Igor Panarin: “Russia already has the means to destroy the decision-making centers of the West”

Igor Panarin: “We can already implement another strategic course in our foreign policy.”
Well-known political scientist about how security forces and liberals worked together in Venezuela and why in Europe thousands of Catholic churches burn


Pos­sess­ing “Pos­eidons” and “Dag­gers”, the Rus­si­an Fed­er­a­tion can afford to imple­ment a dif­fer­ent stra­tegic course in for­eign policy, said Igor Panar­in, a pro­fess­or and head of the InfoS­pet­snaz asso­ci­ation. About why Merkel was in no hurry to con­grat­u­late the new pres­id­ent of Ukraine Zelensky, who actu­ally stands behind him and wheth­er the Kaza­kh­stani polit­ic­al mod­el is sim­il­ar to Ira­ni­an and Chinese, Panar­in told in an inter­view with BUSINESS Online.

 Zelensky is a project of Israel and the United States British lobby”

- Igor Nikolayevich, why is the Krem­lin in no hurry to recog­nize the newly elec­ted Ukrain­i­an Pres­id­ent Vladi­mir Zelensky? After all, he seems to be no stranger to Rus­sia: a nat­ive of the High­er League of KVN

- First of all, Vladi­mir Zelensky is a joint pro­ject of Great Bri­tain and Israel. Let’s leave out his Kawen years — I’m talk­ing about today. Israel should be remembered if only because an Israeli cit­izen and at the same time a Ukrain­i­an olig­arch Igor Kolomoisky played a key role in elect­ing Zelensky and fin­anced his elec­tion cam­paign. As for Lon­don, he worked on the show­man through the US Brit­ish lobby. Actu­ally, the pro­ject was launched two years ago, when the cre­at­ors of the tele­vi­sion series “The Ser­vant of the People” were con­vinced of its pop­ular­ity and decided to start shoot­ing the second sea­son. The image of the mod­est his­tory teach­er Vas­ily Goloborodko, played by Zelensky, quickly found his audi­ence. But few know that the series was sponsored by the Brit­ish lobby of the USA men­tioned by me, and it was, one might say, owned by them. Petro Poroshen­ko of this, of course, knew and made attempts to change the situ­ation, but could not do any­thing. On the con­trary, anoth­er task was clearly set before him: in the first round of the recent pres­id­en­tial elec­tions in Ukraine, cut off (with the help of massive, skill­ful falsi­fic­a­tions) from par­ti­cip­a­tion in the Yulia Tymoshen­ko cam­paign, and not inter­fere with Zelensky. He did it bril­liantly. All Ukrain­i­ans who are cur­rently on the ter­rit­ory of Rus­sia (accord­ing to vari­ous sources, from 2.5 mil­lion to 4 mil­lion people), as well as those who left to work in Poland, are deprived of the right to vote — this is about 1.5 mil­lion cit­izens. Of the total of 7 mil­lion Ukrain­i­ans who are now forced to work abroad, less than 1 per­cent were able to par­ti­cip­ate in the elec­tions. For example: from one and a half mil­lion in Poland about 25 thou­sand voters reached the bal­lot box. This, by the way, was writ­ten to me by the Ukrain­i­ans them­selves, who now work in Poland. The fact is that on my chan­nel on You­Tube and Face­book, Ukraine is in second place by the num­ber of sub­scribers. These people do not neces­sar­ily sup­port my views, but they enter into cor­res­pond­ence with me, express their con­sent or dis­agree­ment. Thus, I learn from them firsthand a lot of curi­ous.

Why was it so hard that Yulia Tymoshen­ko, who was very pop­u­lar in Ukraine, was pushed aside from the elec­tions?

- Because, obvi­ously, she would have eas­ily defeated this comedi­an in the second round. And before Poroshen­ko set the task: not to allow Yulia Vladi­mirovna to fin­ish the elec­tion cam­paign. For him­self, the chocol­ate olig­arch prob­ably still hoped for some mir­acle, but after Zelensky’s meet­ing with Emmanuel Mac­ron, where the showman’s team included some Brit­ish cit­izens ( in par­tic­u­lar, Alex­an­der Danily­uk, former Fin­ance Min­is­ter of Ukraine, whose fam­ily still has Eng­lish cit­izen­ship, — ed. ), these hopes prob­ably dis­ap­peared. I think that the sub­jects of the Eng­lish Queen and organ­ized the fam­ous meet­ing of Vladi­mir Zelensky with Mac­ron, who is con­sidered to be a protégé of Great Bri­tain for good reas­on. And when Poroshen­ko, fol­low­ing his rival, flew to Par­is to Mac­ron, he was appar­ently just presen­ted with an ulti­mat­um, and he could not ignore it. There­fore, his fur­ther allegedly clumsy actions were more like Zelensky’s help. Even the Israeli polit­ic­al con­sult­ant, Moshe Klughaft, whom Petr Alekseevich had hired to save his rat­ing, did everything pos­sible to strengthen the pos­i­tion of Zelensky and sink his “boss”.

In the Lviv region, where, accord­ing to the res­ults of the elec­tions, Poroshen­ko gained the greatest num­ber of sup­port­ers for him­self, people simply did not have time to restruc­ture. A great game that was played at the level of the cap­it­als Kiev – Lon­don – Ber­liy – Wash­ing­ton, very few people under­stood here. The rest of Ukraine was ready to accept Zelensky as pres­id­ent.

Владимир Зеленский
“Vladi­mir Zelensky — a joint pro­ject of Great Bri­tain and Israel” Photo: © Stringer, RIA Nov­osti

That’s why I call Vladi­mir Zelensky a Brit­ish pro­ject — or rather, a pro­ject of the Brit­ish lobby in the United States. Don­ald Trump him­self at the same time took a neut­ral pos­i­tion, although at first his team tried to slow down Zelensky. Let me remind you that the FBI even launched an invest­ig­a­tion against Kolomoisky on sus­pi­cion of money laun­der­ing. The High Court of the United King­dom also repor­ted the arrest of the fin­an­cial assets of Kolomoisky and his part­ner Bogoly­ubov for more than $ 2.5 bil­lion. And the US Spe­cial Rep­res­ent­at­ive for Ukraine Kurt Walk­er also openly advoc­ated Poroshen­ko. But then Trump, who was too busy inter­pret­ing the vari­ous pro­vi­sions of the report of Spe­cial Pro­sec­utor Robert Muller, gave up on what was hap­pen­ing in Ukraine: God be with them, then we’ll fig­ure it out!

As to the pro­spects in Russia’s rela­tions with Zelensky, this can be judged at least by an instant reac­tion (after the end of the elec­tion) of our main enemy, Eng­land, and its Prime Min­is­ter Theresa May, who deman­ded that the newly elec­ted Ukrain­i­an pres­id­ent cooper­ate “to deter Rus­si­an aggres­sion “. The cur­at­ors of Zelensky imme­di­ately showed up. From my point of view, Rus­sia clearly caught this con­fig­ur­a­tion of forces and took the right low pro­file, far from enthu­si­asm, which many expressed on the occa­sion of the comic’s vic­tory. Espe­cially when, on the eve, the High Court of Lon­don sud­denly denied Privat­Bank a law­suit against Kolomoisky, it became extremely clear to many that this was a 100% vic­tory for Zelensky. The Krem­lin under­stood this too and began its act­ive line. It is no coin­cid­ence that three days before the second round, on April 18, by the decision of Prime Min­is­ter Dmitry Med­ve­dev, Rus­sia imposed a ban on the export of oil and oil products to Ukraine.Inter­est­ingly, the ban will take effect from June 1, 2019, that is, just when Vladi­mir Zelensky offi­cially takes office as pres­id­ent ( accord­ing to pre­lim­in­ary inform­a­tion, this should hap­pen before June 3 — editor’s note ).

Of course, we put them in a situ­ation of fairly tight time trouble. Rus­sia and before that sup­plied to Ukraine is not too much oil, but did it mainly through Belarus. Rather, Minsk itself made these deliv­er­ies, enga­ging in re-export and earn­ing bil­lions of dol­lars from it. How­ever, at the end of 2018, we sharply reduced oil sup­plies to Belarus, mak­ing re-export impossible. In addi­tion, two Belarus­i­an refiner­ies recently embarked on the recon­struc­tion and now pro­duce products sev­er­al times less than in the planned mode. All this, of course, will very ser­i­ously affect the eco­nom­ic situ­ation in Ukraine. But we are not the instig­at­ors here — after all, on the eve, it was Kiev who imposed the next eco­nom­ic sanc­tions against Rus­sia, and we simply answered them. This our new line is quite thought out, and I want to believe that it will be more effect­ive than our entire pre­vi­ous course in rela­tion to Ukraine.

“Angela Merkel con­grat­u­lated Zelensky much later than oth­er European lead­ers who rushed to call the victor’s headquar­ters on Sunday even­ing, April 21” Photo: kremlin.ru

 The specialist who had previously been responsible for relations with South Ossetia became the curator of the new course towards Ukraine

- I under­stand cor­rectly that the arrival of Zelensky to power auto­mat­ic­ally pushes Angela Merkel away from the levers of influ­ence on Kiev? And now that these levers will pass into the hands, rel­at­ively speak­ing, of the Eng­lish Queen?More pre­cisely, the Brit­ish cur­at­ors show­man?

- Please note that Angela Merkel con­grat­u­lated Zelensky much later than oth­er European lead­ers who rushed to call the victor’s headquar­ters on Sunday even­ing, April 21. And then her phone call was more like not a con­grat­u­la­tion, but rather a con­sol­id­a­tion of the pre­vi­ously reached agree­ments: she, as it were, spoke again with Zelensky of the con­tinu­ation of cooper­a­tion between the two coun­tries. Ger­many clearly had some oth­er views on Kiev and the align­ment of forces in it. And Merkel clung to Poroshen­ko to the last, meet­ing him in Ber­lin after the failed first round. But the Brit­ish eas­ily put the Ger­mans in place. This sug­gests that Ger­many is still not a free coun­try, the occu­pa­tion forces of Great Bri­tain and the United States are still there, and Ber­lin has no voice in key issues. The situ­ation with Zelensky is once again demon­strated.

It is obvi­ous that the Ger­mans them­selves are hardly sat­is­fied that their coun­try de facto remains occu­pied and depend­ent, there­fore, move­ments for its lib­er­a­tion are ripen­ing inside Ger­many. In this con­text, the eco­nom­ic uni­on of Moscow and Ber­lin is our import­ant stra­tegic found­a­tion for the future.

- Does Ger­many have enough strength to shake off extern­al influ­ence?

- She has not enough intern­al forces. The Ger­mans can only hope for the col­lapse of Lon­don, which is driv­ing itself to a dead end — it’s not for noth­ing that the Brit­ish con­stantly post­pone the terms of their Brexit. There­fore, Ukraine will now have to be very use­ful for Great Bri­tain: if we assume that the future Ukrain­i­an Fin­ance Min­is­ter Alex­an­der Danily­uk was present at the meet­ing of Zelensky with Mac­ron, then, as his cit­izen, Lon­don will try to pump out max­im­um resources from the Square through him. This is their chance to save the Brit­ish eco­nomy from col­lapse.

As for Moscow, the fall of Lon­don will mean for us the pos­sib­il­ity of con­clud­ing a strong Ger­man-Rus­si­an alli­ance. There­fore, it is in our interest to accel­er­ate the col­lapse of the Brit­ish eco­nomy. Brexit already con­trib­utes to this: Eng­land is at a com­plete impasse, as evid­enced by the per­man­ent post­pone­ment of the exit from the EU (the last dead­line was announced on Octo­ber 31, 2019). For them, any future step is bad.

In addi­tion, if the “yel­low vests” still forced to resign Emmanuel Mac­ron, it will be a power­ful blow to the UK.

“Those who pur­sued the same course towards Ukraine in the Krem­lin are either set aside, like Oleg Govorun (left), or barred from mak­ing import­ant decisions.” Photo: kremlin.ru

- A little more than two weeks before the elec­tions in Ukraine, the Krem­lin changed key offi­cials in the pres­id­en­tial admin­is­tra­tion of the Rus­si­an Fed­er­a­tion, appoint­ing Oleg Tatiov, the unof­fi­cial cur­at­or of all Ukrain­i­an issues, instead of Oleg Govorun. What is curi­ous about this cast­ling?

- Rus­sia indic­ated its pos­i­tion in rela­tion to the Ukrain­i­an elec­tion cam­paign long before it took place — when it became clear that Kiev would not allow Rus­si­an observ­ers to the elec­tion and would delete from the list not only the res­id­ents of Don­bass, but also those voters who live in Rus­sia. This pos­i­tion was voiced by Putin’s press sec­ret­ary, Dmitry Peskov, stat­ing that Moscow would delay the recog­ni­tion of the legit­im­acy of the Ukrain­i­an elec­tions. Almost at the same time, in the depart­ment under the con­trol of Vladis­lav Surkov, the cast­ling men­tioned by you took place, which also sym­bol­ized a change in the gen­er­al course.

By and large, the Krem­lin doesn’t care who is in charge of Ukraine: Zelensky, Poroshen­ko or Tymoshen­ko. Rus­sia real­izes its nation­al interests and does what it sees fit. This is a new stra­tegic trend in the beha­vi­or of Moscow, and the issu­ance of Rus­si­an pass­ports to cit­izens of the DPR and LPR keeps with­in its con­text. Those who pur­sued the same course towards Ukraine in the Krem­lin are either set aside, like Oleg Govorun, or barred from mak­ing import­ant decisions. The group of decision makers is now made up of oth­er people.

Notice that it was Alexey Fil­atov who was appoin­ted to the Govorun’s place, that is, an expert who had pre­vi­ously been in charge of man­aging Russia’s rela­tions with South Osse­tia.

- It means that the cer­ti­fic­a­tion of South Osse­tia — Alania and its status as an inde­pend­ent, although par­tially recog­nized repub­lic, could hardly pass by it.

- I will add that the Rus­si­an Fed­er­a­tion has con­cluded an agree­ment with South Osse­tia on integ­ra­tion, defense and secur­ity. Our mil­it­ary base is loc­ated there. All these ques­tions are leg­ally debugged and per­fec­ted there. Let’s see how events will devel­op in the Ukrain­i­an dir­ec­tion, but, appar­ently, stra­tegic decisions have already been made by the Krem­lin. Includ­ing — by chan­ging the course. And most import­antly, these decisions, appar­ently, were made before the first round of pres­id­en­tial elec­tions in Ukraine. Even the resig­na­tion of the Talk­er occurred in advance.

“Tokayev’s can­did­acy as pres­id­ent suits both Rus­sia and China — in his past he is both a gradu­ate of MGIMO and a stu­dent at the Beijing Lin­guist­ic Insti­tute. Such people are rare not only in Kaza­kh­stan, but some­where else in gen­er­al. ”Photo: kremlin.ru

- Let us turn to anoth­er state in the post-Soviet space — to Kaza­kh­stan. Is the Naz­ar­bayevsky power trans­it to be con­sidered com­plete?

- Yes, everything is clear here. From the rul­ing Nur-Otan party in the future early pres­id­en­tial elec­tions on June 9, two can­did­ates could be nom­in­ated: cur­rent head of state Kasym-Zho­mart Tokayev and Dariga Naz­ar­bayeva, the eld­est daugh­ter of Elbasy. Until recently, there could still be doubts about wheth­er Tokayev was a tem­por­ary, inter­me­di­ate fig­ure or wheth­er he would be entrus­ted with the reins of gov­ern­ment. The intrigue was resolved on April 23, when Nur­sultan Naz­ar­bayev him­self offi­cially nom­in­ated Tokayev as pres­id­ent of Kaza­kh­stan. I have no doubt that on June 9, Kasym-Zho­mart Kemele­vich will win and thus the next page of Kazakhstan’s trans­it of power will be turned over.

Nev­er­the­less, this does not mean that the era of Naz­ar­bayev in Kaza­kh­stan will neces­sar­ily be replaced by the era of Tokayev. After all, Tokaev is already 65 years old, and with time, anoth­er fig­ure may be pro­moted to his suc­cessors. How­ever, now in Kaza­kh­stan polit­ics there has come a clar­ity, leav­ing no grounds for dis­crep­an­cies.The Kaza­kh­stani polit­ic­al mod­el, as I under­stand it, is the middle way between the Ira­ni­an and Chinese mod­els, between the styles of gov­ern­ment of Deng Xiaop­ing and Ayatol­lah Khomeini. On the eve of the trans­it of power, Naz­ar­bayev replaced the gov­ern­ment, leav­ing con­trol over the repub­lic­an secur­ity coun­cil and secur­ity forces. As for his daugh­ter Dariga Naz­ar­bayeva, he moved her to pos­i­tion num­ber two in the state — in the chair of the chair­man of the sen­ate of par­lia­ment. To all appear­ances, Tokayev’s can­did­acy as pres­id­ent suits both Rus­sia and China — in his past he is both a gradu­ate of MGIMO and a stu­dent at the Beijing Lin­guist­ic Insti­tute. Such people are rare not only in Kaza­kh­stan, but also any­where else.

 Over the past 10 years in France were destroyed about 2 thousand Catholic churches”

- Now to the coun­tries of the West: who was to bene­fit from the fire in the Cathed­ral of Notre Dame? Were those who benefited from this tragedy?

- Emmanuel Mac­ron, as I said, is a Brit­ish pro­tege, and prob­ably someone hoped that a fire in Notre-Dame de Par­is would help him sur­vive and keep his chair. The move­ment of yel­low “vests” seems to be say­ing: “Yes, what are the ral­lies here!” Is it France before them now? We need to revive the cathed­ral! ”But this did not work: after the fire, two more protest actions were held, and on April 27, 23.6 thou­sand French people went to ral­lies and marches across the coun­try.

Anoth­er thing is that the fire in the cathed­ral can be viewed as part of a large-scale anti-Chris­ti­an cam­paign that has been act­ively pur­su­ing in France since 2010. The year does not come so that one or anoth­er Cath­ol­ic church in the coun­try sud­denly does not catch fire or is not des­troyed by order of the French author­it­ies. Sup­port­ers of the demoli­tion of temples jus­ti­fy them­selves by the fact that the state has no money for their main­ten­ance. Over the past 10 years, accord­ing to some sources, about 2,000 Cath­ol­ic churches and cathed­rals have ceased to exist in France. In the sum­mer of 2016, the most scan­dal­ous image of the Church of St. Rita in Par­is was closed. Spe­cial forces broke into the temple, which was inten­ded to be demol­ished by bull­dozers, inter­rup­ted the ser­vice in the cathed­ral and “evac­u­ated” all parish­ion­ers out­side. And the priest was lit­er­ally dragged, dragged out of his clothes out­side. It may also be recalled that as early as March in Par­is, the church of Saint-Sulpice was set on fire in the 6th arron­disse­ment, not far from the Lux­em­bourg Gar­dens — right dur­ing the organ con­cert that went there. The church of St. John, also loc­ated in the French cap­it­al, burned down on March 17. The police admit­ted that it was arson and put the sus­pect on a wanted list. But they are unlikely to be found, because the arsons and the destruc­tion of the Cath­ol­ic churches under Mac­ron acquired a sys­tem­at­ic char­ac­ter, but it was nev­er heard that any of the guilty were respons­ible for what was done. The Chris­ti­an churches of France are vir­tu­ally defense­less: the police refer to the lack of funds that pre­vent them from find­ing crim­in­als. But at the same time, if some­thing hap­pens to syn­agogues or Jew­ish cemeter­ies, the French police dig their nose to the ground, and the CRIF ( Coun­cil of Jew­ish Organ­iz­a­tions of France - approx. Ed.) Makes angry state­ments. In Feb­ru­ary 2019, Mac­ron per­son­ally went to the desec­rated Jew­ish cemetery in Alsace and deman­ded an invest­ig­a­tion, although the desec­ra­tion of Chris­ti­an val­ues did not cause any protest from the French author­it­ies.

Obvi­ously, the fire in Notre Dame cathed­ral fits into the con­text of what I’m talk­ing about. The ver­sion of spon­tan­eous com­bus­tion in Notre Dame is a com­plete absurdity. Inform­a­tion already passed that all work inside the cathed­ral was stopped an hour before the fire, there was no elec­tri­city on the scaf­fold­ing — not a single spark could run through the wires there. And the fire­fight­ers were called only 23 minutes after the start of the fire, etc. It is clear to me that what happened was a delib­er­ate arson with the use of spe­cial chem­ic­als to stim­u­late the flame. But the French author­it­ies are cov­er­ing this sab­ot­age oper­a­tion.

Do not for­get that Emmanuel Mac­ron is asso­ci­ated with the largest mason­ic lodge “Great East of France”, whose meet­ing in the temple of Arthur Grouse in Par­is, he atten­ded in June 2016. The fight against Chris­tian­ity is one of the main goals of Free­ma­sonry, and in the work of Mac­ron this goal peri­od­ic­ally makes itself felt. It is sym­bol­ic that dur­ing the Mason­ic French Revolu­tion of 1789–1799, statues were dropped from the facade of Notre Dame, and Robe­s­pi­erre prom­ised to demol­ish this “strong­hold of obscur­ant­ism” in gen­er­al. Yes, under the arches of Notre Dame de Par­is in 1804 Napo­leon Bona­parte crowned the king­dom, but then the temple was turned into a wine ware­house and aban­doned — until the fam­ous nov­el by Vic­tor Hugo, who breathed a new life into a for­got­ten shrine. Now, Notre Dame de Par­is has actu­ally been brought back to the state of a wine ware­house, and it will take 10 or even 20 years to restore it.

- Ter­ror­ist attacks on Chris­ti­an churches in Sri Lanka dur­ing the cel­eb­ra­tion of Cath­ol­ic East­er — part of the same anti-Chris­ti­an cam­paign (only on a glob­al scale)? And is it per­miss­ible to think that this attack was under­taken by the prac­tic­ally crushed DAISH (the Arab­ic name of the group “ISIL” banned in the Rus­si­an Fed­er­a­tion — editor’s note ) ?

- I think it is hardly worth remem­ber­ing in this con­nec­tion the DAISH banned in Rus­sia. Offi­cially, the Sri Lankan attacks are revenge for New Zea­l­and (the ter­ror­ist attack in the Christ­ch­urch mosques occurred on March 15, 2019 — ed. ). By the way, I occa­sion­ally read the site of vet­er­ans of the Amer­ic­an intel­li­gence com­munity (it is avail­able online in Eng­lish). There was a par­al­lel between the Nor­we­gi­an ter­ror­ist Anders Breivik and the Aus­trali­an Brenton Tar­rant, who is accused of being killed in New Zea­l­and. But a loner could not des­troy so many people! The site of Amer­ic­an intel­li­gence vet­er­ans has inter­est­ing inform­a­tion that both Breivik and Tar­rant in dif­fer­ent years, but shortly before the attacks, were held in Israel for nine days. So all this is more like a pro­voca­tion with the goal of push­ing two reli­gions to the fore­head.

The sab­ot­age oper­a­tion in Sri Lanka was car­ried out with dev­il­ish clar­ity. The bomb­ings in Brus­sels and Par­is 2015–2016, for all their enorm­ity, are no match for what happened in Sri Lanka. Here is the hand­writ­ing of the sab­ot­age group. As a res­ult of the tragedy, among the dead were three chil­dren of the Dan­ish bil­lion­aire Anders Holk Poulsen. This is also an elo­quent detail. I remind you that when the Titan­ic sank on April 15, 1912, among the ver­sions of the cata­strophe there was also an assump­tion about elim­in­at­ing com­pet­it­ors in such a soph­ist­ic­ated way: it is known that the olig­archs of that time were on board the Titan­ic. In the case of Sri Lanka, it is impossible to exclude the pos­sib­il­ity that, giv­en the gen­er­al anti-Chris­ti­an nature of the oper­a­tion, it was also dir­ec­ted against spe­cif­ic indi­vidu­als.

Few people today write that Sri Lanka is a social­ist coun­try con­nec­ted with Rus­sia and China, included in the Chinese trans­it trade route. Its pres­id­ent, Maitri­p­ala Siris­ena, in his youth was a mem­ber of the Com­mun­ist Party of Ceylon and to this day retained social­ist con­vic­tions. In his own coun­try, he fights with a group of lib­er­al politi­cians who are tra­di­tion­ally sup­por­ted by Lon­don. The explo­sions in churches and hotels are also a blow to the incum­bent pres­id­ent of the repub­lic, and I do not rule out the Lon­don trail in these events. After all, what is DAISH sub­scrib­ing to Sri Lankan atro­cit­ies? This is a three intel­li­gence pro­ject: the Brit­ish MI-6, the Amer­ic­an CIA and the Israeli Mossad. So, in any case, Brit­ish hand­writ­ing can­not be ruled out here. Loc­al shtetl ter­ror­ists is not under force. The sab­ot­age oper­a­tion in Sri Lanka included the geo­pol­it­ic­al aspect, the busi­ness aspect, the anti-Chris­ti­an mes­sage, and the block­ing of the Chinese pro­ject “One Belt, One Way” — all in one bottle.

 We had nowhere else, even in Syria, the experience of such well-coordinated work as in Venezuela

- Venezuela still rages: on April 30, anoth­er attempt of an anti-state coup led by the self-styled “Pres­id­ent” Juan Guaydo was made here. In the mean­time, you noted in your videos on You­Tube that Rus­sia could cred­it Venezuela to its vic­tor­ies. Moreover, all the “Krem­lin towers” were here at the same time: even the lib­er­al bloc of the Rus­si­an gov­ern­ment — and he dis­tin­guished him­self.

At least until recently, offi­cial Cara­cas and Venezuelan Pres­id­ent Nic­olas Maduro were able to hold power in the coun­try.” Of course, not without the sup­port of Rus­sia. A Rus­si­an del­eg­a­tion headed by Deputy Fin­ance Min­is­ter Sergei Storchak flew to Cara­cas, pro­pos­ing meas­ures to improve the Venezuelan eco­nomy. Of course, I would put Ros­neft and Igor Sechin in the first place in provid­ing assist­ance to Venezuela, but without coordin­a­tion with the Min­istry of Fin­ance they would have failed. It turned out to be an unusu­ally suc­cess­ful and well-coordin­ated alli­ance, in which the Min­istry of Defense of the Rus­si­an Fed­er­a­tion took dir­ect part. In March, a group of Rus­si­an mil­it­ary led by the former chief of the main organ­iz­a­tion­al-mobil­iz­a­tion depart­ment of the Rus­si­an Armed Forces Gen­er­al Staff, and now the chief of staff of the Ground Forces, Col­on­el-Gen­er­al Vas­ily Tono­shkur­ov, was brought to Cara­cas on board the An-124 and Il-62 air­craft. Almost sim­ul­tan­eously, our spe­cial­ists on cyber and spe­cial oper­a­tions went to Venezuela to strengthen the country’s defense and repel a pos­sible mil­it­ary aggres­sion.

Ros­neft also tried: the European office of the Venezuelan state oil com­pany PDVSA moved from Lis­bon to Moscow. But to move the office is half the battle, but to rebuild the tech­no­lo­gic­al and fin­an­cial chains … Nev­er­the­less, the Rus­si­an spe­cial­ists in con­tact with the Venezuelan man­aged to do this.

Our indus­tri­al­ists should be com­men­ded as well: we promptly replaced the west­ern equip­ment at the Venezuelan hydro­elec­tric power sta­tions with the Rus­si­an one, and it now reg­u­larly works there. West­ern equip­ment was sub­ject to sab­ot­age, as shown by the March acci­dent at one of the main hydro­elec­tric power plants in Venezuela, El Guri ( as a res­ult, elec­tri­city was cut off in the cap­it­al and 21 out of 23 states - editor’s note ). All this happened in a tough oper­a­tion­al mode and even with a threat to life (there were reports that snipers were shoot­ing at hydro­elec­tric power plants).

I want to emphas­ize that the exper­i­ence of such a well-coordin­ated team­work, as demon­strated by our team in Venezuela (syn­chron­ous actions of the Min­istry of Fin­ance, the Min­istry of Defense, the MIC, Ros­neft, etc.), we have not been any­where else, even in Syr­ia. In the Syr­i­an con­flict, our pre­dom­in­antly Min­istry of Defense acted, and here — sev­er­al Rus­si­an depart­ments and com­pan­ies at once. I think this can be cor­rel­ated with the imple­ment­a­tion of the concept of the counter-hybrid war, pro­claimed by the Chief of the Gen­er­al Staff of the Rus­si­an Armed Forces Valery Ger­asimov on March 1, 2019. Let me remind you, on Frun­ze Embank­ment in Moscow there is a nation­al cen­ter of defense man­age­ment of the Rus­si­an Fed­er­a­tion. In this sense, we actu­ally cre­ated in the Venezuelan ter­rit­ory the advanced crisis cen­ter of this cen­ter.

Of course, this exper­i­ence does not guar­an­tee our final vic­tory. If tomor­row the Amer­ic­an ships begin to massively shoot Venezuela with their mis­siles and Toma­hawks, will they sur­vive the air defense? But it is obvi­ous that at least sev­er­al attempts at a coup d’etat in Cara­cas have been neut­ral­ized by us. The first attempt, the Anglo-Israeli, was asso­ci­ated with pro­voca­tions and protests on the day of the inaug­ur­a­tion of Nic­olas Maduro in early Janu­ary 2019. The impost­or should have come to the fore after the inaug­ur­a­tion had been thwarted. Nev­er­the­less, this did not hap­pen, Maduro took office and said that the gov­ern­ment he heads, and he him­self “will defend the sov­er­eignty of the coun­try at any cost.”

This was fol­lowed by a new, large-scale wave of ral­lies and massive black­outs of the light, but we also suc­cess­fully sup­pressed it. The enemy still has the option of mil­it­ary inter­ven­tion, but in Venezuela there are Cuban spe­cial forces, our and Chinese mil­it­ary experts. So anoth­er ques­tion is how an attempt at mil­it­ary inter­ven­tion for Amer­ic­ans can end. If you hit a pair of mis­siles at US ships, this entire inter­ven­tion will prob­ably end quickly. In any case, it is clear that the struggle for Venezuela will con­tin­ue, but what we have already done is a big tech­no­lo­gic­al step for­ward.

- And in Sudan, we lost with the forced depar­ture of the then-Pres­id­ent Al-Bashir?

- This is the second line of counter-hybrid war. Sudan is a former Brit­ish colony. Accord­ingly, the main instig­at­ors of the loc­al con­flict are again Eng­land and Israel. Shortly before his over­throw, the Sudanese pres­id­ent Omar al-Bashir pro­posed Rus­sia to cre­ate a mil­it­ary base in his coun­try. We were not against it: for us to open such a base in the Red Sea would be a very good option. With this cir­cum­stance, I asso­ci­ate the hasty col­or revolu­tion organ­ized in Sudan.

There is a very import­ant point, which shows in which har­mo­ni­ous alli­ance Great Bri­tain and Israel appear on the inter­na­tion­al arena. The same Israel brought the cur­rent Brazili­an Pres­id­ent Zhaire Bolson­ar to power, and two Israeli olig­archs fin­anced his elec­tion cam­paign (by the way, the coun­try has the largest syn­agogue in Lat­in Amer­ica). We can say that Bolson­ar is the loc­al Zelensky. When it is true to its oblig­a­tions, Brazil began to put pres­sure on Venezuela.

Approx­im­ately the same scheme tried to imple­ment in Sudan. Very sim­il­ar meth­ods were used, which were pre­vi­ously used in Venezuela: in par­tic­u­lar, on April 7, elec­tri­city sud­denly cut off through­out Sudan. The masses, of course, were out­raged. As a res­ult, the mil­it­ary took power, arres­ted the pres­id­ent, but refused to extra­dite him to an inter­na­tion­al court. So it is pos­sible that at the last moment there was an inter­cep­tion of power and we did not lose any­thing in Sudan, but on the con­trary, we gained new exper­i­ence in curb­ing col­or revolu­tions by pree­mpt­ive mil­it­ary actions. While inform­a­tion about this is not very much. But I think we con­duc­ted a suc­cess­ful pre­vent­ive oper­a­tion to pre­vent the Sudanese Zelensky from power, which was already ready there.

I repeat: it seems to me that the Krem­lin is adopt­ing a new for­eign policy that will be fully based on con­sid­er­a­tions of the nation­al secur­ity of Rus­sia, and not on any­thing else. This course can still be adjus­ted in detail, but in gen­er­al it will be dif­fer­ent, unlike in pre­vi­ous years.

“Now Rus­sia has the means to ensure the destruc­tion of all the main decision-mak­ing cen­ters of the West. There­fore, we can already imple­ment anoth­er stra­tegic course in our for­eign policy. ”Photo:“ BUSINESS Online ”

- We have been wait­ing for a new course from the Krem­lin.

Everything is explained very simply: we did not have Zir­cons at our dis­pos­al ( Rus­si­an hyper­son­ic anti-ship cruise mis­sile - ed.) And much more, so we had to man­euver. How­ever, on April 23, Vladi­mir Putin was per­son­ally present at the cere­mo­ni­al launch­ing of the two new­est Rus­si­an ships in St. Peters­burg ( at the Severnaya Verf — ed. ). And most import­antly, he watched live on the launch of the new­est and largest nuc­le­ar sub­mar­ine Bel­gorod in the world. Its dif­fer­ence from oth­er sub­mar­ines is that it will become a reg­u­lar car­ri­er for an under­wa­ter unmanned aer­i­al vehicle with a Pos­eidon nuc­le­ar power plant. This is anoth­er geo­pol­it­ic­al real­ity.“Pos­eidons” can be guar­an­teed to des­troy Lon­don, New York, Wash­ing­ton and oth­er cit­ies of the West, loc­ated in the coastal zone. The device (which, by the way, can carry a nuc­le­ar war­head) is cap­able of rais­ing a giant wave that will simply wash away Lon­don along with its transna­tion­al elite, which has been trick­ing Rus­sia for sev­er­al hun­dred years. Thus, hav­ing in ser­vice “Zir­cons”, “Dag­gers” ( Rus­si­an hyper­son­ic avi­ation mis­sile sys­tem - ed.) And “Pos­eidons”, we can already afford to change the for­eign policy of Ukraine. And, I hope that not only for her.

For a long time, the West believed that Pos­eidons and Dag­gers was a bluff, but now it became con­vinced that it was a real­ity. It was not for noth­ing that Fiona Hill, Dir­ect­or for Rus­sia and Euras­ia of the United States Nation­al Secur­ity Coun­cil flew to Moscow in secrecy. She is also the author of the well-known book “Mr. Putin: an oper­at­ive in the Krem­lin,” and one can say that the anti-Rus­si­an line in her views has always been traced. But now her views under pres­sure are chan­ging, as well as the views of former US Sec­ret­ary of State George Schulz, former US Sec­ret­ary of Defense Wil­li­am Perry and former US Sen­at­or Samuel Nunn, who in their art­icle in The Wall Street Journ­al called on Trump to improve rela­tions with Rus­sia. “To move away from this deadly abyss, we must go to the resump­tion of stra­tegic cooper­a­tion with Rus­sia,” — the authors write. I remind you that in 2014, in con­nec­tion with the situ­ation in Ukraine, the same people deman­ded sanc­tions against the Rus­si­an Fed­er­a­tion and the train­ing of troops. Now their calls look dia­met­ric­ally opposed. But this does not mean that they saw the light. It’s just that now Rus­sia already has super-weapons, there are means for guar­an­teed destruc­tion of all the main decision-mak­ing cen­ters of the West. There­fore, we can already imple­ment a dif­fer­ent stra­tegic course in our for­eign policy.