Razvedchik Interviews its Own Sergei Nariskin

Scout the SVR's internal publication talks with its head

Last year’s Fourth Quarter edition of the SVR’s in-house journal Razvedchik or Scout in English published a year-end appraisal of the coming year, 2024, by its chief Sergei Narishkin and has done so again this year, although the topic’s been inverted and 2024 is reviewed, using his closing words for its title: “Intelligence is Life Itself,” which is a somewhat profound revelation. Last year’s article can be found in the Gym’s archive. A portion of this interview was mentioned in a comment late last night, which alerted me to its publication. So, what’s on Mr. Narishkin’s mind:

Dear Sergei Evgenievich! At the end of last year, your article was published in the Razvedchik magazine on the trends in the development of the international situation in the now outgoing year 2024. Have the forecasts been confirmed and what new processes have emerged? What should Russia and the international community hope for and fear next year?

The main forecast about the growing crisis of the US-centric world and the multipolarity that is replacing it has certainly been confirmed. We observed manifestations of this process throughout the year. Take, for example, the failure of the American "summit for democracy". Let me remind you that this revisionist forum was created by the team of J. Biden to record the redivision of the world according to Washington's patterns, approve the notorious "rules-based order" and ostracize everyone who refuses to swear allegiance to these "rules". It was conceived as a global one, and eventually turned into an ordinary ministerial meeting, to which the White House barely managed to drive several dozen of its closest allies.

The Americans and their satellites received another painful slap on the nose at the so-called peace summit in Bürgenstock. The leaders of major non-Western countries simply refused to take part in this farce, and many of those who came to Switzerland did not sign the final communiqué. The whole world is well aware of the absurdity of attempts to resolve the Ukrainian crisis without Russia's participation, especially given the development of the situation on the line of contact. The peacekeeping and mediation activities of Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Turkey, Arab and African states are based on this understanding. And only the West continues to live in an absolutely artificial, detached from life reality, in which it has already "isolated" Moscow, and if we take into account the odious orders of the ICC, it has inflicted a "strategic defeat" on us.

But the world, thank God, is not a laboratory or a computer game, it cannot be constructed with the help of information and political technologies. We had the opportunity to see the "effectiveness" of Western efforts to "isolate" Russia during the triumphant BRICS summit in Kazan. Without exaggeration, this event was a milestone on the path to the formation of true multipolarity, both in terms of the composition of the participants, the agenda, and the general atmosphere in which it took place. In the Western press, you can often find comparisons between the BRICS and the G7. However, as I have said more than once, there is a fundamental difference between them. The G7 is Washington and its satellites, that is, a direct product of a unipolar world based on the dollar and the arbitrariness of the United States. And BRICS, especially in its current expanded form, is an alliance of equal powers, or rather civilizations, striving to jointly find answers to the most acute challenges of our time, taking into account national interests. The G7 is the past, the BRICS are the future.

Of course, the enemy, as it was said in one wonderful Soviet film, "does not want to give up the sky", that is, refuses to admit that the era of his undivided domination is over. It is not that Washington and London do not understand the essence of what is happening, but the inertia of their colonial thinking and deep-rooted racism are taking their toll. Although at times, the Anglo-Saxons, as they say, lose their nerve. This, in particular, is indicated by their transition to open terror and attempts to physically eliminate opponents. In other words, their favorite "buy or kill" formula clearly began to be dominated by the second ingredient. What, for example, is the high-profile assassination attempt on the Prime Minister of Slovakia Fico, who has the courage to speak out in defense of the national interests of his country? And this is just one episode. Let us recall reports of threats of physical violence against Serbian President Vučić and Hungarian Prime Minister Orban. Obviously, literally all the bright leaders of the emerging multipolar world are under attack.

That is, the West is ready for extreme measures?

I think that it is quite so. One of the possible scenarios for the development of events in the medium term remains an attempt by the Westerners to unleash a global armed conflict with the epicenter in Eurasia. This, you know, is a proven way for world capital to get out of the crisis. It is encouraging, however, that Washington and London are far from the only ones that they say are bound by common values. New, no less stable groups of countries have appeared in the world. Other, more responsible players, who, having united, are able to resist Anglo-Saxon adventures and independently resolve any problems, keeping the planet from sliding into World War III.

How can the processes described above affect the Ukrainian conflict?

The West's strategic calculation in the Ukrainian crisis is very clear: to impose on us a protracted struggle of attrition in order to split Russian society and create conditions for a "color revolution." They will fight, as they say, "to the last Ukrainian", and when they are gone, the Balts, Eastern Europeans, and in the future, the Germans will be forced to fight the "terrible Russian bear". The globalists have the technologies necessary for this to brainwash the population and put pressure on the local elites.

However, I say with confidence that further escalation will not only not lead to the exhaustion of Russia, as Washington and London expect, but will bring the strategic defeat of the West itself closer. Despite the sanctions and the theft of our sovereign assets, the Russian economy is showing growth, import substitution is developing at an accelerated pace, including in high-tech industries. New logistics chains are emerging, and economic ties with non-Western countries are being strengthened, primarily in Greater Eurasia.

All attempts to "destabilize" the situation in Russia were unsuccessful. People realize that we are fighting not against the Kiev junta, but against the collective West, and the price of this confrontation is our freedom and sovereignty. And at the front, the situation is not in favor of Kyiv. The strategic initiative in all areas belongs to us, we are close to achieving our goals, while the Armed Forces of Ukraine are on the verge of collapse, and the Zelensky regime has completely lost its legitimacy and, as a result, its ability to negotiate.

And what can you say about the situation in the post-Soviet space as a whole?

An analysis of the data available in the Service allows us to conclude that the post-Soviet space remains a priority area for attacks by American and British special services. The West has set itself the ambitious goal of severing not only the economic and political, but also the deep historical and humanitarian ties between our countries. This approach follows from the well-known maxim of the Anglo-Saxons: "He who rules Eurasia owns the world." Although "governing" for them means "dividing", "sowing chaos", and then offering themselves to the bloodless peoples as "impartial guarantors of security". How this happens is clearly seen in the Ukrainian example.

At the same time, the American "obsession" with Ukraine is beginning to have a devastating impact on the entire global financial and military-political system built by Washington. The United States is losing the initiative on all fronts: from the Middle East to Asia and Africa. And in the post-Soviet space, they have completely failed. Look, in Georgia, where until recently the puppet Saakashvili was snacking on ties, the Westerners failed to prevent the ruling Georgian Dream party from winning the elections. Having realized the perniciousness of a reckless orientation towards the West, the Georgian authorities decided to act in their own interests and are now consciously moving away from the ultra-liberal transhumanist agenda imposed from the outside, which is infinitely alien to traditional Georgian values. In Moldova, the regime of Maia Sandu barely pulled the desired result in the elections, de facto fixing a deep split in Moldovan society. Azerbaijan and Armenia also do not really listen to the recommendations of the United States and the EU for a peaceful settlement, preferring to resolve all issues on their own.

This summer, President Vladimir Putin put forward an initiative to create a new collective security system in Eurasia to replace the obviously bankrupt Euro-Atlantic model. Today, the topic of forming a contour of equal and indivisible security on the Eurasian continent without the military presence of external powers has already firmly entered the international discourse. It was also raised on the sidelines of the Kazan BRICS summit.

At one time, we offered the Westerners to build a common security space from Lisbon to Vladivostok, but they did not want it. Well, we will build a new architecture without them—say, from Minsk to Pyongyang.

Do you think the West can play a constructive role in building a new world order? Is it possible to negotiate with them or is a direct conflict inevitable? And what place do you assign to Western countries in the future system of international relations?

Places will be distributed by history. A multipolar world, of course, should include both the United States and Europe, provided that they have equal rights with others. Today, humanity is facing a large number of really serious common challenges, such as pandemics, climate change and related global migration, the uncontrolled development of artificial intelligence technologies. Leading regional and world powers need to work together to find ways to respond to them. The American and European poles, with their entrepreneurial and innovative spirits, can and should play an important role in these processes.

But I'm afraid Americans and Europeans are still a long way from returning to their identities. They are likely to face a difficult, dramatic period of internal strife, which, out of habit, will be attributed to the "hand of Moscow." It is difficult for the West to admit the decline of its power. The United States still has a powerful technological potential, the dollar, along with the euro, remains the world reserve currency, McDonald's and MacBook are present in many parts of the world, as well as American aircraft carrier groups.

Nevertheless, Washington's authority in the world is increasingly "sagging". Even the closest allies of the Americans are less and less likely to look back at the opinion of the White House and seek to expand the boundaries of what is possible in politics and economics. You have no idea how many US partners from Asia, Africa and Latin America are in contact with us asking us, as they say, not to stop halfway through the Ukrainian conflict. In addition, the West is literally slaughtering its own "sacred cows", including the same principle of the inviolability of private property. It is obvious to everyone that any state can be in Russia's place. [Recall one of the main propaganda points during the Anti-Communist Crusade was that Communists would “steal” all private property.]

In the end, all this pushes the world majority to become more self-reliant. We are witnessing the true decolonization of the Global South, which has begun to conceptualize itself as a full-fledged geopolitical entity rather than someone's "backyard." You may have noticed that the Kazan summit coincided with the rather bleak British Commonwealth forum in Samoa. During it, the former colonies raised the issue of paying compensation by England for the damage caused. And this is just the beginning. Both the Irish and the Scots, and the residents of Wales have their own claims to London. In the United States, the movement for the decolonization of Texas and California is gaining popularity. To some, such aspirations may seem naïve, but they reflect a general and growing trend.

Mr Yevgenievich, if I may, I would like to ask a few personal questions. We remind readers that you are far from being a stranger to intelligence: in the 1980s, you served in the PGU of the KGB of the USSR, successfully worked in Europe. Do you remember your feelings from the first business trip?

In 1980, after graduating from the Higher Red Banner School of the KGB of the USSR, I returned to Leningrad, from where I was sent to study. I was inexpressibly glad that I was accepted into the intelligence department, into the department of scientific and technical intelligence. After working for four years, including "under the roof" of one of the Leningrad institutions with extensive foreign connections, and having gained some operational experience, I was sent to a one-year faculty of the Red Banner Institute of the KGB (now the Academy of Foreign Intelligence). After graduation, I was left in Moscow to prepare for a business trip abroad.

In general, I repeat, I was both happy and felt a special responsibility for the fact that I was sent to intelligence. This sense of responsibility for the great work entrusted to me and my comrades did not leave me during all four years, when I worked in the residency of Soviet foreign intelligence in one of the European countries.

When do you think it was easier to work: then or now?

Since the magazine "Razvedchik" is a public publication, I will not analyze and compare operational and other special moments: as it was then, 30 years ago, and as it is now. But, speaking about the general background, I want to note that now, perhaps, it is more difficult and for the following reasons. In the mid-1980s, the Cold War continued, the confrontation between the two systems and the two main countries representing these systems, the USSR and the United States. At the same time, the general atmosphere of contacts between Soviet citizens and representatives of the West was generally favorable, it was not felt that there was anything that strongly divided us in the universal human plan.

Now the situation is fundamentally different. Unfortunately, the degrading Western system, the totalitarian-liberal Western bloc strongly disperses the atmosphere of Russophobia in Western society. We see that in the last two to two and a half years, the level of Russophobia has simply gone off the charts. Of course, this leaves an imprint on the work of our foreign offices in Europe and North America. This is perhaps the main difference.

You returned to intelligence after almost twenty years. How much have the forms and methods of work changed, as well as the people themselves, the intelligence officers?

I will say right away that the fundamental foundations of the activities of domestic foreign intelligence have not changed. Of course, all these years methodological techniques and technologies have been improved in various aspects of intelligence, information and analytical work. In addition, there has been a marked redistribution of roles between the individual activities of the Service. First of all, I mean that technological progress has seriously affected the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service, and, as it seems to me, all these years the Service has not only kept up with progress, but has sometimes been one step ahead.

In this regard, new technologies were introduced into operational activities in the most active and creative way—first of all, communication systems, information processing. I saw that over the years the level of the Service's work had grown significantly, operational techniques had become more polished... The scope of a public journal does not allow me to expand on this topic extensively, but it is clear that intelligence is growing and improving. Naturally, this requires a higher level of training of employees, and this is exactly what is happening today.

In addition to leading intelligence, you head the Russian Historical Society and are engaged in educational activities. Tell me, how do you manage to keep up with everything, do you have time to communicate with friends, family, sports?

I don't think I'm some kind of front-runner here, I'm just used to working hard. Both when I worked in St. Petersburg in various positions, and when I moved to Moscow, where the workload increased even more. Of course, responsible, managerial work has always required and continues to require full concentration of effort and attention.

At the same time, of course, I enjoy communicating with my family, with friends, I find time to do physical education and sports. By the way, if we talk about this component, then it is the duty of a foreign intelligence officer to be in good physical shape. And there is nothing here that would distinguish me from others. [Putin immediately comes to mind.] Moreover, the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service has created unique opportunities for sports. Perhaps no other department in Moscow or in the regions has such departments. Therefore, dear colleagues, use it 100%.

And what would you wish to young employees of the Service, who are preparing to go abroad on their first business trip today?

I would say the following. My dear young colleagues! The status of an employee of the Foreign Intelligence Service of Russia obliges you to a lot. You must be ready to always defend the interests of the cause, put them above your own and sometimes even make personal sacrifices.

I advise you throughout your service in intelligence, whether in the central apparatus or abroad, to follow a three-pronged rule: master, implement and develop creatively. This algorithm of actions has been tested by many generations of employees of domestic foreign intelligence.

Colleagues! You are young, energetic, have undergone good special training, and have accumulated certain professional knowledge. Use this baggage creatively both in your work at the Center and during business trips abroad. The main thing is not to be afraid of anything. But at the same time, keep a cool head and remember: the future of our country, our beloved Russia, its security, prosperity and well-being largely depend on the effective work of each foreign intelligence officer, including you.

And finally. Sergey Evgenievich, what is intelligence for you?

I will answer briefly. For me, as an intelligence officer, intelligence is life itself. [My Emphasis]

One of several questions: Just what are European and American “identities”? Most all are Imperialist states whose identities were largely shaped by wars and conquest. Isn’t wanting to fully dominate the world at the root of their collective identity”? Not the commonfolk but the rulers—the globalists.

What are “the interests of the cause” today? The continuance of Russia’s '“security, prosperity, and well-being”? Or is it something more as I can’t see it being any less.

Is the West a genuinely “totalitarian-liberal bloc” ruled by “globalists” who use “brainwashing” to keep and extend their control?

Putin was born in 1952, Narishkin in 1954, and me in 1955, meaning we are essentially peers age-wise, but have vastly different contexts in our foundational life experiences, education and adult lives. However, I would agree “that there was anything (nothing) that strongly divided us in the universal human plan;” yet, today such a divide is being completely manufactured based on some past relics, and that such a divide can become a very major impediment and indeed source of unwarranted conflict as we’ve seen happen before. Narishkin seems to think the West can rejoin Humanity and become part of the Multipolar World if it evolves and develops a new identity as the old ones IMO are the primary source of today’s conflict. He seems to think the West will not accept capitulation related to the issues underlying the Ukraine conflict and that other Europeans seduced by the Globalists will enter the fray. Oddly, he wasn’t asked about Trump and the Syrian tragedy likely happened after the interview occurred. Many I’m sure would like to know his thoughts on both.

*
*
*
Like what you’ve been reading at Karlof1’s Substack? Then please consider subscribing and choosing to make a monthly/yearly pledge to enable my efforts in this challenging realm. Thank You!