One gets the impression that in Washington, having lost its head, and with it the remnants of prudence and superpower composure, indiscriminately “beat on everything that moves” (a vivid example - история with the plane of the Bolivian President Evo Morales). And fall for the bait, at the same time substituting their European satellites, which are publicly exposed as banal vassals, tributaries.
Actually, this circumstance was previously an open secret, but one thing is “everyone knows”, and the other is “everyone sees.” So they saw - in colors and colors. So much so that the Organization of American States (OAS), which is under the complete control of Washington, was forced to “get indignant” by a “plane” incident, making a forced curtsy to resolutely condemning its summit of Latin American leaders. (Just like that Gogol “non-commissioned officer's widow” who “whipped herself out”).
The current monotonous and endless and unimpressive claims of the White House to Moscow do not so much resemble "pressure by authority" (which, like "shagreen leather," shrinks before our eyes), as give the extreme degree of nervousness to American officials, who in this situation all the costs associated with such behavior (which will remind of themselves) also become
a) a public demonstration of powerlessness (and concentration on this powerlessness of universal attention), issuing that “the king is naked” and is no longer the “omnipotent overlord” whom he imagined himself and for which he is trying to give himself out of habit. (“The caravan moves on,” despite the transatlantic “noise design”, and everyone around is watching with interest, absorbing the invaluable experience of how, it turns out, you can handle Washington today, “if all of a sudden”);
b) the dismantling, perhaps irreversible, of the authority of the “citadel of democracy and constitutional freedoms” (and with it the Pharisee American “democratic messianism”), openly and brazenly trampled upon in their own country and around the world. At the expense of this, the weakening of the position and, most importantly, of the “moral leadership” of the United States, which, to a greater extent than military might, allowed them to turn around their shoulder special operations without looking at their own fellow citizens. And even more so for the comprador "native" elites bought up with giblets;
c) erosion of the internal legitimacy of the regime (40% support for Snowden by US residents is impressive, and the cadres of the world that have bypassed the obstruction arranged by provincial journalists to the all-powerful NSA chief Keith Alexander [“Did you lie to Congress, and where is the guarantee that you tell the truth to us? ..”)] “perestroika” persecutions of the notorious “partocracy” enliven in their memory);
d) the transformation of the US special services into "enemies" of public opinion, demonizing them in the eyes of its own citizens and sensitive to the invasion of the privacy of European inhabitants. Combined with the public "flare" of the NSA, which had previously avoided increased public attention, which focused on the CIA and the FBI, these departments and their European counterparts are placed in the unenviable position of the "last" in which their colleagues in the end of 80 from the countries of the former Soviet bloc.
Drawing attention to all of this, some analysts rightly point out that “... Snowden’s actions and movements worry Washington much more than, say, events in Egypt or Syria” (http://www.fondsk.ru/news/2013/07 /11/edvard-snouden-esche-ne-skazal-poslednego-slova-21537.html). The rhetorical question in the air about what caused such a neurosis gets quite an adequate answer in this material: the ex-NSA officer knows much more than he has said or even hasn’t said yet, but he has already handed over to the British “The Guardian”. True, the author’s “fantasy” of this plausible forecast is only enough to predict the possible disclosure of the true causes of death of Hugo Chávez, although it is possible that this may be even “cooler”. And secrets can emerge that will transform the United States into something like the USSR “perestroika” raging on the outskirts. And NATO is an analogue of the disintegrating Warsaw Pact.
Isn't this scenario incredible?
The well-known economist and political scientist Mikhail Khazin, recalling the beginning of the 1970s, when the Soviet Union, which had won the Cold War by that time, chose the future path of global development, writes the following. “... Much was said about the refusal of the USSR authorities from the design principles of the“ Red ”project from the second half of the 50-s. However, those people who headed the Politburo of the Central Committee of the CPSU in 70-s were brought up during the period of the domination of these principles, and it was up to them to ask whether the destruction of the Western economy and the USA should be forced after the catastrophic 1973 oil crisis of the year. I spent a lot of energy trying to figure out whether this question was formulated explicitly, and which one was answered. This investigation (which consisted in conversations with former high-ranking functionaries of the Central Committee of the CPSU and the KGB of the USSR) revealed the following. First, the question was posed. Secondly, the answer to it was reduced to two much simpler, and most importantly, technological problems. One of them concerned the capabilities of the USSR in direct control of the territories that at that time were in the zone of influence of the United States and in which, after the disintegration of the "sovereign", uncontrollable, in many ways, destructive and dangerous processes for the whole world were bound to begin. The second concerned the readiness of the USSR to be alone with China, which by that time had already started a technological revolution. ... The country's leaders came to the conclusion that the USSR did not have the ability to directly control almost half of the world, slipping into totalitarianism, rampant terrorism and anarchy ... As a result, the USSR went on to negotiate with the United States and began the process later called “detente”. Since ... the death of one of the superpowers (that is, the transition to the only independent state in the world) was predetermined by the objective development of the economic situation, the USA less than ten years later faced the same issue and decided it in a fundamentally different way ”(http://worldcrisis.ru / crisis / 188291).
Another side of this problem is the election fronde mentioned by one of the authors of these lines, with Barack Obama of the army generals. Recall: on the eve of the 2012 presidential election of the year 500 (!), Retired generals and admirals issued a statement in support of his rival Mitt Romney (http://tcenavoprosa.ru/archives_analyst/new_detail.php?ID=3213).
Another thing is how profitable this scenario (not only with the collapse of the United States, but also with the destruction of the West) of Russia itself. And, being concerned about this issue, we begin to approach the main point: the notorious “Snowden case” is part of playing out complex, multi-way geopolitical combinations, and not only from both sides - from the western, and from the Russian, but also inside each of these sides. And maneuvering is going around key, fundamental issues of modernity and prospects for further global development, as evidenced by rapidly growing international and domestic political tensions.
The seeming “offensive” of Russia on the United States on the issue of total electronic espionage is in fact not an offensive. And, in our opinion, a purely defensive operation, entered into the context of counteracting the aspirations of the “collective West” in the person put forward at this time on the edge of the European Union to “take over” most of the subjects of the former USSR with the help of the Eastern Partnership project.
In November 2013, the summit of this organization, established in May 2008, will be held in Vilnius, on the eve of the South Ossetian adventure of the Saakashvili regime. It was supposed, it seemed, to expand the political “breakthrough” in the “eastern direction” by the military humiliation of Russia, a demonstration of its helplessness and inability to stand up for the allies. And thus take revenge for the failure of the previous attempt to expand to the East, but not the EU, but NATO, buried by the Russian opposition in the run-up to not becoming "crucial" for the North Atlantic Alliance of the Bucharest Summit (2 of April 4). (Let us recall the activation of the informational headquarters of the “fifth column” of the West within the country during the Georgian aggression: when certain media begin to lie “like gray geldings”, do not hesitate to call black white and not thinking about the consequences, this means that they don’t even receive a recommendation , and the imperative setting, including the specific content of specific false comments).
One can only guess how swift the Eastern Partnership blitzkrieg would be if Russia did not intervene in the conflict and did not put into place the high-handed puppet of “Uncle Sam”. Thanks to the defeat of the aggressors, the military-political (NATO) and economic (EU) vectors of Western expansion against our country could not unite, and the process of promoting a new, now supposedly "European" initiative, due to which the ears of not only Washington, and the “grazing” Western establishment of backstage structures (http://www.fondsk.ru/news/2013/07/09/ugrozhaut-li-usa-proektu-evrazijskoj-integracii-21497.html), has significantly slowed down.
But he, nevertheless, continued to advance, parasitizing on a number of factors:
- on the ambitions of post-Soviet elites, stretching, contrary to all historical experience, to Europe, where, as they naively think (despite the example of Greece), they are better fed and converted;
- on even greater ambitions of the ex-allies of the USSR under the Warsaw Pact, who, not remembering the lessons of history and not thinking about the future, enthusiastically neophytes rush to support the enemies of their temporarily receding geopolitical metropolis. I remember how, against the background of the Munich Agreement, Poland, now with Sweden and the Czech Republic among the rippers of the Eastern Partnership, snatched at the then Czechoslovakia Cieszyn region, and at the same time, with the help of its ambassador in Berlin, Jozef Lipsky offered Hitler to put him "a beautiful monument in Warsaw "For help in solving the" Jewish problem "(Documents and materials on the eve of the Second World War. In 2-x. - M., 1948. T. I. S. 214);
- the allegedly “economic” (although this is for naive fools) character of “partnership”, which formally does not bind its members with any political obligations to the EU (although since the times of Margaret Thatcher it is known that “free cheese is only in a mousetrap”);
- on the consolidating nature of this new “Eastern project” for the West, whose elites are counting on finding a way out of the hopelessness of the current crisis. (Although here it is more legitimate to talk about the dictates of "united Europe" on the part of Washington, which exploits the difficulties of its satellites in its own interests and enjoys the exclusive, dominant status of the Fed's dollar against the European Central Bank).
The publications of a number of experts from the IA REX, the Foundation for Strategic Culture, and other analytical sites, indicate that various “details” of the future Eastern Partnership Free Trade Area Agreement with the EU are being met and interlinked. So, Armenia is inclined to “exchange” for the European integration of its role in the Karabakh settlement. As an option, within the framework of a certain Georgian-Armenian confederation and (or) with the opening of the Turkish border. Accordingly, Azerbaijan is lured by the prospect of being face to face with Stepanakert, deprived of the traditional support from Yerevan (the Karabakh leaders themselves are also periodically hinted at the desirability of their appearance in the Eastern Partnership). In case of refusal, Baku is intimidated by the specter of "internal bloodshed". Belarus and Ukraine, as well as Lithuania and Latvia, are being offered the project of the Fourth Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, in which Poland will dominate due to the share of its economy exceeding 50% (against 35% of the total potential of Kiev and Minsk). Moldova is inclined to “take a time-out” on the “Transnistrian” problem, apparently bearing in mind that the Pridnestrovian Republic itself “will fall to its feet” in the Romanian lobby in Chisinau after the final triumph of the “European vector” on the banks of the Dnieper. Finally, the Swedish-Finnish “bunch” is “sharpened” already on the next stage of the “Eastern Blitzkrieg”, resting on Karelia. And with the help of the Scandinavian headquarters of the subversive site Kavkaz Center, it plans and prepares a separation from the North Caucasus of Russia and at the same time exploits the Circassian and Crimean Tatar factors. With the withdrawal of US and NATO troops from Afghanistan, the republics of Central Asia fall into the cage of these projects: preparing care, the Americans are increasingly alienating Hamid Karzai from themselves, strengthening contacts with the Taliban, and this self-explanatory fact does not need any comment. Especially if you remember the history of this movement and al-Qaeda, which are closely connected with the American special services by their appearance. (See: http://www.iarex.ru/articles/39376.html; http://www.iarex.ru/articles/39590.html; http://www.iarex.ru/articles/39533. html; http://www.iarex.ru/articles/39667.html; http://www.iarex.ru/articles/39409.html; http://www.iarex.ru/articles/39381.html; http://www.iarex.ru/articles/39485.html; http://www.iarex.ru/articles/39510.html; http://www.iarex.ru/articles/39371.html; http: //www.fondsk.ru/news/2013/07/26/zapadnyj-vyzov-evrazijskoj-integracii-21718.html; http://www.fondsk.ru/news/2013/06/28/chetvertayayarech pospolitaja-21310.html; http://www.fondsk.ru/news/2013/06/14/cherkesskij-i-krymsko-tatarskij-voprosy-po-shodnym-geopoliticheskim-lekalam-21011.html; http: // gnopolysy-pokarskij-voprosy-po-shodnym-geopoliticheskim-lekalam-2013.html; www.fondsk.ru/news/05/31/20800/finsko-kavkazskij-emirat-XNUMX.html, etc.).
Old as the world, Anglo-Saxon policy: divide or, in modern manners, "breed" - and conquer!
An element of all this provocative fuss over creating a “sanitary cordon” around Russia followed by “squeezing” our country to the northeast and its isolation (the Anaconda plan of Mehan’s American geopolitics, updated after the Second World War, one of the founders of the Bilderberg Club, the Röttinger), flirting with the Russian, more precisely, the anti-Russian "belolentochnoy" opposition. It is hardly coincidental that such an agent of external influence as Stanislav Belkovsky is now being activated. A series of his speeches from the beginning of June (http://slon.ru/russia/embargo_do_21_gosudarstvo_i_oligarkhiya_10_let_spustya-949243.xhtml; http://www.online812.ru/2013/07/11/003/2009/08.Xhtml; http://www.online0541.ru/2005/XNUMX/XNUMX/XNUMX.Xhtml; http://www.onlineXNUMX.ru/XNUMX/XNUMX/XNUMX/XNUMX.Xhtml; http://www.onlineXNUMX.ru/XNUMX/XNUMX/XNUMX/XNUMX.Xhtml; The essence of the time, ”Sergey Kurginyan, is reduced to the“ proposal of the Yeltsin family ”to Vladimir Putin again“ to become ours ”in exchange for“ the refusal of Medvedev and Khodorkovsky’s discharge ”(http://zavtra.ru/content/view/chervi-i-tverd) . It’s time to remind that it was Belkovsky who, following Yeltsin, insistently voiced the initiative emanating from the West to establish a “constitutional monarchy” in the country, this time led by the British Duke of Kent with the separation of the North Caucasus from Russia (http: // zavtra .ru / content / view / XNUMX-XNUMX-XNUMX). Since Putin, in the XNUMX year, firmly and resolutely refused this influential European delegation, it becomes clear that such a proposal is aimed at delegitimizing and destroying the Russian authorities, that is, developing along the general lines of the plans and interests of the Orange-Belolentochnoy opposition, which and Belkovsky - the same.
All these analytical approaches are extremely important - both by themselves and as a whole, the tragic consequences of their implementation for our country and the post-Soviet space as a whole, on which, it seems, they are again trying to implement the modernized, but pursuing all the same man-hating goals “Master Plan “Ost.” But we present a detailed list of references to relevant materials precisely in order not to be distracted and not to lose the thread of our analysis associated with the role in all this of the notorious “Snowden case”.
On the one hand, it is known that the ex-NSA officer legalized in our country received support not only from the American public, but also from very systemic in terms of rooting in the overseas establishment of global human rights organizations. Including Amnesty International, which is closely related to one of the directors of the final stage of the Cold War, Russia's pathological hater Zbignev Brzezinski, recently the more famous harsh criticism of the foreign policy of the Bush and Jr. administrations. Moving in this vein, Brzezinski corrected the concept of restructuring the world "against Russia, at the expense of Russia and on its fragments" set forth in the "Great Chessboard". And it now appeals to the “expansion of the West” by involving our country in it (as well as Turkey, which influences the situation in the Crimea, the North Caucasus, the Transcaucasus, and along the lines of Turkic-speaking relations - in Central Asia).
What benefit are Brzezinski’s comrades-in-arms going to extract, declaring support for the one whose activities for the second month simply deduces from official Washington, turning almost into a central question of its foreign, and to some extent, domestic policy? (Strain your imagination and imagine the level and scale of the closed “debriefing” now going on in the American "competent" departments!).
And to what extent do these geopolitical "games" fit in with the interests of our homegrown adherents of the so-called "European project", who were at the forefront of involving prominent Soviet scientists in the activities of the Rome Club? But he not only “opened the floodgates” of the notorious “convergence” that led to the collapse of the USSR, but also created in the Vienna International Institute for System Studies (IIASA) a base for training “reformist” personnel for the secret Andropov Committee of the Political Bureau of the CPSU Central Committee on Economic Reform in the USSR (1983 g.). And did not these “Romans” themselves lobby at one time those ambiguous party-state decisions that Khazin mentions?
Is it impossible to assume that a simultaneous blow to the American-European and American-Russian relations, rehearsed with the help of WikiLeaks, will play to strengthen the position of those forces in Europe and Russia who are in favor of implementing the de Gaulle (and in fact, SS) concept "Europe from the Atlantic to the Urals"? Or, in the new-fangled manner, "Euro-Atlantic".
On the other hand, the effect of a "bombshell" produced news about Germany breaking the agreement on cooperation and exchange of intelligence information with the special services of the USA and Great Britain. Perhaps this move of Angela Merkel is purely pre-election in nature (as, for example, last year’s widespread media harassment of global banks in the United States, which ended immediately after Obama’s re-election). In September - elections to the Bundestag.
And if not, and everything is more serious? Or it will be presented as “more serious”, despite the presence of a so-called “Chancellor Act” (1949) between the USA and Germany, which was reported by the outstanding Russian intelligence officer Yuri Drozdov (http://www.customsunion.by/info/ 2845.html) and which, according to his information, significantly limits the independence of German foreign and domestic policy?
Berlin is the strongest, dictating the “rules of the game,” a member of the EU. And today it is under pressure not only from “crisis” countries - Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal. But the "socialist" leadership of France, which is supported by Holland, is historically the springboard of British influence in continental Europe. Here is the time to recall the scandalous extraordinary EU summit at the end of June 2012 and the repeated, more or less diplomatic, “recommendations” of Germany to take on European debts (that is, to give in to the notorious “world bankers”), coming from either George Soros or Henry Kissinger. That is, from the main globally oligarchic clans of the Rothschilds and Rockefellers simultaneously, which testifies to the backstage elite consensus on this key issue of European and world politics.
Strategic differences between the United States and Germany will most likely not arise. However, to inflate tactical differences and, exploiting Berlin’s aspiration for hegemony in the eurozone, to present them as strategic, opening the “second front” of internal opposition in the EU - in relation to the “Eastern Partnership” - is that really possible?
And is it really so difficult to imagine a two-way operation in which Russia, with the help of the allegedly “torn apart” with the Anglo-Saxons and the “Eastern Partnership” of Germany, is first connected with the “axis” with Berlin, thereby torpedoing the Eurasian Union’s project ( ). And after that, the traditional European "axis" Berlin - Paris and the same traditional Atlantic are restored: Washington - London - Berlin. After that, the “trap” for Moscow is finally slammed, as the “divorce” with partners in the CIS becomes irreversible. And, most importantly, to confess! - there are quite a few traitors and collaborators who will applaud such an outcome not only in Kiev, Minsk and the Baltic states, but also in the capital's “corridors of power”.
And for the sake of this, why not turn the United States into a “rebuilding” boiling cauldron, and not put NATO on the brink of collapse? Russia is on this stake - the main "prize"! And even before the new presidential campaign, which is guaranteed to bring the Republican candidate to the Oval Office, the list of which (including Bush III - Jeb) was made public by Kissinger almost a year ago (http://www.rbcdaily.ru/world/562949985257804) is not and far away. Hollywood warned about the "catastrophic" rule of the black president - and not just warned, but shouted. And whose puppet is Hollywood and who gives him ideas for scripts is well known.
Therefore, Snowden - Snowden, and geopolitics - geopolitics. Being a former NSA employee in Russia is a great success, significantly reducing the likelihood of using it against our country and its interests. And at the same time allowing to conduct strong counterplay, which may well include presenting at the right moment to the West such “arguments” that will put it before a difficult and very costly choice: to curtail “Eastern Partnership”, adding to them the “piggy bank” of failed anti-Russian projects, or face the threat of large-scale destabilization at home. Moreover, one that is able to resonate with the current controlled, “distracting” destruction, launched into its ranks by the Western “masters of the global rules of the game”.
Of course, such a turn of events requires political will. But - “Russia is great, but nowhere to retreat! Behind Moscow! ” And the stubbornness of the Kremlin in the "Snowden case" inspires cautious optimism.
In the end, let's not forget: Snowden flew to Moscow not from Washington, but from Hong Kong. That is, from the Special Autonomous Region of the PRC, Hong Kong and Macau.
And until the next summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which for the first time this year takes place not in the June offseason, but in September, pretending to determine the vector of the entire new global political season, it remains only about a month.
We will see what the West who has brewed this “porridge” and the West has sown the wind will reap.
Vladimir Pavlenko - Doctor of Political Sciences, full member of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems (AGP);
Vladimir Shtol - Doctor of Political Sciences, Professor, full member of AGP, Head of the Department of State-Confessional Relations of the Russian Academy of National Economy and Public Administration under the President of the Russian Federation