THE RUSSIAN QUESTION

THE RUSSIAN QUESTION

Boris Gulko

By 1992 the Cold War had ended, and America's foreign policy had lost its ground. That year, the lop-eared billionaire Ross Perot, the joyful inspiration of caricaturists, having entered the fight for the presidency, took 20% of the votes from Bush Sr. thus making Bill Clinton US President. Clinton bombed Serbia for three months in 1999 and, having detached the province of Kosovo from it, created a new Muslim state governed by the terrorist organization KLA, according to the classification of the State Department. This didn’t meet American national interests, but was dictated, it seems, by the highest liberal values. However, an unprovoked war against an independent state for the purpose of weaning part of its territory violated the principle of the unchanging borders in Europe.

The US State Department stated that the principle remained in force, and the bombing of Serbia is an exception to the rule. It was like saying that the girl, despite one episode, remained a virgin.

Much more playful explanation comes to mind in connection with the alternative version of the Balkan war. Clinton needed to divert the attention of Americans from the "Monicagate." Winners are not judged, and America defeated Serbia. The destinies of the world sometimes depend on such rubbish!  

For Russia, the brutal bombings of their historical ally (albeit Serbia was United States ally in both World Wars) demonstrated that after the end of the Cold War-fueled world, the world began to be ruled by the right of the strongest. Russia's taking over the Crimea, unlike the American bombing of Serbia, which claimed hundreds of lives and caused an ecological catastrophe, was bloodless.

Clinton's pale substitute, Bush Jr. believed that foreign policy was an insignificant appendix to his functions, and politically correctly (which means - without concern for the case) appointed black statesmen, who made careers via "positive actions" - first the general Colin Powell, then Condoleezza Rice. But foreign policy came to Bush by itself - in the form of 9/11 terrorist attacks.

The wars in Afghanistan and in Iraq were also conducted by Bush Jr. in politically-correct style. Instead of placing a friendly ruler over Iraq and removing the most odious generals from the Iraqi army, to hire him to guard the order, Bush did just the opposite. He dismissed the army, leaving weapons in its hands, banned politicians from the secular Baath party from holding public office, and declared Iraq a democratic state.

The authorities in Iraq "democratically" moved the power to the clergy of the Shiite majority - Iran's ally. The Iraqi Sunni Sheikh Walid El Azawi, now living in Europe, reported in a recent letter to political scientist Mordechai Keidar: "For many years, Iran has been the real ruler of Iraq, and its ayatollahs dictated actions to the Iraqi government." Suspended from the power of Sunni leaders and the out-of-control army became the basis of the emerged over the time Islamic state. This is the result of the failure of the Bush-led war.

If Clinton's policy was casual and largely determined by his personal problems, and Bush Junior’s was simply incompetent, then President Obama was an ideologist. His views were based on his commitment to Islam, to socialism in the version of Sol Alinsky, as well as to black racism. In international politics, this was reflected in Obama's strong dislike of Israel, in the destruction of secular rule in Libya and the surrender of this country to the Islamists, which removed the natural barrier that deterred the uncontrolled migration of Africans to Europe, bringing Egypt – the key Arab country --  to the power of the extremist Muslim Brotherhood.   Obama helped Muslim Brotherhood stay in power by giving them half a billion of American money, but the Egyptians still rebelled and threw the Islamists off the power.

The most damaging consequences for Western civilization can be Obama's biggest achievement - lifting his sanctions from Iran and de-freezing Iranian money. Mossad Deputy Director Ram Ben-Barak in a recent interview said: "Lately Iran is gaining military, political and economic power. Two years ago, before signing the nuclear agreement with the United States, Iran was in a depressing situation. The economy collapsed, sanctions successfully smothered the country, the planes had no spare parts, and the subsidies to citizens were constantly reduced. "150 billion, de-frozen by Obama, made Iran the dominant force in the Muslim world of the Middle East.”

On January 20^th of this year to the Oval Office of the White House came a man from the real world, not a professional politician. He called the interests of this country his main concern, not party and ideological murky fuss. Before Donald Trump stood the task to correct the catastrophic consequences of irresponsible, incompetent and shameless ideologies of his three predecessors. In the intricacies of Middle Eastern problems, as well as in the North Korean crisis, Russia's active influence is evident. To solve these problems, it is important for America to find common interests with Russia, or levers and incentives that could force Russian politics to move in the direction that is desirable for the United States. There are no ideological differences with Russia, and Russia has suffered so far from Islamic terrorism much more than any Western country. It seemed that the interaction with Russia should have been simple.

It turned out that it wasn’t easy. In the last days of 2016, Obama plunged the US into a diplomatic war with Russia. Responding to the alleged interference of Russian hackers in the US election campaign, Obama sent 35 employees out of the Russian embassy, ​​closed two of their villas for diplomats and imposed sanctions against five Russian departments and six citizens. It looked like a move in a complex political game. Let’s remember that after taking the Office in 2008, Obama easily released 10 captured Russian spies. And before the 2012 elections, the TV crew "overheard" how Obama promised to then-President Medvedev that if he wins,  after the election he’ll be "more flexible" in his relations with Russia. This could be understood in such a way that he asked Russia to influence his interests on American voters, promising later compliance in disputable matters.

After Trump took the office Obama launched an anti-Russian media campaign that acquired a totally hysterical nature.  The media reported that all 17 US intelligence agencies confirmed pre-election hacking of the DNC by the Russian headquarters. Then this number slipped – unnoticeably -- to three.

It is unclear why the alleged attempt to influence the elections was presented by the media as something unprecedented. This is a common occurrence. Clinton received money for his campaign from China. His partner Gore flew to the California monastery to collect "donations" from the suddenly wealthy Buddhist monks, and the Chinese - the fundraiser for the Clinton campaign, after the elections were put in jail for violating the law on their funding.

In 2008, Obama's fund unexpectedly turned out to have twice as much money as its rival, McCain. Among the contributors to Obama were "Mickey Mouse", and "abc", and "xyz". I think it's easy to guess who those invisible goodwill sponsors were.

Both Clinton and Obama unabashedly interfered in the Israeli elections, Clinton succeeded, replacing Netanyahu in 1999 by Barak.

But maybe exposing the DNC scam is a more serious interference in the election than just an illegal infusion of money? Putin disagrees with this, logically remarking: "It doesn’t matter WHO discovers what it is, it's important WHAT it revealed." Putin denied the very fact of hacking, but who would believe him?

However, after the August 9^th publication of a sensational article in the leftist magazine The Nation, it turned out that the data defamatory to Hillary and the Democrats was copied from the computer by DNC not by the mythical Russian hacker, but by someone on the inside. I spoke in detail about this scandal in my essay "Interesting Time". The version of Russian hackers kidnapping of compromising evidence on Democrats and Hillary turned out to be a fiction. It blew up and almost immediately disappeared from the discourse of the American media.

However, the work of the commission of the special prosecutor Muller, who is investigating the connection between Trump's election campaign with Russia, and the sanctions imposed on Russia by Obama and Congress for "interference in the American elections" remain in place. Its unclear why, and they are even growing.

The American ambassador to Russia, Obama's nominee Tefft, in an interview with “Echo Moskvy” (Russian Moscow radio station), explained in his own way on August 28, a diplomatic attack launched by Obama: "The choice that was presented to the Obama administration:" Do you want to wage war with Russia“?  So, it appears he saved us by his sanctions from a nuclear catastrophe that threatened the planet due to the unveiling of the WikiLeaks scam by DNC?

So, after it became clear that the US policy was 8 months in captivity of the intrigue conceived by Obama and supported by the democrats and the press, obedient to him; will it be possible to return to the search for solutions to world conflicts jointly with Russia? But there is also a moral problem on a way to that solution.

After a long awaited and much delayed death of communism in 1991, the power in Russia went to an alcoholic, one of the first secretaries of the regional committees. Boris Yeltsin by the stroke of his pen turned Russia into a corrupt oligarchy. He granted the right to duty-free trade with foreign countries to the Sports Committee of Russia, to the Union of Afghan War Veterans and to some others.  After this many people got to be included in any major international commercial transaction as mediators – all sorts of corrupt officials, who suddenly multiplied in leaps and bounds.

Even without Yeltsin, the morality of the rapidly emerging political and business class of the New Russia is briefly described by the name of the old film by Woody Allen: "Take the money and run." The place of concealment of the seized money became Western and Middle Eastern banks and real estate. The children of the so called “New Russians” went to study in private schools in Switzerland and England, and the oligarchs themselves soon joined their money, real estate and children. It is no accident, if in the Soviet times “dissidents” (protesters) in the USSR concerned themselves with human rights, now the Russian oppositionists are primarily concerned with exposing the corruption of power.

Magnitsky Case violated the life plans of many Russian corrupt officials. The auditor Sergei Magnitsky, who investigated the corruption cases of a number of Russian civil servants, died, more than likely not of the natural causes, in the Moscow prison "Matrosskaya Tishina". American financier William Browder, with whom Magnitsky collaborated, succeeded in enacting the Magnitsky Law in the United States, prohibiting the entry of Russian citizens into America who were involved in the death of the auditor and freezing their assets. A similar law has been adopted in Europe. With the consistent implementation of such laws, Russian corruption will lose its meaning - suitcases with dishonestly acquired currency will have to be hidden elsewhere.

Magnitsky's law is a painful subject in US-Russian relations. Its abolition as a condition of cooperation with the United States in solving common world strategic tasks will almost certainly be demanded by the Russian side. The lobbying of the abolition of Magnitsky's law in the USA by Natalia Veselnitskaya and Rinat Akhmetshin have been noted in the political struggle of America. They promised compromising information on Hillary, and achieved deceit by meeting with Donald Trump Jr, when Trump was still running his campaign. Veselnitskaya got the opportunity to enter the US thanks to the mysterious assistance of Obama’s Minister of Justice Loretta Lynch, and she owes Lynch a favor now. Has she paid her back, casting a shadow on Trump’s suspicion of contacting the Russian authorities?

Ram Ben-Barak in the interview cited above said: "In order to stop Iran, a global agreement between Russia and America is necessary ... The US can give Putin something

he really needs: removing a part of the sanctions and easing in the Ukrainian issue in exchange for the liberation of Syria from Iran. It can work. This can be a solution."

Will Trump go to cooperation with Russia, on which the resolution of the Shia threat and domination in the Middle East depends and preventing its spreading to Europe, as well as the common position in the North Korean conflict? After all, such cooperation can give a new impetus to the hysteria of the president's haters over the Russian influence on his policy.

Trump has to build his strategy with the constant pressure of the Democratic Party, which has only one point left in the program - hatred for the president, as well as Republican oppositionists with their “Not Trump!” attitudes. He has to account for Russian internal processes, trying to promote the positive influence of the Magnitsky Law on them as far as possible.

The resolution of the "Russian question" is a very difficult task. It remains only to wish Trump success in this.

                                                                                   Translated by Alla Axelrod

                                                                                                               9/17/2017