В stories of humanity, the bulk of which, as you know, are wars, the 46th century was marked by their greatest number and unprecedented human losses, huge destruction and loss of material and cultural values. The 11st century, not having passed even a quarter of its duration, promises to be no less bloody. Moreover, a century that has barely begun could well become the last in the history of mankind if effective mechanisms for taming the aggressive nature of modern human society are not found. In the meantime, we can state that there are 2 military conflicts in the 10st century, including those inherited by the XNUMXst century from the XNUMXst century, which began in the XNUMXth century. and ongoing at present - XNUMX, which began in the XXI century. and continuing in our time - XNUMX. All military conflicts occurred and continue to be in various regions of the Eastern Hemisphere.
The greatest threat to the existence of mankind is, of course, world wars.
In World War I, more than 10 million soldiers and officers, more than 11 million civilians were killed. Losses in World War II are still being specified. According to data from various sources, they make up from 55 to 70 million people. Numerous predictions of the consequences of a possible third world war agree on one thing: we are talking about catastrophic population losses and irreparable material losses, after which humanity will inevitably expect degradation, degeneration and disappearance from the face of the planet in a short historical time.
This year we celebrate the 75th anniversary of the Victory in the Great Patriotic War, which brought untold suffering and great glory to the Soviet people to our Motherland. It is significant in our own way that we are celebrating this glorious date in a dramatic pandemic of the previously unknown COVID-19 virus and the steadily approaching global economic crisis. The consequences of the pandemic, already visible today, are associated not only with large casualties and the threat of their further growth. The pandemic challenged the political structure of mankind, all its international and domestic institutions. She revealed the true nature of their moral, moral basis and goals of existence.
A pandemic strikes immediately at all levels of the organization of humanity as a whole and each state individually. The fight against the coronavirus pandemic can only be successful if the efforts of the entire global community are combined. Otherwise, the achievements of each of the individual countries can be leveled due to the breakthrough of the virus from the territory of others who were defeated in the fight against it. Unfortunately, mankind cannot boast of high organization in conducting anti-epidemic measures. What, for example, are practically pirate seizures of anti-epidemic protection means by dealers from the USA, Poland, and the Czech Republic. The borders between European states were restored again, the Schengen agreement has sunk into oblivion. Germany, France and other EU countries refuse more assistance to other affected countries, such as Italy, Spain. Appeals to the EU for help from Serbia remained unanswered. In this situation, the conclusion of Dmitry Rodionov seems to be fair:. “And apparently, it will be worse further. However, the coronavirus will go away. But the former Europe will no longer be. A crack can be covered up, but it cannot be done as it was before. Closed borders and stolen masks marked the beginning of the end of a united Europe. ”
The obvious consequences of the pandemic await the world community in the economy. The International Monetary Fund announced a global economic crisis due to a pandemic that has not been a hundred years old. “We are still dealing with extraordinary uncertainty about the depth and duration of the crisis. However, it is already clear that the global economy will show sharply negative growth rates in 2020, which will be reflected in our World Economic Outlook next week, ”said the head of the fund, Kristalina Georgieva. “In fact, we expect severe economic shocks since the Great Depression (it began with the collapse of the US stock market in 1929. - Auth.),” Said the head of the IMF (April 9.04, 2020).
The coronavirus epidemic has become one of the main threats to the global economy and financial markets. Thus, the forecast for global economic growth by OECD experts (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development — the international economic organization of developed countries that recognize the principles of representative democracy and a free market economy) for 2020 was 2,4% compared to the previous forecast for growth of 2,9%. The main reasons for the slowdown in the economy include a decline in production activity, a decline in the services sector, a decrease in oil prices, the chaos in the stock markets, a decrease in bond yields, and a decrease in world tourism. There was a problem not only with business tourism, but also with leisure. Tourists cancel travel bookings, which affects restaurants, hotels, airlines and other transport companies.
Judging by the numerous publications in print and electronic media, at present, the opinion that after the pandemic and as a result of the developing economic crisis, the world will never be the same again has become almost unanimous.
In the process of forming a new face of the world, several factors can be identified that were brought to life by the consequences of the pandemic and the recession of the world economy. This is primarily the degradation of globalization processes in economics and politics, changes in the composition of world centers of power, the destruction of intra-bloc ties, and changes in their content.
This is especially clearly seen in the obvious devaluation of the value and meaning of the existence of the European Union, the allied relations of the EU and the USA. European solidarity is pushed aside by the interests of national survival, and, quite possibly, in the near future at the head of world politics the national interests of the countries of the world will be established. The voices of those doubting the necessity and expediency of NATO’s existence are already heard. The UN’s ability to renew and adapt to the conditions of the future parade of sovereignty is a condition for its preservation. The fate of the UN will largely depend on the results of the confrontation between the leading countries of the world in the crisis and post-crisis period of development of society.
More recently, in 2017, B.V. Kuroedov with the participation of S.R. Tsyrendorzhiev was offered five alternative scenarios for the development of the international and military-political situation. These include the following.
Strong globalization. The US as a whole manages to impose its own agenda on the rest of the world, projecting influence through a system of controlled economic and military-political organizations and unions (NATO, TTIP / TTP reincarnation, etc.), other major powers are forced to integrate into the system due to their unwillingness to challenge openly relations imposed by Washington. The confrontational nature of the system of international relations is growing sharply.
Moderate globalization. Washington as a whole maintains a leading position within the Western world and a system of alliances during the Cold War. However, the crisis affects Europe. The dynamics of the US is not high. Non-Western centers of power are fragmented, trying to independently build an acceptable balance of interests with the collective West.
Bipolarity 2.0. Fierce opposition to the hegemonic aspirations of the United States forces a number of major powers of the "non-Western world" to form a collective pole of power, based not on one center (as in the days of the USSR), but on several key states - regional leaders with complementary capabilities (in economic, political, technological, informational and military areas).
The rise of China. The crisis within the Western community leads to a weakening of transatlantic ties; in the USA, an increase in isolationist sentiments is noted. China continues its dynamic economic development, the pace of modernization of the PLA is accelerating. Gradually, the initiative in globalization projects is shifting to Beijing.
Regionalization The situation is developing in the same way as in the “Moderate globalization” scenario, but trade contradictions are even more acute, several regional markets are emerging with limited trade and economic interaction among themselves.
Then it was assumed that the most likely scenarios for the near and medium term should be considered the scenario of "Harsh globalization" with the hegemony of the United States and other Western countries, as well as
“Bipolarity 2.0”, when a group of countries of the “non-Western” world, the core of which will be the BRICS countries, will be the rival pole of the West. And this scenario is a start in the formation of a multipolar world. According to our estimates, the world was faced with the choice of its development paths, when the struggle between the conflicting trends of economic and political development created great uncertainty. The growing threat of an economic crisis entailed an escalation of political confrontation between Western countries led by the United States and its geopolitical rivals - primarily China and Russia. Trade wars, economic and other sanctions are examples of the wide range of hostile actions that have been taken against Russia and China. Following proven “divide and rule” political principles, the main efforts of the hostile hybrid campaigns from the West were directed mainly against Russia, so that, weakening it could transfer its attacks against China. The media of the last three years comprehensively examined various aspects of this confrontation. The content of subsequent hybrid campaigns was supposed to violate the stability of the political organization of Russia, establish a ruling regime acceptable to the West in our country and provide the United States and its allies with access to Russian natural and other resources.
However, the expected course of events was changed by the outbreak and unfolding COVID-19 pandemic. In the new international environment, the changing trends in world development are forcing to put forward, as the most likely scenarios, such as "Regionalization" and "The Rise of China." These scenarios as a key condition for their implementation provide for a comprehensive crisis of the Western system, the lack of will and resources to oppose the formation of non-Western centers of power.
The scenario “Regionalization” (“The increasing role of regions”) is based on the hypothesis that the dominant in the transformation of the system of international relations will be the formation of competing trade and economic zones. The rivalry between them will increase as their economic power levels out, they will fight for markets, disputed territories and resources.
The “Regionalization” scenario, as well as the “Moderate globalization” scenario, assigns the main role in the formation of the system of international relations to integration associations, whose role will be even higher due to the actual disintegration of the general globalization project into several regional ones. The regionalization scenario assumes a downward trend in the network power of the United States and a reduction in separation from other global centers of power.
In the medium term, China will be ahead of the EU in assessing the network power, for which during this period the trend will change from moderate growth to a gradual decrease in network power. The process of the formation of the EAEU will be completed, which will ensure for Russia and other participants in this integration project a growth trend in network power
In support of the hypothesis about the development of the international situation according to the “Regionalization” scenario, on April 14, 2020, Academician S. Yu. Glazyev wrote in the Military-Industrial Courier weekly: “It can be assumed that in the current situation, the destruction of the current world order of liberal globalization is in the interests of The United States will be accompanied by the formation of a new world economy, the development of which will take place in the competition of regional integration structures with centers in China and India, while maintaining significant influence of the EU, the USA and hopefully the EAEU. ”
The world economy is in the process of changing technological and world economic structures. Russia so far lags behind the developed countries in the transition to the sixth technological order. ,. This transition, as historical experience shows, is accompanied by various kinds of crises and wars.
The current situation is very similar to that of the Great Depression before the Second World War. Then the way out of the state of critical recession of the economy occurred due to a significant increase in the role of the state in the economy and its militarization. This is clearly seen in the example of the United States and, especially, Germany, not only after Hitler came to power there, but, very importantly, in the period after the end of World War I until 1933, when the participation of American capital led to complete control over the German economy and prepared Hitler's rise to power. So today, the United States is preparing and cultivating Russophobic regimes wherever possible. The most striking examples of this are Ukraine, Georgia, Poland, the Baltic countries. Among less flashy examples of Russophobic countries can be attributed most of the NATO countries.
However, getting out of today's economic crisis, including due to the COVID-19 pandemic, will prove to be much more difficult for the United States if we take into account the US-led trade war with China, from which, apparently, the latter will emerge victorious. But the United States will not agree with the position of the loser in the struggle for lost leadership, in the struggle for markets and resources and in a desperate attempt to regain the status quo, they can take all possible actions, including the transition to the use of military force.
Most likely, the main form of interstate confrontation on the part of the United States in modern conditions will be a hybrid war, as a combination of information-psychological, trade-economic and diplomatic hostile actions with the possible use of cybernetic weapons. Given extreme pragmatism, more precisely, cynicism in choosing means to achieve the goals set by the US military and political leadership (for example, the use of nuclear weapons against Japan, the most severe bombing of Japanese cities), it is quite possible for the Americans to use biological and even nuclear weapons against their opponents.
Analyzing the course and content of the hostile actions of the USA and other NATO countries against Russia, it is quite logical to conclude that the hybrid war against our country has been going on for several years.
The ongoing ongoing fight against the COVID-19 virus pandemic has for some time somewhat reduced the intensity of information and psychological campaigns against Russia. But this does not mean the pacification of our opponents after the end of the pandemic. The national interests of the leading countries of the world will remain unchanged. Moreover, in view of the reduction of opportunities for their implementation in the conditions of an economic downturn, there will be a temptation to switch from competition to confrontation with the use of violence, including armed means.
The Second World War began with Germany seizing the countries of Europe and subordinating their economy to the needs of military operations against the USSR under the banner of a campaign against communism. The period from 1939 to 1941 can be considered the period of preparation for the Drang nach Osten (onslaught on the East).
The new Drang nach Osten will not require the capture of European countries. They are already vassals of the United States, a member of the NATO bloc. Only the flag of anti-communism is replaced by the anti-Russian flag. It seems that anti-Russian propaganda is not ideological: the Russian Federation is currently the same capitalist country as the United States and its allies. In fact, it is the ideology of the hegemony of Atlantism that permeates all the actions of our historical opponents: Great Britain, which has been shaping European politics for more than 200 years, contrasting its interests with the interests of Russia, and for the last 100 years, the United States and Great Britain at the head of the Anglo-Saxon world have been trying to dictate their will to the whole world, disregarding the national interests of the USSR, and now the Russian Federation, China and other countries of the "non-Western world."
British Foreign and Prime Minister Viscount Henry John Temple Palmerston said on March 1, 1858, in the English House of Commons: “We have no eternal allies and we have no permanent enemies; our interests are eternal and permanent. Our duty is to protect these interests. ” The United States, as the current leader of the Anglo-Saxon civilization, is clearly following this course. And, arguing from the point of view of expediency and pragmatism of foreign policy, it is difficult to object to this thesis. Another thing is that in the tradition of Russian foreign policy it is customary to look broader than their national interests, bearing in mind the historical fate of mankind, with which Russia connects its future.
The main content of the Great Patriotic War was armed struggle, the success of which was ensured by the state and capabilities of the military economy and the effectiveness of the socio-political system of the warring states, the morale and unity of the warring peoples. An important role in this confrontation was played by various kinds of sabotage at enterprises, transport, communications in the defense zone or the offensive of associations, formations and units. However, if these actions against the Nazi invaders were widespread and even had operational significance, especially after the initial period of the war, then these actions against the USSR did not have significant success. The efforts of the German special services to create the fifth column in the USSR were in vain.
A certain stake by Nazi ideologists was made on collaborators, the ranks of which were supposed to be formed from enemies of the Soviet regime and various traitors.
According to some historians, the total number of collaborators in the USSR during the war was about 1-1,5 million people. Their activity is evidenced by the activities of various nationalist organizations, including Muslim organizations: the Turkestan Committee, the Volga-Tatar Committee, the Crimean Center, the North Caucasian Headquarters, etc. All of them were under the scrutiny of the Nazi intelligence services. , one of the activities of which was to promote the split of the Soviet Union and the introduction of national hatred and intolerance.
The main reasons for collaboration were the dissatisfaction of some Soviet citizens with the Soviet regime (including collectivization), as well as the ongoing anti-Soviet activity of the White Guard emigration - especially that part of it that took an "implacable position" and, with the outbreak of World War II, took the position of "defeatism" .
Prisoners made up the bulk of the military collaborators. Remaining true to the oath was extremely difficult.
The first reason: the Red Army was not covered by the Geneva Convention on the Treatment of Prisoners of War, their conditions of detention were unbearable. As a result of exhaustion, epidemics and torture, many died.
The second reason is that the Soviet leadership equated surrender to crime. The order of August 16, 41, No. 270, "On the responsibility of servicemen for surrendering and leaving weapons to the enemy," was in force.
Another stratum of the population, in which many collaborators were noted, is citizens with an anti-Soviet position. These are mainly those who lost property during collectivization, relatives of repressed citizens. It should be noted that the motive for the struggle against Bolshevism is very exaggerated in Western historiography. In reality, few contributed to the Third Reich under these slogans.
The Nazis successfully recruited representatives of national minorities of the Soviet Union, using the idea of creating independent states. The strategy was effective where the national question was especially acute - Ukraine, the Baltic states, the Caucasus.
Historians do not give exact numbers, since the topic of collaboration has been hushed up for a long time and has not been studied properly. But most scientists agree that the lion's share of those who collaborated with the Nazis had the main task to survive. There were few who fought against Bolshevism.
A possible war against the Russian Federation is likely to become a hybrid war. Its main content will be information and psychological campaigns, the factual basis of which will be trade and economic, financial sanctions, various restrictions on technological and scientific and technical cooperation, value-added operations aimed at distorting national history, eroding national traditions and moral principles, shaping and preparing from the Russian fifth column of anti-government organizations and terrorist organizations. The military-political goal of these hostile campaigns and actions will be a violation of the stability of the socio-political organization of society, the system of state and military administration. To achieve this goal, one should expect provocative as well as sabotage actions to disorganize state and military administration, the country's energy and transport infrastructure, and finally, change the state power and “re-establish” Russia according to the rules of the sponsors and ideologists of the Russian fifth column - the United States and its allies. In the case of organized resistance from the remaining patriotic part of the population, it is possible to introduce army formations and units into the territory of Russia under the guise of “peacekeeping troops”.
A key condition for the success of the described scenario is the achievement of the most important military-political goal - violation of the stability of the socio-political organization of society, the system of state and military administration. Judging by the current state of our society this goal, our opponents do not achieve. Delaying the ongoing confrontation is playing against them. Despite the hostile actions taken, the Russian economy could not be “torn to shreds"; attempts to strangle it in international isolation led to the opposite result. The authority of Russia is growing. But at the same time, unprovoked anti-Russian rhetoric in NATO countries and especially prominent newcomers to this military bloc such as Poland, the Baltic countries, the Czech Republic, Bulgaria and Ukraine, which is tearing into NATO, are growing. The exercises of the NATO countries near our borders, provocations against Russia in Syria, the unceasing tension of the military-political situation in other countries of the Near and Middle East, as well as in the Arctic region - all this creates the preconditions for the formation of military threats to the Russian Federation.
In this situation, a scenario becomes possible when (the text above) the United States “disagrees with the position of the loser in the struggle for lost leadership, in the struggle for sales markets and resources and in a desperate attempt to regain the status quo, they can take all possible actions, including number and move on to the use of military force. "
The most likely strategic areas where military action can be unleashed should be considered Western, South-Western, as well as the Arctic. In scale, these military operations can reach the level of a local war if, during border battles, it is not possible to localize armed conflicts in a timely manner, inflicting defeat on the invading groups and repelling enemy attacks from aerospace. The strategic nature of the military operations in these military conflicts will differ significantly from the military conflicts of the beginning of the XNUMXst century, primarily in that these military operations will be carried out by approximately equal forces by adversaries using high-tech weapons on both sides. The theater of military operations in all areas, including the Arctic SN, has an urban character with a vulnerable infrastructure. The Arctic SN, despite some geographical remoteness of cities and communications from possible areas of military operations, in fact, does not differ from other continental SNs, where the territory of the warring countries is within the reach of most operational and operational-strategic weapons, and even more so, aviation.
The use of high-tech weapons of warfare presupposes a wide spatial scope and depth of hostilities, inflicting heavy losses of personnel and military equipment on the aggressor, and significant destruction of infrastructure facilities of the territory of the warring states. A feature of possible military conflicts against the Russian Federation is their fierce nature and the relatively short duration of their main phase, followed by a period of completion of hostilities and the establishment of peace agreements on a victorious basis. The duration of future military conflicts will be determined by the timing of the use of stocks of materiel and weapons created for warfare. The replenishment of the combat strength of troops (forces) with new weapons to replace those lost in modern conditions, as was the case in the Great Patriotic War, is practically impossible due to the high technological complexity of the WWE. Losses of the armed forces, the scale of the destruction of the infrastructure of the warring countries and the resulting suffering of the civilian population determine the price of peace or war that opponents can afford to pay. It seems that the duration of the military conflict against the Russian Federation, even if it escalates to a local war, will not exceed 1-2 months.
Nevertheless, it cannot be ruled out that the unfulfilled political and strategic goals of the war, when using conventional, albeit high-precision weapons, can provoke the aggressor to switch to using nuclear weapons. Nuclear strikes against Russia will entail inevitable retaliation, which no one in the world should have any doubts about. President of the Russian Federation V.V. When answering the question of whether Russia will respond to a nuclear attack, since this means a global catastrophe, Putin has now uttered the famous phrase: "Why do we need such a world if Russia will not be there?"
The military threat of the Russian Federation certainly exists. Its source is the insurmountable contradictions in which the interests of the United States, Great Britain, the leaders of the Anglo-Saxon world and Russia, the last bastion of multinational and multiconfessional Russian civilization, clashed geopolitically and ideologically. It has long been well known that the carriers of the military threat are the United States, Britain and other NATO countries. It is much more difficult to establish what is the level and potential of the military threat of the Russian Federation.
As you know, the NATO Allied Forces include nuclear forces (YaS) at the theater of war and general forces (SED), which in the event of an aggravation of the military-political situation, are envisaged to be deployed according to coalition plans.
A nuclear war theater plays the role of a deterrent to a potential aggressor. These include tactical aircraft carrier OVVS and OVMS (more than 600 aircraft), as well as artillery capable of using nuclear weapons.
NATO NAP is represented by the SALT, SIS, and the OVMS. Depending on the operational mission, they are divided into forces of universal use (SOF) and forces of territorial use (STP). SOUs are designed for large-scale military operations and crisis management operations. They are based on multinational operational-tactical formations capable of conducting active military operations for a long time, including on the theater of operations deployed far from Europe - Army Rapid Deployment Corps (AK BR): Combined AK BR of NATO (headquarters - Reindalen, Germany) ; German-Dutch AK BR (Muenster, Germany); Italian AK BR (Milan, Italy); Spanish AK BR (Valencia, Spain); Turkish AK BR (Istanbul, Turkey); The Eurocorps of the BR (Strasbourg, France) and other STPs are supposed to be used mainly for conducting large-scale military operations within the territories of NATO member states. They consist mainly of national formations.
According to the degree of readiness for use, NATO Allied Forces are divided into 3 categories: 1) high-readiness forces (readiness for use up to 90 days; in total, there can be up to 12 army corps, about 28 divisions, more than 70 separate brigades as part of the NMS and STS of NATO NPS) 2,3 thousand combat aircraft, about 250 warships); 2) low readiness forces (91-180 days); 3) long-term deployment forces (over 365 days).
To date, the number of NATO troops in the world is, according to 2015, 1,5 million soldiers, of which 990 thousand are American troops. Joint quick reaction units comprise 30 thousand people, they are supplemented by airborne and other special units. These armed forces can arrive on purpose in a short time - within 3-10 days.
Such a combat structure of NATO forces (forces) certainly provides a high level of military threat to the Russian Federation. However, the real state of NATO troops is currently a different picture. The number and combat readiness of NATO troops, including the grouping of US troops (forces) in Europe, have gradually decreased over the past 20-25 years. As a result, according to American military experts, including analysts at the Rand Corporation research center, the combat capabilities of NATO troops (forces) have become much lower than the combat capabilities of the Russian Armed Forces in Europe.
American military experts are sounding the alarm: in the event of a conflict at the European theater of operations, the Russian armed forces will have a number of significant advantages over NATO armies. Recently, even the chief of staff of the US Army, General Mark Milli, speaking to the Senate Commission on Armed Forces, admitted that recently Russia has significant fire superiority in Europe. Military analysts at the Rand Corporation research center have modeled the possible course of a clash between Russia and NATO in the Baltic states. They agreed that the Russian troops would need only three days to defeat the forces of the North Atlantic Alliance. The situation in 10 days. In accordance with their findings, Moscow in about 10 days is able to deploy an army of 50 thousand soldiers on the designated bridgehead, fully equipped with armored vehicles, artillery and covered by powerful air support. NATO in the same 10 days can mobilize only a few scattered lightly armed units. As a result, after a ten-day deployment of forces, Russia, according to experts from the Rand Corporation, will have a huge advantage over the United States and its allies in almost all types of weapons. Advantage in various types of military equipment. By tanks this advantage will be in the ratio of 7 to 1. For infantry fighting vehicles - 5 to 1. For attack helicopters - 5 to 1. For barreled artillery - 4 to 1. For rocket artillery - 16 to 1. For short-range air defense systems - 24 to 1. And long-range air defense - 17 to 1! NATO superiority in airplanes The only area in which NATO troops so far surpass Russia is combat aircraft. But they will not be able to fully use this trump card either, Western analysts lament, since Russia has the best air defense system in the world.
Indeed, in the last 20–25 years, it was possible to observe the processes of reduction in the combat strength of NATO troops (forces). This was facilitated by the euphoria of the West over the victory in the Cold War against the USSR, the impact of the Agreement on Adaptation of the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces (CFE) in Europe, signed in 1999. Although it did not enter into force, it determined for many years the nature of the development of the armed forces of the CFE member countries. The agreement established for each of them the territorial limit levels (TPU) of weapons and their sublevels, as well as the national limit levels (NPU) of arms, their limit sublevels for regular units and subcategories. It took into account the national characteristics of each country and its armed forces, and fixed the limit levels of the categories of weapons and their sublevels (according to the BBM) that countries could and planned to have after the implementation of the Agreement on the Adaptation of the CFE Treaty.
Estimates of American military analysts and experts undoubtedly compel us to reassess the combat capabilities of NATO troops and forces and the likelihood of a military conflict against Russia. However, the reliability and impartiality of these estimates are in doubt. As the analysis of the content of many analytical reports by American lobbyists shows, all of them are aimed at increasing funding for defense spending. And there are no arguments that these analysts would not have brought to achieve such a goal. Among these arguments, the main and unmistakable one is the Russian military threat, which has now replaced the communist Soviet military threat.
There is no doubt only one thing. A decision on the use of military force against Russia and its allies by the military-political leadership of the United States and NATO will be possible only if the price of victory is acceptable and their own security is guaranteed. Consequently, in the short and medium term, one should expect an increase in the combat capabilities of NATO troops (forces), active efforts to rally the North Atlantic bloc on the basis of further sublimation of myths about an aggressive, inhuman Russia that stands in the way of human progress. The economic crisis, the impact of which on all aspects of the life and activities of the countries of the world is exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic, will lead to a violation of social stability even in leading countries, a decrease in their standard of living, and an increase in fears about the future fate of every citizen and peoples of these countries. In this situation, as it was in Germany, which humbledly existed in the conditions of the Versailles peace, it is worthwhile to be ready for the emergence of new leaders who can be used again to awaken cave nationalism and adventurous plans of world domination in their peoples. From the slogan “Let's make America great again!” to the slogan "Ukraine above all!" the distance is small.
The international situation is changing rapidly. These changes are multifaceted and not all of them are positive. The search for the culprit at the beginning and spread of the coronavirus begins. It is characteristic that among the applicants for this dubious honor in the West, China and Russia are named, although there is evidence of an American trace in the development of new biological weapons, the leak of which served as the beginning of a pandemic. The fact that China and Russia were named the main culprits of the unfolding tragedy is not even surprising, but only confirms that the USA and Western countries are waging an ongoing informational and psychological campaign, a new surge of activity of which should be expected in the near future.
Recipes of success in Russia repelling the hybrid offensive of the West and the threat to its independence and territorial integrity have been spelled out since the Great Patriotic War. In that reality, the sources of the Great Victory were as follows.
Firstly, these are the advantages of the state and social system of the USSR, its moral, political and spiritual unity, patriotism, friendship of peoples, effective organizational work of the political and military leadership of the country, and the firm foreign policy of the Soviet state.
Secondly, this is a powerful military-economic potential of the country, achieved on the basis of the effective and purposeful use of its material and human resources.
Thirdly, an important factor in the victory in the war was the high level of military art and strategic leadership of the military organization as a whole, and the combat skills of our military personnel.
Fourth, one of the most important factors of our Victory was truly massive heroism, which was shown by Soviet people in a long and difficult struggle with the enemy. The heroism of all Soviet people at the front and behind was a characteristic feature of the Great Patriotic War.
Each of these great achievements is the result of selfless work, heroism and talent of our fathers and grandfathers. Whether we are now able to defend our independence and ensure the progressive development of our Fatherland, time will tell.
In the new international situation, the struggle for world leadership will most likely escalate, and at the same time, an information-psychological struggle will inevitably flare up, the purpose of which is to reanimate new old myths about hostile barbaric Russia, the growing threat from China and Iran. This will reunite the West to revive its hegemony. It seems that the unleashing (escalation) of the information-psychological struggle, supported by trade, economic and other sanctions, is the best form of interstate confrontation for the United States and its supporting countries, as well as for the largest financial corporations and the military-industrial complex, in conditions of unconditionally ensuring Russia's security at the expense of strategic containment forces. In the confrontation with Russia, the transition to the open use of military force is most likely after the achievement of the objectives of the hybrid war, when it will be possible to disorganize state and military command, in particular the control of strategic nuclear forces, general forces, destroy the socio-political unity of society.
The reviving desire of many countries of the world, primarily European ones, to pursue a policy expressing their own national interests, as well as the struggle of large international financial and industrial corporations for the redistribution of financial flows, will significantly complicate the situation. According to some experts, a new player is interfering in this struggle - large funds for various purposes, previously not seen in banking. They will seek to transfer both industrial and banking capital. The stimulus for newly arising (and not yet divided) financial flows will be funds from speculative resale of bankrupt thousands of enterprises in the sphere of transport, hotel services and others. In the course of these speculative operations, entire countries may be ravaged. But the most valuable is the extraction, which all the actors of world politics can get through the sharing of Russian resources.
In the new international political environment, it is impossible to exclude a situation where the financial and economic leadership of the United States, which is losing its previously undeniable all-round superiority, can switch to the open use of military force in order to remove its opponents, primarily Russia, China and Iran from the world historical scene. This adventurous step will lead to a disaster on a planetary scale.
The broader, political significance of the consequences of the epidemic was given by prognostic writer Sergei Pereslegin. The internal content of the economic processes taking place today, he writes, is the redistribution of capital. This is due to the fact that numerous ruined enterprises and those that have to survive this, such as airlines, travel agencies, hotels, theaters, cinema networks, the service sector, expert communities will be bought up for nothing and then sold much more expensive. This is a purely financial special operation. Thus, entire countries will be ruined. One gets the impression that the basic task of the pandemic is to reformat the world in order to change the structure of financial flows. The impending economic crisis, says Sergey Pereslegin, is the best way to redistribute industrial assets. There has long been a struggle between two forms of capital - industrial and banking. In simple terms, the first from a political point of view represents the Trump group, the second - Clinton. Now a third force has intervened in this struggle. These are large funds that previously did not conduct banking activities. Now their task is to transfer money to themselves, both industrial and banking.
Typically, global redistribution of finances is done through war. And what we are seeing now is an imitation of global war. Through an epidemic. But the result will be the same.