Direct Translation via Google Translate. Edited.
by Victoria Nikiforova
[RIA] While we were making olive salad here in Russia and decorating the Christmas tree, sadness came over our strategic partners on New Year's Eve. The Americans remembered the anniversary of the collapse of the Soviet Union and suffered that they did not completely destroy it.
According to many local experts, the US overlooked the recovery and rise of Russia. Its economy is self-sufficient and stable, the army is mobile and modern. And most importantly, a nuclear stock equal to the American one was not only preserved by Russia, but also modernized with the latest technology. So how does Washington live with it?
But there was a glimmer of hope. “Whatever the end of Russia’s war in Ukraine , it will be <…> the final point of the collapse of the Soviet Union,” experts at the Hudson Institute thoughtfully broadcast. “And it will mark the fragmentation of the Russian Federation as the legitimate successor to the USSR."
Well, here it is, finally. And then they were already waiting. The report in abbreviated form was immediately reprinted by the most influential The Wall Street Journal . The topic, as we see, is extremely relevant for our opponents. This is not boring Ukraine, whose leader is begging for money all the time. This is the goal that, using Ukraine as a battering ram, Washington is actually striving for.
How do the analysts of the Hudson Institute, which has served the Pentagon for many years, see our future "collapse" and what do they advise the Washington regime to do in this regard?
For starters, they prefer not to think about what will happen to Russia and the world after our victory in Ukraine. This option is simply not considered. This whole post-apocalyptic report is based on the fact that Moscow "can't cope" in Ukraine. In this case, the authors believe, Russia will face a full range of turbulences - from revolution to civil war.
The picture of the defeat of our country is written in broad strokes: "If Russia loses in Ukraine, but is not destroyed, an atmosphere of suspicion and vindictiveness will reign there, reminiscent of Weimar Germany."
The authors believe that the source of turbulence is Russian PMCs, as well as national battalions. Returning after the SVO, the mobilized citizens will not find a job (no, the authors do not explain why this will happen) and will be filled with discontent.
The report notes that there are 83 constituent entities of the Russian Federation, which raises further questions for the professionalism of the authors, since there are 89 regions in the country. Even if we assume that the document deliberately ignores four new regions (DPR, LPR, Zaporozhye and Kherson regions), then to pretend that the Republic of Crimea and the federal city of Sevastopol are also not part of Russia, it is necessary to have outstanding tunnel vision and no less impressive incompetence.
Without citing any sources, in their favorite style highly likely experts report that in some subjects there is a "low-level desire for independence" (low-level independence movement).
Contrary to reality, the Hudson Institute is somehow convinced that the vast majority of those mobilized belong to national minorities. And now their dissatisfaction will fall on the mythical separatism on the ground and, thus, everything will detonate. Russian regions will demand independence from Moscow. The country will be "fragmented."
This is where the States will need to quickly rush in and manage the process of the collapse of Russia. Instantly help with self-determination of the subjects seceding from the Russian Federation, recognize and support their independence. Engage NATO and all other military blocs to surround the former Russian Federation along the perimeter.
Tear off Abkhazia and South Ossetia, Transnistria and Crimea from Russia, oust it from Syria and Africa , take control of Central Asia, Armenia and Azerbaijan.
The US and the EU "should take advantage of Moscow's weakness and <…> carry out the expansion of NATO in the style of" big bang ", admitting as many new members as possible at once. First of all, of course, these will be Georgia and Ukraine.
Inside our country, American strategists fantasize, an unceasing civil war will boil - something like Yugoslavia at maximum speed. Conflicts will also arise in many border regions - the Russian-Estonian border, islands in the Caspian Sea , the Kuriles, and the Caucasus are called as sore points.
The main task of the States at this stage will be to take under international (read: under their own) control of the Russian nuclear arsenal. In general, this will be the cherished goal that they could not achieve before.
The United States should also take advantage of the collapse of Russia to capture those representatives of the Russian elite and the leadership of the country, whom they consider responsible for the crisis in Ukraine, and subject them to an international court.
The Hudson Institute offers Washington to help its allies tear off pieces from Russian territories, but not to interfere in civil strife within Russia. Here follows an excellent, very characteristic of our partners clause.
"The 1990s showed that the collapse of the Soviet Union did not lead to the automatic transformation of Russian society, as many hoped it would," they lament. "It would be better for the United States not to waste resources on transforming Russia’s society, economy, and government into a Western-style democracy. Such attempts have failed before, and will fail now."
Simply put, it was not possible to make Germans or Japanese out of Russians, living peacefully under American occupation and strictly following all orders from Washington. Here you can not argue with the authors. This is indeed true. Russia, as it was a sovereign player on a global scale, has remained so, our people have retained their independence.
On the whole, the report astonishes with the lack of motivation for its conclusions. It does not answer the most important question: what kind of existential collapse must occur in Russia in order for its collapse to really begin?
Our economy is quite stable despite all packages with sanctions. This winter will show that we actually live better than in Europe. The approval ratings of the president of the country were not even dreamed of by his foreign colleagues. The implementation of the NWO led to the annexation of four new regions to Russia - these are millions of people, vast territories, developed industry, and an excellent agricultural industry. And it's "we haven't really started anything yet." At the same time, the hatred of strategic partners towards us has become so obvious that it unites us in itself.
Well, where are the possibilities for a civil war, for all these bloody conflicts that the Americans describe with painful voluptuousness? Some warring kingdoms, warlords, a complete post-apocalypse in the style of "Mad Max" ...
But all this is understandable if you look at what kind of organization this is - the Hudson Institute. One of its creators was the legendary futurist Herman Kahn, author of the theory of deterrence, guaranteed retaliation, the "escalation ladder" of nuclear conflict, and the theory of escalation control. In the States, they are still trying to "restrain" Russia according to his manuals.
Kahn's most famous book is called "On Thermonuclear War" (in parallel with Clausewitz's legendary work "On War"). In it, he wrote that, in fact, the United States could well survive a full-scale nuclear war with the USSR. And on the territory of the Soviet Union, as a result of this war, chaos will arise - and the country will collapse, falling apart.
The book was published in 1960, and already in 1962 the Cuban Missile Crisis broke out, during which the Americans felt that everything was far from being as simple as Kahn's. Contrary to his cheerful statements that thirty million dead Americans was a completely acceptable price for the victory over the Soviets, the US leadership tried to prevent a nuclear war after all.
The whole story so struck the imagination of contemporaries that Stanley Kubrick , who was well acquainted with Kahn, made him the prototype of Dr. Strangelove from his film of the same name - a Nazi maniac who dreams of destroying all mankind and built a doomsday machine. It was Kahn who came up with this hypothetical doomsday machine in his book On Thermonuclear War.
However, Kahn remained in favor with the authorities, his books continued to be published, he forewarned readers that he was writing them mainly to intimidate the Soviets. And the Hudson Institute continued the work they had begun after Kahn's death.
Actually, their latest report is a new variation on an old theme. This is a thinly disguised threat of a nuclear attack on Russia. Kahn also dreamed of how such an attack would trigger disintegration processes in the Soviet Union.
All this, of course, is delusional and absolutely unrealistic fabrications of American fanatics. They do not withstand a collision with reality, which was well shown even by the Caribbean crisis.
However, in the bottom line, we see Washington's carefully planned strategy to "contain" Russia. They will stick to it anyway. As they put it, "we have a unique chance to drive Russia back into its geopolitical box, and we should not miss it."
In theory, if we argue together with the authors, the "collapse" of Russia should become a kind of "end of history." The West has conquered all and is enjoying the fruits of its victories. NATO is no longer needed, it is dissolving itself, the US military is leaving Europe.
But that was not the case, the Hudson Institute works for the Pentagon for good reason. Firstly, they say, after Putin, "it will not be Thomas Jefferson who will come to power in Russia. <…> He will be the same nationalist and authoritarian leader as Putin."
Secondly, the authors warn, "Russia will definitely return. Even if the restoration of its defense industry and economy takes several decades, Moscow will never abandon its imperial plans for Eastern Europe and <…> will be a danger to its neighbors."
Therefore, we need to continue to pump up Europe with American weapons and send more and more of our military there. In essence, there is nothing new in the new report of the Hudson Institute - this is a long-known plan for American aggression on the European continent and the encirclement of Russia along the perimeter. Well, and indispensable dreams of our "collapse", which have long been powerlessly indulged in Washington.
|
