriol here in the United States (I live in Chicago) is unprecedented. People much older than me say – not even during Cold War 1.0 it reached such hateful levels. Plus you have the neocons pushing for a new war and the mid-terms – what if someone in Washington feels that crazy and does one day bomb Moscow? Every day I wake up and the first thing I do is check the news on my phone in bed! I am really scared, I do not want to live through a war, I don’t want the country where I was born to be bombed into submission. But i am also a very logical and rational person so I just want someone to explain and show me how that is not at all a possible scenario here. Thank you!!
Saker,
Thanks for the essay; it is very insightful. I have a few questions. 1. Is the current picture of the Russian Political system by design or is it part of the dynamics of the ongoing internal struggle in the Kremlin? 2. It seems that former ambassador McFaul was unable to read or figure out the Russian socio-political dynamics in the last two years. Since Putin just created a new political party or political organization (All-Russian People’s Front), does this organization have a solid level of cohesion or level of political maturity and strength capable to give direction to the country in the short and long term vs United Russia? 3. If there are two power groups in the Russian political arena (“Atlantic Integrationists” and “Eurasian Sovereignists”), in the absence of Putin, what is the possible scenario in terms of leadership that may give continuity to the Russian Federation’ national and global policies.
Anonymous: “Can you provide some explanation? Thanks.”
Saker: “Can you provide some question? Thanks!”
Very good Saker! I was myself scratching my head at this “comment”… and then I had a good laugh thanks to you. Keep your sense of humour!
Shoe: http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/26/opinion/26iht-edtaubman_ed3_.html
The upswell of pride and patriotism in Russia is like nothing I’ve ever witnessed in twenty years of living here. It’s as if all the humiliation of the breakup of the SU and the Yeltsin years were shaken off in one fell swoop. People who had been critical of Putin and his government, even diehard atlanticists, changed their minds overnight as if a switch had been flipped.
I would not underestimate the importance of Crimea relative to domestic politics. Initiatives that had been delayed or quashed by the liberals in government have had new life breathed into them. As Saker presciently pointed out, those in government who had effectively straddled the fence now are forced to choose sides. I only hope that Putin seizes the chance to implement that which needs to be done in full because now is the chance. In some ways, I am disappointed that the sanctions weren’t harsher; the more “punishment” that is meted out, the stronger the motivation to break away from the West. Anyway, these are wonderful times, I’m very proud of Russia and it feels good to be on the right side of history.
@Honk–
Russia was infected by its own strain of Oreintalism and has only recently come to understand who and where its real friends are. Central Asia is a thorn, but it’s always been a thorn. Putin’s made a lot of effort there. The Spring and Summer will prove most interesting.
@Honk, Russia, Europe
Yes, Russia keeps the door open to Europe. But she shut it to Eurosodom.
WizOz
What the Russians Army is facing. Video is in Russian, but there’s a decent description of the video, also in Russian. Just do a translate on that.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wi1o-BTp_Mg
Dear The Saker,
Glad you are better and thank you for an excellent piece.
I had always thought Medvedev was a Zio sympathiser/atlanticst when he didn’t veto the no fly zone over Libya. I still wonder to this day what would Libya be like now if there had been a no fly zone….very sad what has been done to that country and the cold blooded murder on a head of state was disgusting!
During that period Hilary was known as Hitlery and Killery – so I found it rather ironic that she wants to describe a proper Statesman like Putin as Hitler. The woman is shameless.
I hope Russia succeeds for all our sakes.We need some good leaders in this world.
Rgds,
Veritas
I strongly believe RIA Novosti works for USA government.
Saker
So here we go for another cold war. You know I was born in the early 1980-s and so did not see much of it but I believe I can see a lot of it now.
I have followed Western commentary on Russia for many years and three of the following are most important ones for me w.r.t Russia.
1. Russia’s demographic picture : The Western pundits declare day in and day out that Russia is going to be half empty by 2050. Can you please counter it ?
2. These same people say that the US is going to bury Russia with shale gas. What is your take on this ?
3. The most important part , the Western pundits believe that they can engineer another split between Russia and China alike they did in the Sino-Soviet split in the late 1970-s. What is your expert opinion about it ?
I would be grateful about logical answers to all these three questions.
Take care
Debanjan
Saker
Your blog is brilliant, your analysis phenomenal, you’re educating and enlightening the bewildered herd in the west. You’re as deft and nimble in your repudiation of the western medias narrative as the polite men in green were in Crimea, i salute your indefatigability. I’m from the west and i’m not depressed…..anymore :) The evil empire is disintegrating, the situation reminds me of a line in the song by Lou Reed ‘Last Great American Whale’……… “It’s like what my painter friend Donald said to me
Stick a fork in their ass and turn them over, they’re done” Erin Go Bragh
Hi Debanjan
1. Useful source on Russian demographics. Situation is nothing like as bad as many western pundits claim
http://darussophile.com/category/demography/
2. The idea that US will bury Russia with shale is a joke
http://www.countercurrents.org/heinberg270314.htm
3. Russia and China old article but still interesting
http://darussophile.com/2010/10/russia-china-no-war/
It really is only a minority of idiots in the West that are ruining things for the rest of us. Putin can call them out and build a world order based upon respect for nations, rather than hegemonic globalism.
He needs to think big.
Next potus is jeb bush with vp being condi rice to carry on the fine program layed out in the past and it has no real future.
Thanks and good to see you have recovered.
@Honk 03 April, 2014 01:10
Thanks for reading and asking.
Well, I have to admit that, to a certain extent, what I wrote denotes a sort of “wishful thinking”, a real human need suggested by the personal memories of amazingly friendly, hospital and fair Syrian people I met at their homeland a few years ago. Awesome, deep and moving experiences to be preciously remembered.
On the “more rational side” I can see a clear and steady growth of the – quoting Saker’s words – Axis of Resistance to Empire, while the overstretched western propaganda has reached exceptional levels of abruptness.
The “Bolivarian revolution” started by Chavez has had the time to settle and permeate the society, it won’t be easy to overturn the will of a clear majority of the population.
EU, as far I can see from my daily point of view is slowly collapsing from a mesmerized live to an almost complete flop, US are (apparently?) headless: well, I do reckon “desperate rulers” pursue some definitely insane (and partially hidden) interests.
I hope “rebels/repels/mercenaries/killers” won’t find a way to commit more atrocities.
Stay human, and possibly further.
Baraka & warm Regards!
M.
I translated this article in french. It will soon be published on http://www.agoravox.fr. I will give the link here. Good analysis in french are not luxury — medias are worst of all in western europe. Many thanks and peace in all user’s hearts.
The modus operandi of Britain is to make country and regions unstable and install british stooge with explicit instruction to bring the money -looted ones -to Britain from where it is not going to go anywhere else.
Some oligarch Jews (like thee criminal U.K.-based fugitive oligarch Boris Berezovsky)
were the stooge of British in Russia and they brought so many ill gotten money to uk. So did the Kuwaitis-who brought 4 billions of pounds within a week of first Iraq war problem in august 1990 -so has continued the massive loot of the rest of the world by the English .race through this money protection racket . It is money protection racket in the sense that those eliete’s money is protected only when it is made to be lodged in British London banks. The witness, who appeared on the Rossiya channel with his face hidden and was referred to as Pyotr, accused 61-year-old Berezovsky of killing Alexander Litvinenko because the former security officer knew how the exiled tycoon had obtained political asylum in Britain in 2003. This thief boris berezosvky is a terrorist as well who calls for violet end to Putin-the president who is one of the most loved of his countrymen compared to any in the world.
As someone said “We live in a world where criminals are good guys and patriots are villains: where Berezovsky is a liberal “human rights” activist and Putin is a moral monster.” that putin who is one of the most popular leader of any in the world.
say even if Russia destroys usa then if Britain or rather england is allowed to exist then the english parasitic dog race will ,by very parasitic nature, will try to disrupt Russia or other countries’ existence. therefore instead of attacking usa or poland it is best policy of Russia to attrack and destroy to the whole of england which must be evaporated to a rubble.
That is what explains influx of foreign money to London and how London has overtaken new York in stock market. Forget about service industry -british are the most ill mannered race what service can they provide except protection racket on back of american arms? Britain is looting even usa. Through it is usa which has worked hard (through illegal invasions ) to make other countries unstable so that Britain can get money from protection of stooge elites of those countries..
the modus operandi of Britain is to make country and regions unstable and install british stooge with explicit instruction to bring the money -looted ones -to Britain from where it is not going to go anywhere else.
Some oligarch jews were the stooge of British in Russia and they brought so many ill gotten money to uk. So did the Kuwaitis-who brought 400 billions of pounds within a week of first Iraq war problem in august 1990(now kuwait soverenign fund is nto in kuwait but in londoan and under british occuptation) -so has continued the massive loot of the rest of the world by the English race through this money protection racket . it is money protection racket in the sense that those elite’s money is protected only when it is made to be lodged in British London banks.
@M
> I can see a clear and steady growth of the – quoting Saker’s words – Axis of Resistance to Empire, while the overstretched western propaganda has reached exceptional levels of abruptness.
I agree. And although that’s a positive outlook, will you want to live through the transition?
If e.g. Russians are able to put money where (some of) their (politicians’) mouths are, the petrodollar will be be dealt a severe blow, if not the (long overdue) deathblow.
Currently, the US seems to be almost willingly pushing Russia into the corner where Putin would be more or less forced to ditch the dollar. Which is of course great support for Putin’s anti-Empire policies. But if this destroys the American economy, do you not expect there to be some “Gulf of Asov” incident? I mean the US has produced and stockpiled the weapons all these decades, now that their business model, the very foundation of their existence is going to shit, why not at least try to give it a shot?
Honk
Here is the french translation of the article : http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/international/article/une-nouvelle-guerre-froide-a-150288.
For your francophone friends !
Another cracker of an article. I admire your optimism but fear that the US-UK-NATO really do see this as poker and will keep raising the stakes. We all know what that risks and IMO, though it doesn’t bear thinking about, we should keep it constantly in mind.
I have wikified the article and posted it to Wikispooks here.
Glad to note your recovery. All the best and keep ’em coming.
You can’t have an “Anglo/Zionist” power structure being “pro-Nazi.” That’s just laughable, and keeping this idea going just makes one look foolish.
The “Nazis” in Ukraine were used, and are being discarded. They were useful for their organization and fighting skills, nothing more.
Time to call a spade a spade. The West isn’t controlled by “Anglos and Zionists,” it’s run by Jews.
It’s not the “corporate” media, it’s the Jewish media.
We all know it. Time to run with it.
@Anonymous:You can’t have an “Anglo/Zionist” power structure being “pro-Nazi.” That’s just laughable, and keeping this idea going just makes one look foolish.
Baloney! If you can have the CIA run al-Qaeda you can most definitely have the AngloZionists run Nazis. Not to mention that the Nazis and the Zionists have a history of collaboration not only in pre-war Germany, but also later in Apartheid South Africa.
Yes, Jews control a lot of things. But far from all. For example, its the ANGLOS who run Obama and who kicked the Neocons out of the White House.
BTW – the Saudi Wahabis are ALSO in bed with the Israelis. So what not Nazis?
Things are sometimes a little more complex than just “the Jews, the Jews, the Jews, the Jews…..”
Cheers,
The Saker
If the CIA runs al-Qaeda, then “al-Qaeda” isn’t the Sunni militant group everyone thinks it is.
The pre-WWII Zionists collaborated with the Nazis on only one thing — both wanted Jews out of Germany.
Apartheid South Africa wasn’t “Nazi.” And Jews were instrumental, through media and financial power, in forcing regime change there. You might think that was a good thing. I don’t, and most black South Africans are probably having serious regrets right now.
Obama most trusted advisors were Axelrod and Emanuel, both Jews, and the Pritzker Jews funded him. Sure, the neo-cons are out of favor right now, but the “continuity” of goals remains.
Absolutely brilliant article. I’ll translate it into russian
@Louie: I’ll translate it into russian
Can you please let me know if you post it somewhere?
Many thanks!!
The Saker
@Anonymous: If the CIA runs al-Qaeda, then “al-Qaeda” isn’t the Sunni militant group everyone thinks it is.
Right. They are all Jews.
The pre-WWII Zionists collaborated with the Nazis on only one thing — both wanted Jews out of Germany.
So when their interests coincide, they gladly work together. QED.
Apartheid South Africa wasn’t “Nazi.”
No, it was not National Socialists but rather National Capitalists, but
it was still very similar to it, as is Israel (which also dumped Socialism for Capitalism). So they felt a deep sense of community. Something like “racists of the world, unite!”.
One of the ways of looking at history should be the details of the leadership involved. In this the Saker is amazingly awake, to the nuances of personality power plays. Kudos, Saker. Under Putin there is a brilliant leader who has worked step by step to undo the disasters of the Soviet breakup with the West pillaging it and letting the people twist in the wind. More starkly, China under official Communism, has been a different society from the times of Collective Leadership, then Mao’s singular power mode, then Deng Xiaoping came on and set off three generations of changes, all to the good.
@Honk – 04 April, 2014 00:07
“And although that’s a positive outlook, will you want to live through the transition?”
Well, I’m living right now, no way out from this shaking & interesting times.
I agree, lunatic and psychopathic people in charge of whatever destructive can produce a major harm to humankind, that’s why I feel the urge to be positive and optimistic: no pasaran again.
Warm Regards
M.
Saker wrote: “A new Cold War has begun – let us embrace it with relief!”
How?
By actively supporting the German speaking Putin as the Ulick Varange of Imperium.
Putin deals with both Anglo-Zionist state powers, as well as powerful Jewish individuals. Both matter. Both reinforce each other.
South-Africa as part of BRICS on Chinese invitation with Russian support matters too.
Traditional Zulu president Jacob Zuma acts pro-Putin and pro-China. I support him actively, thus proofing that “Apartheid” South-African “Nationalists-Socialists”, are not racist, as perhaps implied by Saker.
My point to Saker is: focus on your most important theme, and don’t be so strong of opinion in your comments, where some of the controvercial issues clearly are pure polemic pedantics.
Putin as true Western leader of the Resistance a-la Ulick Varange of Imperium most important.
Saker,
You are the best! The best alalysis!
Congratulation and Thank very much.
Dejanir Dalmoro
Pato Branco-PR – Brazil
test
Fantastic information. Thanks.
Unfortunate typo:shit more efforts into exporting gas -‘shift’
@Anonymous: Unfortunate typo:shit more efforts into exporting gas -‘shift’
LOL!!!! I really did outdo myself this time, and even for a typo-specialist like myself, this one is painful. Thank you for pointing this out to me, it’s corrected now.
Many thanks and kind regards,
The Saker
“Hillary Clinton compared Putin to Hitler. Need I say more.”
anyone that is using h. clinton as a source for quotes is really in lala land. LOL
@Debanjan:
“
The Western pundits declare day in and day out that Russia is going to be half empty by 2050.
“
This would be true if the natural population growth rate of 2009 (-1.8 percent) had been stable. But, as Robert’s link already pointed out, it currently is (almost) at zero. According to the CIA, the 2014 growth rate is -0.03%:
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/rs.html
At this rate, it would take until anno domini 4324 for the russian population to reduce itself by 50 percent. So, those “pundits” seem to have spent the last 5 years in a cave without any communication links.
Nice post about the new Cold War Saker.
There is really not much to add.
We gave the rules based international system a try.
But it is pretty hard to make progress when the world’s biggest power ignores those rules.
It was inevitable that the weaker powers would start to band together.
It’s a return to good old fashion “balance of power” politics.
Russia converted to Christianity over a millenia ago.
Altho none can judge another’s piety, Putin publicly proclaims and practices Eastern Orthodox worship.
Russia’s stance against homosexual propaganda for her children, forbidding homosexual adoption, promoting heterosexual marriage and procreation–these are moral positives marginalized or scuttled in USA and EU.
Never forget 25 million (perhaps 50m) Orthodox Christians were martyred by the godless communist bastards. It will take Russia awhile to recover her Christian roots but Putin is helpful.
Came across with your(this) article at Atimes :)
Enjoyed it very much…Most of it seems to be the reality on Ground. Couldn’t help laughing at the “immunization” Joke….Great Article!!!