Atlantic geo-strategists have evidently miscounted relying on the power of their arms, information assets and money. The people in the East especially in the Caucasus respect the force but more that the force they respect the justice. In August, the Russia’s conduct was just, and therefore it again has won respect and recognition in the East, and has re-gained its legal right to be treated at least as a regional super power. In response to the Georgian aggression Russia had to take adequate measures. Should it fail to do it, the consequences for the country and for the entire post-Soviet area would be actually disastrous.
Today the continent of Eurasia became a main arena of conflict of interests of the world civilizations. It is a home-land of five of seven world civilizations (Confucianism, Hinduism, Islam, West Christianity and Slav Orthodox Christianity), which amount to a majority of the mankind. Eurasia is a land of main global natural resource deposits and key strategic communication and trade routes. Now Eurasia is becoming a field of a global standoff, which is still it cradle. 80 per cent of all world conflicts take place in Eurasia. In so doing, a majority of them is provoked from outside. The situation is aggravated by the fact that several Eurasian states already have weapons of mass destruction while others will have it in the nearest future.
The exacerbation of the geopolitical standoff in and around of the largest continent is observed against the background of natural geo and climatic cataclysms and disasters that affect many countries of the world. Due to these and other factors Eurasia continues to be the most attractive and inviting object of the global politics. So, we witness deployment of a real geopolitical battle for the control over the continent. The post-Soviet area is in the focus of this conflict of world civilizations. An undeclared war for the Soviet legacy aggravated immediately after the USSR collapse, and by today it has escalated so much that it has led to unprecedented international tension, which was never observed since the Cold War.
The gravest threat to the Eurasian stability and security is posed by the USA and Great Britain, which do their utmost to change the geopolitical configuration of the state and political forces there and establish their control over the resources of the continent, its communications and key states of Eurasia. Having achieved a certain success in the Balkans, Middle East, Central Asia and the Caucasus, the United States and United Kingdom endeavor to disable and neutralize the geopolitical capabilities of the leading states of the continent, first of all, of China, Russia, Germany and Iran. They made a bridgehead in Iraq and prepare to advance to Iran.
According to the Euro-Atlantic plans with respect to Central Asia the countries that currently trending toward Russia should be taken under control of the USA. If such policy with respect to the Central Asian republics of the former USSR is successful a ring around Iran that includes Afghanistan would close, and the United States would be in position to conduct a prompt military operation against any state of the region including Iran and Pakistan. But the key target of the Euro-Atlantic geo-strategy is behind the hill, it is China that became “a world factory of consumer goods” and actually lays claim to be a world superpower. The shortest way to China runs through the states of Central Asia and Tibet, which geographically adjoins this region and which is destabilized with separatist sentiments in favor of cessation from China.
Simultaneously, the plans of Atlantic strategists imply geopolitical reformatting of the entire Central Asian and Middle-East regions, re-establishment and establishemnt of earlier unrecognized and never existing states in the world map - Kurdistan, Belujistan, Pushtunistan, etc. Such geopolitical processes in the huge continent of Eurasia are to be inspired by destabilization and inspiration of chaos in the vast region.
The August war in the Caucasus, in which Russia defeated Georgia, and especially on-going information hysteria around this event to a great extent discovered and stripped all these geo-strategic projects of the West with respect to the largest continent of the world. According to the Atlantic geo-strategists “Blitzkrieg” in South Ossetia was a kind of presentation to the world public of a new Oriental “road map” to achieve geostrategic objectives. In this “road map” strategic goals of the neo-globalism are achieved thru small puppet states. And it is not incidentally that it was “today’s Georgia” that was selected “a key state”. According to the plans of the Western strategists Georgia was capable of exploding the situation in the entire post-Soviet area, and disabling the regional super powers and first of all Russia. In so doing, the specific traditional historical and cultural Russian-Georgian relations including almost one million-Georgian Diaspora in Russia were planned to be used in case of Georgia’s success in South Ossetia to destabilize the situation in the multi-national regions of Russia, and first of all in the North Caucasus, and inspire ethnic hatred in the Russian megalopolises.
Besides, Georgia may be regarded as the most important geostrategic outpost to ensure blockade of Iran. With its trans-Caucasus communications, airfields and sea ports it plays not only a military strategic role. If Russia had lost that conflict, the politics of all states in the region would have changed, and their pro-American drift would have become more obvious. According to experts, Azerbaijan would have automatically passed under full control of the USA. In this situation, Armenia would have hardly remained allied to Russia. The military success of Georgia would have provoke new escalation of the situation in the North Caucasus, and first of all in Dagestan, Ingushetia and Chechnya. The destabilization in the entire North Caucasus might have provoked exacerbation of the situation in the Volga Region and Crimea.
As the Georgian aggression failed the situation has changed. Today the use of military force against Iran is rather questionable while in case of Russia’s defeat in Ossetia and Abkhazia the situation would have been much more favorable. Meanwhile, it is necessary to understand it well that the military strike on Iran or any other state of the region is still on the agenda. There is no need to forget that America became a main world debtor. And it cannot repay its debt (i.e. trillions of Dollars) because it is impossible to do physically.
The current world financial crisis convincingly confirms that the deadline of collapse of the United States as a world financial center and key instrument of the global policy may be postponed only by a new war. It means that a forceful action against Iran or any other state is inevitable. Americans are not flexible – if they chopped at somebody, they will hit sooner or later. And they have already chopped. Furthermore true masters of the USA (say, shareholders of America LLC) do not care too much about any probable disastrous consequences for common Americans. For sure, the tycoons of the world finance have already found a new territory and other population to incorporate a new LLC with other name. After the US collapse they will make this new Empire-State to pursue their policy of neo-globalism by using “a carrot and stick”, and impose “with fire and sword” a new world order, in which only a few nations will remain civilized while all others will be doomed to degeneration and failure.
In this situation, when the self-preservation and survival of the unique Russian civilization is challenged, Russia has no other option but concentrate its efforts on its own internal problems and consolidate itself in the political, economic and into-cultural aspects, strengthen its statehood, security and defense, simultaneously reinforcing its positions in the international arena. And there is nothing new in it. This approach is predetermined by the historical logic of establishing and development of Russia as a subject of the global politics. All Russian leaders had to take these steps including Russian Kings, Tsars, Emperors and CPSU General Secretaries. Otherwise we saw hard times, chaos, devastation and disintegration.
In spite of the fact that Russia managed to restrain the aggressor mostly due to the military action, nowadays decisive geopolitical battles are fought by the effective use of information and conceptual weapons. We saw it well that the final victory in the Caucasus was won in the battlefield of the information warfare when the balance was swinging from right to left. Look at the “alignment” of the American media outlets during the war in Georgia. While in Russia, we again witnessed shots in the back by certain central media outlets as they did it recently during the Chechen war. Actually it is true that due to the Western information support and “pinpoint” anti-Russian conceptual operations Georgia was in position to compete more or less with Russia worldwide. It is not incidentally that today when a profile of the information conflict is high enough many people still ask a question who was a winner in the August war in the Caucasus?
Meanwhile it is evident that Russia at least is not a loser. Moreover, the August war returns the country to its accustomed channel of historical development. The entire national history convincingly confirms that the country revived and strengthened its positions worldwide only thru military victories. As the Russian wisdom tells us: Russians would never survive if they did not die fighting for their freedom and independence, for the right to live in accordance with their own traditions, speak their native language, possess and dispose their own natural resources. The best representatives of the nation sacrificed themselves in the war to clear the way to the power for the patriotic forces advocating the strong state, it was a war-time when usually there was a reshuffle of the Russian elite. Nowadays, during the Caucasus war that part of the elite stood out, which promotes the ideas of patriotism, revival, orientation of the country to its own forces, to its national interests and self-sufficient economy. It is the most important internal outcome of the August conflict in the Caucasus. The West understands it well. Our geopolitical opponents are losing chances to contain the natural geopolitical ambitions of Russia.
It is the reason of the severe reaction to the Russia’s actions on the side of such Atlantic hawks as Condoleezza Rice, John McCain, and others. It is also a reaction to the success of Russia in changing the situation in the post-Soviet area in its favor and preventing its isolation worldwide. Russia is breaking out through the geopolitical trammels into the new expanses of international politics. The well-known statement of Condoleezza Rice is a relapse of the Cold War. It was made to shake up the allies of the USA and Great Britain, again “line them up” and demonstrate to the world public the readiness of Washington to go all the way in its geostrategic plans.
Russia may be and should be ready to such developments. Its actions in the Caucasus were necessary. It was not in the interests of Russia to enter these territories, moreover to recognize new states of the Caucasus. We have received enclaves with complicated political, economic and ethnic-religious environment in close vicinity of our southern border. Besides, Russia today remains rather vulnerable state. We failed at the arms race in the Soviet time, and now we cannot afford to be drawn into a new arms race. We must timely and adequately respond to the global challenges and threats, and be proactive in response to our geopolitical opponents. We won in Abkhazia and Ossetia, but this victory may become a Pyrrhic one, if saying “A” we will fail to say “B” and put the dot in the current Caucasus conflict.
Today our regional opponents, in particular, Turkey (a NATO member-state) expressly claims that it is ready to dominate in the Caucasus region, in new enclaves, and in particular, in Abkhazia. What is the guarantee that NATO will not strengthen its positions in Abkhazia thru Ankara? And what will be the conduct of Abkhazia itself? In case of undesirable developments, neither the recognition of the new states, nor the treaties concluded with them including the military ones will be an efficient remedy. If new offshore companies are established in the Caucasus, as dreamed by Sukhum, and the economy in the enclaves is opened to the world market forces, it will be very difficult to predict new processes and vectors of capital, trade and business there. Actually establishment of offshore companies never implies sufficient police control. The history confirms that the Soviet Union it its time failed to keep the political situation in certain its overseas territories under its control in spite of even its military presence for example in the East European countries.
Today Russia should actively control the situation not only in Abkhazia and South Ossetia but also in other regions adjacent to its southern border to prevent negative processes there. The point is that the situation in the Transcaucasia is closely bound up with that in the Middle East and Central Asia. We should understand that as soon as the United States is involved in Kurdistan, the situation will immediately change in the vast region of Middle East and Central Asia, the areas of compact settlement of the Kurds, including Iran, Iraq, Syria, Turkey and Transcaucasia. It is important to avoid the situation when our objective ally, the Kurds, would work under the plans and in the interests of our geopolitical opponents. The same relates to the Baluchi in Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan, the Pashtuns in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Russia should not be scared to work with the countries, which are associated with international challenges and threats.
For instance, today there is no urgent need to help Americans in their war against Talibs. Meanwhile under agreements with NATO we still render assistance to the United States in Afghanistan, in particular, we provide transport corridors and certain other military-technical services. Simultaneously the threats and challenges emanating from this region are not decreasing but increasing. Drug trafficking from Afghanistan to Russia has radically increased likewise the illegal migration; the threat of Islamic extremism remains urgent, etc. And all such developments are not in the interests of Russia.
This situation looks similar to the recent developments in the Balkans when Russia under an agreement with the USA and its NATO allies sent its peacekeepers to Bosnia and Herzegovina and in fact tied hands of the Serbs in the Serb Republic. As a matter of fact our military presence itself held out hope to Serbs that everything is done correctly in the interests of the Serb Republic and Belgrade. Meanwhile, Yugoslavia was butchered alive. Thus, Russia helped to the West to solve its problems and lost its good positions in the Balkans. The today’s situation in Afghanistan is similar to that in the Balkans. Yet the people there like in Serbia still have friendly attitude to Russia.
It’s high time to act exclusively in our own national interests. Let us recall that ten years ago when Talibs started moving northwards, all Central Asian republics, which earlier looked away from Russia, simultaneously turned their faces toward Moscow asking for its help. It means that we must actively work in Afghanistan with all forces, and first of all, with Talibs who represent the 20-million Pashtun population. We have ignored this important factor since the time of the Soviet military presence in Afghanistan where the Pashtuns are a majority of the population. That time the USSR put its stake on national minorities, the Uzbeks and Tajiks, however the internal political situation every time was stuck in the Pashtun problem. We have to understand that they are the major and well-organized part of the Afghan population, and they live under their own “code of honor”, Pashtunwalai, rather than Islamic laws. De-facto, the state of Pashtuns likewise the state of Kurds exists in the territory of two countries, Pakistan and Afghanistan. Pashtuns do not recognize the Durand Line that split the Pashtun tribes. It is not incidentally that the actual ruling regime in Kabul closely allied to the USA is gravely concerned with “a Pashtun problem”.
So, we have to reasons to ignore “the Pashtun factor”. We should actively communicate and cooperate with the Pashtuns including Talibs. In my opinion, emergence of a new state, Pashtunistan, in this region would only strengthen the positions of Russia there. In so doing, as distinct from the multinational structures Russia in this territory needs stability rather than controlled chaos. Therefore we need to support a certain hierarchy, comparability of interests of all states. It is not incidentally that the Russian President emphasized the need of a new approach to building of a new world order. And we have to start it from Eurasia. What’s wrong with it, if Russia would propose to establish an international collective security force of a UN-force type but in Eurasia, and thus to start a dialogue between the East and West but without the USA?
Exacerbation of the situation at the Caucasus border of Russia has a direct impact on the entire post-Soviet area. A problem that causes particular concern is a political crisis in Ukraine. Deep involvement of official Kyev in the Caucasus conflict left its mark on it. The political and diplomatic support, arms shipments and at last information on direct participation of Ukrainians in the combat activities on the side of the Georgian troops could not be ignored. For the first time in the modern history the Russian-Ukrainian relations escalated to the maximum. And it is quite logical that Russian Premier Vladimir Putin expressly claimed at his meeting with Ukrainian Premier Julia Timoshenko that a crime has been perpetrated with respect to the relationship of the two nations.
Today Russia for the first time declared its intention to act “in a mirrored manner” and adequately. And it is correct. As a matter of fact our unjustified advances to Ukrainian establishment representatives, ill-considered signing and extension of the inter-state treaty, and finally sponsorship of the Ukrainian statehood in prejudice to the interests of Russia led to complete failure of our foreign policy toward the neighbor fraternal country. Moreover, the toothless Russian policy and political correctness were perceived all these years by Russia’s enemies as its weakness that provoked there severe opposition to Moscow and simultaneously caused dissatisfaction of the pro-Russian forces in Ukraine. The vacuum created after pumping-out of the Russian influence was promptly filled by our geopolitical opponents and first of all by the USA.
We cannon bear with it any longer. The elites in Russia, Ukraine and Byelorussia too should at last understand the need of mutual and joint responsibility for the destiny of the fraternal nations. Otherwise the consequences for them could be fatal. Today it is evident that the Crimea and Sevastopol may become “a booster” for permanent escalation of the Russian-Ukrainian relations. They are the most vulnerable points to be affected easily. We already read in press about plans to separate the Crimea by the Cyprus model. It may happen that neither Ukraine nor Russia will have the Crimea. Moreover, “the Crimea crisis” may inspire disintegration of Ukraine, and radically weaken the positions of Russia in the Black Sea basin where we already observe military presence of the USA and its NATO allies.
Active influence on the situation in Ukraine implies primarily all-out efforts to support generation of respectful pro-Russian forces. In so doing, it is very important to avoid any use-of-force scenarios in Ukraine. It is wise to actively work with the Crimea Tatars in the peninsular. Meanwhile now we do nothing in this direction yet we have good opportunities to exert influence on them here in Russia. Our trade and economic, information and humanitarian assets are a powerful reserve of the Russian’s influence. Within the framework of close cooperation between the Cambers of Commerce and Industry of Russia and Ukraine our businessmen could achieve much better success that politicians. In this connection, a special significance is of Economic Forum Ukraine-Russia – Cooperation in Innovations and Investments to be held in Kyev. And finally it’s high time to abandon the Russian toothless diplomacy in Kyev.
The Union State of Byelorussia and Russia plays a special role in consolidation of the post-Soviet area and restoration of the region’s geopolitical significance. It is important to avoid the situation when the Republic of Belarus, which in fact is the sole reliable ally of Moscow and a kind of “an open corridor” between Europe and Russia thru “the Baltic-to-Black-Sea sanitary cordon” would become involved in any anti-Russian plans. To this end, it is necessary to additionally boost the process of Union-State building. The recent visit of the Head of the Russian Government to Minsk and his talks with the top leaders of Byelorussia, as well as the results of the Union Government meeting are encouraging. After emergence of new independent states South Ossetia and Abkhazia, which are also supported by Minsk, it would be wise to place a question about their membership in the Union State on the agenda. Thus, we can pave the way to establishment of an actual Eurasian union that may be attractive not only to CIS states but also to other states of Eurasia.
As for the prospects of closer integration in the post-Soviet area, much depends on Russia. The sooner the country gets out of the Western influence, consolidates its the multinational and polyconfessional society, and restores its economy, culture and military power, the more attractive Russia will be to other states for integration. I would like to hope that this time is not far off.
