В РОССИИ НАЧАЛАСЬ СЕЗОННАЯ РАСПРОДАЖА СОЮЗНИКОВ. ОЧЕРЕДЬ ДОШЛА ДО АБХАЗОВ И ОСЕТИН?
По сообщению СМИ, руководство России снова выполняет требование своих тайных хозяев и готовится предать очередных друзей РФ. Арцах (Карабах) и Армения – не единственные союзники Москвы, которых продал и предал Кремль. Осталаась ещё парочка непроданных друзей: похоже, очередь дошла и до них. Почему власти России систематически предают всех своих и так немногочисленных соратников? У бывшего советника президента Украины Алексея Арестовича своя трактовка этой аномалии: "Путин - западный проект и Запад не хочет, чтоб он проиграл". Вашему вниманию представляем очередную публикацию на эту тему.
Россия готовится сдать Грузии Абхазию и Южную Осетию
В последнее время в российско-абхазских отношениях наблюдаются тенденции напряженности, которые получают противоречивые оценки.
В частности,
один из абхазских оппозиционных телеграм-каналов опубликовал еще
не проверенный документ, согласно которому Россия уведомила правительство
Абхазии о том, что прекратит бюджетную поддержку до тех пор, пока Сухум не
проведет ряд реформ, в том числе не снимет ограничения на покупку недвижимости
для граждан России. Документ предположительно является протоколом встречи
президента Абхазии Аслана Бжании и заместителя руководителя администрации
президента России Дмитрия Козака 19 августа.
Помимо
прекращения бюджетной поддержки, в документе говорится, что президент Бжания
согласился предоставить Абхазии подробную информацию о депутатах и
оппозиционерах, которые «действуют в ущерб интересам Российской Федерации и
развитию российско-абхазских отношений». Согласно документу, Москва в ближайшее
время поручит российским чиновникам разорвать отношения с последними из-за
«неконструктивной позиции в выполнении своих обязательств перед российской
стороной» и что будет рассмотрен вопрос о лишении их российского гражданства.
В опубликованном
документе также отмечается, что осенью 2024 года и зимой 2025 года российская
электроэнергия будет поставляться в Абхазию по коммерческой ставке, а не по
ранее субсидируемой.
Примечательно, что вопрос
продажи недвижимости - давняя проблема между Россией и Абхазией. Ранее
в этом году правительство Абхазии было вынуждено отказаться от законопроекта,
разрешающего продажу жилья иностранцам, после того, как выяснилось, что у
правительства нет необходимых голосов в парламенте для принятия законопроекта.
Эта проблема, а также другие вопросы, в том числе передача России
государственной дачи Пицунда, вызвали углубляющийся раскол в отношениях между
Абхазией и Россией и вызвали массовые протесты в Абхазии.
Несмотря на
то, что этот документ подлежит проверке, он появился на фоне заявлений об
ухудшении российско-абхазских отношений. До этого, 26 августа, президент России
Владимир Путин не праздновал день международного признания Абхазии, что вызвало большой ажиотаж в стране, а пророссийские СМИ начали публиковать
критические заметки в адрес Бжании. В то
же время Россия также неожиданно отменила заседание межправительственной
комиссии, которое должно было состояться 26 августа.
Примечательно, что ряд экспертов утверждают, что
напряженность между властями Российской Федерации и Абхазии носит формальный
характер, а на самом деле под этим готовится основа для сдачи Абхазии, а
также Южной Осетии Грузии. Уже длительное время муссируется информация о том,
что между Москвой и Тбилиси ведутся секретные переговоры по этому вопросу, согласно которому в случае отказа от западной
интеграции и резкого внешнеполитического поворота в сторону России российская
сторона согласится отдать Грузии Абхазию и Южную Осетию каким-либо вариантом,
например, в статусе автономных республик.
По мнению экспертов,
такой
сценарий реалистичен, поскольку Россия еще в 2008 году признала независимость
этих самопровозглашенных республик, отделившихся от Грузии, но до сих пор не
включила их в свой состав, в отличие от территорий, отнятых у Украины, которые
были присоединены к России на референдумах. Это означает, что политические
власти Российской Федерации, по крайней мере, не исключают такого сценария, на
что несколько месяцев назад также намекнул заместитель министра иностранных дел
Российской Федерации Михаил Галузин, заявив, что
власти Грузии извлекли урок из преступной авантюры и стремятся «вернуть»
Абхазию и Южную Осетию мирным путем.
В политических партиях
Грузии, особенно на фоне углубляющейся напряженности в отношениях с Западом,
этот вопрос активно обсуждается. В частности, в последнее
время в СМИ муссируется информация о том, что в случае успеха на выборах в
Грузии в октябре 2024 г. правящая партия «Грузинская мечта» собирается принять новую Конституцию,
который предоставит Абхазии и Южной
Осетии особый статус, открыв путь для
их возвращения под управление Тбилиси. Именно
с этой реальностью эксперты связывают оптимизм властей Грузии, которые при каждом удобном случае заявляют, что
вернут оккупированные территории страны, но исключительно мирным путем, а
иногда отмечают, что сделают это к 2030 году.
Насколько эта
информация, распространенная в СМИ и среди экспертов, соответствует
действительности, покажет время, однако, если руководствоваться этими
утверждениями, циркулирующими за политическими кулисами, которые на фоне резких заявлений Запада кажутся
довольно убедительными, то можно предположить, что переговоры между властями
Грузии и России по этому вопросу действительно ведутся. Трудно сказать,
к какому результату приведут эти переговоры или в каком формате Москва готова сдать Абхазию и Южную Осетию Грузии - определенную автономию и т. д, пока неизвестно, однако однозначно, что
власти Грузии на данном этапе ведут активные переговоры со всеми геополитическими
центрами, целью которых является не сохранение собственной власти, а спекуляция
интересами государства и получение максимальной выгоды от этого процесса.
Политические
власти Грузии, по сути, поняли, что в
обозримом будущем ни в ЕС, ни тем более в НАТО не готовы принять Тбилиси,
поэтому сейчас стремятся путем переговоров с Россией выжать из нее максимум,
добившись захвата Абхазии и Южной Осетии мирным путем. Что касается
России, то сложившаяся ситуация предоставила последней исключительную
возможность вернуть Грузию в сферу своего влияния, которой последняя, похоже,
стремится воспользоваться.
Возможные
развязки этих развитий вокруг Грузии во многом зависят от результатов
предстоящих осенью парламентских выборов, ставки на которые растут с каждым
днем, что может привести к непредсказуемым результатам.
https://oragir.news/hy/material/2024/09/02/128339
***
АЛЕКСЕЙ АРЕСТОВИЧ: "ПУТИН - ПОРОЖДЕНИЕ ЗАПАДА И ЗАПАД НЕ ХОЧЕТ, ЧТОБЫ ОН ПРОИГРАЛ" - ВИДЕО
Бывший советник руководителя Офиса президента Украины по вопросам стратегических коммуникаций в сфере нацбезопасности и обороны, бывший советник по вопросам информационной политики главы украинской делегации в Минской группе Алексей Арестович продолжает выступать с сенсационными заявлениями относительно странной позиции Запада по отношению к Украине и путинской России.
***
РОССИЯ РАСТЕРЯЛА ВСЕХ СВОИХ ДРУЗЕЙ И СОЮЗНИКОВ - ВЗГЛЯД ИЗ МОСКВЫ
***
THE SEASONAL SALE OF ALLIES HAS BEGUN IN RUSSIA
Has tne turn reached the Abkhazians and ossetians?
According to media reports, the Russian leadership is again fulfilling the demand of its secret masters and is preparing to betray the next friends of the Russian Federation. Artsakh (Karabakh) and Armenia are not the only allies of Moscow that have been sold and betrayed by the Kremlin. There are still a couple of unsold friends left: it looks like their turn has reached them. Why do the Russian authorities systematically betray all their already few associates? Former adviser to the President of Ukraine Alexei Arestovich has his own interpretation of this anomaly: "Putin is a Western project and the West does not want him to lose." We present to your attention another publication on this topic.
Recently, there have been trends of tension in Russian-Abkhaz relations, which receive contradictory assessments. In particular, one of the Abkhaz opposition telegram channels published an unverified document according to which Russia notified the government of Abkhazia that it would stop budget support until Sukhum implements a number of reforms, including lifting restrictions on the purchase of real estate for Russian citizens. The document is presumably the protocol of the meeting between the President of Abkhazia Aslan Bzhania and the Deputy head of the Presidential Administration of Russia Dmitry Kozak on August 19. In addition to the termination of budget support, the document says that President Bzhania agreed to provide Abkhazia with detailed information about deputies and oppositionists who "act to the detriment of the interests of the Russian Federation and the development of Russian-Abkhazian relations." According to the document, Moscow will soon instruct Russian officials to sever relations with the latter due to an "unconstructive position in fulfilling their obligations to the Russian side" and that the issue of depriving them of Russian citizenship will be considered. The published document also notes that in the autumn of 2024 and winter of 2025, Russian electricity will be supplied to Abkhazia at a commercial rate, and not at a previously subsidized one.
It is noteworthy that the issue of selling real estate is a long-standing problem between Russia and Abkhazia. Earlier this year, the Government of Abkhazia was forced to abandon a bill allowing the sale of housing to foreigners after it turned out that the government did not have the necessary votes in parliament to pass the bill. This problem, as well as other issues, including the transfer of the Pitsunda state cottage to Russia, caused a deepening rift in relations between Abkhazia and Russia and sparked mass protests in Abkhazia. Despite the fact that this document is subject to verification, it appeared against the background of statements about the deterioration of Russian-Abkhaz relations. Prior to that, on August 26, Russian President Vladimir Putin did not celebrate the day of international recognition of Abkhazia, which caused a great stir in the country, and pro-Russian media began publishing critical notes against Bzhania. At the same time, Russia also unexpectedly canceled the meeting of the intergovernmental commission, which was supposed to take place on August 26. It is noteworthy that a number of experts claim that the tension between the authorities of the Russian Federation and Abkhazia is of a formal nature, but in fact, the basis is being prepared for the surrender of Abkhazia, as well as South Ossetia to Georgia. Information has been circulating for a long time that secret negotiations are underway between Moscow and Tbilisi on this issue, according to which, in case of rejection of Western integration and a sharp foreign policy turn towards Russia, the Russian side will agree to give Abkhazia and South Ossetia to Georgia by some option, for example, in the status of autonomous republics. According to experts, such a scenario is realistic, since Russia recognized the independence of these self-proclaimed republics that separated from Georgia back in 2008, but has not yet included them in its composition, unlike the territories taken from Ukraine, which were annexed to Russia in referendums. This means that the political authorities of the Russian Federation, at least, do not rule out such a scenario, as Mikhail Galuzin, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation, also hinted a few months ago, saying that the Georgian authorities had learned a lesson from the criminal adventure and were striving to "return" Abkhazia and South Ossetia peacefully.
This issue is being actively discussed in the political parties of Georgia, especially against the background of deepening tensions in relations with the West. In particular, information has recently been circulating in the media that, if successful in the elections in Georgia in October 2024, the ruling Georgian Dream party is going to adopt a new Constitution that will grant Abkhazia and South Ossetia a special status, opening the way for their return to Tbilisi. It is with this reality that experts associate the optimism of the Georgian authorities, who at every opportunity declare that they will return the occupied territories of the country, but exclusively peacefully, and sometimes note that they will do so by 2030. Time will tell how much this information, distributed in the media and among experts, corresponds to reality, however, if we are guided by these statements circulating behind the political scenes, which seem quite convincing against the background of harsh statements from the West, then we can assume that negotiations between the Georgian and Russian authorities on this issue are indeed underway. It is difficult to say what result these negotiations will lead to or in what format Moscow is ready to surrender Abkhazia and South Ossetia to Georgia - a certain autonomy, etc. Yes, it is not yet known, but it is unequivocal that the Georgian authorities at this stage are actively negotiating with all geopolitical centers, the purpose of which is not to preserve their own power, but to speculate on the interests of the state and get the maximum benefit from this process. The Georgian political authorities, in fact, realized that in the foreseeable future neither the EU nor NATO are ready to accept Tbilisi, so now they are trying to squeeze the maximum out of it through negotiations with Russia, having achieved the capture of Abkhazia and South Ossetia peacefully. As for Russia, the current situation has provided the latter with an exceptional opportunity to return Georgia to its sphere of influence, which the latter seems to be trying to take advantage of. The possible outcomes of these developments around Georgia largely depend on the results of the upcoming parliamentary elections in autumn, the stakes for which are growing every day, which can lead to unpredictable results.
https://oragir.news/hy/material/2024/09/02/128339
A. ARESTOVICH: "PUTIN IS A PRODUCT OF THE WEST AND THE WEST DOES NOT WANT HIM TO BE DEFEATED" - VIDEO
Former adviser to the head of the Office of the President of Ukraine on strategic communications in the field of national security and defense, former adviser on information policy to the head of the Ukrainian delegation to the Minsk Group Alexey Arestovich continues to make sensational statements about the strange position of the West in relation to Ukraine and Putin's Russia.
It is curious that the former representative of the President of Ukraine comes to the same conclusion as the rare Armenian observers so far: despite the demonstrative "enmity" in the international arena, the United States and Russia are clearly cooperating on a number of issues. In any case, it is already obvious that Washington and Moscow have agreed on the massacre of the Armenian people, especially the Armenians of Artsakh (Karabakh), as far as Artsakh is concerned.
The brutal murder of the famous philanthropist Levon Hayrapetyan in a Russian prison, clearly organized by the authorities of the Russian Federation, and, to put it mildly, the strange silence of the West in this matter, say that the United States and the Russian Federation have reached an understanding, at least in this matter. As we can see, Ukrainian politicians and representatives of the Russian opposition are already coming to the same conclusion...
Details are in the video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T6i_xNn63tk
In the orbit of influence of the USSR there were almost 2/3 of the world's population, up to half of the world's GDP (at that time) and the same amount of terrestrial land. It was a powerful empire that had full sovereignty and a clear understanding of priorities and development vectors.
What do we have now? Nothing. We do not have a single strategic ally in the world, that is, none at all, absolutely ringing emptiness! Let's explain what we mean by a strategic ally. To understand the structure, three levels of allied relations can be distinguished (with an example for Russia). The first level. Allies who are guaranteed to enter into an armed conflict on the side of Russia and will defend the interests of the Russian Federation in the international arena, even if this contradicts their own interests, economic expediency and even security issues. The second level. Allies who will be ready to provide material, financial or political assistance to Russia in the event of an aggravation of the situation or a critical situation of the Russian Federation. At the same time, the second-tier countries are not ready to infringe on their own interests for the sake of Russia and will not enter the war on the side of the Russian Federation as long as it does not directly concern them. The third level. Allies who remain neutral with Russia and will not assist its enemies in the event of a war against the Russian Federation. That is, these are countries that will not fight against Russia, but at the same time are not ready to fight with the Russian Federation. The third-level allies retain full autonomy in relation to Russia and are not ready to infringe on their own interests for the sake of Moscow.
Who is Russia's third-level ally? China, India, Vietnam, North Korea, Mongolia, Algeria, Syria, Iran, Brazil, Argentina, Venezuela, Chile, Cuba. As for the CIS countries, this is a big question. The current crisis has clearly shown that we are in some way on different sides of the barricades, that is, none of the CIS countries is a first-level ally for Russia. In the event of an unlikely, even hypothetical conflict between NATO and Russia, even the participation of Belarus on the Russian side is questionable. Belarus will not fight against the Russian Federation (as long as Lukashenko is there), but the full-fledged assistance of Belarus on the side of Russia is a debatable issue, there are no guarantees, including, given the mass of unfriendly and aggressive gestures of Lukashenko towards the Russian Federation.
How is the United States doing? The United States has virtually the whole world as its third-level allies, except for North Korea, Cuba (historically), Venezuela and some countries where pro-American structures are actively fighting (Syria, Yemen). Despite the fact that the United States is not loved in many places, it has managed to maintain political influence and dominance in all key regions of the world. Even China can be considered a third-level ally of the United States, if only for the reason that the United States is China's main trading partner, and American investments in China are in the first place. Plus, China holds over 1.2 trillion. gold-foreign exchange reserves in U.S. securities. Despite the fact that Beijing is Washington's number one geopolitical opponent due to its expansion, both economically and financially, but it retains complete neutrality with the United States, at least for now. Another reason why we have included China as a third–level ally is that China will not fight against the United States (at least in the next 7-10 years). China is ideologically closer to Russia and will never be a partner of the United States in the political or military arena (it will not fight for the United States), but the economic and financial ties between China and the United States are too strong to pretend that they do not exist. Regarding the first-level U.S. allies? They have been decrypted in recent years. These are all EU countries + Norway + Sweden + Switzerland + Japan + Canada + Australia, Ukraine was added. Israel, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the UAE and Kuwait should also be taken into account here. The United States has all the key countries in its orbit of influence, where technology, production facilities, financial resources and economic power are located. If necessary, the United States can mobilize the controlled regions in such a way that they are loaded with weapons, which will devalue all of Russia's military power. No matter how many tanks Russia produces, the production, financial and economic capabilities of pro-American countries are significantly, many times higher. Yes, now, from a military point of view, the balance of power between Russia and European countries (without the United States) is near parity, but this calculation does not take into account the mobilization capabilities of Germany. They may have a pitiful hundred tanks in service, but if necessary, they can be packed with thousands.
With the exception of blitzkrieg or the use of weapons of mass destruction, we have no realistic chance of confrontation with the United States and its allies, even from a military point of view. There is no chance at all - until a pool of strong allies gets into the orbit of Russia's influence. They have superiority in human resources, industrial, financial and economic. They control technology and all raw material channels (for this, the United States has expanded into the Middle East). When Hitler attacked the USSR, the strategic balance of power compared to the current one was in favor of that period, that is, it is much worse now. We have lost all our friends and partners. How? Yes, simply because after the collapse of the USSR, Russia betrayed all its allies. Always! No one wants to be friends with Russia, because Russia in the eyes of the world community is a technologically backward nobody with an anti-people oligarchic form of government, which at the same time betrays all its allies. Apart from the shameful flight at the beginning of the 21st century from military bases in Cuba and Vietnam, we completely missed the dominance in the Mediterranean and the Middle East. We kept Iraq in our sphere of influence. But they passed it twice. In 1991 and 2003. If the surrender of 1991 was justified by the collapse of the USSR (it was not up to Iraq), then the surrender in 2003 once again showed that we have absolutely no control and are not going to control our external influence on the world stage. We turned in our friends in Libya in 2011. It is revealing and cynical. So much so that one of our most loyal African friends was forced to fight back somewhere in the sewers of Sirte and beaten to death by a wild native audience. Eventually, in the autumn of 2011, the Russian Foreign Ministry accepted the new government of Libya, which was unfriendly to the Russian Federation, as legal and the flag of the Transitional National Council of Libya (at that time) proudly flaunted above the Libyan Embassy in Moscow. It's a shame.
We lost our leverage over Egypt at the time of the tsunami of color revolutions during the Arab Spring. This washed out any previous political levers from Egypt, making the Egyptian authorities far from being as favorably disposed towards Russia as they were during the Mubarak period. We turned in our friends in Syria. And there was a multi-passageway. At first it seemed that this was Russia's biggest geopolitical victory in the 21st century, when we managed to deflect the blow of the "progressive community" against Syria through a resolution on the forced chemical disarmament of Damascus in exchange for refusing to invade Syria and reducing the degree of tension. Ukraine. This is a separate topic, it will not work in any way, alas. But also with Syria. They said "A" without intending to say "B". The operation to take Crimea was really brilliant, without any sarcasm. Moreover, it is so brilliant that it has discouraged NATO, the Pentagon, and the CIA. No one expected such agility and such speed. Swiftly, decisively, audaciously, aggressively, but at the same time extremely clean and correct. This will go down in all historical textbooks as the fastest operation to annex such a large territory in a short period (less than 3 weeks) without armed conflict under external pressure (in the absence of political agreements). This increased the morale and morale of the army, the patriotic mood in Russia, led to the unity of the people and the consolidation of the elites. Political will and determination have led to an exceptionally positive result. This is definitely a victory!
But Crimea was followed by an almost complete failure of Russia's foreign policy on Ukraine. However, this is a topic of another conversation.
What do we have in the end? The absence of strategic allies of the first and even second level. A bare front. The opponent takes Russia in his claws. A rival at the borders (the creation of a NATO shock lever in the Baltic States), increased hostility and Russophobia in the Baltic States and Poland. The creation of an architecture of an exclusively hostile structure to Russia with a population of 40 million for the purpose of pitting two previously fraternal peoples against each other and unleashing a war of annihilation. Increased information, political, economic and financial pressure on Russia from countries that generate more than half of the world's GDP. What is this but a complete failure of Russia's foreign policy?
https://spydell.livejournal.com/579972.html
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий