Liquidation of the junta

2024 Author: Seth Attwood | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-16 15:55

Junta, I'm sorry! Junta, goodbye!

Any terrorist regime develops according to the same laws. The violent suppression of the opposition is justified by external aggression or the danger of such aggression. The result of the policy of forceful suppression in domestic politics is the destruction of the feedback mechanism. The authorities are unable to assess the speed of transmission and the efficiency of signal perception at the lower levels of government. There is an imbalance in the bureaucratic apparatus, some of whose structures begin to work for themselves (as an option for the interests of one of the competing power groups), and some begin, at best, to imitate work, taking a wait and see attitude.

As a result, the efficiency of economic management is sharply reduced and corruption is critically increasing - seeing the instability of power, officials at all levels are trying to secure their future, plundering everything they can reach. The deterioration of relations with external partners (accusing them of preparing for aggression) inflicts an additional blow on economies in the form of a rupture or a sharp reduction in foreign economic ties.

The economic troubles are again explained by the intrigues of internal and external enemies, which leads to an increase in the repression of the regime and their spread to ever wider sections of the population. Not only oppositionists, but also neutrals, then those who sympathize with the regime, then active supporters of the regime, and finally the pillars of the regime, who have lost the internal struggle for power, begin to fall under the flywheel of repression.

The struggle for power between the various factions of the regime becomes more and more fierce as the economic resource is depleted. Even representatives of the top of the regime are not immune from repression. Only a dictator at the very top of the pyramid can feel in relative political and economic security. However, the concentration of all benefits and powers in one position leads to a sharp increase in competition for its occupation. Thus, the security of the dictator becomes imaginary. He actually finds himself in a state of constant war with his own entourage for his own position. Moreover, no matter how many members of the encirclement the dictator changes and how many dictators the encirclement eliminates, the severity of the confrontation will not decrease, but increase.

This is an inevitable process - the leaders of the terrorist regime are striving to achieve elusive stability, both on a national scale and for themselves. To this end, they use what seems to them the most effective method - extrajudicial repression, force, armed suppression of the opposition and opponents. However, the law cannot be repealed only for a specific group of people. The law is either valid or not valid throughout the state. This is why the repressive pressure is expanding.

Initially, only the political opposition is subjected to repression. Then, as economic problems arise, repression is also applied for economic protests against the policy of the authorities, which are declared either the opposition or its accomplices. Then any disagreement with the "general line", even an attempt to discuss the advisability of taking certain measures within the framework of the top of the regime, also becomes unacceptable liberty and entails repression. With each new round, the repression is getting tougher. This is also understandable: since dismissal from work and the ban on the profession did not help, in the logic of a repressive regime, it is necessary to intensify repression and, for example, to put in jail. Then you can confiscate property, deprive parental rights. But very quickly the death penalty becomes the only punishment for real and imaginary crimes against the regime.

At the same time, the regular judicial procedure is either not observed at all, or is a farce, that is, any political (even purely theoretical) dispute is resolved in favor of the one who has more armed supporters and who is ready, without hesitation, to use armed force to solve their problems. A man with a gun becomes a law enforcement officer and a judge and prosecutor. The loyalty of a person with a gun to the nominal leadership of the state is determined not by the legitimacy of the latter (it becomes illegitimate from the moment the laws and the constitution are no longer observed in the country, no matter what the world community thinks or says about this), but the ability of the leadership to accumulate sufficient resources to satisfy the needs of their law enforcement agencies, which are quickly turning into ordinary gangs.

Ultimately, a state captured by gangs and living on the principle of a gang depletes the resources necessary to maintain at least the appearance of a centralized organism. An era of disintegration, clashes between gangs, for control over territories and remaining resources is coming. These clashes are completely indistinguishable from feudal wars and the further, the more they plunge the country into chaos.

If the world community (neighbors or other interested countries) does not have a desire or need to intervene and restore order, then chaos can last for decades, and in especially difficult cases even for centuries. The population is reduced to a size corresponding to the new social structure and new economic relations (if this can be called society and economy). Roughly speaking, there are as many mouths on the territory as in the new conditions this territory is able to feed. Economic activity is degrading, society is returning to subsistence farming. After that, the restoration of the normal functioning of the social organism is possible only as a result of the accidental appearance of the unifying hero (Qin Shi Huang or Genghis Khan), who will restore the regular state with iron and blood, placing at the forefront the absolute primacy of the law (legism, yasa). Or as a result of purposeful external intervention, when the restoration of civilization in a specific territory will be carried out by the efforts of neighboring states, which will find it cheaper to incur one-time large costs for the restoration of a regular political and economic structure than to constantly spend money and energy on protection from the dangers emanating from such a civilizational black hole.

It happens that outside intervention, the exceptional talents of a dictator, or special historical conditions are able to slow down the disintegration of a terrorist regime. But one way or another, it turns out to be inevitable. Even the "New State" regime that existed in Portugal from 1926 to 1974 eventually collapsed, exhausting all the country's resources and losing the ability to further self-defense. But Salazar's Portugal was a NATO member, that is, it received external support to stabilize the regime.

The junta of black colonels in Greece, which, unlike Lisbon, was not a guarantor of the preservation of Western control over the huge colonial empire (which immediately after the Carnation Revolution in 1974 passed into the sphere of influence of the USSR) collapsed in just seven years. Few regimes survive, as in Somalia, to complete Makhnovism. Sometimes a regime, under the pressure of the interests of the economy and external players, gradually reduces the pressure of terror and returns to democracy (as, for example, in Chile). An absolutely ideal, sterile pure experiment is impossible in principle, but within a fairly wide range of endpoints, the vector and dynamics of the development of such modes are always the same.

In general, variations, sometimes non-standard and very interesting, are possible, but the end is always the same - the collapse of the terrorist regime (either in a civilized and controlled form, or in the worst case, when it manages to go all the way to the end).

Based on the availability of internal resources and the effectiveness of the regime's structures, modern Kiev authorities have exhausted all possibilities for existence back in October 2014after which the collapse, agony and collapse became not only inevitable, but had to proceed very quickly. However, the existence of the regime was extended. Obviously, there were more reasons, but two main ones lie on the surface.

First, the United States has come to the conclusion that with minimal support, Kiev is capable of providing centralized resistance in the East for some time before the front collapses. This centralized resistance could be used to increase pressure on Europe to openly enter the conflict on the side of Ukraine. But for this, Ukraine had to maintain at least the semblance of centralized control.

Secondly, Russia, which also relied on attracting Europe in this battle with the United States to its side, had to ensure uninterrupted gas transit to the EU, and therefore could not stop supplies to Ukraine. Ultimately, both the Russian game and the American one were largely paid for by Europe, which provided loans to Kiev in addition to the IMF money, as well as Ukraine itself, which used its gold and foreign exchange reserves to repay debts to Gazprom and pay for gas, but the essence of the matter is not changed, the Kiev regime was able to survive the winter, which it should not have survived, and entered 2015.

However, since December-January, most of the positive external factors for Ukraine have ceased to operate.

Firstly, The EU still refused to play the American game in Ukraine(leading, ultimately, to the destruction of the EU itself) and limited political and diplomatic support to Kiev, and then completely began to put quite tough pressure on it, demanding to fulfill the obligations on Minsk-2 and launch the peace process.

Secondly, The US failed to get the EU into an open clash with Russia over UkraineMoreover, the positions of Berlin, Paris and Moscow began to gradually converge precisely on the basis of a common desire to somehow end the conflict, which brings everyone the same problems. At the same time, frank speeches of Kiev politicians with claims to Europe on behalf of and relying on the authority of the United States caused a fair amount of irritation in European capitals. They are now looking at Kiev, as Professor Preobrazhensky is at Sharikov - they warmed him, fed him, dressed him up, but he got mad and brought Shvonder the right to pump.

Thirdly, dried up gold and foreign exchange reserves of KievThis means that there will not be enough loans to support the necessary government spending. The Americans do not want to give their money, the EU also does not seek to finance the regime, which is essentially bankrupt. Russia is ready to supply gas, but for money.

Fourth, the situation in Donbass is rapidly sliding towards renewed hostilities. The third catastrophic defeat in a row, moreover, in conditions of an economic catastrophe, the army of Kiev, as a whole, will not survive. Since the militia will also not be able to take control of the entire territory of Ukraine with cash forces, the sign of the Nazi-bandit Makhnovism takes on real shape.

Fifth, having moved, but not finished off Kolomoisky, demonstrating but not bringing to the end the intention to clean up the political space from alternative teams, declaring the intention to dispossess the former oligarchs, but not implementing it, not disarming the Nazi militants and not establishing control over them (in spite of own ultimatum) Poroshenko received the appearance of strengthening his own positions and stabilizing the situation, but in fact he became a figure much more hated by the entire political elite of Kiev than Yanukovych was in 2013. Viktor Fedorovich had, if not sincere friends, then at least loyal performers, Pyotr Alekseevich does not have that either.

Thus, the problems that did not finish off the Ukrainian statehood in the fall of last year, for the most part, will aggravate again in May-June, and the remaining (gas) one is guaranteed in September-October (perhaps if the EU does not want to risk and wait for autumn, and earlier - synchronously with the rest). At the same time, not only the internal, but also the external resource, which made it possible to achieve a conditional temporary stabilization of the regime, has finally been exhausted. That is, a collapse can occur suddenly and be extremely deep.

Russia has already impermissibly delayed the elimination of the Kiev terrorist regime. Let me remind you that the Germans entered Kiev on September 19, 1941, and were driven out of the city by the morning of November 6, 1943. The city was in their hands for two years and a month and a half. This is not 1941. And despite the fact that the geopolitical enemy of Russia is the United States (an enemy no less dangerous than Germany in 1941), the people not only lack a sense of catastrophe, but there is a sense of victory. In these conditions, the further preservation of the Kiev regime (which has already held out for a year and two months) becomes unacceptable from a moral and political point of view. Moreover, this regime not only continues the genocide of Russians in Donbass, but openly declares its intentions and is preparing to spread this practice to all territories controlled by Kiev. Terror is completely out of control.

Finally, the process of spontaneous destruction of the regime, once it has begun, must proceed very quickly, and Russia (like other neighbors of Ukraine) may simply be unable to ensure in time neither its interests, nor the protection of the civilian population of the territories controlled by Kiev, nor to prevent a humanitarian catastrophe. Meanwhile, as soon as the regime falls, the responsibility for everything that happens in Ukraine (including for each person killed) will be borne by the world community as a whole, Ukraine's neighbors in particular, and Russia in particular. This is not fair, but hardly anyone doubts that responsibility will be distributed in this way.

That is why even today the Russian leadership should have a clear-cut plan of action for preemption, providing for the final liquidation of the Kiev junta in the summer, with an immediate (without a period of uncertainty) replacing it with a new adequate government.

Why summer? Because until autumn it is necessary not only to ensure uninterrupted gas transit to the EU, but also to enable Ukrainian farmers to harvest crops with minimal losses in order to prevent mass starvation, otherwise inevitable. Yes, a lot of things need to be done before the cold weather, so that a mass plague of the population does not begin in Ukraine.

Therefore, we must try to do everything in the summer, and the sooner the better. The task is very difficult, almost impossible, but it must be solved. Moreover, Kiev has already felt the weakness of the junta and the falling power is preparing to pick up "civilized" Russophobes, former regionals, democratic society, etc.

Power should never be given up to these groups. They are worse than the junta. It was they who, consistently changing each other in power over the past 20 years, led the country to the establishment of the Nazi dictatorship, to which they surrendered power on a saucer with a blue border. And again they will pass, because they did not understand anything and did not learn anything. Today, Ukraine does not have an adequate political force capable of taking and retaining power in the country, preventing it from being split into destinies and further not even a humanitarian, but a civilizational catastrophe. All those who nominated themselves for a political tender have been tested for 23 years and proved their insolvency. That is, even if general political conditions force the organization of a puppet transitional regime from the residents of Ukraine, the real levers of government should be in the hands of the Governor-General (who, however, can be called somehow more neutral - the essence is important, not the name) …

And, finally, in order to work with Ukraine, the goal must be clearly defined. Russia has already suffered great casualties in this conflict. Moreover, these sacrifices were not inevitable. They are completely on the conscience of the cowardly, limited and thieving Ukrainian leadership, which managed to give power over a 45 million country to a group of ten nonentities, supported (in February 2014) by tens of thousands of Nazi militants and just bandits. Russia will still suffer losses (financial and economic) and they will also be on the conscience of those who refused to fulfill their duty (the president, prime minister, members of the government, politicians, deputies from the majority) and suppress the "Maidan". Well, the big sacrifices during the war can only be justified by the big gains as a result.

Moreover, the task of restoring borders (when it will work out, where will it work out and how it will work out) will still face any Russian government, regardless of whether it realizes it or not. It is no coincidence that the line of the European border of the USSR in 1945 practically coincided with the western border of Russia in the XII-XIII centuries. The 700-year-old desire of the people to restore the destroyed unity could not be accidental and cannot be canceled by two or three decades of turmoil.

Rostislav Ischenko, columnist, Russia Today