Medvedev at Izvestia: Points of No Return

Former President of Russia Dmirty Medvedev has written an essay for the Izvestia publication whose editor described it thusly: «Deputy Chairman of the Security Council of the Russian Federation Dmitry Medvedev on the causes of the current geopolitical crisis and the key to preserving the future for the whole world.» The machine translation has its problems as usual, but the meaning isn't affected. All emphasis original:

Last year's anniversary – the 100th anniversary of the formation of the USSR – was held against the backdrop of tectonic processes that originated three decades ago and in 2022 provoked powerful, destructive shocks. With a metallic roar, the foundations of the post-Soviet world order collapsed, which until recently was considered, if not the best, but still more or less familiar. The international airbags have not worked, and now the cracks are spreading wide and deep throughout the system of maintaining peace on the planet.

The reasons for what is happening are sought in the legacy of a long and relatively new history. After all, what we are witnessing now has happened more than once – at the moment when another world empire was coming to an end.

Let us turn to the events of the relatively recent past, which many of us have witnessed. The beginning of the tragedy that is unfolding today in Ukraine was laid at the end of the last century. Specifically, at the moment when the Soviet Union collapsed. For a long time, the powerful country rested on post-war agreements and mutual interests of the participating countries, on bloc confrontation and nuclear missiles, on food supplies to its satellites, on tractors and tanks, on "socialist realism", although the communist regime lasted much less than the centuries-old Russian Empire it defeated.

I will not delve into what motives drove the political leaders, through whose efforts the USSR collapsed so quickly. As well as in the arguments about who undermined the Soviet Union: the machinations of external enemies, an uncompetitive economy or an arms race. It is likely that its last leader, who passed away in the year of the centenary of the Union, sincerely believed that he was acting for the benefit of the multinational people of the great state, the head of which he became after the notorious "race on carriages". At the same time, the leaders of the Union republics cynically cared only about becoming heads of independent states created on the still smoking remains of a large country. Anyway, then there was Foros and the August putsch. And the end of the Soviet Union, which remained for the older generation a beloved Fatherland and a beautiful dream of justice.

The Western world looked down on all this, with the arrogant squint of a victor and a sense of sheer superiority. Thinking only about how to satisfy their skin interests. And by all means continuing to push our country into the abyss to completely eliminate its long-standing competitor. All the blissful talk about an equal partnership, a brave new world without dividing lines and other good-natured nonsense was conducted only to avert one's eyes. And they turned out to be only meaningless formulas that masked the perverse intentions of our eternal opponents.

The various politicians who took power in the new Russia could not cope with the threat that had arisen. Someone out of ignorance, lack of political culture and experience, and someone is sincerely mistaken in the intentions of our "new friends". Hard times came: people were rapidly sliding into poverty, and the systemically important sectors of the economy, which fell under the avalanche of privatization, fell into decay. Separatism blossomed, hot spots formed inside the country, and the Caucasus became ablaze.

The credit to the then authorities – the presidents of the USSR and the RSFSR Mikhail Gorbachev and Boris Yeltsin – was often credited with the fact that after the death of the "communist monster" it was possible to prevent anything similar to a civil war, as after the coup of October 24, 1917. It's both true and false. A critical mass of discontent could turn into a full-fledged civil confrontation, on the threshold of which we found ourselves in 1993. But then they did not yet try to actively fan the fire of the conflict from abroad, because the Western world was satisfied with a weak, defeated, submissive Russia. All this will begin a little later, in the mid-90s. And our multinational people then showed wisdom, not allowing to "rock" the country and provoke destructive internal aggression.

The main thing that can be listed as a plus for the leadership of the collapsed USSR and the first head of its successor Russia is that they did not make the most terrible mistake: they did not allow its most powerful nuclear potential to be torn apart on the newly formed patchwork quilt on the site of the great country.

At the cost of incredible efforts, Russia has gradually overcome the most difficult times. She forced her to reckon with herself at the international level, fully paid off her foreign debt, and began to restore the economy and the social sphere. She regained respect for her armed forces, continued to pursue a policy of nuclear deterrence and did not allow provocations.

But history is inexorable. Rome and Constantinople. The Arab Caliphs and Genghis Khan. The rise and inglorious death of Napoleon. "Sunset" in the colonies of powerful Britain. Charlemagne's Europe. Incas and Persians. The Ottoman Empire and Tsarist Russia. On which of these pages you open the volumes of the world chronicle, you will find the same thing. After the heyday of the empire and its golden age, there is a long way to the same end: to disintegration and war or war and disintegration. It's world law. This is what happened to us, to the Soviet Union, only in a deferred version. The war could have happened earlier - in the 90s of the past century, in the first two decades of the XXI century, but it has flared up now. Such a development of events is associated with the inexorable and cruel course of world history. A big country dies and a war begins. Sooner or later. The accumulated internal contradictions and grievances are too strong. There is a deep nationalism, primitive envy and greed. And, of course, the strongest catalyst for war after the death of an empire is always the countries around it, wishing to further divide the collapsed power. In our case, it was the frostbitten and cynical position of the Western world. The Anglo-Saxon civilization, completely ragged by its impunity, which simply went crazy on the basis of the ideas of exclusivity and invented messianism.

Two dates can be considered points of no return. The first is in the autumn of 2008, when the Western world supported Georgia's aggression against the Ossetian people and raised to the skies an asshole, drug addict and adventurer, who was later rejected not only by his own country, but also by a stranger, where he cowardly fled. The aggressor was then given a quick and firm rebuff.

The second turning point is the spring of 2014, when the people of Crimea expressed their will in a legitimate referendum, returning forever to their historical homeland. In the Western world, this caused a frenzied, impotent hysteria, which continues to this day. Their convulsions are fueled by cave Russophobia and the desire to create a new-born Frankenstein in the person of Ukraine – a special "anti-Russia", about which the president of our country wrote. What else can I say? Only one thing: the wise predecessors of today's brainless Western politicians said this: Deus quos vult perdere dementat prius – whom God wants to punish, he first deprives reason. It was this insane hysteria, the obsessive desire to tear apart our country, that ultimately led to a special military operation.

History demonstrates something else: any collapsed empire buries half the world, or even more, under its rubble. This, it seems, does not want to understand those who first collapsed the USSR, and now are trying to destroy the Russian Federation. They still have delusional illusions that by sending the Soviet Union to the other world without firing a shot, they will be able to bury today's Russia without significant problems for themselves, throwing the lives of thousands of people involved in the conflict into the furnace. These are extremely dangerous misconceptions. As with the USSR it will not work. If the question of the existence of Russia itself seriously arises, it will not be resolved on the Ukrainian front. And together with the question of the further existence of the entire human civilization. There should be no ambiguity here. We don't need a world without Russia.

Of course, it is possible to continue to pump weapons into the neo-fascist Kiev regime and prevent any opportunity to revive negotiations. Our enemies are doing just that, not wanting to understand that their goals are knowingly leading to a total fiasco. A loss for everyone. Crash. Apocalypse. When the former life will have to be forgotten for centuries, until the smoke debris ceases to emit radiation.

Russia will not allow this. And we are not alone in this endeavor. Western countries with satellites account for only 15% of the world's population. There are many more of us, and we are much stronger. The calm power of our great country and the authority of its partners are the key to preserving the future for our entire world.