Why Putin turned the world upside down: we reveal the main secret of the hero of the day

The vast majority of people at least once in their lives dream of turning this world upside down – radically changing it in accordance with their ideals, norms and ideas about right and wrong. But only an absolute, one might even say, a tiny minority succeed in this. This Friday, one of the most elite group on Earth, Russian President Vladimir Putin, turns 70.

In his memoirs, former US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice describes, among other things, the following episode of her communication with the Russian leader: “Putin told me that he was delighted that the Secretary of State would be a specialist in Russia: central location for you!”

I didn’t know if he really thought that or if he was trying to flatter me. But I made a note in my head: do not underestimate the Russians – and the help they can provide and the damage they can cause.

On the eve of the anniversary of Vladimir Putin, it can be stated that the Americans failed to achieve the laudable goal formulated by Condoleezza Rice. The “Russians” – both the country and its president – were still underestimated.

Meanwhile, Condoleezza Rice, as a “specialist on Russia” (some acquaintances of the former US Secretary of State note that she remained a specialist on the USSR) had every opportunity to understand what lies ahead for all of us.

We read elsewhere in her memoirs: “They say that for Russia to lose Ukraine is the same as for the United States to lose Texas or California. But even that comparison is not strong enough.” What comparison, then, from the point of view of Condoleezza Rice, is sufficiently strong and adequate? And here’s what: “losing Ukraine” (in the sense of seeing it in a hostile NATO camp) for Russia is the same as “losing the original 13 colonies” for the United States. For those who are not very aware of the details of American history of the XVIII century: “the original 13 colonies” is the very heart, the core of the United States, the first territory of the country.

After rereading this excerpt from the memoirs of the former secretary of state, I urgently climbed to look for the date of publication of her book. Note: This was written in 2011. There were still about 11 years left before the “hour X” of world history.

Why was this decade and a half wasted by the West (or if not wasted, then definitely not to achieve the result that would ensure a stable peace in Europe)? Here is the only thing that comes to my mind: having formulated its famous question “Who from Mr. Putin?” back in 2000, the collective West could not find a clear answer to it.

Most world politicians say one thing, think another, do a third. When Putin conducts one of his political (or even military) special operations, he is naturally well aware of the importance of “disorienting the enemy.” However, one of the most important hallmarks of GDP as a world leader is its unusual frankness. He says what he thinks and does what he says. Of course, the promises and threats of the master of the Kremlin are often not fulfilled immediately. Sometimes, before these threats become a reality of world politics, years and whole five-year periods pass. However, looking back, one can almost always notice: after all, Putin warned, but Putin warned.

February 2007, Vladimir Putin’s famous speech at the Munich Security Conference: “What is a unipolar world? No matter how this term is decorated, it ultimately means only one thing in practice: it is one center of power, one center of power, one center of decision-making. This is a world of one master, one sovereign. And this is ultimately destructive not only for everyone who is within the framework of this system, but also for the sovereign himself, because it destroys him from the inside.

And this has nothing to do, of course, with democracy. Because democracy is, as you know, the power of the majority, taking into account the interests and opinions of the minority. By the way, Russia, we are constantly being taught democracy. But those who teach us, for some reason, do not really want to learn.”

By the fall of 2022, Putin’s rhetoric, aimed at criticizing the “Western model of the world order”, of course, sharpened sharply: “All this time the West has been looking for and continues to look for a new chance to hit us, weaken and destroy Russia, which they have always dreamed of, split our state, play off nations among themselves, doom them to poverty and extinction. They are simply haunted by the fact that there is such a great, huge country in the world, with its territory, natural wealth, resources, with a people who do not know how and will never live according to someone else’s orders.

The West is ready to step over everything to preserve the neo-colonial system that allows it to parasitize, essentially rob the world at the expense of the power of the dollar and technological diktat, and collect real tribute from humanity.”

But what exactly underlies this tightening? Why, from a politician who, having come to power, first sincerely tried to integrate Russia into the world order that existed at that time, VVP first turned into a harsh critic of the West, and then into a leader who is now destroying Western hegemony in Ukraine by force?

A clear answer to this question can, in my opinion, be found in another book published in the United States more than ten years ago. Analyzing in his “Superpower Illusions” the West’s reaction to Putin’s Munich speech, the penultimate US ambassador to the USSR, Jack Matlock, wrote in 2010: and that “one cold war is more than enough.” He vowed to go to Moscow and explain that American policy is not directed against Russian interests.

And then – attention! – further, Jack Matlock, who knows our country superbly, wrote a phrase that explains, if not everything, then almost everything: “Russia’s problem was not a lack of communications, but the Bush administration’s refusal to take Russian interests and approaches seriously.” The Bush administration is gone, the problem remains. The Obama administration is gone – the problem has become even more serious … Sooner or later everything had to reach a boiling point, a point of no return. In 2022, we have reached that point of no return.

Am I trying to rewrite history by using phrases like “sooner or later everything had to reach the point of no return”? From the point of view of the political possibilities and political options previously open to Putin, my such self-criticism is unequivocally completely fair. But the situation should be looked at from the point of view of what we know about the president’s internal value-based political attitudes – about his ideas about the only correct internal structure of Russia and its only correct place in the world.

On February 17, 2021, the President responds to the remark of the late Vladimir Zhirinovsky: “Cave nationalism, the slogan of which is “Russia only for Russians”, only harms Russians, only harms Russia and contributes to its buildup from within, and we must not allow this … in order to preserve Russia, which is multinational and multiconfessional, it is necessary that a representative of each ethnic group, even the smallest, feel that this is his homeland, he has no other, he is protected here, and he is ready to lay down his life in order to defend this country “.

October 18, 2018, meeting of the Valdai Club. Dialogue of the President with the moderator of the event Fyodor Lukyanov. Putin: “I want Russia to survive, including in the interests of the Russian people. And in this sense, I said that I am the most correct, the most real nationalist and the most effective. But this is not cave nationalism, stupid and stupid, which leads to the collapse of our state.” Lukyanov: “If you are alone, then this is not enough. Do you have like-minded people, the same non-nationalists?” Putin: Yes. Nearly 146 million people.”

Is there anything about foreign policy in these two fragments of presidential speeches? Formally, it really isn’t. But turn on your intuition. Read not only what is said, but also what follows directly or indirectly from what was said.

Russia, in Putin’s eyes, can only be a great and independent world power. Some former independent world powers are quite comfortable as Washington’s junior partners. For example, for the former US colonial mistress Great Britain, the “special relationship” with America is a subject of quasi-religious cult in political circles. For Putin, this path is both impossible and unacceptable and disgusting. He is deeply convinced that Russia’s partnership with the West can be either equal or none. In 2022, this is what we have – “no partnership”.

Having reached the age of 70, even the most active people before often calm down – they put calmness, stability, absence of shocks, moral comfort at the forefront. But for Putin, the source of moral comfort, the well from which he draws spiritual strength, is the main mission of his political life. The mission, more important than which there is nothing, is the struggle to restore Russia’s leading role in the world. And this is not at all a clumsy (or clumsy – there seems to be such a word in the Russian language) attempt to say something pleasant about the hero of the day. This is just a statement of reality.