Year of bloodless revolutions
The failed end of the Arab Spring operation, the beginning of the anti-liberal riot in Western civilization, its split into continental and transatlantic components, the Turkish drift, the creation by Pyongyang of a fully-fledged nuclear missile shield, the new geopolitics of China announced at the XIX CPC Congress. Rare years have been so full of turning points. 2017, without exaggeration, can be considered revolutionary for the world as a whole. The foundations were laid for the development of planetary processes for decades to come.
In our country, much was expected of this year by analogy with 1917. Moreover, the similarity took place in many ways. Deep property stratification, spiritual disorientation, expressed in the absence of a unifying idea, social and political disunity with a clearly formed opposition of the ruling elite and the majority of the population, primarily the main revolutionary layer of the modern age - the intellectual proletariat, and the aggravation of the conflict in the power top between Western-liberal and quasi-empire blocs, defective sovereignty both in domestic and foreign policy, resulting from the critically strong dependence of countries s from foreign technology and supplies, the conduct of war, the contradiction between patriotic rhetoric and liberal economic policies, the dominance of a cosmopolitan oligarchy in the country's economic life ...
There were differences. Those that worsened the situation in comparison with 1917 may include the absence of power sacredness and the open opposition of Russia with Western civilization as a whole. Among those that contributed to the preservation of stability, we should highlight the presence of the technological and material reserves left over from the USSR, the people’s fatigue from shocks of the previous quarter of a century, international successes, and non-participation in the First World War. Russia's involvement in the Syrian conflict is not a serious irritating factor, its negative impact on the situation in Russian society is negligible, and the positive global and public response is quite large due to effective propaganda. We note the absence of real opposition, in particular the liberal-oligarchic, in federal representative institutions, complete control, unlike the 1917 of the highest authorities, to the President of Russia. This set of circumstances allowed Russia to avoid serious shocks.
Therefore, the year of the centenary of the Great October Socialist Revolution was relatively calm for our country. At the same time, it was full of events that say that 2017 was the turning point for the world as a whole, for geopolitics.
Sunset "Arab Spring"
First of all, let us recall the announcement by our president of the end of the war with the IG (prohibited in the Russian Federation). Today, many cringe: they say, the words of Putin are not a decree to terrorists, even our air base in Syria was hit. Here we must clearly draw a line of demarcation between the end of the war and the subsequent pursuit of individual IG units that have retained their combat capability, as well as the struggle against other armed gangs, the “moderate opposition” in the understanding of Western “partners.” The war in Syria has ended since the quasi-state structures were completely defeated on its territory, with all settlements populated from its occupation. There is no doubt that the IS militants from among the local residents will wage a partisan war, and individual detachments will continue to strike from the territory of neighboring states. However, the IG as a holistic entity ceased to exist. And that means the end of the war. So, after the defeat of Nazi Germany, even more than 10 years on our territory, there was a struggle against Hitler's shortages: "Forest Brothers" and Ukrainian nationalists.
It may seem that this is a local event concerning only Syria. However, its significance is much broader, if you look from the point of view of the chain of conflicts that have shaken the Middle East and North Africa since 2011. Then began the so-called Arab Spring. By all indications, a series of social explosions, which inflamed the region in an extremely short time, were initiated from outside. The speed, the unity of the scenario, the super-operational reaction of the leaders of the Western world, their preemptive statements of support for the protests and the demands on the leaders of the target countries to surrender power show that Washington, London, Paris are directly related to the organization of the uprisings. There is every reason to consider these events as a single geopolitical operation - a complex interrelated in terms of goals, objectives, methods and forms, forces and means of action involved, aiming at changing the global and regional situation in a certain way. It can be stated: with the defeat of the Islamic State in Syria, the “Arab Spring” ended in complete failure, not a single reasonable geopolitical goal was reached by the West after these events. Moreover, he has largely lost influence in the region, having acquired a lot of problems, in particular with refugees. And these are signs of defeat. And if we consider that the main content of the operation were armed conflicts, hybrid and traditional, the defeat is military. It finally took shape as a victory over the IG in 2017.
Alternative to globalism
Geopolitical failures have led to the emergence of trends that are extremely dangerous for Western elites, which can be combined into the concept of anti-liberal revolt. In fact, this is a protest against the domination of transnational elites and their puppets. What is most interesting, on this basis, both right and left begin to unite. In Russia, this was expressed in the nomination of a single presidential candidate from the broad front of real opposition to the liberal regime - from the CPRF to national patriots. In the West, the beginning of the anti-liberal rebellion was marked by events, many of which were considered to be unlikely until the moment they occurred. The first in this series should be called the presidency of Donald Trump. The electoral college delivered the verdict of December 19 of 2016. However, Trump's full-fledged presidential powers took place at the start of 2017. He walked as an expression of the interests of those US business groups that are focused on the re-industrialization of the country, the restoration of its sovereignty to the full, the liberation from transnational influence in foreign and domestic policy. Political parties and movements in the West, oriented toward the independence of their states, perceived Trump's victory as their own success and as an example to follow.
In the elections in France in the second round came Marin le Pen. Although she lost, the victory of Macron hung in the balance. This is a huge success of the French national forces and a very serious warning for transnationals and liberal fundamentalists - in the next elections, opponents can take over. In Germany, the situation is no better: the “Alternative for Germany” is gaining momentum. This young party, created just five years ago (6 February 2013 of the year), with 25 thousands of members, won 94 seats from 709 (slightly more than 13%) in the Bundestag and 166 from 1821 (about 9%) in the Landtag. Very good start. Many today call the "Alternative" neo-fascist and even draw parallels with the NSDAP, which certainly has its ground in view of the scandalous statements of individual leaders. However, in the context of opposition to liberal fundamentalism and national forces, the success of this party is an alarming signal for the first. In Germany, they attack him on the left. The result is that there has not yet been formed a full-fledged government, the creation of which was postponed until March.
Of course, it is impossible not to recall Brexit. Although the referendum on leaving the UK from the EU was held in 2016, the main consequences were already apparent in 2017. We can also mention the prime minister of Hungary with the president of the Czech Republic, the first high-ranking "insurgents" against the dominance of liberal fundamentalism in the European Union.
And although the American establishment managed to “bridle” the disobedient president in hard struggle, just give up the slack and there will be new strikes on the transnationals and their ideological “roof” - liberal fundamentalism. A “riot” that started in 2017 will gain momentum.
In Western civilization, the fundamental "tectonic" processes took shape and intensified. They are centrifugal in nature. Obvious forms have acquired the process of separating the old continental Europe from the Atlantic axis London - Washington. The start served Brexit. And the process was given strength by Trump with statements about the uselessness of NATO, the US unwillingness to bear the burden of military spending for the entire bloc, the rejection of the Transatlantic Partnership (and of course, the US’s withdrawal from the Trans-Pacific, which could not be a serious warning to European partners). As a result, the EU seriously thought about the European army. And despite the talk that its creation does not diminish the significance of NATO as the main tool of military cooperation, everyone understands that the bloc ceases to ensure the security of old Europe.
Detonator pulling
It was in 2017-m that another revolutionary event occurred for Eurasia: Turkey entered into an alliance with Iran and Russia on the Syrian issue. And the United States in this community is not visible in any capacity. A couple of years ago it was impossible to imagine such a thing. Turkey has always been a reliable ally of the United States, a key NATO fighter on the southern flank, blocking our country from the Mediterranean. Ankara’s decision to purchase Russian C-400 air defense systems can be considered equally revolutionary. There are pros and cons, you can argue about them. But the main thing is that the leading NATO country on its southern flank is drifting towards Russia, and how it is purchasing the most complicated weapon, agreeing on military-technical dependence on our country in one of the most key areas. How the relationship will develop further, time will tell, and the decisive will be the ability of our leadership to develop adequate solutions.
It is worth highlighting another landmark event 2017-th. In Syria, the confrontation of two coalitions took shape: conditionally western under the auspices of the United States and eastern led by Russia. The first was an anti-Igilov group with terrorist organizations of various kinds under its control. The second included Russia, Iran and Syria, as well as the Lebanese Hezbollah. Turkey turned over to the Eastern coalition after the failed coup (behind which “American ears” stuck out) and seeing Washington’s unwillingness to take into account the interests of Ankara in this situation.
At the same time, the armed struggle in Syria in 2017 for the most part was already fought between these coalitions as a proxy war. The United States has ceased to be ashamed of supporting terrorists, openly saving the militants under their control from various "boilers". And after the defeat of the IG, they proceeded to prepare a new army of Islamist militants for the war in Syria. New Year's attacks on our base “Hmeimim” became a bad symptom, indicating a high risk of turning the proxy war into a direct clash between the eastern (without Turkey) and the western coalitions. After all, the answer could be similar attacks on US bases in Syria and even in adjacent countries with the escalation of the “erroneous” attacks of the Russian air forces and the US Air Force into open armed confrontation. And this could become a third world detonator - after all, the core of coalitions has already taken shape and will continue to grow.
Strategists and fellow travelers
2017-th became a turning point for the Pacific. The key event is the successful testing of the Hwaseong-15 rocket, which recorded the creation of a full-fledged nuclear missile shield by the North Koreans. Reaching a height of about 4500 kilometers, the warhead fell into the sea, flying a little less than a thousand kilometers. That is, with the optimal trajectory of the rocket could deliver a charge at a distance of about 12 thousands of kilometers. North Korea received a full-fledged ICBM, and with it the opportunity to deliver nuclear strikes throughout the United States. The consequences were not slow. A full-fledged negotiation process between the DPRK and RK began with the summit meeting. The belligerence in the speeches of American politicians has noticeably diminished. Our president praised Kim Jong-un as a mature statesman. The question of the participation of North Korean athletes in the Olympic Games was quickly resolved. And note, they will act under their own flag, and not under neutral, as suggested by ours. It seems that the matter is not in doping, but in the fact that the North Korean elite does not hold assets in foreign banks, it does not seem to take them out of its small country at all, unlike our oligarchs, who have few Russian spaces to store capital. It can be said that the chances of a military conflict on the Korean Peninsula are minimized.
The example of the DPRK is especially striking against the background of much more economically richer and larger countries that, having gone to the West, abandoned their nuclear missile programs and eventually fell victim to aggression, were completely defeated, accompanied by terrible human losses, the number of which exceeded several million This is primarily Libya and Iraq.
Of course, the 19th CPC congress became a landmark for world geopolitics. Proclaimed the new course of China - the creation of a union of the countries of the "common path" Capitalist Russia with the elite trying to sit on two chairs does not fit into this concept. Hence, China can no longer be regarded as a strategic ally. Only - tactical, friendly relations with which are caused solely by the presence of a common enemy, primarily the United States, as well as current economic interests, primarily the desire of the PRC to have Russia as its source of raw materials, and partly a scientific and technological donor. Beijing has previously spoken about the start of a full-scale geopolitical offensive. However, it was precisely after the XIX Congress, when the allies (and, therefore, opponents) of China were clearly named, that it acquires a clear form and organization.
By the way, according to some experts who lived and worked in China for a long time, it was the rejection of the socialist idea as such, the defeat of the CPSU that became the main reason why they stopped considering Russia as a spiritually close state. Moreover, in Beijing they remember those who used China’s temporary weakness during the years of its “national shame”. Among these countries was the Russian Empire. The Chinese clearly distinguish between an empire led by an autocrat and the USSR. The first is estimated by them as hostile, the second is estimated as a savior and friend (this is a Stalinist state). Modern Russia is considered by certain very influential layers as the likeness of precisely that imperial, and not Soviet.
Information