by R.Lesnoix for The Saker blog
Over the last few weeks, a curious change has taken place in both mainstream media and among alternative news and opinion sites. Earlier on, the focus has been on actions of the west and the US in particular, with the mainstream media mostly extolling its virtues and the alternative media usually decrying them. Now the focus seems to be on Russia, and especially on what Russia does not do; not thwarting Israeli attacks in Syria, not responding adequately to the FUKUS cruise missile attack of last April, not delivering the S-300 to Syria, etc. Both sides regularly point to her as being ‘weak‘ in some way or other for not acting, or more precisely, for not reacting to certain events. So why does Russia do what it does? And why does she sometimes refrain from acting? The answer is, off course, that she acts in the interests of Russia. One can debate whether or not a specific action, or its absence, benefits her. That debate can be very enlightening and may help to understand the considerations made in Moscow. It gives us some insight into the weight attributed to different pros and cons affecting the deliberations. But we should not lose out of sight that we need to consider her actions and passivity in light of her interests. Before you can answer the why, you have to ask, and answer, what Russia’s interests are?
Now take a step back. Zoom out to the really big picture. Don’t get caught up in the minutiae of current events. Get back to the fundamentals. Once you do this you’ll realize that there is one priority for Russia which trumps all other considerations: survival. That is a fairly abstract concept though, survival of Russia. What does that mean in practical terms? What is this Russia that wants to survive? It is tempting to go into a comprehensive description of its people, culture, geography, sovereignty, etc. to come to an exact definition. The answer is deceptively straightforward and does not require lengthy analysis and deliberation. The Russia that wants to survive is whatever its rulers of the moment decide it is. They set the boundaries of what is and isn’t included. Their view may clash with yours. You may find theirs unrealistic, undesirable or just wrong. That, however, is a matter of opinion, not fact. There is no objective definition. Yes, you can come up with a definition, but it will always be subjective. In the end the opinion of the decision makers in Russia counts in determining their actions and inactions. Their opinion on what Russia is matters in the real world, others not so much.
So who are these rulers who define the state? It’s not just the president. It’s not his inner circle either. It’s the whole constellation of institutionalized power within the country. Nongovernmental groups and organizations are part of it too. Power and influence are not equally distributed among all of these actors, and varies over time and across different topics. The citizenry at large is also included in this as they can affect the institutions of power in several ways such as through elections, demonstrations, direct participation, religious beliefs, etc. Together these form a national consciousness of what it means to be Russian. This is not a fixed idea as it can and will deviate with time, because of various factions within society who gain and lose influence. Most of the time these deviations are very small, occasionally they are large. The national idea of what defined Russia differed significantly during the Soviet era from what came before and what came after. What happens is that one faction gains a disproportionate amount of power and influence over the form in which this national identity is expressed. Once in a while things get shaken up, usually through war, revolution or economic misery. A new state takes over from the previous one. Soviet Russia died and was replaced by Yeltsin’s yard-sale Russia. The national identity and its expression, the specific form of government of the day with all its trappings, are not the identical.
For one of the best examples of this subjectivity in expressing the state, look at how Germany changed during the 1800s and the 1900s. It redefined itself several times as different sets of actors dominated and took very diverse forms: the more or less independent states of the Holy Roman Empire, the German Empire, the Weimar Republic, the Third Reich, split between the capitalist BRD and the socialist DDR, reunited as one Germany and finally a Germany as the leader of the European Union which has usurped much of its members national sovereignty. Given the dominant position of the country in the EU, this is arguably the New German Empire. These changes over the last 200 + years were more than just geographical or of political systems. During these successive versions of the country people had evolving ideas of what it meant to be German and Germany. Don’t take national identity for granted. Don’t confuse relatively minor unchanging elements of national identity with the whole. Don’t mistake culture for national identity either. They are similar but not the same. Culture refers to the typical behaviors in a nation; national identity refers to how people see themselves and their place in the world as a nation. Take the United States where the national identity still is one of democracy, freedom and peace. Yet they have a culture of (legal) corruption, incarceration and violence. In my opinion this mismatch between culture and identity explains a significant part of America’s societal ills.
Let’s look at these different Germanies in terms of survival. The idea of the Holy Roman Empire as the foundation of being German was abstract because back then ‘Germans’ identified with their region. You were Bavarian, or Hanoverian, or Saxon, etc. Being German didn’t represent that much. It was more a statement of what you were not, not French or British or Russian or Italian or Swedish, but part of that group of intermingled statelets in central Europe referred to as Germany (a term that goes back to the days of Julius Caesar). Which does have a better ring to it than group-of-intermingled-statelets-in-central-Europe. Between the death of the Holy Roman Empire in 1806 and the formation of the German Empire in 1871 a new awareness of being-German developed, a true national identity had taken root. It grew during the imperial epoch and by the time the German Empire died in 1918 it was deeply embedded. Now being German did signify something and for many, maybe even most, it had equalled or superseded their regional identity. When the Third Reich died, the idea of Germany did not. The BRD and DDR which followed differed radically not just from each other but also from what came before. Yet both were still clearly German. These are all examples of rulers (in the broad sense as described above) redefining the nation and shaping the national consciousness into new forms. Nowadays there is a distinct sense of national identity among Germans, and regional identity has taken a backseat.
What this illustrates is that there is a distinction between the content of a national identity and the form, the institutions and their relative power, in which this identity is expressed. Most often there is a large overlap. If there isn’t, revolution or oppression is around the corner. The form may change (another type of government) but unless you are willing to do what the Romans did to Carthage, the country will reemerge in a new incarnation. It will retain enough of its national identity to be clearly recognizable as that country. This makes for a tricky situation. When talking about current Russia, how do you distinguish between the expressed form of the nation and the underlying national identity? Usually, you can use these two to refer to the same thing but for this article, the distinction is relevant. Russia and the Russian Federation are not the same thing.
We’ve seen how different incarnations of a nation can die but the country can live on. The Soviet Union disappeared but Russia continued. Out of the French Revolution of 1789 the First French Republic was born in 1792. Now France has its Fifth Republic, and it underwent two periods of imperial rule between republics. Yet it has always been France. Times have changed, unfortunately. In the age of nuclear weapons, it is conceivable that enough destructive force is unleashed on a nation to effectively eradicate it entirely. Not only the death of the Russian Federation but also the death of Russia are possible. This is the context of Putin’s remarks during the interview of March 7th, 2018:
“So, if someone made a decision to destroy Russia then, we have a legitimate right to attack. Yes, for human kind this would be a global catastrophe, for the world it will be a global catastrophe, but me as a citizen of Russia and the head of the Russian state, then I want to ask myself a question, but why would we need such a world if there is no Russia?”
The survival of Russia is now a genuine issue. The survival of the Russian Federation is also a concrete issue. I can’t help but wonder if and to which degree the rulers of the Russian Federation recognize the distinction between the two. It is easy to imagine those in power equating a forced end to their rule to the end of their nation. The prospect of becoming a vassal of the US for example, which would effectively put an end to the current Russian Federation, might be unpalatable to such an extent that it could trigger an extreme response. This could also happen in the US. The imminent demise of their Empire will lead to drastic changes in the power balance in Washington. Those with power who’ll see themselves end up as the losers of this internal struggle, could also react in destructive ways, likely aimed abroad.
With both the survival of Russia and the Russian Federation as real issues, these are, and should be, key considerations for the Russian government when deciding on how to act or refrain from actions. The chaos that now typifies US politics presents risks. As I pointed out in a previous article, the risk of nuclear war does not solely come from military escalation. Nonmilitary escalation could also lead to a global catastrophe. Defusing the situation where and when they can makes sense. The resulting actions or inactions may look like weakness or indecisiveness but when dealing with idiots you need to be extra careful. As Mark Twain said:
“The best swordsman in the world doesn’t need to fear the second best swordsman in the world; no, the person for him to be afraid of is some ignorant antagonist who has never had a sword in his hand before; he doesn’t do the thing he ought to do, and so the expert isn’t prepared for him.”
Whether the rest of us like it or not, it makes sense for the Russian government to avoid getting dragged into risky adventures by third parties. We have gotten used to having a policeman on the block. We subconsciously expect the Russians to be the new good guy to put out fires and stop bullies. But why should they? What has the rest of the world done for Russia lately? Why should they risk themselves for them? In Syria Russia has a security concern which affects their own safety. Combatting the jihadis there is in Russia’s direct interest. It is way better to take them on abroad than it is to wait until they strike within Russia’s own borders. The manner in which they have done this has been very cost effective too. It has offered them the opportunity to train and gain experience in a real combat environment. They have been able to test their own new weapons and other systems and observe the (lack of) performance of potential future adversaries and their equipment. They’ve used the fighting to showcase what their military technology is capable of and generated substantial sales. Expanding the scale or scope of their military activities abroad provides diminishing returns and risks getting caught in the proverbial quagmire. There would have to be a commensurate interest to justify it.
The Russian government should act on behalf of Russia and the Russian people. They should not act on behalf of the rest of the world unless that coincides with their own interests. Survival may be the first consideration, but it is not the only one. Ensuring the safety of its citizens is important too. Providing for those citizens as well as they can is also high on the list. The Russian government is reducing its military spending and increasing investments in infrastructure, public health and education. Increasing the welfare, health, wealth and happiness of its citizens should be genuine goals of any government in any nation. The more money a nation has to spend, the more they can realize these noble goals. Which brings us to another interest of the Russian Federation: increasing its income so it can spend more on improving the life of Russians and on ensuring their safety.
Once again we go back to basics. Throughout human history trade has been the way to generate supplemental income. Trade is a win/win situation. Both sides gain something in the transaction. Both sides are better off than they were before. Think of it as pies. Through trade both sides increase the size of their pies. Bigger pies mean more generous portions for everyone. Russia is a big country, and it has a lot of resources and goods available for trade. More trade partners means more trade and better deals. That also means additional income. The larger the number of trade partners is, the larger the pie becomes. You don’t need to be friends with someone to conduct business transactions with them, but you want to avoid creating enemies as these make for poor trade partners. Russia has a genuine interest in making friends, not enemies. Why should they intervene or act on behalf of third parties, undoubtedly antagonizing others while doing so?
The Russian government is doing the opposite. They follow a policy of turning enemies into neutrals, neutrals into friends and friends into allies. Even when relations experience a downturn, like those with Europe after 2014, they do their best to repair these. It may take time but it in the end it will pay off. Many people seem to view the current international situation as some kind of duel between Russia and the US where all events are analyzed in terms of winner-and-loser. That’s a distinctly American way of looking at the world. It’s not how the Russian government looks at it. They will happily let the US turn neutrals into enemies and friends into neutrals. Russia doesn’t really have to do much for this to happen. The US is perfectly capable of alienating almost the entire world by itself.
The most recent folly is the withdrawal from the Iran deal and declaring trade war on Europe. That is an incredibly stupid move. I’ve consistently talked about the confrontations between Russia and the US, and not the west in general. Given how Europe has followed US policies, there is an understandable view that they are mere vassals who can be more or less ignored. I believe that is incorrect and risky. Treat vassals poorly and they may rise up or defect. The EU and the US are not friends. Allies yes, as long as they have sufficient mutual interests. Assuming they were friends in the first place, this ended at least as early as 1999 with NATO’s war on Yugoslavia. The Americans seemed completely oblivious to how problematic it was morally for the governments and people of the European NATO countries to initiate a war against a fellow European country. This went against everything the European nations had worked for and had advocated since the end of the second world war. Understandably the leaders of these countries negotiated during NATO meetings before the attacks began to strictly limit them. And so it was decided. I watched many of them announce before their parliaments and their national press that NATO would intervene but would act only in Kosovo and only against purely military targets.
The following day they woke up to news of bombings across all of Serbia and against civilian targets. The European leaders had not just been betrayed by their US ‘allies’, they had been humiliated in front of their people, their parliaments, their constituents as they now had to publicly defend the actions of NATO. I have rarely seen politicians with such held back rage as I saw that day. I sincerely believe that was the day the US lost most of their European friends and allies. They still followed, but reluctantly and with a minimum of effort. When 9/11 happened two years later and the US called upon them to join the ‘War on Terror’ they were far from eager to do so. The American press of the day was outraged at the lack of support and many nasty stories appeared in US media. But could you blame them? The American treachery was fresh in their minds. Since then the story has been much the same. Reluctant European allies most of whom merely give token support when called upon. Europe has been drifting further and further away. It won’t be long before the divorce is final, especially if Trump is stupid enough to push through his trade war. Russia knows that there is very little love left between the main European and North-American partners. So they stay on friendly terms with Europe. They keep the door open. For them Europe is the big prize. Full on trade between Russia and the EU will produce considerable benefits for both. Russia’s pie will get bigger as will Europe’s. The best security strategy for Russia is to establish good economic relations with them. More income will also mean a more generous budget for security and defense.
We’re not there yet. Bad blood between the US and the EU does not directly translate into friendship between Russia and the EU. But it will be the start. With the UK leaving the EU, the most bitter and vitriolic Russia hater will be gone. They’ll try to keep the EU from looking east (the real reason why the UK establishment was against Brexit) instead of west but it will be a losing battle. Europe’s future lies to its east. And Russia patiently waits for that inevitable future to arrive.
R.Lesnoix is a concerned citizen who grew up during the Cold War under the constant fear of nuclear weapons. He is dismayed with the direction the western democracies are going in.
Rapallo.
Europe should take care, the Brits and US will likely come up with nasty surprises. Cuidado.
This is a foolish piece. Europe is a land of stagnation and confusion. Their culture has become postmodern and their political systems are stuck in early Cold War era dynamics. Russia should be looking everywhere BUT there. Even America has more hope, believe it or not.
How, exactly?
You do not know Europe if you think that you can separate it from the US. They were even bigger transatlantic “scandals” before (remember Iraq War) and what happened? Nothing. Europe continued to be a puppet.
Europe is looking for “Big Daddy” to take care of things and keep order. They are begging the US to continue being the world’s policeman, because they are too afraid of the wider, illiberal world out there. They can’t have an independent policy because that will be “racist” and “antisemitic”.
Call a european “antisemitic” or “racist” and you have him by the balls. They are so traumatised by WW2 that they know nothing but to serve.
We know that “inside the beltway” in Washington DC thinks like this. But be careful, they might push too hard in their arrogance. Especially Germany. The Germans are obviously sick of being regarded as America’s poodle. The English and the French like being America’s poodle, but the Germans don’t. Like any modern capitalist country that is short on real democracy, the industrialists and the bankers have an over-sized voice in the government of the country. Those industrialists and bankers have seen billions lost following America on Russian sanctions. Now they are being told that they must lose billions more following America on Iranian sanctions. Don’t know and can’t judge if this is the moment they stand up to the bully, but if the bully keeps pushing them around and stealing their money, they will stand up to the bully.
The Germans are a proud people. They’ve been proud to be Saxon. They’ve been proud to be Bavarian. They’ve been proud to be Prussian. They’ve been proud to be ‘not-French’. If the bully keeps believing they can keep pushing the Germans around, they will someday find proud Germans standing up to them. If that comes over the sanctions against Iran for living up to their agreements, then when the snap comes all the Russian sanctions will come off at the same time. If the Germans are going to stand up to the Americans on one issue, there is no reason not to stand up to the Americans on all issues. Since the Americans have forgotten diplomacy and now only know how to call names, sneer at people, and bully people, then that day is sure to come. When it comes is a bit of a question, but American arrogance and bullying and the perception that America now knows nothing else means that day is most certainly coming.
If you read the German-language press, including Spiegel.de, you will find articles daily on how much they are pulling away from the U.S., including both analysts and politicians. Compare Merkel with Putin in Sochi with her visit to Trump in D.C. Even the bland Merkel is looking east. Intelligent Germans are increasingly finding Trump and his ilk simply loathsome. The turning point has been reached. Within a generation or two Russia and the EU will be fully integrated. The U.S. and Britain will be in full decline. IMHO anyway.
Rick, this maybe so, but I see all that stuff as “feel good” brainwashing propaganda. Nobody will be free in Europe until they destroy “Brussels” aka the EU.
And get rid of NATO while exposing the CIA
The English and the French like being America’s poodle, but the Germans don’t.
That’s entirely news to me. Germans love to label many things in English words / terms, but they’re too stupid for using proper English (for example: Handy instead of Mobile Phone / Cell Phone, public viewing instead of Public Space Broadcasting, body bag instead of belt bag …). Many job titles are in English as well (Key Account Manager instead of Kundenbetreuer, Facility Manager instead of Hausmeister, Consultant instead of Berater etc.). The French on the opposite mainly use business cards in French only. Some of those cards are printed on the backside with an English translation. Germans are way more americanized than the French, maybe even more than the British.
“”The English and the French like being America’s poodle…” How quickly we forget a large British “Statesman’s” boast about how things really work: “…American brawn and British brains”.
And the French (used to, anyway) get it right: “Perfide Albion! Toujours, toujours perfide Albion.” But let us not even look there: as with British “data-gathering and use firm” Cambridge Analytica: “move on, there’s nothing to see here”: Hey, we don’t even exist anymore so there is nothing for anyone to investigate about us.
But David Halper is still at U of Cambridge. According to the LaRouche people Halper is an American who “has longstanding ties to the Bush family and the Pentagon’s China-bashing Office of Net Assessment, who is now teaching at Cambridge University, where he is close to former MI6 chief Richard Dearlove. It is Halper, a longstanding CIA and FBI informant, who initiated contact with minor players in the Trump Campaign, planting lies about Russian hacking of the DNC emails, aiming to facilitate the dodgy Christopher Steele dossier lies.”
Nope. Just been at a french state emploiment bureau (Pôle Emploi) meeting to watch an informative audiovisual. Seven out of nine paragraphes and/or keypoints had English names. The phenomenon is all over the place. They love English words but just can’t pronounce them… :-)
But are the proud, or even willing to be non-philo-jewish?
Because, to really get freedom from being the “poodle“, they will have to break free from these chains. These are the chains behind the subservience to the Americans, and they may well break the ostensible bonds apparently to Washington but still be subordinated!
This is an excellent article. To my mind it captures the realities of the situation in all the nuances touched upon here.
I love the distinction between national culture and national identity. It’s not a concept I’ve come across before, but it’s very useful. I suspect that identity has come into being from the shrinking of the world into the global village, and the sense of finality descending on many borders, after millennia of contest and war.
Perhaps one can even speculate that under this pressure of global self-awareness, individual nation-identity forms first based on cultural myth, but ultimately must be reconciled with actual cultural practices.
In other words, as the world shrinks and neighbors can no longer be unknown or ignored, a nation must come to terms with itself – and this is an actual tension or imperative placed precisely by the total world becoming more familiar with all of itself.
The US has always resisted this impingement of the world, and retreated into a rugged-individual, frontier-lonesomeness mindset. Perhaps, the ending of its willful ignorance of other countries is also the maturing of its own national mind. One implies the other, so perhaps it doesn’t matter which comes first, and which is the cause and which the result.
~~
As to Russia, her interests as the author states are most fundamentally, survival. I always thought if I had a country with borders as large as Russia has, I would view the only real national security as living in a world at peace. And as to the life in the middle, between survival and ultimate security, this is surely the matter of having a full fridge, as the author states.
So Putin said in 2007 that Russia would seek a new parity. In March, 2018, he declared that it had been reached (and then some!). And efforts to shape a world at peace have long been policy. So he immediately turned his government’s attention to the part in the middle, the matter of having a well fed and existentially satisfied population.
Putin decided to fight his fifth column by making the ordinary people totally content to be simply Russian. This undramatic move will make Russia unassailable from within as well as from without.
Good comments, as usual, Grieved.
The only pit in the pudding is enemies of Russia abound nearby for all sorts of reasons.
And there is a massive hybrid war plan with tens of billions of dollars behind it, as well as the use of proxies bankrolled by petroleum kingdoms, and a nazified border war dedicated to killing Russians and Russian-speaking folks caught in the war.
Now, pure economic warfare aimed to destroy the energy industry, so crucial to Russian stability.
Sanctions upon sanctions to stifle capital investment in Russia.
False flag poisoning events used to demonized the Russian government abound.
How Russia copes will be a test of its greatness, depth of culture, agility with diplomacy and cold-blooded use of tactics and weapons (as we have seen in Syria, in “benign” EW demonstrations, and “observable” tests of secret weapons systems.)
No nation has been in the crosshairs of such a powerful foe as Russia has been to the US hegemon for so long, and now, with such baseless American fear and doctrinal unity. It makes the decades of USSR as ‘red menace’ seem quaint.
Russophobia is deep and real in the most virulent parts of the Western Alliance. Like any beast, the Empire wants blood and flesh and broken bones, and then it will tear apart the nation and steal its riches.
The Hegemon is very real, needs no cause belli, requires no public support, and is operating on more fronts today than before Trump took office. It intends to stop the Eurasian development, BRI, China’s rise to #1, Russia as the globe’s number one energy producer, and it is working to break both Russia and China as multi-polar rivals to its unipolar dominance.
2018 will see the strategic partnership of Russia and China draw tighter and work more in tandem than ever before. No singular nation can take on the Hegemon alone.
Hi Grieved,
you may well be on to something with your speculation. The current wave of renewed nationalism/patriotism in most of Europe coincided with losing national sovereignty to the EU, and received a major boost when waves of immigrants came to Europe. Integrating these requires insight in yourselves, into what exactly do these people need to integrate? And how much remaining ‘difference’ between groups in society are we comfortable with living on a day-to-day basis? I think we are only at the beginning of a renewed national and European awareness (Europe is not the EU!). One symptom of this is a greater urge to stand up to the US. It will only grow, especially if the confrontations that force us to (re)evaluate ourselves and our societies continue.
Knowing who you are and what you stand for is not a bad thing at all, even though the banner of ‘nationalism’ is usually draped over it to give it a negative taste. It depends on who you (both singular and plural) decide you are and what you decide you stand for.
This is the view from the top. From governmental bureaucracy and its coercion in all its forms, the corporate and the money masters and does not deal with realm of global corporate control and its opinions of the people it rules over. What’s in it for the people of Russia, Europe or the USA/British Commonwealth in this article under the trickle down neo liberal economic mantra that rules the day. There are bigger things afoot within the ranks of the universal worker bees than acceptance of a ‘One World Order’ and enslavement from the ‘top.’ Despite all this grand making of plans by these elites the people will ultimately have their say on what form of rule/law/money they will give their allegiance to. I wouldn’t place all my money on the bet that the plan to standardize, inventory and control the world by the likes of the current ruling elite will even be around at the end of this century such is the growing injustice of their rule.
well..in all of this, how does the increased inclusion of the ‘Atlanticists’ in Putin’s cabinet coincide with Russia’s survival, given that that group is recognized as traitors.. at least by the comments I read in the Saker all the time?
the author did not discuss this..or am I to take it for granted that this ‘survival of Russia’ of his, is a non ideological issue..all Russians are included, the inclination to betrayal of the nation by potential Russian traitors notwithstanding, or transcended by the question of national survival?
but if survival of the nation is the issue..and it surely is..aren’t the potential traitors a serious part of that challenge?
Agreed. And if Russia’s Atlantic Integrationists are recognized as adversarial to Russia`s survival (by whatever definition that may take), is it not prudent to undertake an effective disconnection of same from their foreign influences and support structures?
To this end, which of three possible avenues might be taken? a) Politically, statutorily, and/or procedurally neutralize historical and potential traitors inside the domestic arena (yielding temporary to mid-term relief), b) destroy nexi of mischief and aggression in their foreign redoubts (the longer-term solution), or c) trust in fatigue and/or attrition to yield the desired result (the crapshoot choice).
Option b) surely carries the greatest short-term cost and geopolitical risk. It is also the most disruptive to Russia’s international profile, as such has been carefully cultured by Putin (without seeming to materially offend Medvedevian sensibilities).
Though it is commonly accepted that, in the specific case of battling the West’s Islamist proxies, it is better to engage them “far from home” than “close to home”, the same logic, if used to justify direct confrontation (or even warring) with Empire’s agents (not her proxies), seems to be viewed as unacceptably at odds with Russia’s well-advertised doctrine of protecting only her own demonstrable interests, and doing so within tightly circumscribed parameters. In other words, your guilt in committing the cardinal sin of intervention turns upon whether you are acting extraterritorially against adversaries wearing collars colored blue or closer to white.
Putin has confirmed the promise (reciprocal threat) that Russia will not accept the next act of war upon it to remain confined to Russian territory. But what if it were understood that the next act of war has already been taken?
Within that judgement lies the essence of righteous pre-emption. Although the answer may be clear to some, still I will ask, has Russia already foregone that option? And if so, have her prospects for survival increased thereby?
Hardlooker, thanks for your insight.
“a concerned citizen who grew up during the Cold War under the constant fear of nuclear weapons… dismayed with the direction the western democracies are going in.”
That’s my tag line – I say almost exactly the same thing to people all the time these days.
There is no bad blood between EU Citizens and the U.S. The Globalist media/polling complex keeps trying to cover up the fact that EU leaders in France and Germany are arrogant and wholly out of touch with their people (1), but the lie isn’t working anymore. Italy (2), Poland, and, Hungary (3) have excellent relations with the U.S. as they cripple Macron and Merkel’s feeble attempts to ‘lead’ the EU towards ‘multi-culturalism’.
There is true opportunity here for the Christians of Europe, Russia, and the U.S. to come together instead of being driven apart by unelected ‘elites’ pushing an anti-Christian agenda. Such an alliance could bring peace and prosperity to large chunks of the world.
__________
(1) http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/05/european-arrogance-on-display.php
(2) http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5752753/Italys-5-Star-League-seek-presidents-backing-PM.html
(3) http://www.foxnews.com/world/2018/05/15/soros-group-pulls-out-hungary-as-orban-government-floats-stop-soros-package.html
Italy (2), Poland, and, Hungary (3) have excellent relations with the U.S. as they cripple Macron and Merkel’s feeble attempts to ‘lead’ the EU towards ‘multi-culturalism’.
I’ve lived fairly good with multi-culturalism until East Germans and Eastern Europeans, mainly from Poland, the Baltic States and now Hungary, tried to tell me that multi-culturalism doesn’t work. I know way more and better Muslim craftsman than I know Polish ones who’re undermining Western European wages. Who is sending large amounts of money to Eastern Europe? It’s Western Europe.
There is true opportunity here for the Christians of Europe, Russia, and the U.S. to come together instead of being driven apart
Keep on dreaming. Those driving people apart are fake Christians and Zionist Christians (as well as Zionists) who rejoice each time some Muslim country is bombed to rubble. Fake Muslims assist those fake Christians to sow the seeds of hatred.
Mr. Lesnoix,
I tip my hat to your eloquence and the depth of your thoughts! It is such writings that keep me returning to Saker’s blog. Please, keep it up!
Total – Сердце в руке
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=DmuzfRQRws8
”We have gotten used to having a policeman on the block. We subconsciously expect the Russians to be the new good guy to put out fires and stop bullies. But why should they? What has the rest of the world done for Russia lately? Why should they risk themselves for them.”
Because if the didn’t intervene in Syria the Jihadis next target would be Chechnya and Dagestan. QED. Russia has already retreated to its borders and now has NATO massing in readiness for an attack. All thanks to the criminal policies of Gorbachov and Yeltsin and the rest of the surrender monkeys. Russia’s buffer zone in East Europe has gone and the way is now open for a NATO incursion. Russia’s intervention abroad is not a legal or moral question, it is one of strategic realpolitik. In 1939 Stalin invaded Poland and Finland, not out of any love for Poles and Finns, but to defend the USSR’s frontiers from the ultimate attack by the Wehrmacht.
The EU is a undemocratic Jewish Mafia asset. As is the USA. The rest is Kindergarten and wishful thinking.
The article is basically correct, although it exaggerated when it stated that the survival of the Russian Federation is at stake. It’s nothing of the sort. Yes, the survival of the Federation was at stake when Yeltsin was in power, before patriotic forces inside the country asked him to resign and hand power over to Putin.
The point is that Russians, just like the Chinese, have incredible amounts of patience, something that Americans do not. It’s a characteristic of both countries. In Russia they have a saying which goes like this:”Good. We wait”. And yes, they will wait until Europe turns towards the East. Analysts have since last year, if not before, been stating that it’s only a matter of time before a rift occurs between European and American elites. It’s going that way.
We have to go back to 1989. When the Warsaw Pact collapsed, NATO should then immediately have been terminated and money directed towards infrastructure, both in Europe and in the US. It was not. For NATO and the Western elites, and especially the American elites, the ultimate prize was the Russian Federation, which they wanted broken up and plundered. NATO was kept on and the EU introduced, which is a carbon copy of the US Federation and a civilian component of NATO. Both were pushing towards the East. The coup d’etat in Kiev in 2014 was intended to bring a pro-Western puppet Government in Ukraine, so that the country could join the EU and NATO, so that NATO could place it’s missile systems against Russian borders and present Russia with an ultimatum: Surrender or perish. Well, it did not come to that. We all know what happened.
NATO is now costing the West 2 billion dollars a day. The US has the largest foreign and domestic debt in the world, while the dollar is printed backed by nothing. Quite a number of EU countries are in a similar position.
And Russia ? It was relieved of the burden of financing the Warsaw Pact and some of the former Soviet Republics. It turned towards it’s infrastructure. It has entered into an economic partnership with China, creating the BRICS, the Shanghai Cooperation Zone, the Eurasian Economic Union and the Silk Road, all of which are offering trade based on respect of the sovereign status of nation states. Attractive indeed.
And the US ? It has learned nothing, nor is it capable of changing, it’s debt and worthless dollar preventing it from changing. It is still implementing it’s imperial policies, offering countries a choice between regime change or a heap of bombs. It even found fit to apply imperial policies in Europe, threatening European firms with sanctions if they dared to participate in the building of the Nord Stream – 2 gas pipeline. Even I was astonished when I read about it. This can be taken as proof that Washington DC has lost leave of it’s senses and is not any more responsible for it’s actions. As for European politicians, they were brought into an impossible situation, having to prove to their populations that they were not Washington’s imperial stooges.
What is even worse is that Washington is beefing up it’s troops strengths in Europe. Wall Street is under the impression that since Europe fought two world wars that it is willing fight a third world war, which quite simply is not the case. In fact, nothing is further from the truth.
Yes, Europe in the end will turn towards Russia and the East. It’s inevitable. When sanctions were introduced against Russia, they were also introduced against Europe, which by the second half of 2016 lost 100 billion euros in trade with Russia. Both Washington and Wall Street decided to play it “clever”. By applying sanctions against Russia, Washington was hoping to ruin the Russian economy and turn Europe towards the US, especially Germany, hoping to prevent it from joining the Russian-Chinese block. Well, Europeans are not stupid. The moment sanctions were introduced, 500 German industrialists ended up in Russia, conducting negotiations. Nobody in Europe wants to be reduced to Wall Street’s little colony, to be manipulated and fleeced.
The US empire will collapse and Europe will turn towards the East. No, it will not happen overnight. It’s a step by step approach. The only question which needs to be asked is if Washington will do something stupid like starting a wider war in order to prevent this. We shall see.
Author. Excellent article. I will comment on one little thing, which you touched on and this is “policeman”
I remember, from history and Polish literature that Imperial Russia particularly when ruled by Tsaritsa Katerina Velikaya, was accused of being Europe’s Policeman or Gendarme if you like. Always interfering with everybody’s business. OK, for the ones lacking historical knowledge this was in the late 1700’s and later. Well later we had Napoleon trying to introduce the “French Revolution” to the rest of Europe. Does that remind you of anyone today?
Anonymous (regarding Germans), excellent take on that subject. I will add, that Germany, is shackled down legally by the Emperor, which is the result of the WWII. German people have to produce, new breed of Patriots who will shake the shackles off their wrists. The same goes for all the European nations.
Nuts: love the article, merci bien.
“…there is a distinction between the content of a national identity and the form, the institutions and their relative power, in which this identity is expressed. Most often there is a large overlap. If there isn’t, revolution or oppression is around the corner.”
“…escalation could also lead to a global catastrophe. Defusing the situation where and when they can makes sense. The resulting actions or inactions may look like weakness or indecisiveness but when dealing with idiots you need to be extra careful.”
“… Mark Twain said:
“The best swordsman in the world doesn’t need to fear the second best swordsman in the world; no, the person for him to be afraid of is some ignorant antagonist who has never had a sword in his hand before; he doesn’t do the thing he ought to do, and so the expert isn’t prepared for him.””
Is The Dupe the “ignorant antagonist” or just being branded as that by his handlers?
Are the recent new Russian government cabinet appointments explicitly designed to continue to build bridges with the EU, under the current constraints, or an appeasement to another virtual nation, so that the world football championship tournament will not be attacked using the all-too-familiar false-flag attack, attributed, using massive media-air-advantage to the convenient fall-people of the aforementioned virtual nation, who also conveniently control the western mainstream media?
Please read “The Controversy of Zion by Douglas Reed, to learn about the long standing trend of activities of these people and why the world will never be safe until there is full recognition of why systemic gaming of the world’s systems of governance, by cultural de-empathification against humanity is incompatible with the survival of humanity.
The Euroweenies will not separate from Uncle Sam, because the (Western) European ruling class has been cultivated, groomed, and put into power by the USA since the end of World War 2 at the very latest.
This is nearly 3/4 quarters of a century of Americanization.
And this is not so easy to shake off–unless there is massive and sustained rebellion that impacts most institutions in society including government, media, intellectual class, military, business, civil society, religion, and the arts.
This takes determination, struggle, and the willingness to overcome struggle.
Do you think Europe has the balls to do this?
Most Europeans will take the easy way out and continue with the status quo.
EU’s Mogherini holding firm on JCPOA – Is US isolation begenning?
https://www.veteranstoday.com/2018/05/22/eus-mogherini-holding-firm-on-jcpoa-is-us-isolation-beginning/
Iran foreign minister’s message to America
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-cSQXZ_FzvY
Israeli govt minister tells EU: ‘Go to a thousand, thousand hells’
https://www.rt.com/news/427542-israeli-minister-eu-hells/
“Steinitz was giving an interview to a local radio station when he said of the EU, “Let them go to a thousand thousand hells,” as cited by Haaretz. His response followed the EU’s call for a “swift investigation” into the Israeli police’s violent crackdown on protesters in Haifa last Friday. They had been criticising the State of Israel for the high death toll at the border with Gaza.
The protests resulted in the serious injury of Jafar Farah, director of the Haifa-based NGO Mossawa, which champions the rights of Israeli-Arabs.
He slammed the EU as “an organization that no-one is leading and is less friendly to Israel than the European states themselves.” Steinitz’s stance was backed by Public Security Minister Gilad Erdan
In the same interview Israel’s energy minister also slammed the EU for cementing its relationship with Iran and maintaining the Iran nuclear deal.
Farah, whose knee had been broken at a Friday protest night, was taken into custody together with other 20 activists. “When I was brought to the police station with my son, I found him on the floor covered in blood. When I asked the police officer, ‘Who gave you the right to treat my son this way?’ his response was to break my knee,” Farah said in an interview with Army Radio.”
Top EU Official Warns Israel ‘Not to Disparage Europe’ – Reports
https://sputniknews.com/world/201805231064711169-europe-israel-trump-legacy/
“You shouldn’t disparage Europe. Look at the numbers: We are still your biggest trade partners. You don’t understand that we are under immense public pressure against Israel,” the official reportedly said.
Saying that “Trump won’t be president forever,” the official pointed out that “just like nobody imagined that the Obama legacy would be erased so quickly, it can happen to the other side.”
Meanwhile, zionazi-gay arrogance continues unabated:
Pictures don’t lie? US envoy accepts fake photo with Jerusalem mosque replaced by Jewish temple
https://www.rt.com/news/427497-us-ambassador-jerusalem-photo/
“US Ambassador to Israel David Friedman was all smiles as he accepted the aerial photo of Jerusalem
While a gift to a US ambassador by an Israeli organization isn’t exactly breaking news considering the Jewish State’s extreme delight at Washington’s decision to relocate its embassy to Jerusalem, this one particular gift was more than a bit absurd, because it isn’t at all factual.
The photo shows the iconic Al-Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock replaced with the Third Temple, which has been long sought after by Jews. The image of Friedman was first published on the ultra-Orthodox news website Kikar Hashabat.
Meanwhile, despite the US Embassy insisting that Washington supports the status quo, others aren’t so sure. Al-Aqsa Mosque even made it into a Dutch comedian’s parody of Israel’s winning Eurovision song. “The world’s leaders are eating out of my hand… we’re throwing a party, are you coming? Later, at the al-Aqsa mosque, which will be empty soon anyway,” one lyric states. Israel’s Embassy in the Netherlands has lodged an official complaint.”
This one:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5LV5F4gZHLI
Well done parody, btw.
Note to commentator … no use of caps … saker’s moderation policy …please resubmit without caps