Nikolai Starikov: America will never leave Russia alone
- Nikolai Viktorovich, the enmity between the USSR and the USA was ideological: we built communism, they built capitalism. But now in Russia there is also capitalism, and America is still plotting against us. ..- There are simple canons in geopolitics. States are divided into two types - land and sea powers.
The former must develop a fleet in order to defend their resources. And the latter should cut them off from the coast and take away resources. Britain and the USA are classic maritime powers. We are the quintessence of sushi.
We can be “red”, “green”, even milk mushrooms in the back, but geopolitics says: as a large Eurasian civilization of land, the civilization of the sea will still try to split you up and cut you off from the coast. This is what you need to understand.
- But the West kept insisting that it was fighting a “communist conspiracy against the free world”...
- I analyzed it in my book. Those Russian sovereigns who developed the fleet died as a result of strange diseases or palace conspiracies, which surprisingly coincided with situations when Russia was half a step away from strategic victories. After the death of Peter I, for example (which did not occur, it seems to me, due to natural reasons), Russia went through a series of palace coups and was relegated to a secondary role in Europe for a long time. Without fleet we are beginning to be strangled and pushed deeper into the continent. Let us remember the collapse of the USSR. Which republics of the former Soviet Union were immediately accepted into NATO, cut off from Russia and sent troops there? Baltic. Why? This is access to the sea. And according to the canons of geopolitics, the first steps that a sea power must take are to cut off the civilization of the land from the sea, to create puppet regimes in the coastal zones directed against the civilization of the land.
- And for this reason, the United States and Britain are so interested in having regimes unfriendly to Russia in Ukraine and Georgia?
- Certainly. The task is to cut off Moscow and the Black Sea as much as possible. As for Ukraine, there is another goal. This is an important part of the Russian people. And according to the principle of “Divide and conquer”, you need to set one part of the people against another, while you yourself are on the sidelines. The British did the same in India. When they left there, they created several states, and as a result, Indians from Pakistan are fighting Indians from India. One can recall two Irelands, two Sudans... This is a classic of the genre.
- Anglo-Saxon model of world governance?
- This is also the Roman model of “Divide and Conquer.” It’s just that these guys have mastered the system of pitting peoples against each other like no one else. What did the British do when they came to America? They pitted the Indians against each other, and then gave them blankets contaminated with smallpox. Firewater plus smallpox, as a result, millions of Indians were destroyed. Russians, coming to some region, never did this. On the contrary, local conflicts were immediately extinguished. Let's take Dagestan. More than 100 nations. The languages are different. There are a million conflicts. There was an endless war there. Russia came to the Caucasus - the reason for war disappeared, the enemy was already on the other side of the borders. You ask yourself the question, why do “color” revolutions occur in those countries that are beginning to matter in the geopolitical situation, and not in those where human rights are worse and things are more difficult for the people? And why does the US support revolutions there?
- I went to rallies of the “swamp” opposition in Moscow. There were many people there who sincerely believed in their ideals.
- Always like that. At the head of any revolution are several paid agents, ambitious or just scoundrels. Everyone else does not receive any dividends and believes in ideals. But they are being manipulated. And there is always a group of “orange” elites that receive an immunity mandate from the United States. Please note that such revolutions work in countries where there is already a pro-American regime. Let's take Egypt.
- Mubarak was an ally of the United States.
- Yes. But the Americans forbade Mubarak to use force against the demonstrators. As a result, he resigned... Kyiv, Mr. Kuchma is sitting, who is more pro-American and certainly not pro-Russian. The US makes it clear to him that if he suppresses the Orange Revolution by force, it will end badly for him. Let's take Georgia. Shevardnadze, focusing on the United States... Well, where the regime is not pro-American, bombings are used, as in Yugoslavia, Libya, as almost happened in Syria...
- And we have?
- Let's remember that with Putin's return to the presidency, our policy has seriously changed. And the Americans understood perfectly well: Putin would interfere with them. Now ask yourself. So, if you were in the US leadership, would you pay the opposition in Russia to help you prevent Putin’s return? Of course they would! First of all, it's cheap. Secondly, you immediately resolve your issues not only within Russia. The man who leads Russia is interfering with your plans in many parts of the planet. Now remember the main slogan of the “swamp” opposition: “Anyone, but not Putin.” And when did the opposition begin to become more active? After the decision to return Putin was announced. You just need to compare the interests of the most powerful Western power with the actions of pro-Western forces in Russia. And the mosaic will come together.
- But hardly anyone will dare to bomb Russia?
- As 1991 showed, there is no need to bomb. Let's get this straight. Gorbachev destroyed not only the USSR, he returned to our geopolitical opponents what Peter I and Catherine II had taken from them. Because Peter I bought the Baltic lands as a result of a long war with the Swedes. Catherine II annexed Crimea. And Gorbachev gave it. He did not squander the Soviet heritage, but what our ancestors conquered with blood and sweat for centuries. And all this happened, as in 1917, amid talk of freedom. Now this dope has subsided from most of our people, they see that the threats have not disappeared.
- For example, from China?
- Stop it. China is a land state that has more contradictions not with Russia, but with the states of the sea. The threat of China is deliberately pedaled by pro-Western forces inside Russia. Because their task is to quarrel between Russia and China and repeat the scenario of the First World War, when the British pitted two continental powers against each other. Now they would like to entrust the role of Germany to China.
- It turns out that geopolitically we are enemies with Britain, and with Germany we are allies. But in alliance with the British, we already fought against Germany...
- During the First World War, it was a strategic miscalculation of Nicholas II. As a result, the Russian Empire was destroyed. The British managed to drag Russia into a conflict with those with whom it should have been friends - the Germans. The Second World War is already on the conscience (if, of course, he had a conscience) of Adolf Hitler. But today Germany is no longer a land state; it has joined a large maritime association - NATO. Ask yourself: What are American, British and French troops doing in Germany today? Who are they protecting her from? From Poland, a NATO member? Maybe from France itself - a NATO member? They are there defending Germany from the Germans themselves! This is an occupying army. It's the same with Japan.
- Can Russia restore what it lost with the collapse of the USSR?
- Stolypin also said: give a decade of quiet development, and you will not recognize Russia. The main thing for us is to stay away from conflicts. But the restoration of Russia is impossible without including other parts of Russian civilization in its zone of influence. And first of all - Ukraine.
- If we need to avoid conflicts, why are we quarreling with the United States over Syria?
- Syria is not the goal of world players, but a point of application of forces to achieve the goal. The USA and Britain are consistently destroying the statehood of the countries of the Middle East in order to create chaos on the borders of Russia and China. Russia was able to halt the advance of this chaos by changing international opinion on Syria with a brilliant proposal to control its chemical weapons. On the other hand, Putin gave Obama a chance to get out of the clinch without losing face.
- If the States are our geopolitical adversary, why do we let them save face?
- The US is decrepit, and the West is reaching a dead end thanks to its financial model based on the dollar. Our task is to prevent this model from collapsing all at once. Otherwise, the only way out for the United States will be a big war. The task of Russia and China is to prevent a war from starting by dismantling the dollar system smoothly.
- In my opinion, you are overly optimistic about our future.
- No one can win the World Cup once and for all. The same as losing. If we lost territories and influence in 1991, this does not mean that we lost them forever. There is no place for despondency here. There must be room for understanding. The main thing is that great geopolitical players, whom the Russian land has often given birth to, continue to come to the leadership of Russia.
Our news channels
Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.
Information