Igor Panarin: “God forbid war tomorrow, but our army is ready for this”

A well-known polit­ic­al ana­lyst on how Putin was sent an “otvetku” for the throne of the Byz­antine emper­or and what is behind the “yel­low vests” in France


Eng­land is destabil­iz­ing the world in order to dis­rupt the imple­ment­a­tion of the Chinese pro­ject “One Belt — One Way”, which intends to unite the mar­kets of the PRC, the Rus­si­an Fed­er­a­tion and Europe, said Igor Panar­in, pro­fess­or and head of the InfoS­pet­snaz asso­ci­ation. The fact that con­nects the pres­id­ent of France Mac­ron with the Masons and the Roth­schilds, why Putin has no one to go to except Met­ro­pol­it­an Tik­hon Shevkun­ov, and wheth­er Rus­sia can learn not to lose to the Brit­ish, Panar­in told in an inter­view with BUSINESS Online.

Igor Panar­in believes that Eng­land is destabil­iz­ing the world in order to dis­rupt the imple­ment­a­tion of the Chinese pro­ject “One Belt — One Way”, which intends to unite the mar­kets of the PRC, the Rus­si­an Fed­er­a­tion and Europe.

 Nationally oriented French capital changed into yellow vests”

- Igor Nikolayevich, one of the high­lights of the end of 2018 was the revolu­tion of the “yel­low vests” in France.Some even began to talk about the decline of the Fifth Repub­lic and the begin­ning of the Sixth. Who, in your opin­ion, is the main tar­get of this revolu­tion and what forces stand behind it? Do the French protests have “extern­al reas­ons”, as they say in Europe, blam­ing it on the US or on Rus­sia?

- I think that the reas­ons for the French protests are mostly intern­al. To begin with, in France, a split has long been brew­ing. Let us recall the fam­ous nov­el “The Mosque of Notre Dame” by Elena Chudinova, which modeled some of the scen­ari­os that began to be real­ized later in the fantasy genre ( the nov­el takes place in 2048, when Europe, accord­ing to the author, is com­pletely cap­tured by Muslim migrants — Ed. ). Indeed, the flow of refugees from North Africa and the Middle East, Afric­ans and Arabs besieging the Old World, has reached appalling pro­por­tions. It was evid­ent 8 or 10 years ago — I remem­ber my impres­sion of the “col­or” Par­is, when the prob­lem of migrants enter­ing Europe seemed to have not seemed so acute.

For a long time, the “yel­low vests” did not express any spe­cif­ic require­ments, although it was clear to every­one that the mere increase in gas­ol­ine prices could hardly pro­voke such large-scale unrest. Finally, 25 demands appeared in open access, which Prot­est­ants make to their gov­ern­ment. What do we see? Yes, there are a lot of eco­nom­ic require­ments related to salar­ies, pen­sions and taxes — up to the call to remove radars from the roads as a form of “veiled tax”. But there are loud polit­ic­al demands — for example, France’s with­draw­al from the EU and NATO. And it helps us under­stand the 2018 revolu­tion and integ­rate it into the gen­er­al con­text of French his­tory.

Recall that the riots of 1968 (the so-called “Red May” — ed. ) In France were a response to the actions of the then Pres­id­ent Charles de Gaulle. By the way, the Soviet Uni­on did not sup­port them, and it is com­pletely wrong, as I believe. It was one of the stra­tegic mis­takes of the USSR — if it had not been, the story could have gone dif­fer­ently. And in the mid-1960s, de Gaulle deman­ded the return of gold giv­en to the United States under the Mar­shall Plan in exchange for these “green candy wrap­pers,” as he called dol­lars. In fact, the French pres­id­ent pro­posed to aban­don the use of the dol­lar in inter­na­tion­al pay­ments and once again return to the gold stand­ard. “Gold does not change its nature: it can be in bars, bars, coins; it has no nation­al­ity, it has long been accep­ted by the whole world as a con­stant value, ”de Gaulle declared then. Thereby he actu­ally pushed the Bretton Woods sys­tem to its first col­lapse in 1971–1973.

But there was anoth­er blow that the French lead­er struck Amer­ica after the Second World War. Few people now remem­ber that the headquar­ters of NATO was pre­vi­ously loc­ated not in Brus­sels, but in Par­is. When I was in Par­is, I looked at this build­ing (known as the Chail­lot Palace, built in 1937) — not far from the Rus­si­an embassy there. But Charles de Gaulle insisted that in 1967 the headquar­ters of the North Atlantic Alli­ance moved from Chail­lot to Brus­sels.This indic­ated that the French Pres­id­ent had begun a nation­ally ori­ented course. There­fore, the events of 1968 with their out­er shell of the “stu­dent revolt” were in fact dir­ec­ted per­son­ally against de Gaulle and against the inde­pend­ent course of France.

What is hap­pen­ing now? My point of view on mod­ern French events (although not enough inform­a­tion) is that they are dia­met­ric­ally opposed to the unrest of the 68th year. Oppos­ite from the point of view of the vec­tor: this is an attempt to return to de Gaulle and nation­al sov­er­eignty, the nation­al state, to aban­don the extern­al frame­work of the EU and NATO, which are again gov­erned by the Anglo-Sax­ons. Moreover, there was inform­a­tion that among the “yel­low vests” the demand for Trump is grow­ing. About this, Don­ald Trump him­self wrote with a cer­tain naiv­ety in his Twit­ter: “They are chant­ing:“ We need Trump! ”I love France. They want me! ”But the point is prob­ably not in Trump him­self, but in those mod­els and sym­bols that are asso­ci­ated with him.

They say about the extraordin­ary organ­iz­a­tion of “yel­low vests.” I would not exclude an organ­iz­a­tion­al factor here, of course, but with­in French. Let me remind you that Emmanuel Mac­ron came to the pres­id­ency in 2017 almost from nowhere and was com­pletely unpre­pared for his role. This is a fully Brit­ish protégé, a pro­tege of Lon­don bankers, who is inten­ded for extern­al con­trol and for stalling France. And he car­ries out this mis­sion, without rep­res­ent­ing him­self per­son­ally. About two years ago ( in June 2016 — ed. ) Mac­ron openly atten­ded a meet­ing of the fam­ous mason­ic organ­iz­a­tion “Great East of France”. This took place in the temple of Arthur Grouse (former great mas­ter of the “Great East­ern France” — approx. Ed.). on Cade street in Par­is. Mac­ron was then still in the rank of Min­is­ter of Eco­nomy and Fin­ance and made a report before the Mason­ic broth­ers on the top­ic “Is glob­al­iz­a­tion syn­onym­ous with pro­gress?”. I saw, by the way, this won­der­ful man­sion on Kade Street — beau­ti­ful, entour­age … But what does this con­nec­tion between Mac­ron and the Masons and the Brit­ish say? The fact that he is abso­lutely depend­ent fig­ure. Plus his mor­al char­ac­ter, his con­nec­tion with his own body­guard of Arab­ic ori­gin, all sorts of scan­dals … All this makes the cur­rent own­er of the Elysi­an Palace a fig­ure of rejec­tion among the major­ity of the French pop­u­la­tion. Yes, with the help of cer­tain tech­no­lo­gic­al chains, he was helped to come to power, but the feel­ing of rejec­tion to this man is grow­ing against the back­ground of his withered wife, against his tricks with body­guards, against the back­ground of orgies in the Elysee Palace, which the people see, and against the back­ground of vari­ous non-tra­di­tion­al cur­rents that have received rap­id devel­op­ment under Mac­ron. At the same time, the liv­ing stand­ards of the French deteri­or­ated sharply, and the struggle of the nation­ally ori­ented French cap­it­al with the Roth­schilds, primar­ily with the Lon­don bankers, began. This was expressed, as I see it, in the move­ment of “yel­low vests.” This is not just street com­mo­tion — it is the struggle of nation­al cap­it­al with inter­na­tion­al, primar­ily Brit­ish, cap­it­al. And it is no coin­cid­ence that the French are talk­ing about Trump — they have their own, French Trump, not yet. Mar­ine Le Pen on this role does not pull …

- I just wanted to ask about it. It is known that Mar­ine Le Pen sup­ports the “yel­low vests” move­ment, although her voice in the protests that swept France has so far not been heard.

- She, in my opin­ion, has dis­cred­ited her­self. That is, she is clearly not Trump, although they said when there was a tough struggle between her and Mac­ron in the second round of the pres­id­en­tial elec­tion that she looked like him. And Jean-Luc Mélen­chon (deputy to the French Nation­al Assembly, took 4th place in the pres­id­en­tial elec­tion of 2017) is also, in gen­er­al, not Trump. Per­haps Mac­ron would have fled to Eng­land long ago, but the “yel­low vests” do not have a worthy politi­cian, there is no French Trump. There is a strong pop­u­lar dis­con­tent, but its energy sec­tor can­not take the shape of a polit­ic­al fig­ure, which could have replaced Mac­ron in the wake of protests. Per­haps such a per­son will appear. I do not exclude that he is being pro­tec­ted for the time being — not only from par­ti­cip­a­tion in bar­ri­cade battles, but also from pos­sible dis­cred­it. I am not a con­nois­seur of France, and I can­not judge it fully, but so far such a fig­ure has not appeared on the sur­face.

In the recent past, the French had such a fig­ure — this is the former man­aging dir­ect­or of the IMF, Domi­n­ique Strauss-Kahn. He was a really strong dom­in­ant polit­ic­al fig­ure, but a pro­voca­tion was organ­ized against him, allegedly con­nec­ted with the har­ass­ment of the Afric­an-maid, and brought him out of the polit­ic­al sphere. We remem­ber well this story, which ended in noth­ing: the woman admit­ted that she was lying. How­ever, Strauss-Kahn as a politi­cian had already put up a cross. He was “removed” pre­vent­ively.

 Yel­low vests” are smart guys: remem­ber­ing this les­son, they under­stand that it is impossible to dis­play a strong fig­ure ahead of time for every­one to see. The snipers’ law will work right away: either NATO or the Brit­ish will try to defame the new lead­er. Mac­ron is still the pres­id­ent of France, and it is not known when he will run away and wheth­er he will run away at all. So that there is no pro­voca­tion and strikes on a strong fig­ure, it is pos­sible that they simply do not take it to the first line, but wait for the pen­du­lum from the Fifth Repub­lic to swing to the Sixth. And then the “French Trump” will appear, but object­ively, of course, there is a need not in the “French Trump”, but in the mod­ern de Gaulle. For Rus­sia, it would be great if a new de Gaulle stood at the head of France, which would be aimed at the excel­lent rela­tions between Par­is and Moscow. This would be the best way out for us from the chaos into which French soci­ety plunged. I do not exclude that the “yel­low vests” have some kind of “ambush regi­ment” togeth­er with the new ver­sion of de Gaulle. Some­times they call the names of a num­ber of French olig­archs, they or not they — I do not know. But I am con­vinced that this time the nation­ally ori­ented French cap­it­al has changed into “yel­low vests”.

It couldn’t have been a proving such a large-scale unrest. ”Photo: © Irina Kalashnikova, RIA NovostiBy the way, when Macro in Argen­tina at the air­port ( dur­ing the G20 Sum­mit -approx. Ed. ) Was met only by air­port work­ers in “yel­low vests”, I think it was not an acci­dent. In Rus­sia, few people know and under­stand the spe­cif­ics of Argen­tina.Every­one thinks that this is a kind of Span­ish coun­try, but this is not entirely true. I have been there sev­er­al times and made sure that the Itali­ans and French are equally in Argen­tina, and the Span­iards are only in third place. And there are a lot of former French, eth­nic, and not only on the fact of cit­izen­ship. There­fore, I do not exclude that Macron’s loneli­ness at the air­port of Buenos Aires and his first encounter with “yel­low vests” may be part of a cer­tain transat­lantic game.

- But will France be giv­en the oppor­tun­ity to become free from the dic­tates of NATO and Amer­ica? She is, in essence, alone on the European con­tin­ent.

I told you about the optim­ist­ic scen­ario.” But there are few real chances — after all, Nic­olas Sarkozy had viol­ated de Gaulle’s prin­ciple and brought France into the mil­it­ary organ­iz­a­tion. Of course, sur­roun­ded on all sides, the coun­try is unlikely to achieve com­plete inde­pend­ence. But we see that “yel­low vests” appeared in Bel­gi­um. Wheth­er this wave will go on is a big ques­tion. Of course, the intern­al block­ing mech­an­isms will take effect. There will be tough oppos­i­tion to the nation­ally ori­ented course of France, regard­less of who will stand in its head.

 BREXIT is like the Mexican wall of Donald Trump: England wants to isolate itself from dying Europe”

- On March 29, the upcom­ing 2019, the so-called Brexit is sched­uled . Already in Janu­ary, a vote will be held in the Brit­ish Par­lia­ment, and, if it is suc­cess­ful, the divorce of Great Bri­tain with the Old World will be inev­it­able.Wheth­er Brexit , in your opin­ion? And what con­sequences will this lead to?

-   In the case of Brexit, a rather tricky and at the same time simple Brit­ish com­bin­a­tion is seen. She sug­gests that the flow of immig­rants from Europe to Eng­land will decrease or be reduced to zero. At the same time, on the con­trary, even more refugees are sup­posed to be sent to Europe, as far as it is gen­er­ally pos­sible under the UN glob­al migra­tion pact. Now the Balt­ics are begin­ning to rebel, feel­ing that a gen­er­al migra­tion wave has hung over it. What can we say about the big European coun­tries … But in the eyes of Eng­land it is just a blow to the com­pet­it­ors. At the same time, all trade and eco­nom­ic pref­er­ences of Lon­don remain. That is such a simple plan: let migrants go to com­pet­it­ors, let them spend resources on their main­ten­ance, let the refugees burn cars there and destabil­ize the situ­ation. This will all help the Brit­ish elim­in­ate their eco­nom­ic rivals in Europe. And the Brit­ish, by con­trast, are pro­tec­ted by an iron fence from migrants, but in eco­nom­ic terms there is no fence. I would regard the whole idea of Brexit.

The flow of migrants to the UK is also quite high — it is not sur­pris­ing that they felt a cer­tain threat. And now the Brit­ish are try­ing to block it with the power of this com­bin­a­tion, while at the same time pre­serving the pref­er­ences through North­ern Ire­land and oth­er dir­ec­tions. Brexit is designed as a block, as a kind of Mex­ic­an wall by Don­ald Trump. The Amer­ic­an pres­id­ent, too, put­ting a wall on the bor­der with Mex­ico, main­tains eco­nom­ic ties with it. The Brit­ish came up with this man­euver a little earli­er: they verbally cri­ti­cize Trump, but in fact they began to build the wall between them­selves and the rest of the world first. The usu­al cun­ning.

- That is, con­tin­ent­al Europe, in the eyes of the Brit­ish, is a sink­ing ship sent to loot­ing migrants. A Brit­ish gen­tle­men at this time peace­fully smoking by the fire­place.

- Yes, but they want to take goods from a sink­ing ship, until it sinks to the bot­tom, at a dis­count. That is, to keep the rela­tion­ship as in the good old days.

- But the Brit­ish are still Europeans too. Do not they feel sorry for Europe?

- In fact, they are throw­ing Europe. In Ger­many, every sixth cit­izen is already eth­nic­ally non-Ger­man. Last year alone, 800,000 new refugees arrived here, two years ago a mil­lion. Ger­many is not such a big coun­try: 89 mil­lion people. This is not such a gigant­ic num­ber to accept a mil­lion new­comers a year who do not want to work and are not going to, but are plan­ning to live on social bene­fits and cre­ate a crim­in­al envir­on­ment there. At the same time, they are guar­an­teed social bene­fits of 350 euros, tem­por­ary hous­ing, etc. That is, the Ger­man gov­ern­ment is forced to simply return approx­im­ately 350 mil­lion euros. How long will Ger­many sur­vive?

I remind you that the main migra­tion ava­lanche has star­ted since 2015. But what was the reas­on? I think that the reas­on lies on the sur­face — in 2013, Beijing pro­claimed the concept of a new eco­nom­ic belt of the Silk Road: “One belt is one way”. It took time for the Brit­ish to real­ize that the goal of the pro­ject was to reach Europe, to the largest European ports like Ham­burg, etc. By and large, link­ing Europe to China on a glob­al time scale. The con­tain­ers along this path will be two to three times faster than where the banker con­trols everything.

When the Brit­ish real­ized what the Chinese pro­ject could turn into, they decided to sac­ri­fice Europe. Say, it’s bet­ter that you don’t get it to any­one, you’ll rather per­ish in migra­tion chaos than we allow it. It is appro­pri­ate to recall the Russo-Japan­ese war of 1904–1905. The Brit­ish fin­anced Japan dur­ing this peri­od. Why? Because in the early 1900s, it was planned to con­nect our Chinese-East­ern Rail­way (at that time the Man­churi­an Road) with Qing­dao, a city that had been handed over to Ger­many by con­ces­sion since 1897. And so the two empires, Kais­er Ger­many and Tsar­ist Rus­sia, planned to carry out, through com­mu­nic­a­tion with Qing­dao, a gigant­ic trans-Euras­i­an pro­ject — and then on to Ber­lin and Ham­burg. 100 years ago! The Brit­ish pre­ven­ted — they organ­ized the Rus­si­an-Japan­ese war. As a res­ult, these plans did not come true.

100 years ago, Rus­sia was num­ber one in this pro­ject, since the Celes­ti­al Empire still remained weak. Roles are chan­ging now. China is num­ber one, Rus­sia is num­ber two and Ger­many is num­ber three. And here again, it’s very use­ful for Lon­don to begin the break­down of Ger­many and the whole of Europe. In all of this, eco­nom­ic interests, the usu­al thirst for profit, are read again. The logic here is oper­at­ive and very simple, it does not think in cat­egor­ies: “what will hap­pen next when Europe dis­ap­pears as a whole?”

- In fact of the mat­ter. Bri­tain is just an archipelago. Is she close to the flam­ing Europe that she can feel safe?

- This is, in fact, the prob­lem: people think in the oper­a­tion­al cat­egor­ies of profit. They believe that they can move to Switzer­land, and then, per­haps, to Hong Kong or any­where else, where they have bunkers.But the glob­al prob­lem lies in the fact that with the depar­ture of Zbig­niew Brzez­in­ski ( died in 2017 — ed. ), There are prac­tic­ally no car­ri­ers of stra­tegic think­ing left in the West. Henry Kis­sing­er is 95 years old, he is unlikely to be able to think con­cep­tu­ally. And today’s ideo­logues have crazy profits that they care about — this is the main thing. And profits will remain, but for a very short peri­od of time — until chaos over­takes them.

“For a long time, the” yel­low vests “did not express any spe­cif­ic require­ments, although it was clear to every­one that the mere increase in gas­ol­ine prices could hardly pro­voke such large-scale unrest” Photo: © Irina Kalash­nikova, RIA Nov­osti

Here I will remem­ber Fath­er Tik­hon Shevkun­ov, who bril­liantly described the death of Byz­an­ti­um ( in his film The Death of an Empire. The Byz­antine Les­son ” — ed.). When a rel­at­ively small Turk­ish army approached the walls of impreg­nable Con­stantinople, almost none of the rich Byz­antine nobil­ity was going to defend the cap­it­al. Very soon they paid for it — they were all cut out phys­ic­ally. This is a very good example of short-sighted­ness. Today’s West­ern mag­nates, chas­ing addi­tion­al profits, do not see that ahead lies the abyss, which in many ways they them­selves dug. And this gap is con­stantly expand­ing. Ques­tion: are these people adequate? It turns out that they first pro­voked the Rus­si­an-Japan­ese war, then plunged human­ity into the First and Second World Wars — and all for the sake of profit in the end. But now the means of destruc­tion are much more power­ful … In my opin­ion, the sense of danger in these people atrophied — and this is a glob­al prob­lem not only for them, but for all of us.

- Trump is often called the lead­er of the white Chris­ti­an major­ity (although it is not known wheth­er it is the major­ity). When you say that Europe has a demand for Trump, do you mean a cer­tain lead­er of the white European pop­u­la­tion that is already con­sidered endangered?

Is Putin too demon­ized for Europe?

- Yes, he is demon­ized. In order to carry out the oper­a­tion of razde­mon­iz­a­tion, time is needed, but not very much of it remains. Demon­iz­a­tion in recent years is delib­er­ately. On the oth­er hand, we could not stand the blow after Putin’s fam­ous trip to Athos — remem­ber when he took a place in a niche inten­ded for Byz­antine emper­ors ( in 2016, in the Athos Church of the Assump­tion of the Blessed Vir­gin Mary, the Pres­id­ent of the Rus­si­an Fed­er­a­tion at the insist­ence of the Greeks took stasidia — the most hon­or­able “Roy­al” place in the cathed­ral — ed.)? After that, we received a series of punches in the con­text of this par­tic­u­lar story. That sym­bol­ic ges­ture did not lead to spir­itu­al move­ment, on the con­trary, we showed weak­ness. I am not talk­ing only about Putin, I mean the Rus­si­an Ortho­dox Church. It is obvi­ous that major stra­tegic mis­takes have been made by us in recent years. And this is not only our, but also the European prob­lem: Trump in Europe seems to have nowhere to appear. But, if, as already said, the French for the time being hide their Trump from pry­ing eyes, then Europe still has a chance for sal­va­tion.

 Part of Putin’s entourage does not pull its leader. Personnel actions are ripe »

Since you men­tioned Putin and Athos, I can­not help ask­ing: is the rup­ture of the Moscow Pat­ri­arch­ate with the Con­stantinople Pat­ri­arch­ate a“ response ”for the imper­i­al“ laurels ”of the Rus­si­an pres­id­ent?

Yes, this is otvetka,” but it was neces­sary to pre­pare for it the very next day after Vladi­mir Putin left Athos. Moreover, the hon­ors rendered to our head of state were sup­por­ted by the Athon­ite broth­er­hood — a glob­al integ­ra­tion and spir­itu­al mod­el was built, rooted in the Byz­antine past. It was neces­sary to build mech­an­isms, but sev­er­al years passed, but almost noth­ing was built. Fath­er Tik­hon, who was the only one who could build some intel­li­gible mod­el, on the con­trary, was sent far from Moscow.

- In Pskov — Met­ro­pol­it­an

- Yeah, well, that Putin went to him in Novem­ber of last year ( the Rus­si­an pres­id­ent vis­ited the Holy Dorm­ition Pskov-Caves Mon­as­tery Novem­ber 18 — Ed.. ). I think this is a very import­ant point. It was Tik­hon Shevkun­ov who was the cen­ter of a cer­tain crys­tal­liz­a­tion — spir­itu­al, intel­lec­tu­al, and Ortho­dox — in Moscow and in Rus­sia as such. There is no oth­er fig­ure besides him. Any­way, we were not able to take a punch. How we will get out of this situ­ation is not very clear yet. Now there are more neg­at­ive scen­ari­os than pos­it­ive ones. But the neg­at­ive scen­ario that was already launched, from my point of view, could have been avoided.

- By the way, Putin began his pres­id­ency in 2000 with a trip to the Pskovo-Pech­ersk Lav­ra. Then there was still alive John Krestyankin, the fam­ous old man. There is even a pic­ture where Putin is cap­tured with him. And there is a legend that it was Kres­ti­ankin who blessed Putin for such a long pres­id­ency. Then, in 2000, the second to the Pres­id­ent of the Rus­si­an Fed­er­a­tion after Yeltsin was very dif­fi­cult — his fate and the fate of the whole coun­try were decided. But why now, after 18 years, Putin vis­ited the same mon­as­tery again? Is he again very dif­fi­cult and needs sup­port?

- To some extent, yes, now is the same turn­ing point as it was in 2000. This is con­nec­ted with the inter­na­tion­al “press­ing” of our coun­try, the tough geo­pol­it­ic­al struggle in the Rus­sia-China-US tri­angle, rivalry for Europe, and intern­al polit­ic­al intrigues. Obvi­ously, some of Putin’s entour­age do not “pull” their lead­er, but the pres­id­ent does not want to get rid of him by his eth­ic­al, intern­al prin­ciples. Dicho­tomy … In March 2018, Putin’s tri­umph in the pres­id­en­tial elec­tion was obvi­ous — more than 76 per­cent. And then fol­lowed a deteri­or­a­tion in atti­tudes towards him in soci­ety, dis­sat­is­fac­tion with tax increases and pen­sion reform. This is a whole tangle of prob­lems. We need to make some turn­ing decisions. And Vladi­mir Vladi­mirovich has long been weigh­ing which way to go. Here, as in a fairy tale, you can go to the right or to the left, the altern­at­ive is sad. For example,in 2015, Putin in a dif­fi­cult situ­ation made a very right decision: I mean the begin­ning of the Syr­i­an anti-ter­ror­ist oper­a­tion. Oth­er­wise, Dam­as­cus would have fallen unequi­voc­ally, and these ter­ror­ist hordes would rush to us. It would be much worse. But Syr­ia was able to hold, man­aged to “work out the army” and pre­pare it for a lar­ger mil­it­ary con­flict. God for­bid war tomor­row, but at least the Rus­si­an armed forces are ready for this. This is the main res­ult of Syr­ia: the ter­ror­ists are des­troyed, the army is ready, and we got a breather.God for­bid war tomor­row, but at least the Rus­si­an armed forces are ready for this. This is the main res­ult of Syr­ia: the ter­ror­ists were des­troyed, the army is ready, and we got a break.God for­bid war tomor­row, but at least the Rus­si­an armed forces are ready for this. This is the main res­ult of Syr­ia: the ter­ror­ists were des­troyed, the army is ready, and we got a break.

It depends on us how we use this res­pite. By the way, sym­bol­ic that Putin traveled last sum­mer to rest in the taiga togeth­er with Defense Min­is­ter Sergei Shoigu and Dir­ect­or of the Fed­er­al Secur­ity Ser­vice Alex­an­der Bort­nikov ( on the Yen­i­sei River in the Repub­lic of Tyva, home­land Shoigu — Ed..). So, after the Kerch incid­ent, I believe that Bort­nikov became the num­ber two fig­ure, and Shoigu num­ber three. In terms of inform­a­tion, the FSB acted with great pro­fes­sion­al­ism, and this instills great­er optim­ism. The Kerch incid­ent is a glob­al pro­voca­tion of a high level, and the FSB not only with­stood it with hon­or, but out­played the organ­izers, worked for five plus. Bort­nikov him­self showed excel­lent organ­iz­a­tion­al skills of a pre­vent­ive nature, and his sub­or­din­ates worked an order of mag­nitude high­er than their coun­ter­parts in the Min­istry of Defense. This is even sur­pris­ing, because the “secur­ity officers” did not have any Syr­i­an three-year exper­i­ence. There­fore, with a tough fight, Vladi­mir Vladi­mirovich will rely on someone. And I hope that he will make the right decision. After all, in addi­tion to the mobil­iz­a­tion path of devel­op­ment, which was shown by Stal­in, in fact,no oth­er choice. Now we are in a situ­ation of 1931, only we have not 10 years ahead, but much less, of course. There­fore, by the way, Putin, speak­ing before United Rus­sia, cov­ertly uttered some phrases from Stalin’s speech in 1931, but in a much softer ver­sion. Their com­mon mean­ing is that if we don’t mobil­ize, we will be crushed (in the mouth of Vladi­mir Putin, it soun­ded as fol­lows: “The world as a whole is in a state of trans­form­a­tion, a very power­ful, dynam­ic­ally devel­op­ing trans­form­a­tion, and if we don’t ori­ent ourselves in time, if we don’t under­stand what we need to do and how, we can fall behind forever” — approx. ed. ).

“We could not stand the blow after Putin’s fam­ous trip to Athos, when he took his place in a niche for the Byz­antine emper­ors. That sym­bol­ic ges­ture did not lead to spir­itu­al move­ment. ”

Unfor­tu­nately, now the geo­pol­it­ic­al power of Rus­sia is in third place, India is catch­ing up with us. In terms of the mil­it­ary poten­tial, everything seems to be quite good for us, in terms of the eco­nomy — weakly, in some oth­er para­met­ers too. For example, in the space sphere “under the able guid­ance” we have rolled back for the first time in recent years.Pre­vi­ously, Rus­sia has always been the lead­er in the num­ber of mis­sile launches, and now we are in third place. This is a tech­no­lo­gic­al defeat. There are many oth­er neg­at­ive factors that are not very cap­able of instilling optim­ism. Need to quickly rebuild. I think some decisions can be made imme­di­ately after the New Year. It is obvi­ous that per­son­nel actions have also matured here. Wheth­er Putin will go to them, I do not know.

They have been wait­ing for these actions from him for a long time and seem to be tired of wait­ing.

- There­fore, Putin and went to his fath­er Tik­hon. In this situ­ation, he no longer has any­one to go to, as I under­stand it.Fath­er Tik­hon bril­liantly knows the story. He stud­ied the death of Byz­an­ti­um in detail, and I hope that he could pass on these les­sons to his high-rank­ing guest.

 There is no analogue of the British cyber brigade in any country in the world. Salisbury, Creaking is their job. ”

I watched your videos on the Kerch incid­ent. There, as our main oppon­ent in these events, you men­tion the 77th Brit­ish Bri­gade. What is this team — please tell us more.

- In fact, this is the offi­cial cyber­bri­gade (77th Bri­gade), num­ber­ing in its ranks about 2 thou­sand people and inten­ded for dis­in­form­a­tion and work in social net­works, Rus­si­an above all. There is no ana­logy to this cyber-form­a­tion in any coun­try of the world, includ­ing in the USA. The Amer­ic­ans are only recruit­ing their own divi­sion with sim­il­ar tasks. UK ahead of every­one. All these Salis­bury, Creaks and oth­er pro­voca­tions are their job. In the same series I should have staked myself and the Kerch incid­ent, but the FSB, as I said, was able to beat them. If the guys have cal­cu­lated those people who have been work­ing pro­fes­sion­ally for sev­er­al years now ( offi­cially the team, also called “Chindits”, was launched in April 2015 — approx. Ed. ), Then this is pos­sible. I should add that in fact this Brit­ish bri­gade man­ages the activ­it­ies of the NATO cyber cen­ter in Tallinn (the so-called cen­ter of excel­lence of the alli­ance on cooper­at­ive cyber defense - ed.) And a sim­il­ar cen­ter in Riga. In fact, this is their advanced point. Here you can add a Brit­ish base on the island of Cyprus. It is also inter­est­ing that, as BBC Rus­si­an Ser­vice repor­ted on Decem­ber 2, sev­er­al mil­it­ary groups from the secret 77th bri­gade of the Brit­ish army are in Ukraine. That is, the NATO chain around Rus­sia is being built on all sides along the bor­ders. There­fore, this is a very dan­ger­ous struc­ture, and it should not be under­es­tim­ated, and the num­ber is very decent — 2 thou­sand sol­diers. In Rus­sia, such form­a­tions, in prin­ciple, no. What we are accused of (the so-called Rus­si­an hack­ers) is done out­side of state struc­tures and in terms of num­bers an order of mag­nitude less. Of course, we need to form sim­il­ar para­mil­it­ary struc­tures, more act­ively pro­mote our pos­i­tion in Europe. It is bene­fi­cial for us that Europe be saved and free from chaos. The plan of Great Bri­tain, about which I spoke above, is a blow not only to China, but also to us.

- Due to what we beat the 77th bri­gade in the his­tory of the Kerch incid­ent?

- The main thing is to anti­cip­ate the inter­pret­a­tion of events. For com­par­is­on: in the offi­cial “Twit­ter” of the RF Min­istry of Defense, the mes­sage about the tragedy of the IL-20 appeared only 14 hours after the Israeli planes pur­pose­fully “framed” our IL-20 under the Syr­i­an air defense sys­tem. By the way, inform­ing about what happened and bring­ing your point of view are two dif­fer­ent things. The appear­ance of inform­a­tion about the incid­ent itself 14 hours after it is absurd.With a huge num­ber of people in the inform­a­tion depart­ment of the Min­istry of Defense, this is all the more strik­ing. The FSB, on the con­trary, made a clear oper­a­tion­al doc­u­ment­a­tion of the entire pro­voca­tion and organ­ized a quick present­a­tion of our agenda and our, Rus­si­an point of view in the media. The tri­umph was that the Euronews tele­vi­sion chan­nel (it is clear that we did not con­trol them) was shown a giant report on Novem­ber 28th. I myself watched it: 70 per­cent of the time there was devoted to our inter­pret­a­tion of the Kerch incid­ent, and only 30 per­cent — anoth­er point of view. Usu­ally, everything is exactly the oppos­ite. And this is only because the FSB was able to cre­ate a favor­able inform­a­tion flow for us. In fact, it happened for the first time. The sys­tem worked, but under the con­trol of the FSB.Under the dir­ec­tion of the Min­istry of Defense and oth­er struc­tures, noth­ing of the kind, unfor­tu­nately, hap­pens.

- I know people from the Min­istry of Defense, I worked with them for a while and I am well aware of their slow reac­tion.

- I myself was in shock: what can I talk about in Twit­ter after 14 hours, when the issue is resolved by the minute, and in an hour or two should the pic­ture be formed? Same thing on their web­site, Face­book and so on.

- Why didn’t it hap­pen with Viol­in­ists?

- “The Case of Scri­pals” is a deep pro­voca­tion. Obvi­ously, the Brit­ish beat us: they developed a com­bin­a­tion to which we did not react in a timely man­ner. And they already had a clear plan at the time, as our struc­tures tra­di­tion­ally acted with a delay. For us, this inform­a­tion­al story is abso­lutely not a plus, as they say. There was a com­pre­hens­ive cam­paign here, but I do not know who did it. The FSB did not do this. FSB showed how she can, in Kerch. Between the Kerch and the “case of Skri­p­ale” — a huge dis­tance.

- Should Pet­rov and Boshirov be released on tele­vi­sion, in the sin­cer­ity of which many TV view­ers doubted?

- In my opin­ion, the point is not at all in Pet­rov and Boshirov. And not in this sep­ar­ate epis­ode. We took the wrong pos­i­tion right from the start. Belatedly, on the 16th, that is, more than 10 days after the events and after the glob­al media had a gen­er­al view of the situ­ation, we began to react. The reas­on was that a cit­izen of Rus­sia suffered in this tragedy. And only 10 days later, I repeat, the Rus­si­an invest­ig­a­tion began on this issue. Accord­ing to the logic of effi­ciency, it was neces­sary to react with­in 24 hours! There­fore, it makes no sense to con­sider this sep­ar­ate step with Pet­rov and Boshirov — suc­cess­ful or not. From the very begin­ning, the wrong response strategy was adop­ted. In it, noth­ing was even coun­ted. After all, you can cal­cu­late any pro­voca­tion. And the enemy, obvi­ously, modeled all our actions. He imposed the ini­ti­at­ive, foresaw our reac­tion, waited for our actions, and then threw the fol­low­ing traps. We were from the very begin­ning an object of con­front­a­tion, and not a sub­ject: we were always giv­en some kind of intro­duct­ory, we reacted to them, some­times suc­cess­fully, some­times not; fol­lowed by new intro­duct­ory, and we con­stantly trailed in the tail.

Although the mis­in­form­a­tion com­pon­ent of the Skri­p­ale case was obvi­ous, start­ing with the fam­ous photo taken at the pizzer­ia a few hours before the pois­on­ing. In the pic­ture Sergey and Julia Skri­p­al are sit­ting with raised glasses, and in the mir­ror in the back­ground the pho­to­graph­er is vaguely reflec­ted. Who is this per­son? Has he suffered too? Why is there no men­tion of him in the case? None of these ques­tions we asked. This is a pos­i­tion that, to put it mildly, does not lead to suc­cess. But accord­ing to Kerch our game, our agenda dom­in­ated. Obvi­ously, dif­fer­ent people were respons­ible for Salis­bury and Kerch. So, you can replay the Brit­ish — you can and should. I hope that the pres­id­ent will appre­ci­ate it and decide that we will not lose in the future.

- Yes, and it is needed not only for France, it is also needed in Ger­many. Angela Merkel is clearly not the lead­er that time demands. Per­haps, Mat­teo Salvini, the Itali­an Min­is­ter of the Interi­or and one of the lead­ers of the League of the North, is able to grow to the level of an all-European lead­er. In early Decem­ber, when Salvini gathered a demon­stra­tion in Rome with the par­ti­cip­a­tion of 80 thou­sand people, he said that pogroms and riots in France breed poverty and migrants. But how much will they give him to grow? So far, he is not even an Itali­an lead­er, not a prime min­is­ter, but simply the min­is­ter of intern­al affairs. How­ever, at the European level, I do not see any oth­er fig­ure except Salvini. In the United States, in fact, there was an upris­ing of the white pop­u­la­tion, which pro­moted Don­ald Trump (or Trump saddled him). In Europe, a sim­il­ar pro­cess is under­way, but who will lead it? For example, can Vladi­mir Putin become such a lead­er? Unfor­tu­nately, hardly, prob­ably.