The purpose of this offensive is the destruction of Western civilization (TV Club Continent)
https://t.me/TribulelouisThe translation of the interview is given in an abbreviated form
Nov. 3rd, 2022 11:55 am
[personal profile] interview_ani
Transcript of Andrey Illarionov's interview in tv Club Continent from 01.11.2022.
The hosts are Elena Prigova and Igor Tsesarsky.
[ A. Illarionov: The answer is very simple - there are no former KGB majors. A person is on duty, has been on duty, is on duty, will be on duty. He does what he was taught, what he is constantly proud of and says that he was taught disinformation, special operations in the field of information, manipulation of information, misleading people. He uses all these tricks, he is at work. The peculiarity of only his current work is that he that, as a KGB major, he works for two services. He works for his own GB service, and for the Biden administration, at the same time. In the conditions of the Cold War and the existence of the Soviet Union, such a phenomenon did not exist. This is the phenomenon of this new world. The New World is precisely because there is an administration in the White House that not only does not shy away, it gladly uses the services and sets the tasks that KGB majors perform with such pleasure.
And it seems to me that the connection here is not so much with this election campaign, although maybe it also played a role, and perhaps it is connected with the fact that I have already noticed, which means that the KGB major, he is pulled by the string and he throws out his ear of garbage every time in this or that program, in this or that speech, I devote some time and some explanations to this, what is the position of the current administration of the United States of America in relation to Ukraine. When I tell the ins and outs, what its goals are, and especially if it is done, naturally, we try to do it, reasonably, with facts, with figures, with documents. After each of these cases, we get this portion. The first time was literally a day or two after Biden's meeting with Putin, during which Biden surrendered Ukraine, because then he agreed not only to the implementation of the Minsk agreements, he agreed to political autonomy for Lugandonia, and this was confirmed by Ms. Nuland in the morning in her public interview. But more than that, Mr. Biden handed over then a list of 17, I think, critical sectors of American infrastructure into the hands of Putin directly, from which, probably, he was also amazed, but of course he took the list. The very critical infrastructure that Putin's missiles are destroying in Ukraine today is a list of this American infrastructure that Mr. Biden gave to Putin at that time. And it was then that I actually told you what such a person should deserve, who submits the most important documents, materials, secrets not only of another country, he not only surrenders another country, Ukraine, he surrenders American secrets to his own not a potential, but a real enemy. Well, then this pattern was repeated. A day later, two, a maximum of three after such a performance, we get a lot of garbage, which suggests that this high appreciation of our modest work, and this means that we get to the point, this means that we are right in the top ten, in the bull's-eye, which means that we are absolutely right, we will continue to do it. And the more KGB majors get angry, the more we'll have fun and rejoice because we've gotten to the right place. And let them proceed on what they can come from. ]
https://interview-ani.dreamwidth.org/19354.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDwQuTICzpQ
A. Illarionov: Good afternoon, Igor! Good afternoon, Lena! Indeed, in the last few weeks, this campaign, which has not subsided over the past two years naturally after the new administration found itself in the White House and a campaign of demonization, attacks, slander, manipulation, misinformation of both the American public and the world community, of course, the Ukrainian public against the Republicans, and I would say even more broadly, the supporters of freedom. Supporters of freedom in the United States of America, and supporters of freedom around the world. This campaign has never stopped. But in the last few weeks, apparently, in connection with the upcoming midterm elections, this campaign has acquired new heights, or more precisely, lowlands, given the dirt and the techniques that are used both against representatives of the Republican Party directly involved in political life, and against those who are trying to simply objectively present information about what is happening.
For example, you mentioned the names of the same McCarthy, McConnell, former Vice President Pence, who spoke accordingly: McCarthy advocated consistent assistance to Ukraine, Pence advocated the preservation of aid to Ukraine, and McConnell advocated more aid to Ukraine. Repeatedly said. Naturally, it was all presented as: these terrible Republicans are in favor of cutting and even ending aid. It's just outright lies, outright misinformation. In the conditions that the United States has plunged into today and not only today, but in the last few years, this turns out to be a completely normal phenomenon for this administration, for these people: disinformation, manipulation, lies, slander, dirt. We remember what happened in the summer of 2020, there was not only dirt and slander, there were also attacks on people. Let me remind you that during the summer months of 2020, more than 4,000 US citizens were killed during pogroms that were organized, prepared, and attacked by totalitarian forces that oppose freedom. And that's only happened in 100 cities in the United States, which are home to 15 percent of the U.S. population. This proportion is hardly worth extending to the entire population of the United States, because pogroms occurred primarily in cities and in large cities, but nevertheless there was nothing like this in the history of the United States. This, of course, took place under the slogans of "stopping the financing of the police", fanning a hate campaign within American society.
In general, the campaign is certainly aimed not only at winning a political victory in order to dislodge its political opponents, opponents from the executive branch. The campaign itself has much deeper roots. It is aimed at destroying the free society that was established in the United States of America, which for almost two and a half centuries has been a model and a flagship and a torch for free democratic societies throughout the world. This campaign is aimed at the destruction of this society. Therefore, what we are seeing now, what we are facing today, these attacks both directly on the participants in the political process and on those who tell the truth about what is really happening is the same campaign. This campaign is aimed at the victory of totalitarianism both in the United States of America and around the world. Understandable.
A. Illarionov: Then we need to start over, but I will try very briefly. I've talked about this a few times, but just briefly in this situation. First. Putin's idea of military action against neighboring states, and later against Europe and the whole world, originated no later than 2003. No later than 2004, he began preparations for these actions and began to take steps, for example, linguistic aggression against Ukraine, and then active participation in the presidential elections of 2004, trying to push his protégé. In 2006, economic preparations for war began, preparing foreign exchange and gold and foreign exchange reserves necessary for a long-term war. In 2007, ideological preparations and propaganda preparations began, and this signal was Putin's speech at the Munich Security Conference, in which he outlined his main features. The year 2008 was an attack on Georgia. Putin's 2012 key policy article on the need to create a historic Russia. In 2014, the seizure of Crimea, the occupation, the deployment of the war in the Donbas and its transfer at a time when the separatists supported by him and partially Russian troops began to suffer defeat, the transition to a terrorist war. This is a very important element, we will return to this, with the downing of the Malaysian airliner MH-17. The year 2015 is the war, the participation of Russian troops in the bombing and the destruction of civilians in Syria. 2022 is a massive attack on Ukraine in order to eliminate its statehood and independence.
What will happen next, how it will develop further, depends on how the scenario of the war on the territory of Ukraine against Ukraine will develop. If, God forbid, Putin's plans had succeeded, and Ukraine could not withstand this blow, then Putin would certainly have gone on right away, without stopping, would have reached Moldova and occupied Moldova. Belarus is already de facto occupied by Russian troops, and the local dictator practically fulfills all of Putin's wishes. And after these new twists and turns had been consolidated, the next steps would begin to the west, to the northwest, to conquer and destabilize other European countries.
Putin has never hidden his goals, and last December he even released two documents, one addressed to the United States of America, the other to NATO, in which he openly publicly declared his goals: half of Europe. The so-called denatoization of half of Europe.
Therefore, now we are in the stage when Putin ran into the heroic resistance of Ukraine and the Ukrainians, trying to break it. There have already been three stages of this stage of the war: the first stage of an attempted blitzkrieg during the first month, which failed for Putin; then a five-month successive offensive by Russian troops in the south and southeast, which was halted by Ukrainian troops; then within a month, a little more than a month, a successful successful counteroffensive of Ukrainian troops, which led to the liberation of a significant territory of the Kharkiv region, the beginning of the liberation of the Luhansk region, the liberation of a significant part of the Kherson region. These counteroffensives by Ukrainian troops frightened Putin. And along with the fact that there was a reduction in the liquid part of the foreign exchange reserves, along with the fact that the potential main ally on whom Putin so hoped, China began to distance itself from him, Putin moved to the fourth stage within this stage, trying to repeat a kind of new version of the blitz-krieg, increasing the intensity of hostilities, mobilizing new several hundred thousand conscripts, throwing them into the furnace of war. Now at least 100,000 mobilized over the past month have been thrown into plugging holes. For Putin, these people, as well as any people who are Ukrainians, Georgians, Syrians, and citizens, no matter where they are, in Nord-Ost, on the fronts of the Russian-Ukrainian war, are of no value. He is ready to throw thousands, tens, hundreds of thousands, I think millions of people into the furnace. He is guided by his completely paranoid goals, paranoid aspirations.
Now we are at the fourth stage, which can be called a terrorist war. Just as in the fourteenth year, Putin moved to openly terrorist methods with the downing of a civilian passenger liner, now he is doing just that, trying to strike and destroy civilian critical infrastructure. And only brags about it, talking about what the next transformers, the next power lines, the next stations were hit by Russian strikes. By all standards and by all standards, these are war crimes. This is a violation of the rules of warfare in the most blatant form, and Putin does not hide it at all, on the contrary, he boasts that he is engaged in war crimes.
Now at this stage at this stage of this war and the Russian-Ukrainian, and the Russian-European war, and the war of the current Kremlin against peace, against freedom, against security, against democracy, against human rights not only on the territory of Russia, but also on the territory of other countries of the world.
A. Illarionov: This is the second edition of Zhirinovsky. He is trying to occupy this niche, trying to get into the Zhirinovsky doll, in general, he does the same thing, but we just have to give credit, after all, Zhirinovsky had a certain acting talent. Of course, he did not cease to be a scoundrel, but it should be noted that a certain charm was present in his abominations. And this type is devoid of these qualities, and therefore what he succeeds in is extremely vulgar, rude. Well, what can I say, professor's son.
A. Illarionov: Not yet. The fact is that not only the voyage of such a group of ships, but even the presence of such ships in the immediate vicinity, this, all other things being equal, is of course a very significant fact and a significant factor. In English, the term used is capacity building, that is, building up opportunities that can be done. This is not a guarantee that they will be used, but they can be used. By itself, the increase in the grouping of troops of the United States of America, especially under the overall leadership of NATO ... because not only this aircraft carrier and this group goes to Europe, it goes under the command of the military command of NATO. This should also be borne in mind. That in itself does not mean as long as the White House says, and it continues to say, that the United States has done, is doing, and will continue to do everything necessary to protect every inch, every inch of NATO territory. It was these statements that were made both before February 24, and on February 24, after February 24 and continue to be heard now. That is, as long as the White House talks about defending NATO territory, it is about the same when, for example, in the famous film "The Magnificent Seven", when Mexican peasants receive information that a gang is going to attack this particular village, the cowboy says: "But we will protect the neighboring village to the last inch, and we will not give a single peasant offense." Or, when a thug molests a woman in a dark alley and a passing ambal says, I will defend the kiosk at the far end of the street. It's kind of the same thing. That is, until the leadership of the United States of America changes its strategic position that all those armed forces that are at the disposal of the United States, its allies, NATO, all those organizations that were created to ensure peace and security in the North Atlantic region. This is exactly the main purpose for which the Washington Treaty on the creation of the North Atlantic Organization was signed. As long as NATO, the United States, through the current administration, does not remember the commitments it has undertaken, namely, to ensure peace, security, stability in Europe and in the North Atlantic region, until then, unfortunately, all these movements will mean nothing.
A. Illarionov: Conferences of this kind deserve attention. There are a lot of such conferences of different levels, different representation of participation. I have to say that I have participated in a dozen different such conferences. They take place in different places, it is absolutely necessary to participate in them, first of all, in order to convey to the audience the point of view of Ukraine about what is happening in Ukraine. In particular, at the Belgrade conference there was a team of people from Ukraine, they told about what is happening in Ukraine. But not all conferences are attended by representatives of Ukraine, and not all conferences of this kind are representatives of Ukraine frankly enough effective enough to convey the main content for this audience, and in order to communicate the main thesis that is needed today. The main thesis for the international public, for potential and real partners of Ukraine is weapons. Weapons, weapons, weapons again. To achieve at least stabilization of the situation on the front, ensuring an advantage, first ensuring parity, and then preponderance and ultimately the victory of Ukraine, is possible only by obtaining the necessary amount of weapons from Ukraine's partners and allies.
We have repeatedly talked about this, and many of our colleagues Sergei Lyubarsky and Gary Tabakh regularly talk about the need for arms supplies from our partners, from the United States of America. According to my calculations, for more than 8 months, as this stage of the war goes on, the United States and Ukraine's allies supply weapons ... More precisely, it is a broader concept than pure weapons, worth no more than two billion dollars a month. This is not even enough to achieve military parity. To achieve military parity, it is necessary to supply at least five times more weapons, $ 10 billion just to ensure military parity. And this thesis, which I conduct at all meetings of this kind, both in public and not in public, and in other places, presenting to colleagues, listeners, interested parties calculations of what is really happening, how much is actually supplied and how much is not supplied.
Because many people have a mythological idea that the United States and its allies have flooded Ukraine with weapons, that there it is bathed in these weapons, that lend-lease is coming, that ocean liners of all kinds of equipment are being loaded, that planes are flying - all this is disinformation, all this is a myth. There's none of that. Ukraine lacks weapons, and because of this shortage of weapons, because of this shortage of weapons, Ukrainians pay for it with the blood, the blood of their comrades, their colleagues, fighters on the front line. Because the lack of the necessary number of weapons leads to the fact that high losses on the part of the armed forces of Ukraine remain, and conditions are not provided for achieving parity and for continuing the offensive.
We see that after the successful offensives in September in the Kharkiv region, in the Luhansk region, in the Kherson region, the Ukrainian offensive stopped. It stopped because the allies do not supply the necessary number of weapons, and Putin threw into this furnace several dozen, up to hundreds of thousands of mobilized people who die there at the front by the thousands, but as a result of this, the front line has more or less stabilized. And in some areas, for example, near Bakhmut, near Pavlovka, Russian troops are again advancing and exerting very strong pressure on Ukrainian troops.
Therefore, returning to this conference, to such conferences, this is the most important task to tell, to explain to the European public, to foreign representatives, what is really happening. Amazingly, at the same conference, there were people who said: no, no, what are you, you need to negotiate with Putin. This was said by people, representatives of European countries. And others said, no, no, you know, great, you know, you have a very pessimistic view, let's make such an optimistic view... this war has rallied the West in such a way, rallied Western leaders in such a way, they are now in a unity in which they have never been. Then we answer that, firstly, what kind of unity is there, it is necessary to watch, but for this unity Ukraine pays with the lives of hundreds of its children, thousands of women who have been subjected to violence, thousands, if not tens of thousands of men who die at the front, destroyed cities, destroyed infrastructure.
This is not just a high price, it is an unacceptable price for the so-called unity of Western leaders. Let these leaders be divided, but let those people who died in this war remain alive.
A. Illarionov: There are several circumstances to keep in mind here. First, Serbia, against the entire European background, probably occupies one of the most consistent pro-Russian positions, even pro-Kremlin positions. Serbia takes a much more pro-Kremlin position than, for example, Hungary, about which everyone talks, and about Serbia they do not talk so much. Because Serbia is not a member of the European Union. The current leadership of Serbia, the president, the government take an openly pro-Kremlin position. Serbia, unlike other European countries, is filled with Russian citizens of various kinds. Serbia itself is overflowing with Kremlin agents, and you don't have to be a specialist to see it. And this is a contrast compared to Poland, to the Baltic states. It's just visible to the naked eye. That's on the one hand.
On the other hand, the organizer of the conference I attended is a center that takes an opposition position towards the current government in Belgrade. They stand for democracy, for freedom, for human rights, for the protection of Ukraine. And their position is in this sense unique in Serbia. They are under siege inside the country, and we must pay tribute to their courage, their bravery, that they have not only continued their activities for 25 years, but they are holding such conferences and doing their little work, what they can do, in order to turn public opinion in Serbia in the right direction. It is true that they are in the minority today, but on the other hand, they are trying to change this ratio, and it is desirable to turn the minority, apparently, into a majority. They are working on it, working courageously, responsibly and professionally. That's the second thing.
Third. In Serbia, because of the historical situation, especially because of what happened in 1999, there was a different attitude towards the European Union and towards NATO. In Serbia, and this must be said frankly, there is a national consensus, perhaps with the exception of this center or a very small group of people for whom NATO is an absolutely unacceptable organization, membership in which is impossible in the near future. It's neither good nor bad. It's just the reality of what's happening in Serbia. You can think about why this happened, how they came to it, but at least today this issue is not worth it, and demanding NATO membership for Serbia is not something that can be solved in the foreseeable future.
On the other hand, if we look at how NATO failed, as an organizer, in ensuring the security of, for example, Ukraine, which was under attack by an aggressor; As NATO did nothing, that is, all the assistance from NATO turned out to be equal, I think, to 50 tons of gasoline, which in February or early March was delivered to Ukraine. All other military assistance is provided through bilateral channels. Not through NATO. NATO has taken exactly the same position in relation to another victim of Putin's aggression, Georgia. And here another question arises. This is a question not only for Serbia, but also for Serbia, for Ukraine, and in general for any other country, a potential victim of any aggressor. The question is, if this is an organization that is constantly mentioned: the largest, the strongest, the most powerful, possessing the largest armed forces, possessing the largest military budgets, the largest military-industrial complex, is not able to fulfill its direct duties, because at the head of this organization, at least for four years, there is a person who does not give the right orders, does not give the right order, then what to do to those ... and accordingly, this window for at least two, four years, or as it was under President Obama for 8 years - opens a window, a window or a giant gate during which the aggressor can do whatever he wants.
Then the question arises of how to make such an organization, how to really create such security guarantees or guarantees of punishment for the aggressor in the event that he still commits such an attack, aggression, in order to learn the lessons of the failed NATO organization. After all, we began to talk about this, that the United Nations was also created in order to ensure peace after the Second World War. We have seen that the United Nations cannot cope with this task. The Organization for Security cooperation in Europe was created, the same goal, to ensure peace, security and cooperation in Europe. This organization has also failed to fulfill its purpose. But every time they write that the UN has not fulfilled this task, the OSCE has not fulfilled this task, by the way, this is very much loved by American professors who write in the journal Foreign Affairs, the main journal on international politics, the last article there by Ms. Fiona Hill and Angela Stent, leading experts in the field of Russian studies, Putinism and other things. They all said that the OSCE is not coping with this task, the UN is not coping with this task, and NATO has been forgotten. And the current administration of the United States of America was also forgotten. But we understand that they forgot not by chance, but intentionally.
Therefore, we understand that NATO is an important organization, a serious organization, membership in this organization at least for today really ensures the security of members, because there has not been a single attack, a real attack, a large-scale large-scale offensive against a NATO member, but this is not a guarantee of peace and security in all of Europe, it is not a guarantee of peace and security in the North Atlantic region. as stated in the charter of this organization.
And therefore, for Ukraine, for Georgia, and for any other country that can become a victim of such aggression, a serious question arises: what to do to ensure peace and security for the peoples of these countries?
A. Illarionov: Do you mean the Russian economy?
I. Tsesarsky: Yes.
A. Illarionov: The basic situation remains the same as we talked about in previous times. But still, this is a fairly significant, qualitative change in the situation. A qualitative change in the situation is connected with this. When Putin began this stage of the war in February 2022, the main economic resource he had at his disposal was the liquid portion of foreign exchange reserves. Then these liquid foreign exchange reserves were enough to wage war for 47 months, that is, for 4 years. It's certainly a very long, very long time. As a result of what happened both in terms of sanctions pressure and in terms of the use of reserves, today the liquid part of foreign exchange reserves, according to official data, which, there is reason to believe, are overestimated, is enough for 17-18 months, that is, for a year and a half. Of course, someone can say that a year and a half is a very long time, and you will have to agree with this, but a year and a half is shorter than 4 years, and this is shorter by two and a half years after 8 months of war. So there's some progress, and that's the kind of progress that actually gives the shortest time frame for a potential war of attrition. Because the other two parameters, which are traditionally used to assess the resource potential of a country waging a war of attrition, give, according to these calculations, the possibility of conducting for a much longer period.
If one of these factors is directly the mobilization reserve, then there is a demographic potential. And the demographic mobilization reserve of today's Russia is up to 25 or even up to 29 million people. It is clear that even if, as a result of this mobilization, according to estimates, not the 300,000 that Shoigu and Putin are persistently trying to talk about are really called up, but apparently about 600,000 have been mobilized, and according to some estimates, up to one and a half million people will be called up by the middle of winter. Even with such a scale of mobilization of the remaining 25 or 29 million people, or if we take into account that 5 million or 10 million by this time will flee the country, hide, go into the forests, will be sick, they will not be able to find them, the mobilization reserve is still huge. It allows, in this case, to throw a huge number of people into the war for a very long time, for many, many years. Therefore, this resource is, from the current point of view, let's say, almost unlimited.
The second major resource is the availability of equipment, military equipment, respectively, tanks, armored vehicles, artillery pieces, missiles, aircraft, helicopters and everything else. We all know that estimates of the number of missiles available have accompanied us all these 8 months. And as we know, all these 8 months we were given false information. We were told that these missiles would be enough, now they will run out, here for the last week, here in two weeks ... we see - it's not true. Therefore, we must be very careful with these assessments. Nevertheless, according to more or less confirmed estimates, both the former and the current ones, say, for the main types of military equipment, for example, as for tanks, during these 8-plus months of the war, the armed forces of Ukraine destroyed about 1/4 of the tank fleet that Putin had on February 24. If these calculations are correct, then the remaining 3/4 of the tank fleet, if it was destroyed in 8 months, then accordingly three quarters of this will be enough, respectively, 8 by 3 = for 24 months, that is, for two years.
For other types of weapons, these figures are even higher. But since tanks are still the main type of heavy weapons that are still used in the course of hostilities, let's say the minimum horizon of warfare for this factor is two years. And accordingly, from this point of view, liquid foreign exchange reserves, which at the moment are enough for 17-18 months at the current rate of spending reserves, this is the shortest period that would allow the Kremlin to wage this war.
Consequently, very serious practical conclusions can be drawn from this. Of course, this does not mean that the armed forces of Ukraine should cease hostilities. No way. On the contrary, they should continue, they should do what they do professionally, defending the freedom, independence of Ukraine and Ukrainians. But we must be aware of the scale of resources that oppose them. But in the field of economic struggle, economic confrontation, here the approach to the desired state may be much shorter, and here the help of Partners, allies of Ukraine can be really very important and very effective if they pursue a real sanctions policy in relation to all resources, the export of which from Russia turns into an increase or preservation, or replenishment of liquid foreign exchange reserves.
If Western countries, as well as countries that can join the Western allies, pursue a more consistent policy of sanctions, then these reserves will shrink faster and thereby bring closer the turning point in the war not only on the economic front, but also on the direct front of the armed confrontation.
A. Illarionov: First of all, it should be noted that if the elections end with what is predicted, and if the right-wing coalition really comes to power, then it turns out that the left was in power in Israel for a little more than a year, which by any standards is simply a negligible period during which they were able to completely discredit themselves even for a fairly left-wing Israeli public. This is still a record figure. That's the first thing.
Second. I remember very well the congratulatory telegram of the President of the United States Biden to the current, apparently outgoing Israeli prime minister, when he won the previous election. I just don't recall such a congratulatory telegram where he licked just in every possible way and praised this person, because Biden clearly did not tolerate Netanyahu, just did not tolerate it at all, and therefore told how wonderful this person is. It will be very interesting for me to get acquainted with the text, the style of the new telegram, which, apparently, he will have to send to the winner of this election.
Third. The biggest question, of course, is the attitude of the new government, which will be formed as a result of these elections, in relation to Ukraine, in relation to Putin's war against Ukraine. Different points of view are expressed. I would not like to give any forecasts now. I'll be looking forward to it. But at least with regard to his neighbors, including those neighbors who pursue an aggressive policy towards Israel, it seems to me that Mr. Netanyahu has regularly demonstrated his position. He is not a man who is willing to pay with Israel's interests, Israel's security interests, for the sake of maintaining good relations with foreign leaders. For him, after all, the interests of his country and his people are a priority. I think that this position, which he demonstrated, and demonstrated by his relatives, including his older brother during the raid in Entebbe, Yonatan Netanyahu, I think that he will continue in the same spirit.
A. Illarionov: Well, it seems to me that the American public is to a small extent influenced by events in other countries of the world. We are well aware that with the exception of just a few hundred or thousands of people in Washington, New York, Chicago, Miami, and San Francisco, in general, the vast majority of America is preoccupied with domestic affairs. Therefore, it seems to me that the influence will be limited, especially since the United States, as we understand, and we have also repeatedly said this, is in a state of developing Civil War, at times. That is, for the most part, this is such a cold civil war, but in the summer of 2020 it broke through in the hot stage. And in general, since at least one side is really constantly pouring gasoline and throwing matches, lighting matches, this Cold War at any time can break through with flames. Therefore, the most important thing is what is happening in the minds of American citizens, and in the minds of those potential speakers of the American radio stations "Thousand Hills", if we mean what happened in Rwanda during that genocide, in fact, in the United States of America there are many such persons who are engaged in this and conduct their propaganda to incite hatred within society according to the same patterns. Unfortunately, we have seen from the events of the history of the twentieth year that if anyone used to think that Anglo-Saxon societies, and above all American societies, are immune from socialism, communism, authoritarianism, totalitarianism, then the events of 2020, and the next two-plus years, show that alas, this is not the case.
Therefore, for my part, I consider it important to convey to those people in the United States of America who are still able to perceive objective information, to report on the threats facing American society, threats of a repetition of the arrival of totalitarian forces, as it was in 1917 in Russia, in 1933 in Germany, and other countries.
Yekaterina Prigova: You have just said a very important thing. There are people who incite this hatred, artificially implement this chip of hatred into consciousness, dividing one society into right and left, and emphasizing all other differences, starting from gender and race. But we have people who, living in America, enjoy absolute right, absolute freedom, approved and declared by the First Amendment, and they sow hatred for people who speak Russian. These people live in different parts of the world.
We have a gamer on the dude, a comrade, who will not calm down, because what happened today, I think it is unprecedented. Two programs on YouTube in two parts are dedicated to you, and are dedicated in such a form that ... well, A lot of people called me, we even had people ask this question in the feed: why does a person behave this way, and why did he choose you, namely you, as the object of his hatred, I emphasize, hatred, not based on facts, but based only on hatred. And this hatred he has periodically, as attacks go, at the moment when we have some elections in our country or changes are coming. The right is likely to take over our House of Representatives, and at that moment, exactly a week before this election, a comrade with KGB shoulder straps appears.
A. Illarionov: The answer is very simple - there are no former KGB majors. A person is on duty, has been on duty, is on duty, will be on duty. He does what he was taught, what he is constantly proud of and says that he was taught disinformation, special operations in the field of information, information manipulation, misleading people. He uses all these tricks, he's at work. The peculiarity of his current work is that, as a major of the KGB, he works for two services. He works for his own GB service, and for the Biden administration, at the same time. In the conditions of the Cold War and the existence of the Soviet Union, such a phenomenon did not exist. This is the phenomenon of this new world. The New World is precisely because there is an administration in the White House that not only does not shy away, it gladly uses the services and sets the tasks that KGB majors perform with such pleasure.
And it seems to me that the connection here is not so much with this election campaign, although maybe it also played a role, and perhaps it is connected with the fact that I have already noticed, which means that the KGB major, he is pulled by the string and he throws out his ear of garbage every time in this or that program, in this or that speech, I devote some time and some explanations to this, what is the position of the current administration of the United States of America in relation to Ukraine. When I tell the ins and outs, what its goals are, and especially if it is done, naturally, we try to do it, reasonably, with facts, with figures, with documents. After each of these cases, we get this portion. The first time was literally a day or two after Biden's meeting with Putin, during which Biden surrendered Ukraine, because then he agreed not only to the implementation of the Minsk agreements, he agreed to political autonomy for Lugandonia, and this was confirmed by Ms. Nuland in the morning in her public interview. But more than that, Mr. Biden handed over then a list of 17, I think, critical sectors of American infrastructure into the hands of Putin directly, from which, probably, he was also amazed, but of course he took the list. The very critical infrastructure that Putin's missiles are destroying in Ukraine today is a list of this American infrastructure that Mr. Biden gave to Putin at that time. And it was then that I actually told you what such a person should deserve, who submits the most important documents, materials, secrets not only of another country, he not only surrenders another country, Ukraine, he surrenders American secrets to his own not a potential, but a real enemy. Well, then this pattern was repeated. A day later, two, a maximum of three after such a performance, we get a lot of garbage, which suggests that this high appreciation of our modest work, and this means that we get to the point, this means that we are right in the top ten, in the bull's-eye, which means that we are absolutely right, we will continue to do it. And the more KGB majors get angry, the more we'll have fun and rejoice because we've gotten to the right place. And let them proceed on what they can come from.
E. Prigova: That's right, Jupiter, you're angry, so you're wrong.
A. Illarionov: Only it's not Jupiter, I'm sorry, it's a bag, that's it.
E. Prigova: Yes, yes.
A. Illarionov: Which is in the hole.
I. Tsesarsky: That's true. You know, we're coming to an end. Maybe a couple of last questions, I'll start, Lena will then continue with her question, and we will close today's meeting. I have a very short question: what do you expect from the G20 summit, who do you expect there, and in general I am a little ashamed that the president, who is called the 46th, will go there and will actually have fun in a very ... I would say this fun is fun, but to amuse the audience that will come to this summit. What are you waiting for?
A. Illarionov: I do not expect anything special, and first of all because this is a meaningless organization created for the so-called international diplomatic tourism. It's just that at one time there was one in the beginning of the Minister of Finance of Canada, who had great ambitions and who was cramped in his country, he wanted to travel around the world and get acquainted with the sights of different countries of the world at public expense. Therefore, he first came up with a list of 20 countries that seemed to him the most interesting, not all of which, perhaps, he was in, and wanted to visit, look and created the so-called financial twenty. There is absolutely no sense in which, because these are completely different countries that are in different positions, they have nothing in common absolutely, but any such international institutions allow you to use taxpayers' money in order to travel to interesting ... and in this case, the most interesting, most curious exotic places for such meetings are selected. And the current one is also naturally in the same row. Why not travel, Bali is not a bad place.
And then, because this finance minister later became canada's prime minister, he transformed that financial twenty into a political twenty. And I remember that at that time there was a real organization that really dealt with and continues to deal, as far as possible, with issues about which the members have more or less a single ... not even so much a single position, but a single approach - this is seven. This is the seven democratic highly developed countries of the world. Yes, they have internal disputes, but nevertheless there is a certain common feature, some common features that unite these countries. The G20 has nothing of the kind, so it is basically impossible to form any single policy, a single position, on any significant issues. This, I will say again, is diplomatic tourism. Well, there will be another diplomatic tourism. And for the person you mentioned, well, why not, actually, maybe he's never been there, wants to get acquainted with it, they say the beaches are good. Why not.
A. Illarionov: I would not use the term uselessness, I would say inefficiency. There is a benefit from one organization, the other, and the third organization. I don't mean 20, I mean the UN, I mean NATO, I mean the OSCE. One can argue many, little, but there is a certain benefit, only the goals for which these organizations were created are generally noble: the maintenance of peace and security in Europe, the maintenance of peace and security in the world. This is certainly an absolutely noble necessary goal. Organizations were created after the catastrophe of the Second World War, in which tens of millions of people died, and therefore the meaning of creating such organizations in order to avoid a repetition of these horrors is quite understandable. Another thing is that these organizations do not cope with these goals. From this point of view, twenty is fundamentally different from them. The 20 was not created with these noble goals in mind. For what purposes was it created? It was created with the goals of tourism. With the purposes of tourism at public expense. At the expense of the taxpayers of each of these countries. Therefore, there is a fundamental difference between the organizations that were created in the early period of the Cold War, including representatives of the Us administration, in which those leaders of those American organizations really thought about what the world should be like, and what to do to ensure that the world does not fall apart, or some scoundrels do not disrupt it in another multimillion-dollar murder. And this twenty is a defeat of a completely different time, a time of juiring, a time of entertainment, a time of relaxation, when the main problems are the fight against the climate or the fight against changing the movement of the planets, and some similar things. I mean, it's a different reflection.
As for the attitude of certain people to the terrorist and the murderer, the fact is that thank God at least we are, this is for sure, the heirs of a certain cultural code of Christian civilization, which manifests itself in different ways and there are different parts. But at least in this civilization, these great goals, great criteria, great principles of freedom, democracy, the rule of law, the separation of powers, freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of expression were developed. Please note that no other civilization has developed these criteria, these goals, these principles. None of them came to this on their own. These ideas, these principles, these goals came to other civilizations from here from a civilization that can be called Christian, can be called European. I generally call it Western civilization. That would be more correct. Western civilization in this sense is unique in the history of mankind, nothing like other civilizations have created. And therefore, when within the framework of countries that belong to one Western civilization, these countries are united in the framework, for example, of the seven, they are able to make decisions, to pursue certain policies within the framework of these principles in order to achieve certain goals.
As soon as a large number of states appear in an organization, especially when the post-war structure after the Second World War goes back centuries, and a large number of states appear, whose leaders are brought up in completely different cultural traditions, in which the very concepts of freedom, human rights, and the rule of law simply do not exist, these international organizations begin to break down. Because, I will say again, by and large there are no so-called universal values. There are different values in different cultures, and there are just killers, there are terrorists, there are cannibals. Their values are different. And so it's not a problem for them to deal with another cannibal, or another terrorist, or another killer. This is one of the most important, and perhaps the most important, question of the modern world: how to live and how to ensure any peaceful and decent, dignified existence, when countries and states that do not share the great principles of Western civilization begin to occupy an increasing share in the world, in the world population, in the world economy, in the world political weight. This is the greatest threat to all of us belonging to this Western civilization, and of course the most important threat, the greatest threat, is the threat to the United States of America itself, one of the main citadels of Western civilization, the destruction of which is consistently worked by powerful forces located not only outside the United States of America, but also in the United States of America itself. And many of the issues that we have touched upon and discussed today from, therefore, the singers of the regular radio stations of a thousand hills to the leaders in power, are aimed at the same thing - at the destruction of Western civilization in the United States of America.
https://interview-ani.dreamwidth.org/19354.html
Additional Tribule NWO Resources
https://telegra.ph/NWO-State-Terror-11-03
https://telegra.ph/The-Democrats-are-on-the-attack-in-a-final-and-decisive-battle-11-05
https://telegra.ph/Sweepstakes-of-the-interim-results-of-the-elections-81122-11-01
https://telegra.ph/Obama-knows-a-thing-or-two-about-Russian-vodka-11-05
