Sergey Karaganov: Breaking Europe's Back: What Should Russia's Policy Towards the West Be

I should note that RT’s version of Karaganov’s Profile essay is essentially completely rewritten including its title, “Sergey Karaganov: Russia must help overthrow Western Europe’s dangerous political elites,” although RT merely says it “was translated and edited by the RT team.” I’ll also include a note to those who are VK users that I wasn’t allowed to sign in to my profile account and thus spread my writings further and also communicate with my 1400+ friends. That means Peter Watson’s VK account with its vital biowar and covid files will also be lost. Very sad for Russian Free Speech.

So, does Karaganov advocate active intervention in other nations domestic actions in violation of the UN Charter like the Outlaw US Empire does, or is RT lying in its headline? The only way to find out is to read on:

Trump's election temporarily put the development of our policy towards the West, including its ongoing war in Ukraine, on pause. We did not react too strongly (which is right) to the Biden's rearguard provocations, but our soldiers continued offensive operations and grinding Western mercenary troops in Ukraine.

Now from all sides they are talking about the possibility of a compromise, about its contours. And in our country, at least in the media, they began to briskly discuss such options.

Now, together with our colleagues, we are preparing a large-scale study and situational analysis devoted to the development of recommendations regarding Russia's policy towards the West. I will not predict the results of the discussion, but I will simply share some preliminary considerations. They may be useful during the preparation of the report and are designed to create the basis for a broader discussion.

The Trump administration now has no serious reasons to negotiate with us on the terms that we have set. The war is economically beneficial to the United States, since it allows it to rob allies with redoubled energy, update the military-industrial complex, and impose its economic interests through systemic sanctions on dozens of countries around the world. And, of course, continue to inflict damage on Russia in the hope of exhausting it, and in the best case scenario for the United States, to bring down or take out of the game as the military-strategic core of the rising and freeing World Majority, a powerful strategic pillar of the main competitor – China. Although this war with the main domestic political point of view for Trump is unnecessary and even a little harmful, the balance of interests is more likely to be for its continuation.

I will put myself in Trump's shoes – an American nationalist with elements of traditional messianism, but without the globalist-liberal scum of the last three or four decades and Biden's involvement in Ukrainian corruption schemes. Only three things can move this conditional Trump to agreements that suit us. The first is the threat of an Afghanistan 2.0—the complete defeat and shameful flight of the Kyiv regime and the demonstrative failure of the West led by America. The second is Russia's departure from the de facto alliance with China. And the third is the threat of the spillover of hostilities into the territory of the United States and its vital possessions, which will be accompanied by the mass death of Americans (including the destruction of military bases).

A complete defeat is necessary, but without a much more active use of the nuclear deterrence factor, it will cost extremely–-if not prohibitively–-dearly and will require the death of thousands and thousands more of the best sons of our fatherland. China's surrender is absurdly counterproductive for us. If the Trumpists of the first term tried to persuade us to do this, now they seem to understand that Russia will not agree to this. The nuclear factor will be discussed later.

For the current European elites, the Euro-integrators, the war is urgently needed. Not only because of the hope to undermine the traditional geopolitical rival, to take revenge for the defeats of the last three centuries, but also because of Russophobia. These elites and their European bureaucracy are failing in almost all directions. The European project is bursting at the seams.

The use of Russia as a bogeyman, and now as a real enemy, which has been going on for more than a decade, is the main tool for legitimizing their project and preserving power by the European elites. In addition, "strategic parasitism"-–the absence of fear of war-–has grown much stronger in Europe than in the United States. Not only do the Europeans not want to think about what it can mean for them, but they no longer know how to think about it. Since Soviet times and based on the experience of working with de Gaulle, Mitterrand, Brandt, Schröder and the like, we have become accustomed to considering the Americans as the main instigators of confrontation and militarization of politics in the West. This is not entirely true, and now it is not at all true. It was Churchill, when it seemed to him profitable, who dragged the United States into the Cold War. It was European strategists (they still existed then), and not the Americans, who initiated the missile crisis of the 1970s. Now the European elites are the main sponsors of the Kiev junta. They, forgetting that it was their predecessors who unleashed two world wars, are pushing Europe and the world towards a third. Sending Ukrainian cannon fodder to slaughter, they are preparing a new one—Eastern Europeans from a number of Balkan states, Romania and Poland. They have begun to deploy mobile bases, where contingents of potential landsknechts are trained. They will try to continue the war not only to the "last Ukrainian", but soon to the "last Eastern European".

NATO and Brussels anti-Russia propaganda is already surpassing Hitler's. Even personal human ties with Russia are being systematically severed. Those who advocate normal relations are being poisoned and kicked out of their jobs. In fact, a totalitarian liberal ideology is being imposed. They even forget about the pretensions to democracy, although they are still squealing about it. The latest example is the annulment of the results of the presidential election in Romania, which was not won by a pro-Brussels candidate.

The European elites are not only clearly preparing their populations and countries for war. Even approximate dates are being named when they may be ready to unleash it.

How to stop the madness? Stop the slide towards a third world war, at least in Europe? Achieve an end to the war?

Talk of compromises, truces revolves around freezing along the line of the current confrontation. This will make it possible to rearm the remnants of Ukrainians and, supplementing them with contingents from other countries, to start a new round of hostilities. We will have to fight again. At the same time, from less favorable political positions. It will be possible and necessary, if it is already completely suppressed, to present such a compromise as a victory. But this will be a non-victory, but, frankly speaking, a victory for the West. This is how it will be perceived all over the world. And in many ways, we too.

I will not list all the tools to avoid such a scenario. I will name only the most important ones. First, you need to finally tell yourself, the world and your opponents the obvious. Europe is the source of all the major misfortunes of humanity, two world wars, genocides, anti-human ideologies, colonialism, racism, Nazism and so on. The metaphor of a well-known European official about Europe as a "blooming garden" sounds much more realistic if you call it a field overgrown with fat weeds, blossoming on humus from hundreds of millions of killed, robbed, enslaved. And around rises a garden of the ruins of suppressed and robbed civilizations and peoples. Europe should be called the way it deserves to make the threat of the use of nuclear weapons against it more convincing and justified.

Secondly, to point out another obvious truth – any war between Russia and NATO/EU will inevitably acquire a nuclear character or escalate to the nuclear level if the West continues to fight against us in Ukraine. This instruction is necessary, among other things, to limit the unfolding arms race. It is pointless to procure huge arsenals of conventional weapons if the armies equipped with them, and the countries that sent these armies, will inevitably be swept away by a nuclear tornado.

Thirdly, it is necessary to advance for several more months, grinding the enemy. But the sooner the better it is necessary to announce that our patience, our readiness to sacrifice our men for the sake of victory over this bastard will soon run out and we will announce the price—for every killed Russian soldier, a thousand Europeans will die if they do not stop indulging their rulers who are waging war against Russia. We need to tell the Europeans directly: your elites will make the next portion of cannon fodder out of you, and in the event of the transition of the war to the nuclear level, we will not be able to protect the civilian population of Europe, as we are trying to do in Ukraine. We will warn about strikes, as promised by Vladimir Putin, but nuclear weapons are even less selective than conventional weapons. Of course, at the same time, the European elites must be confronted with the fact: they, their places of residence, will become the first targets for nuclear retaliation strikes. It will not be possible to sit it out.

And the Americans just need to be told that if they continue to throw wood into the furnace of the Ukrainian conflict, we will cross the nuclear Rubicon in a few steps, hit their allies, and if there is a non-nuclear response, as threatened, a nuclear strike will follow on their bases in Europe and around the world. If they decide to respond with a nuclear weapon, they will receive a nuclear strike on their territory.

Fourth, we need to continue our military build-up, which is necessary in a super-turbulent and crisis world. But at the same time, it is necessary not only to change the nuclear doctrine, which, thank God, has already begun, but also to resume, if the Americans and their henchmen do not want to come to an agreement, a decisive movement up the ladder of nuclear escalation to increase the effectiveness of our nuclear deterrence-retaliation forces. The Hazelnut is an excellent weapon, praise to its customers and creators, but it is not a replacement for nuclear weapons, but simply another effective step on the ladder of escalation.

Fifth, it is necessary to convey to the United States through various channels that we do not want to humiliate them and are ready to help ensure their dignified way out of the Ukrainian catastrophe, where the Americans have been dragged by liberal globalists and Europeans.

But the main thing is to understand that we cannot and do not have the right to show indecision before the country, our people and humanity. Not only the fate of Russia is at stake, but also the fate of human civilization in its current form.

If and when the Americans retreat, Ukraine will be defeated quite quickly. Its east and south will go to Russia. In the center and west of today's Ukraine, a demilitarized, with a no-fly zone over it, a neutral state should be formed, where everyone who does not want to live in Russia and obey our laws can gather. A truce will be concluded.

Well, after the truce, it will be necessary to work towards a joint solution to the problems facing humanity with friends from the world majority. And even with the Americans, if they still come to their senses. At the same time, it is urgently necessary to move Europe away from solving world problems for a while. It is once again becoming the main threat to itself and to the world.

Peace on the subcontinent can be established only when Europe's back is once again broken, as it happened as a result of our victories over Napoleon and Hitler, when the generation of the current elites changes. And even then not in a narrow European context–-it is a thing of the past—but in the Eurasian context. [My Emphasis]

Vereshchagin's painting "Retreat. Flight on the High Road", which depicts Napoleon with the remnants of his army, leaving Russia.

Karaganov’s memory is short—it was the Outlaw US Empire who since 1945 saved and nurtured Nazism and worked hand and glove with OUN to use Ukraine as a weapon against USSR then Russian Federation. Does he not recall the “Fuck the EU” we’re calling the shots here phone intercept that showed the world who was guilty of Maidan and the 2014 coup? Again, IMO it’s very clear that Europe isn’t “the main sponsors of Kiev.” Generally, Europe(an) must be followed by Elities, and all of them are essentially planted by the Outlaw US Empire as they attended US Neoliberal Academies, so he must beware painting everyone with the same brush as he clearly has the opposite of Russophobia—Europhobia. However, he refrained from advocating actively destabilizing internal domestic relations of European nations as RT blared—nowhere does he use the term “overthrow” or any other term associated with a coup. As we’ve read before, Karaganov does love his nukes—too much—Oreshnik isn’t potent enough for him. I do get a hint that he’s attempting his own version of Divide and Rule in playing the Outlaw US Empire off its European Colonies. But for whose consumption is that?

Another question: Does Europe’s back need to be broken? The Ukraine conflict has allowed the Outlaw US Empire to colonize EU/NATO, although a few nations have a greater degree of sovereignty than others. Occupied Germany needs a completely different sort of leadership that advocates for its freedom, while it’s currently in a recession that will worsen. The Poles don’t want war with Russia and need to elect better government. The Baltics will remain as they are for another generation, but they’re no threat. France is bad as Germany. Central Europe outside of Germany is either neutral or Pro-Russian. No NATO member wants to pay 5% GDP to US weapons makers who can only make very expensive junk. The UK is its own case but is also falling apart from Neoliberalism. And the Nordic nations are docile trend followers with their own share of domestic problems. All the pro-war bombast is coming from Brussels—EU/NATO: The Liberal Totalitarian Junta.

Mr. Karaganov says his paper is but one of several: “I will not predict the results of the discussion, but I will simply share some preliminary considerations;” so, the above are merely his own “considerations” to be added to others from which Russian policy is to be suggested to the government. I certainly hope when/if RT publishes those papers it links to the originals so we can read what was actually written.

*
*
*
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!