Famous political scientist Igor Panarin on how Putin was sent a "response" for the throne of the Byzantine emperor and what is behind the "yellow vests" in France
England is destabilizing the world in order to disrupt the implementation of the Chinese project "One Belt - One Road", which intends to unite the markets of China, Russia and Europe, said Igor Panarin, professor and head of the InfoSpetsnaz Association. About what connects French President Macron with the Freemasons and the Rothschilds, why Putin has no one to go to except Metropolitan Tikhon Shevkunov, and whether Russia can learn not to lose to the British. Panarin said in an interview.
Igor Panarin believes that Britain is destabilizing the world in order to disrupt the implementation of the Chinese project "One Belt - One Road", which intends to unite the markets of China, Russia and Europe.
“THE NATIONAL ORIENTED FRENCH CAPITAL HAS BEEN DISAPPEARED IN YELLOW VESTS”
- Igor Nikolaevich, one of the brightest events of the end of 2018 was the revolution of “yellow vests” in France. Some even began to talk about the decline of the Fifth Republic and the beginning of the Sixth. Who, in your opinion, is the main target of this revolution and what forces are behind it? Do the French protests have "external reasons", as they say in Europe, blaming the United States or Russia?
- I think that the reasons for the French protests are mostly internal. To begin with, a split has long been brewing in France. Let us recall the famous novel by Elena Chudinova "Notre Dame Mosque", which modeled in a fantastic genre some of the scenarios that later began to be realized (the action of the novel takes place in 2048, when Europe, according to the author, has already been completely captured by Muslim migrants - ed.). Indeed, the flow of refugees from North Africa and the Middle East, Africans and Arabs besieging the Old World, has reached appalling proportions. This was obvious 8-10 years ago - I remember my impression of the "colored" Paris, when the problem of the import of migrants to Europe did not seem to look so acute.
For a long time, the "yellow vests" did not express any specific requirements, although it was clear to everyone that the rise in gasoline prices alone could hardly provoke such large-scale unrest. Finally, 25 demands that Protestants make to their government appeared in the public domain. What do we see? Yes, there are many economic demands regarding salaries, pensions and taxes - even the call to remove radars from the roads as a form of "veiled tax." But there are also loud political demands - for example, France's withdrawal from the EU and NATO. And it helps us understand the 2018 revolution and integrate it into the overall context of French history.
Recall that the riots of 1968 (the so-called "red May" - ed.) In France were a response to the actions of the then President Charles de Gaulle. By the way, the Soviet Union did not support them, and it is completely wrong, in my opinion. This was one of the strategic mistakes of the USSR - had it not been for her, history could have gone differently. And in the mid-1960s, de Gaulle demanded the return of the gold given to the United States under the Marshall Plan in exchange for these "green candy wrappers", as he called dollars. In fact, the French president proposed to abandon the use of the dollar in international settlements and return to the gold standard. “Gold does not change its nature: it can be in bars, bars, coins; it has no nationality, it has long been accepted by the whole world as an invariable value,”de Gaulle declared then. By doing so, he actually pushed the Bretton Woods system towards its first collapse in 1971-1973.
But there was another blow that the French leader dealt to America, which had grown stronger after the Second World War. Few now remember that NATO's headquarters were previously located not in Brussels, but in Paris. When I was in Paris, I looked at this building (known as the Chaillot Palace, built in 1937) - there is not so far from the Russian embassy. But Charles de Gaulle insisted that in 1967 the headquarters of the North Atlantic Alliance be moved from Chaillot to Brussels. This indicated that the French President began to pursue a nationally oriented course. Therefore, the events of 1968, with their outer shell of "student revolt", were in fact directed personally against de Gaulle and against the independent course of France.
Promotional video:
What is happening now? My point of view on modern French events (although there is not enough information yet) is that they are diametrically opposed to the unrest of 68. They are opposite in terms of the vector: this is an attempt to return to de Gaulle and national sovereignty, the nation state, to abandon the external framework of the EU and NATO, which are again controlled by the Anglo-Saxons. Moreover, it was reported that among the "yellow vests" there is a growing demand for Trump. Donald Trump himself wrote about this with some naivety in his Twitter: “They chant:“We need Trump!”I love France. They want me! " But the point, perhaps, is not in Trump himself, but in those models and symbols that are associated with him.
They also talk about the extraordinary organization of the "yellow vests". Of course, I would not rule out the organizational factor here, but within the French one. Let me remind you that Emmanuel Macron came to the presidency in 2017 from almost nowhere and was completely unprepared for his role. He is a completely British henchman, a protege of London bankers, who is assigned to external control and to corral France. And he fulfills this mission without representing himself personally. About two years ago (in June 2016 - ed.) Macron openly attended a meeting of the well-known Masonic organization "Great East of France". This took place in the temple of Arthur Grusier (the former great master of the "Great East of France" - ed.). on the rue Cade in Paris. Macron was then still in the rank of Minister of Economy and Finance and made a report to the Masonic brothers on the topic "Globalization - a synonym for progress?" By the way, I saw this wonderful mansion on Kade Street - beautiful, entourage … But what does this connection between Macron and the Freemasons and the British mean? That he is an absolutely dependent figure. Plus his moral character, his relationship with his own bodyguard of Arab origin (Alexander Benall - ed.), All kinds of scandals … All this makes the current owner of the Elysee Palace a figure of rejection among the majority of the French population. Yes, with the help of certain technological chains they helped him to come to power, but the feeling of rejection for this man grows against the background of his withered wife, against the background of his antics with bodyguards, against the background of orgies in the Elysee Palace, which people see,and against the background of the flourishing of various unconventional movements that developed rapidly under Macron. At the same time, the standard of living of the French deteriorated sharply, and the nationally oriented French capital began a battle with the Rothschilds, first of all, with London bankers. This was expressed, as I see it, in the movement of the "yellow vests". These are not just street riots - this is a struggle between national capital and international, primarily British, capital. And it's no coincidence that the French talk about Trump - they don't have their own French Trump yet. Marine Le Pen is not drawn to this role …as I see it, in the movement of "yellow vests". These are not just street riots - this is a struggle between national capital and international, primarily British, capital. And it's no coincidence that the French talk about Trump - they don't have their own French Trump yet. Marine Le Pen is not drawn to this role …as I see it, in the movement of "yellow vests". These are not just street riots - this is a struggle between national capital and international, primarily British, capital. And it's no coincidence that the French talk about Trump - they don't have their own French Trump yet. Marine Le Pen is not drawn to this role …
I just wanted to ask about her. Marine Le Pen is known to support the yellow vest movement, although her voice in the protests that gripped France is still barely audible
- She, in my opinion, discredited herself. That is, she is clearly not Trump, although they said when there was a tough fight between her and Macron in the second round of the presidential election that she was like him. And Jean-Luc Melanchon (member of the French National Assembly, took 4th place in the 2017 presidential election) is also, in general, not Trump. Perhaps Macron would have fled to England long ago, but the "yellow vests" have no worthy politician, no French Trump. There is strong popular discontent, but its energy cannot take the form of some political figure who, in the wake of protests, could replace Macron. Perhaps such a person will appear. I do not exclude that he is being protected until a time - not only from participation in barricade battles, but also from possible discrediting. I am not a connoisseur of France and cannot fully judge this,but so far such a figure has not appeared on the surface.
In the recent past, the French have had such a figure: former IMF Managing Director Dominique Strauss-Kahn. He was indeed a strong dominant political figure, but a provocation was organized against him, allegedly related to the harassment of an African-American maid, and was taken out of the political sphere. We well remember this story, which ended in nothing: the woman confessed that she was lying. However, by that time, a cross had already been put on Strauss-Cana as a policy. He was "removed" preventively.
“Yellow vests” are smart guys: remembering this lesson, they understand that it is impossible to display a strong figure ahead of time for everyone to see. The law of snipers will work immediately: either NATO or the British will try to discredit the newly-minted leader. Macron is still the President of France, and it is not known when he will run away and if he will run away at all. To avoid provocations and blows to a strong figure, it is possible that she is simply not taken to the first line, but they are waiting for the pendulum from the Fifth Republic to swing to the Sixth. And then “French Trump” will appear, but objectively, of course, there is a need not for “French Trump”, but for modern de Gaulle. It would be great for Russia if a new de Gaulle stood at the head of France, aiming at excellent relations between Paris and Moscow. It would be the best way out of the chaos in which French society has plunged. I do not exclude that the "yellow vests" have some kind of "ambush regiment" along with de Gaulle's new version. Sometimes the names of a number of French oligarchs are called, whether they are they or not - I don't know. But I am convinced that this time the nationally oriented French capital has changed into the "yellow vests".
By the way, when Macron in Argentina at the airport (during the G20 summit - ed.) Was met only by airfield workers in "yellow vests", I think it was not an accident. In Russia, few people know and understand the specifics of Argentina. Everyone thinks that this is some kind of Spanish country, but this is not entirely true. I have been there several times and made sure that in Argentina there are equal numbers of Italians and French, and the Spaniards are only in third place. Moreover, there are a lot of former French people, ethnic, and not only on the basis of citizenship. Therefore, I do not exclude that Macron's loneliness at the Buenos Aires airport and his first encounter with the "yellow vests" may be an element of some kind of transatlantic game.
But will France be given the opportunity to become free from the dictates of NATO and America? She is, in essence, alone on the European continent
- I told the optimistic scenario. But there are few real chances - after all, Nicolas Sarkozy violated de Gaulle's principle and brought France into the military organization. Of course, surrounded on all sides, the country is unlikely to achieve complete independence. But we see that “yellow vests” have appeared in Belgium as well. Whether this wave will go further is a big question. Of course, the internal NATO blocking mechanisms will take effect. There will be tough opposition to the nationally oriented course of France, regardless of who will be at its head.
BREXIT IS LIKE THE MEXICAN WALL OF DONALD TRUMP: ENGLAND WANTS TO GET AWAY FROM DYING EUROPE
- The so-called Brexit is scheduled for March 29, 2019. A vote in the British Parliament will be held in January, and if it is successful, the UK's divorce from the Old World will be inevitable. Do you think Brexit will take place? And what are the consequences of this?
- In the case of Brexit, a rather tricky and at the same time simple British combination is visible. She assumes that the flow of emigrants from Europe to England will decrease or be reduced to zero. At the same time, on the contrary, it is planned to send even more refugees to Europe, as far as is generally permissible under the UN global migration pact. Already the Baltics are beginning to rebel, feeling that a general migration wave is hanging over it too. What can we say about large European countries … But in the eyes of England, this is just a blow to competitors. At the same time, all trade and economic preferences remain with London. That is, such a simple plan: let migrants go to competitors, let them spend resources on their maintenance, let refugees burn cars there and destabilize the situation. All this will help the British to eliminate economic competitors in Europe. And the British, on the contrary, are fenced off with an iron fence from migrants, but economically there is no fence. This is how I would interpret the whole Brexit plan.
The flow of migrants to the UK is also quite high - it is not surprising that they felt a certain threat. And now the British are trying to block it with the power of this combination, while preserving as much as possible preferences through Northern Ireland and other directions. Brexit is conceived as a bloc, a kind of Donald Trump's Mexican wall. After all, the American president, too, by erecting a wall on the border with Mexico, maintains economic ties with it. The British came up with this maneuver a little earlier: in words they criticize Trump, but in reality they were the first to build a wall between themselves and the rest of the world. The usual deceit.
- That is, continental Europe in the eyes of the British is a sinking ship, given to be plundered by migrants. And English gentlemen at this time peacefully smoke by the fireplace.
- Yes, but they want to take goods from the sinking ship at a discount before it sinks. That is, to keep the relationship as in the good old days.
- But the British are still Europeans. Don't they feel sorry for Europe?
- In fact, they are abandoning Europe. In Germany, for example, every sixth citizen is not ethnically German. Last year alone, 800,000 new refugees arrived here, two years ago - a million. Germany is a smaller country: 89 million people. This is not such a gigantic number to admit a million newcomers a year who do not want to work and do not intend to, but plan to live on social benefits and create a criminal environment there. At the same time, they are guaranteed a social benefit of 350 euros, temporary housing, etc. That is, approximately 350 million euros the German government is forced to simply give monthly. How long will Germany last?
Let me remind you that the main migratory avalanche started in 2015. But what was the reason? I think that the reason lies on the surface - in 2013, Beijing proclaimed the concept of a new economic belt of the Silk Road: "One Belt - One Road." It took a while for the British to realize that the goal of the project was access to Europe, to the largest European ports like Hamburg, etc. By and large, to tie Europe to China on a global scale. Containers along this path will pass two to three times faster than where everything is controlled by a bunch of bankers.
When the British realized what the Chinese project could turn out to be, they decided to sacrifice Europe. Say, you'd better not get anyone, you'd better perish in the chaos of migration than we would allow this. It is appropriate here to recall the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-1905. The British funded Japan during this period. Why? Because in the early 1900s, it was planned to connect our Chinese Eastern Railway (at that time the Manchurian road) with Qingdao, a city that was transferred to Germany by concession since 1897. And so two empires, imperial Germany and tsarist Russia, planned to carry out a gigantic trans-Eurasian project through communication with Qingdao - and further to Berlin and Hamburg. 100 years ago! The British interfered - they organized the Russo-Japanese War. As a result, these plans were not destined to come true.
100 years ago, Russia was number one in this project, since the Celestial Empire was still weak. Now the roles are changing. China is number one, Russia is number two and Germany is number three. And here again, very opportunely for London, the disintegration of Germany and all of Europe begins. In all this, economic interests, the usual thirst for profit are again read. The logic here is operational and very simple, it does not think in categories: "what will happen then when Europe disappears as a whole?"
- That's just the point. Britain is just an archipelago. Can she really feel safe next to a flaming Europe?
- This, in fact, is the problem: people think in operational categories of making a profit. They think they can move to Switzerland, and then maybe Hong Kong or wherever they have bunkers. But the global problem is that with the departure of Zbigniew Brzezinski (died in 2017 - ed.), There are practically no carriers of strategic thinking left in the West. Henry Kissinger is already 95 years old, he is hardly capable of conceptual thinking. And today's ideologues have crazy profits, which they care about - this is the main thing. And the profits will remain, but for a very short period of time - until chaos overtakes them too.
Here I remember Father Tikhon Shevkunov, who brilliantly described the death of Byzantium (in his film “The Death of an Empire. Byzantine Lesson” - ed.). When a relatively small Turkish army approached the walls of impregnable Constantinople, almost none of the wealthy Byzantine nobility was going to defend the capital. Very soon they paid for it - they were all cut out physically. This is a very telling example of myopia. Today's Western tycoons, chasing additional profits, do not see what lies ahead - the abyss, which in many ways they themselves dug. And this chasm is constantly widening. The question is: how adequate are these people? It turns out that they first provoked the Russo-Japanese War, then plunged humanity into the First and Second World Wars - and all for the sake of making a profit in the end. But now the means of destruction are much more powerful … In my opinion, the sense of danger in these people has atrophied - and this is a global problem not only for them, but for all of us.
- Trump is often called the leader of the white Christian majority (although it is not known whether it is the majority). When you say that Europe has a demand for Trump, do you mean a certain leader of the white population of Europe who is already considered to be dying out?
- Yes, and it is needed not only for France, Germany also needs it. Angela Merkel is clearly not the kind of leader that time takes. Perhaps Matteo Salvini, the Italian minister of the interior and one of the leaders of the League of the North, can grow to the level of a pan-European leader. In early December, when Salvini gathered a demonstration in Rome with the participation of 80 thousand people, he said that the pogroms and riots in France are breeding poverty and migrants. But how much will he be allowed to grow? So far, he is not even an Italian leader, not a prime minister, but simply an interior minister. However, at the European level, I see no other figure other than Salvini. In the United States, in fact, there was an uprising of the white population, which promoted Donald Trump from its ranks (or Trump saddled him). In Europe, a similar process is underway, but who will lead it? For instance,can Vladimir Putin be such a leader? Unfortunately, hardly, probably.
Is Putin too demonized for Europe?
- Yes, he's demonized. In order to carry out the operation of de-demonization, time is needed, but there is not very much of it left. Demonization in recent years has been purposeful. On the other hand, we could not withstand the blow after Putin's famous trip to Athos - remember, when he took a place in the niche intended for the Byzantine emperors (in 2016, in the Athos Church of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary, the President of the Russian Federation, at the insistence of the Greeks, took stasidia - the most honorable, "Royal" place in the cathedral - ed.)? After that, we received a series of blows in the context of this particular story. That symbolic gesture did not lead to spiritual movement; on the contrary, we showed weakness. I'm not just talking about Putin, I mean the Russian Orthodox Church. It is obvious that we have made major strategic mistakes in recent years. And this is not only ours,but also a European problem: Trump seems to have nowhere to appear in Europe. But, if, as already said, the French for the time being hide their Trump from prying eyes, then Europe still has a chance of salvation.
“PART OF PUTIN'S ENVIRONMENT DOESN'T PASS ITS LEADER. PERSONNEL ACTIONS RAPE"
Since you mentioned Putin and Athos, I cannot but ask: is the rupture of the Moscow Patriarchate with the Patriarchate of Constantinople a" response "for the imperial" laurels "of the Russian president?
- Yes, this is a response, but it was necessary to prepare for it the very next day after Vladimir Putin left Athos. Moreover, the honors shown to our head of state were supported by the Athonite brotherhood - a global integration and spiritual model was built, rooted in the Byzantine past. It was necessary to build mechanisms, but several years passed, but practically nothing was built. Father Tikhon, who was the only one who could build some intelligible model, on the contrary, was sent far from Moscow.
- In Pskov - as a metropolitan
- Yes, and it's good that Putin visited him in November last year (the President of the Russian Federation visited the Holy Dormition Pskovo-Pechersky Monastery on November 18 - ed.). I think this is a very important point. It was Tikhon Shevkunov who was the center of a certain crystallization - spiritual, intellectual and Orthodox - in Moscow and in Russia as such. There is no other figure besides him. One way or another, we were unable to take the blow. How we will get out of this situation is not yet very clear. There are now more negative scenarios than positive ones. But the negative scenario that has already been launched, from my point of view, could have been avoided.
- By the way, Putin began his presidency in 2000 with a trip to the Pskov-Pechersk Lavra. Then there was still alive John Krestyankin, the famous elder. There is even a photograph of Putin with him. And there is a legend that it was Krestyankin who blessed Putin for such a long presidency. Then, in 2000, the second president of the Russian Federation after Yeltsin was very difficult - his fate and the fate of the whole country were being decided. But why now, after 18 years, Putin again visited the same monastery? Is it very difficult for him again and needs support?
- To some extent, yes, now is the same turning point as it was in 2000. This is due to the international “pressing” of our country, the tough geopolitical struggle in the Russia-China-USA triangle, rivalry for Europe, and internal political intrigues. It is obvious that part of Putin's entourage does not "pull" their leader, but the president, according to his ethical, internal principles, does not want to get rid of him. Dichotomy … In March 2018, Putin's triumph in the presidential election was obvious - over 76 percent. This was followed by a deterioration in the attitude towards him in society, dissatisfaction with the increase in taxes and the pension reform. This is a whole tangle of problems. We need to make some kind of turning decisions. And Vladimir Vladimirovich has long been weighing which path to take. Here, as in a fairy tale - you go to the right or to the left, the alternative is not fun. For instance,in 2015, in a difficult situation, Putin made a very correct decision: I mean the start of the Syrian anti-terrorist operation. Otherwise Damascus would have fallen unambiguously, and these terrorist hordes would have rushed to us. It would have been much worse. But Syria managed to keep, managed to "work out the army" and prepare it for a larger military conflict. God forbid there is war tomorrow, but at least the Russian armed forces are ready for this. This is the main result of Syria: the terrorists have been destroyed, the army is ready, and we have received a respite. God forbid there is war tomorrow, but at least the Russian armed forces are ready for this. This is the main result of Syria: the terrorists have been destroyed, the army is ready, and we have received a respite. God forbid there is war tomorrow, but at least the Russian armed forces are ready for this. This is the main result of Syria: the terrorists have been destroyed, the army is ready, and we have received a respite.
It depends on us how we use this respite. By the way, it is symbolic that last summer Putin went to rest in the taiga with Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu and FSB Director Alexander Bortnikov (on the Yenisei in the Republic of Tyva, Shoigu's homeland - ed.). So, after the Kerch incident, I believe that Bortnikov became number two, and Shoigu - number three. In terms of information, the FSB acted with great professionalism, and this inspires more optimism. The Kerch incident is a high-level global provocation, and the FSB not only withstood it with honor, but outplayed the organizers, worked with a plus. Bortnikov himself showed excellent organizational abilities of a preventive nature, and his subordinates worked an order of magnitude higher than their colleagues from the Ministry of Defense. It's even amazingbecause the "chekists" did not have any Syrian three-year experience. Consequently, with a tough struggle, Vladimir Vladimirovich will have someone to rely on. And I hope that he will make the right decision. After all, apart from the mobilization path of development, which was demonstrated by Stalin, in fact, we have no other choice. Now we are in the situation of 1931, only we have not 10 years ahead of us, but much less, of course. Therefore, by the way, Putin, speaking in front of United Russia, veiledly pronounced some phrases from Stalin's speech of 1931, but in a much softer version. Their general meaning is that if we do not mobilize, then we will be crushed (in the mouth of Vladimir Putin it sounded as follows: “The world as a whole is in a state of transformation, a very powerful, dynamically developing transformation, and if we do not orient ourselves in time,if we do not understand in time what we need to do and how, we can lag behind forever "- approx. ed.).
Unfortunately, now the geopolitical power of Russia is in third place, India is catching up with us. In terms of military potential, everything seems to be good, in terms of economy - weak, in some other parameters - too. For example, in the space sphere "under the skillful leadership" we have rolled back for the first time in recent years. Previously, Russia has always been the leader in the number of missile launches, and now we are in third place. This is a technological defeat. There are many other negative factors that are not very capable of instilling optimism. You need to quickly rebuild. I think some decisions can be made right after the New Year. It is obvious that personnel actions are also ripe here. I don’t know if Putin will agree to them.
These actions have been expected from him for a long time and, it seems, are already tired of waiting
- That is why Putin went to see Father Tikhon. In this situation, he has no one else to go to, as I understand it. Father Tikhon knows history brilliantly. He studied the death of Byzantium in detail, and I hope that he could pass on these lessons to his high-ranking guest.
“We could not withstand the blow after Putin's famous trip to Athos, when he took his place in the niche intended for the Byzantine emperors. That symbolic gesture did not lead to spiritual movement"
“THERE IS NO ANALOGUE OF THE BRITISH CYBERBRIGADE IN ANY COUNTRY OF THE WORLD. SALSEBURY SCREEDED - THIS IS THEIR WORK”
I watched your videos on the Kerch incident. There, you mention the 77th British brigade as our main enemy in these events. What kind of brigade is this - please tell us in more detail
- In fact, this is the official cyber brigade (77th Brigade), numbering in its ranks about 2 thousand people and intended for disinformation and work in social networks, primarily Russian. There is no analogue to this cyber formation in any country in the world, including the United States, the Americans are only recruiting their own unit with similar tasks. Great Britain was ahead of everyone. All these Salisbury, Skripals and other provocations are their work. The Kerch incident should have staked out itself in the same row, but the FSB, as I said, was able to outplay them. If the guys have counted those people who have been working professionally for several years (officially the team, also called the Chindits, was put into operation in April 2015 - ed.), Then it is possible. I will add,that in fact this British brigade is in charge of the activities of the NATO cyber center in Tallinn (the so-called center of excellence of the alliance for cooperative cyber defense - ed.) and a similar center in Riga. In fact, this is their front line. To this you can add the British base on the island of Cyprus. It is also interesting that, as the BBC Russian Service reported on December 2, several military groups from the secret 77th brigade of the British Army are in Ukraine. That is, the NATO chain around Russia is being built on all sides along the borders. Therefore, it is a very dangerous structure, and it cannot be underestimated, and the number is very decent - 2,000 servicemen. In principle, there are no such formations in Russia. What we are accused of (the so-called Russian hackers) is being done outside state structures and is an order of magnitude smaller in number. Certainlywe need to form similar militarized structures, to more actively promote our position in Europe. It is beneficial for us that Europe is saved and delivered from chaos. The British plan, which I spoke about above, is a blow not only to China, but also to us.
- How did we beat the 77th brigade in the history of the Kerch incident?
- The main thing is to be ahead in the interpretation of events. For comparison: in the official "Twitter" of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, the message about the tragedy with the IL-20 appeared only 14 hours after Israeli planes deliberately "substituted" our IL-20 under the Syrian air defense. By the way, informing about what happened and communicating your point of view are two different things. The appearance of information about the incident itself 14 hours after it is absurd. Given the huge number of people in the Defense Ministry's information department, this is all the more striking. And the FSB, on the contrary, made a clear operational documentation of the entire provocation and organized a quick presentation of our agenda and our Russian point of view in the media. It was a triumph that a gigantic November 28 report was shown on Euronews (clearly we did not run it). I watched it myself: 70 percent of the time there was devoted to our interpretation of the Kerch incident, and only 30 percent to a different point of view. Usually everything happens exactly the opposite. And this is only because the FSB managed to create a favorable information flow for us. In fact, this happened for the first time. The system worked, but under the control of the FSB. Unfortunately, nothing of the kind is happening under the control of the Ministry of Defense and other structures.not happening.not happening.
- I know people from the Ministry of Defense, I worked with them for some time and I can well imagine their slow reaction.
- I myself was shocked: what can you talk about on Twitter after 14 hours, when the issue is resolved in minutes, and in an hour or two the picture should be formed? It's the same on their website, Facebook, and so on.
- Why didn't it work out with the Skripals?
- The Skripals Case is a deep provocation. Obviously, the British have outplayed us: they have developed a combination to which we did not react in time. And they already had a clear plan, while our structures traditionally acted late. For us, this informational story is not at all a plus, as they say. There was a complex campaign here, but I don't know who was involved in it. The FSB did not do this. The FSB showed how she can in Kerch. There is a huge distance between Kerch and the "Skripals case".
- Should we have released Petrov and Boshirov on television, whose sincerity was doubted by many viewers?
- In my opinion, the point is not Petrov and Boshirov. And not in this particular episode. We took the wrong position from the very beginning. With a delay, on the 16th, that is, more than 10 days after the events and after a general view of the world mass media about the situation was formed, we began to react. The reason was that a Russian citizen suffered in this tragedy. And only after 10 days, I repeat, the Russian investigation on this issue began. According to the logic of efficiency, it was necessary to react within 24 hours! Therefore, it makes no sense to consider this separate step with Petrov and Boshirov - whether it is successful or not. The wrong response strategy was adopted from the outset. Nothing was even calculated in it. Any provocation can be calculated. And the enemy, obviously, modeled all our actions. He imposed the initiativeforesaw our reaction, waited for our actions, and then threw the next traps. From the very beginning, we were an object of confrontation, not a subject: all the time we were given some kind of introductory, we reacted to them, sometimes successfully, sometimes not; new introductions followed, and we were constantly trailing behind.
Although the disinformation component of the Skripal case was evident, starting with the famous photograph taken in a pizzeria a few hours before the poisoning. In the photo, Sergei and Yulia Skripal are sitting with their glasses raised, and the photographer is vaguely reflected in the mirror in the background. Who is this man? Was he hurt too? Why is there no mention of him in the case? We did not ask any of these questions. This is a position that, to put it mildly, does not lead to success. But according to Kerch, our game, our agenda dominated. It is obvious that different people were responsible for Salisbury and Kerch. This means that you can outplay the British - you can and should. I hope that the president will appreciate this and make a decision so that we do not lose in the future.
