The US Senate International Committee (read: prosecutors) sent the head of the State Department (read: judge) an indictment that accused Russia of one of the worst international sins of the world - the sponsorship of terrorism. This applies to the support of the republics of Donbass. Mike Pompeo will now have to decide: Russia is guilty or not, whether she is a sponsor or for now, if she is suspicious. For the time being.
The outcome in this theater of absurdity is actually not so important - whether it is recognized or not. The main thing is to hang a label, which you can’t get rid of later. The states are not used to this, the experience is enormous. Sleight of hand and no cheating: white turns black - and vice versa.
The phantasmagoria of the situation lies in the fact that Russia is well aware of the origins and roots of modern terrorism. This is a byproduct, if not a direct product, of the US planting its version of democracy around the world. From the Afghan Mujahideen and Al-Qaeda * to the banned Islamic State in Russia **. And this is only the tip of the iceberg, in the underwater part of which there is a state, leading, in fact, terrorist politics around the world for decades.
I must say that not only this Senate bill, which is not amenable to sound logic, but also the whole current Ukrainian situation to tear away from Russia is known by whom it was directed and provoked. But no one will ask them for lawlessness: after all, they themselves appoint terrorists and sponsors, and indeed they paint the world in any color according to the principle "I want to turn everything around." Although no, everyone understands and is silent - such is the political etiquette of the time of the monocentric world. Otherwise, they’ll write in “sponsors” or “axis of evil”.
In idle talks about sponsorship of terrorism, it’s not only the themes of Ukraine and Syria that are involved (literally a few days earlier, the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution on Crimea). For the boiler, in which a very specific potion is brewed, a long-playing series about the Skripals, the murder of a terrorist in Germany, and the unfolding sports lawlessness and blackmail of Russia came in handy. There are economic ingredients in this boiler, for example, new levers of strangulation of the Nord Stream 2, and so on. This should also help in carrying out resuscitation measures of the NATO brain, otherwise it is poking around there for a long time. There is also a domestic political component in the dubious cocktail: in the States themselves, a hard squabble goes for a place on Olympus, which is why they will throw a new test for the Trump administration.
An important background component of the brew became historical excursions and accusations of the European Parliament against the Soviet Union in unleashing the Second World War. So that everyone understands that the current suspicions are not accidental: allegedly such is the inveterate lawlessness of Russia, which does not change, but only does evil around the world and from time immemorial has been a threat to peace. However, the output is shown: a white flag. Refuse yourself, become none so that you can experiment and draw any scribbles, then - maybe someday ...
The global anti-Russian chess game without rules has acquired quite understandable and predictable outlines. It’s like in pictures by numbers: first, various color spots are visible there, which gradually add up to the picture itself.
All the moves in this game, as well as the current action of psychological intimidation and exhaustion, are designed for the effect of a double action: continuous external pressure, as well as betting on Russian confusion. Many of us, too, are not free in judgment and in the power of stereotypes, they are accustomed to gaze with reverence at the beautiful distant light of civilization, at their distant "law", perceived as a standard of justice. In their own country this is not seen. The middle law is corrupt and unrighteous that the terrorist ...
That is, all these overseas gestures of bad will are built not only in one clear line, but also in the general strategy of three-part action: the unanimous condemnation of Russia at the world party committee of the pillars of democracy, a signal of dissatisfaction within the country and another economic press. All this is a perestroika triad.
So it was already in the 1980s, when the Soviet Union was branded the "evil empire", now a new turn has been found. It is in the spirit of the times. For the full picture, it remains to wait for the coming of architects and foremen of the new perestroika inside Russia, and everything will go according to the well-worn oil ...
At one time, the Russian philosopher Alexander Zinoviev wrote a lot about the crisis in the mental sphere of Soviet society, which eventually led to the collapse of the country. The exhausting Cold War with the main destructive element - ideological weapons, which ultimately led to ideological chaos in a large country, contributed a lot to this business.
An excellent illustration of all this can be found in the book by Eduard Limonov, “A Foreigner in the Time of Troubles,” written in the very beginning of the 1990s. In the epilogue, the protagonist tells his woman a tale "about a strong and powerful people" who, in the absence of a real enemy, got bored and began to listen to alternative voices telling the whole "truth" about his life and history. He listened so much that he came to the conclusion that he was unrighteous and depraved.
He began to perceive his story "as an unjust violence and a chain of crimes." In addition to external forces, unimaginable zeal and diligence "educated people, the energetic part of the educated, wanting to seize power in the country" showed incredible zeal and effort. As a result of the crisis of the "mental sphere" the people "ceased to be Great." He believed in a lie and began to live for her.
Actually, now the goal of the political black magic label “sponsor of terrorism” is to select the key for launching a new similar crisis. That Russia itself believed in a lie.
In order to inspire and deepen the inferiority complex, to develop nihilism in relation to Russian modernity. Like, everything is rotten, everything is untrue and endless crimes, so no dialogue: to demolish everything to the ground - and there will be happiness ...
Washington now acts in the status of global Kashpirovsky, setting, hypnotizing, deceiving. The purpose of this manipulation is to ask Russia a vector for the very perestroika. Back to the era of decay. Suggestion of nostalgia for those times when we were sweet and pleasant for everyone in all respects, when they applauded us, sent kisses and scratched us behind the ears. It is about this super-goal of American political passes that we must remember and speak. Without this, common sense and logic cannot be found there, but only a dull nostalgia for the Cold War. All this - greetings from there, the old, used political rags that your NATO. After all, it’s not in the Procrustean bed of their values that they want to fit Russia, but (let's be honest) they dream of arranging a “dismemberment” and a new Bialowieza cut, that is, to finish what was started.
Not so long ago, then, the President of the European Council, Donald Tusk, stated that the collapse of the Soviet Union was not the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century, but, on the contrary, “became a blessing for Georgians, Poles, Ukrainians and all of Eastern and Central Europe. And also for the Russians. ” Apparently, hoping for a new joy and blessing. He is not alone.
Their strategic interests lie in our new tragedy. This is what the world Russophobian chorus of neuroparalytic and psychological influence sings about, periodically coming up with new couplets and slogans. Now here is the "Sponsor of Terrorism!" Shouting out ...
* Al-Qaeda - an organization recognized as terrorist by a decision of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of February 14, 2003.
** “Islamic State” (IG) - the organization was recognized as terrorist by decision of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of December 29, 2014.
The author’s point of view may not coincide with the position of the publisher.