There is such a widespread belief that we lost in Ukraine, that our diplomacy did not work well, that we “lost” this country. Often found in the comments, and not just the trolls. With pain and tremor in the voice, people say: our rulers missed Ukraine. So, I would like to discuss it. The fact is that I have an unequivocal opinion here: we could not win in any way. There were no such “winning options”. There were none from the beginning.
Several factors play a role here. First of all, as you know, "it is better to be first in the village than the second in Rome." Being a president, a prime minister and a deputy is pleasant and honorable, but this means a lot of competition. Think, looking at the modern Ukrainian "elitarians" - what chances would they have in Moscow, in the case of preservation / creation of a single management structure? This thought is by no means mine, the thought is rather old, but nevertheless true. Somehow it is gradually forgotten over time that in the Ukrainian SSR the standard of living was higher than in the RSFSR. Significantly higher. We are all about them bake, about pennies. About them dear, and I do not need to push here about democratic values.
An ordinary Ukrainian, like an ordinary Russian, cares about the same things: salary, utility bills, food prices, medicine is not very free. So do not tell tales about the "European vector". So, from the point of view of “devouring” in the Ukrainian SSR in 80, it was better and richer than in the Non-Black Earth Region. After 25 years, the situation has changed dramatically. Who is guilty? Blame Vlad. And you thought? The management vertical of the “outskirts” turned out to be an order of magnitude worse. They did exactly what the Western media like to blame Putin and Co.: they plundered everything. And do not tell tales about oil and gas: the defense spending of the Russian Federation is not comparable with the Ukrainian way. We still have space and science remains. So the point is precisely in the quality of management. In Russia, it is stupidly much higher than in Ukraine. In the zero years, Kiev simply lost outright in Moscow in terms of management quality. It cannot be said that the Ukrainian "elitist" did not understand this simple fact - they understood. And the fact is deadly: next to it there is exactly the same Russian-speaking, but an order of magnitude more efficient state. Tse zrada. Like South Korea for the Kim family.
In theory, an ordinary Kiev resident, a Kharkiv citizen, having arrived in Russia, could compare and draw conclusions. Ukrainian Rezun wrote about it a lot in his "bestsellers". About socialism vs "free rich countries." He wrote a lot, beautifully and convincingly. Here we will drive out political instructors and commissioners and we will live "like a gospel." Politrukov drove away. With the standard of living somehow did not work out. With freedoms - by the way, too. For some reason, we in Russia thought that economic growth would make it more attractive for the same Ukrainians. In principle, yes, I did, for migrant workers. But among Ukrainian politicians, this very “rise from its knees” caused tons of hatred: they could not provide anything like that, but they don’t want to give power, even partially. In order to compete with Russia, they had to carry out similar reforms - nothing complicated, by analogy. By the way, only a rich, prosperous Ukraine (as the “little Ukrainians” planned) could serve as a counterweight to Russia (as the West was plotting). In theory, it was necessary for the West to support Yanukovich in 2004, to load tens of billions into Ukraine every year, to open production ... Perhaps, it grew together with the “counterweight” (although in Ukraine they steal and deceive a lot).
But no one followed this path. Uninteresting turned out or expensive, I do not know. And they went on a virtual way of forcing hatred towards Russia. All of these attacks and negotiations somehow forgot that Ukraine’s 2013 year was hopelessly and completely lost in the field of the Russian economy. And it became clear much earlier. Imagine - the Ukrainian leadership is sitting and does not do a damn thing in such a situation. How will it end for him? Scam him. I don’t know if Lukashenka had any chances in Russia, but Putin with his reforms was a real threat to ukrovlasts and ukroelit. Build oligarchs, increase tax collection, strengthen the vertical of power ... In Ukraine? Yes, you sho! How can you ?! Something about this situation resembles an unreformed, in a timely manner, Rzeczpospolita. Which "ate" "prosharennye" neighbors. Here is the same with the “Europeans”. Poland, Russia and even Romania carried out reforms, but Ukraine was stuck in the intertemporal period. Hmm, probably the Polish gentry at the end of the 18 of the 20th century also “imagined poems” ... But, alas, история was absolutely merciless to them. So, for the Ukrainian elitarians, the situation in the “zero” was the peak: not only Poland, but already Russia completes the post-Soviet period and goes into a brighter tomorrow. And Ukraine is stuck in a swamp. Well European Poland, but the Horde! Therefore, Goebbels himself would have been glad and envied Ukrainian propaganda. Kiev, unlike Moscow, was not interested in economic and state reforms, but in the field of propaganda ... Here they would give a hundred points to anyone.
As we all know from the discussions on the Internet - any Ukrainian is perfectly grounded in the issue of Russian problems and jambs. And they didn’t do anything else, criticized, damn it, Russ, and very professionally. It is useless to argue with them - they are studying from the kindergarten specialty: "Backward and totalitarian Russia in the era of globalization." Or close to her. And how to equip Ukraine, they do not know, and are not interested in this sad topic. They criticize Russia. And all this is done with one main goal: so that the citizens of Ukraine (let's call them so neutral) do not ask uncomfortable questions about the standard of living in their homeland and in the neighboring state in the east. “Why do Russians live richer?” - that’s the main question. Insolent and cynical question-making, to which the leaders of “independent Ukraine” have absolutely no answer. And the phrase follows him: “Go to the bathhouse with your“ taming ”, I want to live like a human being, like in Moscow.” A curtain.
That is why the propaganda from each iron, that is why Hopak is round the clock, that is why ATO and “Krol in a leather coat”. Anything but this question. Yes, of course, there was a desire to tear Ukraine away from Russia by “civilization” for the sake of, say, the West, but there was also a more mundane desire - to preserve its “little one” at any cost and explain to lackeys that they are the salt of this land. Ukrainian leaders were well aware that a number of more effective, more modern and less corrupt state: because of nationalist hysteria. They needed the same wedge between the Russians and the Ukrainians, first of all because the Negros did not ask unnecessary questions about the standard of living of their neighbors. Those same Ukrainian "elitist" were well aware of their price, knowing that they were the fifth wheel in the cart. Just look closely at their “spiritualized” faces. Well, who are they? Ukraine could not become a European country, primarily because Ukrainian leaders did not reach European standards.
That was the problem — the leaders, not the “heavy Soviet legacy,” and, by the way, the Ukrainian leaders themselves were well aware of that. It is from there that the false, vile, and duplicitous position of the Ukrainian authorities throughout the entire period of independence goes through. These glorious guys were well aware that with normal hands, they have no chances, no prospects, no future. That is precisely why, on the one hand, they kind of smiled and hinted that friendship is possible, but on the other hand, turning away, they carried out an absolutely Russophobic policy. This, by the way, is not so much an emotional stance as a sober calculation: to incite the Ukrainians against the Russians. Yes, just like that, the massacre that happened in the Donbas prepared for all the years of independence. Just appreciate the level of meanness and betrayal: these people were ready to kindle a civil war in their homes, just to save power. No, guys, under the “hand of the Moscow Tsar” is somehow safer, otherwise you have some Julia Caesars from the garbage. And life and then cruelly laughed at the Ukrainian elites: they did lose both power and money.
That is, if the solution of the political crisis from the Russian elites after the 90s is to restore the economy, the state and raise the standard of living for the “ordinary Russian”, then the Ukrainian elites took a different path. That's right: they solved the same problem, but if in Moscow they decided to reduce the level of population discontent, then in Kiev they decided to incite the Ukrainians against the Russians. Here is an unexpected decision. Cynically, you say? Cynically, but in principle, it works up to a certain point. By the way, as in the "civilized" Latvia in 2008 year. Breed two communities between themselves and rise above the fray. Such is the “Eastern European democracy”. What a bold conclusion can be drawn from that the prospects (normal prospects) of these powers are somehow not visible on the horizon. No need for a prosperous country to engage in any nonsense, well, imagine, after the revolution in the United States and the victory in the war of independence, American propaganda poured dozens of years into the ears how bad it was under King George. Just imagine how many generations of American children scare "red uniforms" ...
By the way, this Russophobic trend of Kiev met with a complete understanding in Europe and the USA (for obvious reasons). And after all this, someone there criticizes our diplomacy. But, forgive me, but what could she have done in such a situation? All Ukrainian elites were extremely Russophobic, there was no room for maneuver at all. For example, we begin to promote our ideas through “non-governmental organizations”, and the SBU takes everyone under a tight cap and declares them “agents of the Kremlin”. Against any political activity in Russia, up to such harmless as the hire of feature films, the Kiev Vlada rose a wall. Well, the cinema, the cinema in the working club show ... No, it is impossible. But gas should be cheaper. What kind of political activity was possible in such conditions? How do you imagine that? At the level of underground workers and leaflets? Someone is broadcasting there that, along the lines of Western intelligence agencies, it was necessary to prepare combat groups. Yeah, battle groups. Can you imagine the level of a possible diplomatic scandal? On Bandera with weapons Kiev closed his eyes, that is why they were formed. Nobody would give us that.
On the whole, for moral and ethical reasons, Russia could not make leaps and bounds to prepare a civil war in Ukraine. Not ours is a method. You see, in this situation, we could not win. No, from the word at all. Kiev politicians are completely focused on the West (as well as Kiev intellectuals, as well as business), Ukraine is open for agents of influence of the West wide open, but closed for Russian influence tightly, tremendous efforts are constantly being made to incite Russophobia ... How could Moscow win in such a situation? All efforts of the Ukrainian authorities were aimed at stirring up conflicts with Russia. One of the main reasons: to distract people from economic problems. The shelling of Donbass did not start from scratch: 22 was taught to hate Russians at the official level. And we still have people wondering why it is so difficult to communicate with Ukrainians on the Internet. And everything is quite simple - it is not accidental and it is the result of a serious state policy. It is clear that in Russia there was nothing like this and could not be (Russia is a civilized European state). That is why for Russians the exorbitant level of cruelty shown by Kiev in the Donbas was a complete surprise. Simply, we lived in another world, a world where the incitement of ethnic hatred is prohibited by law.
In Ukraine, it was the core of public policy. That is why a civil war there was in fact inevitable. It’s just that you have to pay for everything, you also have to pay for solving internal political problems by bleeding different groups of the population. Life is frankly unhappy and impoverished, a mass of disgruntled and indignant, how to merge protest into a safe channel, how to stabilize the situation at least temporarily? And nothing complicated - it is necessary to find a scapegoat. Reception is old as the world. Here he is to blame for everything! Stake him! So, Russophobia, besides the strategic one (the work of “breaking up” two nations), also played a purely tactical role. Who is to blame? Russians! And who else? A kind of "fifty shades of Russophobia." Thus, the Ukrainian "leaders" are not just furious with fat, they saved themselves from popular anger. Right here and now. By the way, our “most faithful ally” is doing something similar. It is not me to kick the father, but just to demonstrate the trend. Well, you need to dodge it so that you can hang your jambs on Russia! Belarus is an independent country, in principle, there is no Crimea and Donbass. Nevertheless, Alexander Rygorych is able to introduce into the domestic political game a "threat from the east." And our dear Baltic leaders somehow manage to redirect part of the anger of the people to Moscow. Although it seems to be - NATO, the EU, what kind of "Moscow" ?? However, contrive.
Just in Ukraine, due to the presence of the Crimea, the Donbass, the Black Sea Fleet and zapadentsev, this was manifested most clearly and vividly. Again, due to the peculiarities of the domestic political situation, it is extremely difficult if it’s possible at all: in 90, we struggled to survive in this complex world, and no one tried to tell you what kind of bad Belarusians or Ukrainians are. Not before we were there, but in Kiev at that time, work was actively carried out in the direction of national construction and exposing the "wiles of Moscow." Last year 24 moved in very different directions, so the level of hatred on the part of Ukrainians is not clear to us. Approximately, as if someone 20 studied eastern philosophy, and someone did not study, the difference will be stunning, and here: communication with Ukrainians is extremely difficult in principle. Impossible it, no matter how you try. If they had been going to Europe for the 24 years, everything would have been much better, but all this time they had learned to hate Russia. This is the core of the so-called "Ukrainians". That is why, if we had in Kiev, not Chernomyrdin and his ilk, but Talleyrand, all one thing would not have been achieved.
A good commander must understand when victory is impossible in principle. So, Kiev is just such a characteristic case, you cannot win where there is no victory in the set of possible results. All the arguments about the fact that victory is always possible, the main thing to want is the essence of propaganda for ordinary Red Army men. Sometimes you shouldn't even try. Complete dishonesty and “shifting” on the basis of European integration made cooperation with the Ukrainian elites absolutely impossible: they could maliciously squabble among themselves, but they were united by one thing: hatred of Russia. And Russia could not work out the current version of the annihilation of Ukraine for moral and ethical reasons: as a result of the collapse of the Ukrainian statehood, very many people will die (I will not describe it). The position of the West was much more advantageous: the Ukrainians listened to them, their mouths were open, and Berlin / Washington did not have any moral obligations to the Ukrainian people.
As a result, what happened happened: for the sake of obtaining a new market, the same Germans absolutely calmly pushed Ukraine into the abyss of civil war. This is actually not “European integration”, it is colonization. As a rule, when conquering a new colony among the natives, there could be very high losses, up to and including the complete elimination of certain tribes and nations. But none of the Europeans did not stop. No matter how many natives die, it is important to capture a new market / source of raw materials. In principle, now you can even not read the memoirs, you can play a computer toy (strategy) - everything is shown there clearly and vividly. One keystroke ... and no more "recalcitrant Zulus". Frankly speaking, the inadequacy of the Ukrainian citizens and their complete lack of understanding of political realities are driving me to a rage. They are colonized, that is, turned into white slaves of Europeans of the first class, and they jump for joy. That is, the average Ukrainian turned out to be even more stupid than the average Zulu. And if one of the Ukrainians says, and if we don’t like it, then we’ll get out of there, then this, excuse me, is the very case when the entrance is a ruble, and there is no way out for the project.
Gentlemen, you are again confusing the Soviet Union and the British Empire. From the USSR, Ukraine came out without a single shot and with a flourishing modern economy. But the path of Ireland to freedom was much more thorny ... and modern production after going out there was not found. No, they were, but more somehow in Britain itself. The meaning of the coup was the colonization of the lands of Ukraine and the transformation of Ukrainians into a herd of obedient "Euro-slaves". And only the latest fool can believe that you can exit this system of your own free will. “Listen, master, I no longer work for you, I want to be free!” - so what? Guys - now you are the property! That is, the question of how many Ukrainians will perish in the course of “Euro-colonization” and what the living standard will be there according to the results, did not seriously bother anyone in Berlin / Brussels. Do you think that the British were very concerned about the colonization of India?
Again and again: Ukrainians will certainly become part of Greater Europe, this is true, but in what capacity? At about the same, in which the Indians became part of the British Empire. By the way, many Ukrainians are quite happy with this. And the flag in their hands, but as you understand, discussion with them is basically impossible. They have already made their historical choice. And the more impoverished, terrible and powerless the life of an ordinary Ukrainian will be, the higher will be the degree of anti-Russian propaganda. But simply, not to compare, not to think that another way of life is possible - without poverty, slavery and constant humiliation in front of foreign masters.
So, returning to our sheep, how could we “break” this scenario? If working with elites is impossible in principle, past them too? To enter troops, to occupy the country, to hang out extremists and to restore the economy? I assure you, we would face frank hatred, sabotage and guerrilla war (for freedom!). And complete international isolation. To unleash a bloody civil war in Ukraine? Moral aspect? We are not Germans, by golly, to create such lewdness. Yes, that same war has already begun and a lot of more blood is shed there. But at least we are not responsible for this. No matter how the political map is laid down, the population of Ukraine will have to be greatly reduced. Just in fact: Ukraine is a post-apocalyptic country, where the economy has been destroyed, even without nuclear weapons. The situation is actually very serious - it will only get worse, worse and worse. Up to complete collapse. But we are not responsible for this - the Maidan cookies were baked not in Moscow.
Why did I talk about the moral horizon of events? And precisely here lies the reason for our “failure”. In the absence of mass support within Ukraine and with the complete "frostbite" of our European and overseas opponents, we could not win. Once again: I am not ready to take moral responsibility for the mass extinction of Ukrainians. Unlike the average German, for whom the question is how much sales of German goods and his personal standard of living will increase as a result of Ukraine’s “accession”. And Europeans in case of failure, in principle, can act with Ukraine without special regrets, as with Libya - just quit dying on the sidelines. “As a result of Russian aggression, this country erases a miserable existence” - such will be the leitmotif of European News. “Putin destroyed the European dreams of this country by launching a hybrid war against her,” - somehow somehow everything will be voiced by the TV hosts. Why am I so pessimistic and what is this “mass death"? It's very simple - who else in 2013 could predict the shelling of the Donbass? It seemed fantastic. But every single day people perish there. 2 years soon. And for these 2 damn years, I have not noticed in Ukraine any Minins and Pozharsky, no Scharnhorsts and Kosciuszko. The country is no longer on the verge of destruction, it is “abroad”. But not a single Ukrainian patriot is in a hurry to save her ... So Ukraine is doomed, and we cannot be bigger Ukrainians than the Ukrainians themselves.
I know that many Ukrainians and Belarusians will say in response: but you also have fascists / nationalists there who organize marches and attack Tajiks. There is, how not to be, there are fascists, and ultras, and just scumbags. But there is a fundamental difference: the Russian state has not flirted with them, is not flirting and is not going to flirt. For him, it is either offenders or potential criminals. Underground, in short. Feel the difference. In a free society, which, of course, is modern Russia, there are a variety of social / anti-social movements. Or do you want to ban everything and give everyone the same pants? The point is not in the presence of such extremists, but in a hostile attitude towards them from the official authorities of the Russian Federation. They will never be "their" for Russian officials. Their lot is the lot of the marginals. They will never make a bet. The Nashists were anyone but nationalists. When they were. There is a difference in the social structure: a resident of Ukraine or Belarus thinks that any organized political group should be supported / receive permission “from the very top”. They have no other way. Gentlemen, alas, here in Russia is "different." And if you see a column of demonstrators marching through the streets of Moscow, for example, with imperial flags, this does not mean that Putin gave the go-ahead. This is the same freedom to her.