Home Misperceptions Russia - Then & Now Gallery Contact & Links About
© all rights reserved 2011
POSTSCRIPT: THE IMMEDIATE PAST AND SHORT TERM FUTURE THE ELECTION OF 2012  The key to this election was the 90,000 cameras.  This brilliant stroke by Putin’s forces was easy to implement; it wasn’t necessary to purchase and install such a  quantity of equipment quickly, as Russia’s 160+ security organs already had it on hand.  The cameras backed off the great majority of Western protest and greatly  reduced physical observation at the polls as well as post-election commentary.  All voters knew that they would be filmed by security organs and that all results  would be quickly correlated to individuals, especially individuals who might be protesters.  The lives of these people could then be subject to intense scrutiny and  harassment.  This actually happened to one of the candidates, Prokhorov, during the campaign as state security-obtained videos of him in compromising personal  positions were distributed widely in an effort to discredit his reputation---this tactic sent a strong signal to the voters that everyone is a vulnerable object with Putin  using more and more high-tech scrutiny.  The result was that fewer people voted, and most of those who did vote were Putin supporters.  One certainty from here  on is that, like in Great Britain, more cameras will be deployed to watch the daily movements of the general population, making this technique more important, but  still not as important as good old-fashioned USSR-mode gossiping to get dirt on the population. (WARNING)  (DANGER)  (WARNING)  (DANGER)  (WARNING)  (DANGER)  (WARNING)  (DANGER) The following uses of English, translated from original Russian by the finest Russian native-speaking translators and/or English native-speaking Russian (socialist, usually) sympathizers, MUST NOT be interpreted in the context of typical Western thought.  These translations are merely a failed attempt to translate the essence  of Russian culture into English, so they must be additionally interpreted for the Western mind.  These Russian attempts at translation are as fruitless as would be  any non-native-Russian-speaker’s attempt to really translate a novel like WAR AND PEACE into English and yet retain the Russian cultural essence.  See  TRANSLATION below each comment for more clarity regarding analysis and intent.  Ear noodling refers to the Russian idiomatic expression for, literally,  covering/stuffing a listener’s ears/brains with noodles, with the effect that the listener is deceived or rendered stupefied. It’s like stunning an animal before slaying it-  --an old hunting tactic.   (WARNING)  (DANGER)  (WARNING)  (DANGER)  (WARNING)  (DANGER)  (WARNING)  (DANGER) PUTIN AND THE MEDIA  The world according to President Putin: These comments are from a recent visionary essay published in a prominent Russian newspaper.  ARAB SPRING: (PUTIN) Initially perceived as opportunity for positive change, Russian companies are now losing business in local commercial markets to  companies of states involved in regime change.  Kremlin will work with new Arab Governments to restore economic relationships. TRANSLATION:  Rather than comprehensive relations, only economic (defense/defense-related) relationships are vital for Russia in this relatively distant region.   Russia seeks to limit the development of political systems which would impede existing trade agreements in the future, and take any steps necessary to hinder  change of any kind. “Opportunity for positive change” is totally undefined beyond the above, and is meaningless to Russia from a Western socio-economic  standpoint. LIBYA:  (PUTIN) Western support for regime change under pretext of humanitarian support undermined principles of Libyan state sovereignty.  Execution of  Muammar Gaddafi ---  not just medieval but primeval ---  was manifestation of those actions.  TRANSLATION:  My principles related to state sovereignty are quite similar to those of Gaddafi: chiefly, the leader is the state.  My definitions of execution and  assassination are intertwined and don’t relate to western definitions.  I also understand the terms medieval and primeval very well, and like Gaddafi, apply them to  my management style, without consideration for history or context.  And in my personal, modern, and refined view of those definitions, Western countries and the  Libyan people are medieval and primeval.  The Syrian people as well, of course.   As well, I strive not to be assassinated, and my internal/international support  structures strive to prevent such.  I proudly use this pretext as one of many methods of suppressing my own population.   Great Russia may interpret the context of  humanitarian support as it feels applicable to individual cases to serve its own interests, at any time and without fear of international recriminations.  For example,  in the cases of Ossetia and Abkhazia, we felt that humanitarian support was necessary to deal with Georgian oppression. NORTH KOREA:  (PUTIN) Moscow cannot accept North Korea’s nuclear status.  TRANSLATION: Ear noodling vagueness, as “nuclear status” and everything else related is left totally unclear.  Russia never just tacitly accepts or rejects.  Russia  interacts by  either embracing or destroying. Russia gains absolutely nothing from North Korean cooperation. And, as North Koreans are more of a  Mongolian/Chinese inbred people, the racial discrimination factor encourages “the less said, the better.”  . SYRIA: (PUTIN) Libyan scenario must not be employed in Syria.  International community must work to achieve internal reconciliation and prevent all-out civil war.   Russia is working towards introduction of multi-party political system promised by President Assad. TRANSLATION:  Russia views Syria as practically a non-slavic Serbia.  This long-time link is most vital to Russia’s maintaining influence in the Middle East through  defense agreements.  Politically, Russia wants an election system in Syria identical to Russia’s, where the appearance of many political parties is supposed to  make foreigners believe that democracy exists.  Russia is staying out of Syria (except for closet military advisors, a-la-Serbia) but also keeping the other 75% of its  perceived “Middle East Quartet” (UN, U.S., EU, and Russia: see ARAB-ISRAELI CONFLICT, below) out as well.  Thus, the prospect of a Libyan scenario only  increases, not decreases, as unabated slaughter and prospects for famine continue to negatively affect the overall population and divide the regime’s military ranks.   Slaughter and famine don’t encourage reconciliation; rather, they encourage hostility.  Putin has no interest in words like compromise or reconciliation---they are not  even in the Russian dictionary.  To repeat,, Russia, with no FUNCTIONING multi-party political system, can’t possibly be interested in promoting same in any  foreign country.  A window on current Syrian government leadership = an open window on Russia’s, today.  Note as well that no mention of China, Russia’s  “partner” in this strategy, is made here.  This is an indication that Sino-Russo teamwork isn’t as strong as perceived. CHINA:  (PUTIN)  World’s second largest economy offers colossal potential for business cooperation.  TRANSLATION:  More noodles for the ears.  Russia has absolutely no control over China, and China is running completely roughshod over Russia.  So Russia  always tries to marginalize China, because Russia is usually never dictated to.  The main business principle for Russia:  Do it absolutely our way, period.  This  works fine inside of Russia but outside (except for activities subject to criminal/Government protection-subsidy), Russia is a fish totally out of water. China has 12  times more people and 12 times bigger an economy, despite not exporting raw materials (except rare ones).  For them, Russia is just a little fry with huge future  “colonial” potential, after Mongolia is completed.  Though Russia IS concerned about nuclear weapons and defensive systems vis-à-vis the West, their main geo-  political concern is China.  Both countries realize this, but don’t publicize it.    UNITED STATES:  (PUTIN) Obsessed with idea of absolute invulnerability.  Concept is unfeasible, requiring absolute vulnerability for all other nations.  Instability  of Moscow-Washington relationship is due, in part, to stereotypical perception of Russia on Capitol Hill.  U.S. plans to establish missile defense system in Europe,  close to Russia’s borders, will trigger countermeasures and undermine global security. TRANSLATION: It takes one to “know” one.   Putin means just the opposite ---  Russia is obsessed with such invulnerability, and seeks all other nations’  vulnerability.  Free world economics and political systems don’t allow such obsessive behaviors.  Russia lives and breathes emotion/sense-based obsession, which is why the word is used here.  Putin indicates that his inner Russian self is even more powerful that his cold-war Soviet reason for being, and that he still wants to  blend both creatively in creating ink for the West.  Putin would like, especially in cases such as Iran,  to see value in international relationships which place primary  value on military and economic VULNERABILITY, combined, rather than merely economic and political capacity/capability, with a good example being Georgia. The  “Capitol Hill” (note: not even any mention of the Judiciary) comment means that Russia has no need for any government system requiring checks and balances  between executive, legislative, and judicial.   The “missile defense” comment means that Russia, as the world’s lone evolved strictly forest-based hunter-gatherer  culture, still prioritizes  its offensive capability, even though it is perfectly capable of defending itself. Russia understands very well that the best offense is a good  defense.  This has been proven to Russia twice resoundingly in the last 200 years during massive ground-based conflicts (War of 1812, WW-2)  Yet Russia still  wants to minimize its state-of-the-art defensive capability and prioritize casting modern (not yet fully developed) spears beyond its borders---to the continuing  detriment (in all aspects of life) of its perennially suffering people.  This made at least some sense when the Soviet Union was promoting its view of world Socialism  and there was a huge population/material resource base to suck from. Not now.  Rational perspectives aren’t tangible here, with this issue, as even though Russia’s masses can understand (and just want to just live/suffer in peace), the dominant Russian leadership never has.  Their emotions and senses tell them: we know that this missile system isn’t meant for us, BUT IT COULD BE LATER ON, so it must be rejected outright.  This is a perfect example of Russians’ flawed ability to value  long-term analysis and prediction. Evolution can’t happen in terms shorter than multiple generations, so one should not expect Lavrov to refine his views any time  soon.  Paradoxically, the subject related to the missile system, the current Iranian Islamic  State, was in large part created by The Soviet Union and has since  blossomed by doing “business” with Russia (see ARAB SPRING).  This means that Russia views  Iran as an offensive partner against Europe…most interesting  (see EUROPE).  ALL OF THIS  reflects  REAL obsession.  GLOBAL SECURITY:  (PUTIN) All states have inalienable rights to security.  This can only be achieved through cooperation with Russia.  TRANSLATION:  Russia wants to influence all countries’ weapons capability, including all countries which have different political/economic systems AND all  countries which still have Soviet-legacy equipment AND which have geo-political/economic influence and intellectual property beyond the developed capacity of  Russia, regardless of whether the capacity is larger or smaller.  If just one obsessive (obsessive: see UNITED STATES) Putin comment of the many expressed  here had to be chosen as the MOST obsessive comment, this is THE ONE.  This truly reflects the master hunter-gatherer.  He also implies that no nation is secure,  no nation is safe.  Russia should be feared as prey should be alarmed by a wolf.  This allows an inside view of Russia’s crime-based domestic society.  IRAN:  (PUTIN) Consequences of growing threat of military threat of military strike against Iran will be disastrous.  Moscow recognizes Tehran’s right to develop  civilian nuclear program  ---  including  uranium enrichment  ----  but under IAEA peaceful atom safeguards.  If this is done, all sanctions against Iran must be  rescinded. TRANSLATION:  The IAEA being tossed out of the country after being refused access to weapons-related research facilities is of no importance to Russia.  A  military strike against Iran would be disastrous for all EXCEPT Russia, which will rapidly move to re-establish control over many of its Soviet-era positions.  Russia  just now really needs technical/economic $poil$ in a defensive context---like in Eastern Europe after WW-2 earlier and like Ossetia and Abkhazia recently.  Russia  supports the big Iranian stall strategy 100%.  They are all-in on future Middle East influence, with Iran as the lynchpin.  Big ear-noodling  here.      EUROPE:  (PUTIN) Russia is an inalienable part of European civilization.  Moscow proposes creation of Union of Europe.  Abolition of visas would give powerful  impetus to integration.  Russia supports strong EU as envisioned by Germany and France. TRANSLATION:  Russia is completely alienated from European civilization.  Russia hasn’t been any part of continental Europe for thousands of years, and has only  marginally resumed contact since the 1700’s.  Europe always has been and always be merely a convenient technical trading partner and a distant cultural curiosity.   Russia wants nothing to do with Europe legally, politically, or economically---but wants to join the World Trade Organization on the pretense of it respecting western  rules and regulations and of wanting to appear European.  Russia wants to speak through its natural resources exporting and weapons capabilities, though it  realizes that its ability  and desire to create (a-la-WTO) capital wealth is  non-existent domestically and internationally.  Moscow never proposes anything seriously  unless it is military (threatening) in nature, because its long term financial (WEST = capital + law) prognosis always has been and always will be weak.  Everyone  recognizes how little value Putin places on political, processes inside his own country. The “Union of Europe” comment is interesting given that just recently, Russia  made a similar proposal was made to join Russia with several Central Asian nations and Belorussia; it shows just how flexible and exotic the Russian ADAPTIVE  mentality is capable of being, and Russia’s Asian bloc policies haven’t even been considered yet.  The reality is that Russia isn’t European, Central Asian, or Asian-  --because its mentality is uniquely forested. And  uniquely TRI-polar, as well, as one famous U.S. ex-Secretary of State might have suggested.  It usually takes, at  minimum, an Eastern European to really understand a Russian on their  terms.  The “strong EU” comment means that Germany and France, as two of Russia’s  largest trading partners, will be arm-twisted to convey Russia’s vague agendas.  Abolition of visas would speed up Russia’s brain drain, eliminating all opposition to Putin’s rule.  It would also greatly facilitate the expansion of Russia’s secret services and espionage back into former Soviet-occupied countries---it’s all hunting and  gathering.    AFGHANISTAN:  (PUTIN) NATO-led military coalition has failed to meet its objectives --- threats of terrorism and drug trafficking continue.  Process of national  reconciliation should be joined by Taliban, on condition they renounce violence, recognize country’s constitution and sever ties with Al Qieda.    TRANSLATION:  Russia wants to define its own war on terror in its own way, mainly as it’s reflected inside Russia’s own borders, and not in any coordinated  international perspective. No degree of success regarding any joined international counter-terrorism effort will alter how terrorism is interpreted and dealt with inside  of Russia.  For example, Russia interprets Chechnya as a terrorist hub instead of an independence-seeking region when everyone knows it’s really only like the  Kurdish region and other primarily sloped  places where life is mainly just based on animal husbandry and spot agriculture.  The “drug-trafficking” relates to  Afghanistan-related narcotics problems inside of Russia.  Russia is now the main opium pipeline from Afghanistan to Europe, which consumes over 60% of world-  wide output.  Being a crime-based society, Russia cares little (except for some lip-service, like above) about the trail of devastated lives left in the wake of this  activity.  From a purely business perspective, Russia is encouraging further development of opium in Central Asia, since it’s too cold to grow in the forest.  Finally,  The Soviet Union and  Russia have had a long history subsidizing opponents of Israel in the Middle East, so Russia knows quite well, based on its experience with  Hamas, etc., that the Taliban would never agree to the terms stated above.  In Russian, the word reconciliation mainly applies to domestic life, and never has been  a part an international diplomatic vocabulary.   In Russia, the stereotypical perception is that the male rules the family with an iron fist, so reconciliation rarely  applies, anyway.  More ear noodling.   ARAB-ISRAELI CONFLICT: (PUTIN)  Russia will continue to work with Israeli and Palestinian leaders for resumption of peace process both on bilateral basis  and within (a) format of (the) Middle East Quartet of UN, U.S., EU and Russia.     TRANSLATION:  As referenced often in other parts of this site, Russia demands to be treated as an equal in world affairs based on their Soviet history and on their  nuclear arsenal, in spite of the fact that Russians can no longer afford to advocate/defend their view of world (weapons giving) $ocialism.  This region is like all  other parts of the world, mainly just a minor trading partner group.  Russians hate Jews even more than they hate Muslims.  Russia doesn’t “work with” anyone.   Russia only dictates to people.  Russia always benefits from conflict and strife, and by manipulating peace processes.  Again, strangely, there is not even a  patronizing mention of China, which Russia constantly seeks to marginalize---to its detriment and China’s benefit in numerous bilateral settings.