The Deceptive Fight

Dmitry Medvedev is summing up his work before he leaves his presidential post. He said that during his time in office, relations between Russia and the U.S. have been the best over the last decade. For a true Russian patriot, it sounds at best like an attempt to "trick stupid Yankees" and at worst a blasphemous lie.

Relations with the United Stated cannot be good by definition. "America stinks, we will win!" That is our hymn, our Symbol of Faith. If that is taken away too, will we have anything at all? Seriously, without an enemy, Russian politics is simply nauseating: dull buffoonery, flattering authorities, political debunking (not followed by anything), pitiful squabbles between stupid old men who have been mumbling something on talk shows on our screens for twenty years already.

If everything is done as part of a big game against the U.S. however, then it is illuminated by a mysterious magic light. In that case, stealing is not stealing, squabbling is not really squabbling, nonsense is not nonsense. All of these are our military tricks. War means war, and war writes anything off. Especially when a war is that amazing! Judge for yourself: The enemy is: a) the biggest celebrity (tell me who your enemy is, and I will tell you who you are); b) quiet — a war without any risk or does not require real action from any of us is purely in TV shows; c) traditions — our grandparents and great-grandparents fought against them and we were told to do the same. … It is psychological warfare. When we feel it, we fight. When we do not feel it, we do not fight. That is the only difference. If we feel it, we are fighting the “empress of the seas.”* When we do not feel anything, we are left with nothing and try to fix it from time to time.

If we fight against America, it means that we exist as a world power. Plus, if we are not in a war, does it mean that nobody is interested in fighting us? Does it mean that we are like “Cowboy Joe,” chased by nobody?** If we are not in a war, then what have we been doing for all these years? And who are we? Just a bunch of weirdoes?

After reading that, a true patriot would just shrug his shoulders: What kind of nonsense is this? … So there is no cold war between Russia and the U.S. — political, economic and informational war? So the U.S. is not the anti-Russian center of evil? So America is not dreaming of conquering, capturing or splitting us and taking our wealth away like Genghis Khan, Napoleon or Hitler? So none of it is going on and it is just our imagination? Perfect. But how do you explain the following facts then, which are certainly not just our “imagination?”

First of all: What long teeth you have Grandma! Why is NATO expanding? Why are your anti-ballistic missiles getting so close? Why do you need a military budget like that? Why? Yes, that is what we are talking about.

It means that the U.S. is planning to achieve apparent military superiority over Russia. And? What happens next?

What do you mean "what happens next?" They ATTACK us — that is what! Or they are going to threaten to attack us. And then, thanks to these threats, they will take our untold wealth — well, they will intimidate us with their possible attacks.

The U.S. does not have obvious military superiority over Russia yet, but they do have it over the EU, Japan, Latin America, the Middle East, etc. And what? Are they attacking everybody? Intimidating? Are they demanding ransom?

No. Why would they do it?

Well, for the same reason: to rip them off. Murder with the intent to rob, as has been said. Or are we the only ones that possess something worth being taken away, while the EU and Japan do not have anything? Are you trying to say that there is no oil in Saudi Arabia or Mexico?

Do not act like a fool! Those countries are their sycophants! While we have pride, we are independent! We will confront them and we will be the ones they attack.

How exactly do we oppose them? Yes, we do vote differently in the U.N., but that is about it. We keep our money in the U.S. (and it is the right thing to do; any mistress converts part of her family savings into dollars. Whether it is the "right" thing to do or should be "illegal," that is the way it is). Meanwhile, the EU is the U.S.’ biggest competitor in the world in economic, financial and technological aspects. I am not even trying to talk about Venezuela, Bolivia or Cuba — so-called U.S. "sycophants." The first thing Saudi Arabia and some other countries did was nationalize their oil resources and then raise oil prices significantly. Still, nothing happened, nobody attacked them. They do not look so much like sycophants anymore, do they?

So, are you trying to say that Americans, whom you like so much, are just very altruistic?

No, they are not. The thing is that world policy is organized a little bit differently than murder with intent to rob or a typical "stole — got drunk — was sentenced" approach. The U.S. is not trying to "rob" anybody. Their purpose is to maintain the system of the world order. In the way acceptable to them. And Russia is a part of it. And we cannot do anything to oppose their system (we tried in 1917; that is enough). They are the world police, maintaining the current system. And that is why they are armed. It might be "bad." Still, they are not trying to attack Russia.

Another thing: Really? And what about Iraq, Serbia, Libya, Afghanistan? Is that not enough for you?!

Russia was in a war with Georgia. And, by the way, Georgia is an American ally, while neither Iraq nor Libya is a Russian ally. And Serbia is not a Russian ally either. ... Does the fact that we were in a war with Georgia mean that we were trying to threaten the U.S.? No, not at all. Then why do you think that American troop presence in Iraq (and it was not American troops fighting in Serbia or Libya) means that the U.S. is threatening Russia? Is that what we WANT to think? What are they threatening us with? With a nuclear war — which would be suicidal for both of us?

And by the way, Iraqi oil is still the property of the Republic of Iraq. [Russia’s] Channel One did not mention it though. Oil procurement in the country is administered not only by American companies but also by Russian (LUKOIL, for example) and Chinese ones, as well as many others. And the politics of Iraq is not that simple. For example, they maintain good relations with Iran (Georgia has good relations with Iran too, as well as with Belarus). The U.S. spent $4 trillion on this war and, as a result, our budget received a lot of extra money due to higher oil prices. And that is what Russian TV channels are not telling us about.

I am saying this in an attempt to prove that the reasons for the war in Iraq are much more complicated (or maybe more stupid) than just attack and take their resources away. In Afghanistan they are fighting against our common enemy, and Russian authorities are actually thankful for that.

So are we supposed to be thankful for Iraq and Afghanistan?

No, we are not. They are just acting in their personal interests in the way they can, but they are not fighting "against us."

Another thing: Why are they funding “the fifth column”: [Parnas opposition politicians] Boris Nemtsov and Co.? What if they are paying you too for the articles — and you too disintegrate when confronted? ...

Honestly, I could not care less about the U.S. I am too lazy to even visit there and see what their life is like for real, unlike many of their haters do. I do not care about the U.S., but anti-Americanism "offends my mind," as said in one of those American movies (about a different issue though).

As for Nemtsov and Co., I do not like them at all. Actually, quite the contrary (the same way "professional liberals" feel about me). Most of the opposition “leaders" seems to be totally unpleasant, aggressive, stupid and intolerant people, like true “scoops” [those who belong to the Soviet era]. "Pathetic and worthless people," as they said in the classics. A lot of times they just seem inadequate. They are as much obsessed with "Putinophobia" as patriots are with "Americanophobia." Not all of them are like that, of course. But they are a completely different issue (and hopefully, I will have a chance to talk about them later). If they take money from foreigners for their political work, they should know that it is against the law. Why is nobody prosecuted for it? Even if they are paid, what is the danger for Russia? Whoever they are, are they preparing a military plot? No, they just organize peaceful rallies. Just let them do it. What is the problem?

Yes, the U.S. for some reason thinks that the whole world should have "legitimate elections." I do not understand why, since it is none of their business. They consider themselves "democracy teachers," which is actually pretty stupid. ... But in any case, legitimate elections are not a crime. And they would not give power to [Russian political activist] Alexey Navalniy. I am not the only one who does not like them. Even in a crystal clean election, Putin would win, or another high official or, at worst, a left-wing nationalist. That is what Russian people stand by.

The most important thing is that legitimate elections (regardless of the way you define this phrase) are not an American diversion. Russian legitimate elections are not connected with the U.S. in any way. It is a completely different issue. And regular rotation of power is not an American evil plan but a usual prerequisite for the existence of democratic states. It has nothing to do with U.S.-Russia relations. And the theory that if by some miracle they came to power Nemtsov and Navalniy "are going to give everything to the U.S." does not make any sense.

In the 1990s, Yeltsin conducted privatization. However, foreigners got nothing out of it. The situation in Russia was much worse at that time, despite the fact that Russia had Western advisers and different propaganda. And Americans did nothing in response. Yeltsin gave them the finger and they just dealt with it. They neither attacked us nor presented us with an ultimatum: "Give away Gazprom or get a bomb. ... "

The same thing happened in Ukraine. After "their" Orange Revolution won, Americans did not get anything. Yes, [Viktor] Yushchenko's rhetoric was anti-Russian. However, most of the decisions that the "orange" made were “pro-Russian” (that is why [Yulia] Tymoshenko sits in prison now). [Viktor] Yanukovich would not let that happen.

Let us talk about the Americans again. They are neither "altruists" nor "friends of Russia" (why should they be?), but foreign policy (including that of the U.S.) is a much more complicated issue than robbery and plunder. There are such things as competition and cooperation. And in general, there is partnership. There is no uncompromising struggle for destruction. I am not going to mention a possibility of a nuclear war; it is just that Russia does not need the destruction (or significant weakening) of the U.S. and the U.S. does not want the collapse of Russia. Both countries actually want to save the current balance of power in the world. Still, they both want their role to be more meaningful. "The struggle with the U.S." is only needed to create quasi-arguments in our public mind, especially since there are no real arguments. It is not a "psychological war" with the United States, it is psychological self-deception.

If you teach a scientist, you can only make him worse. You cannot persuade those who have their own beliefs. I am not so stupid that I do not to understand that. It is nice and flattering to have an important enemy. Nobody wants to give that away. Besides, you do not have to feed the enemy if it is imaginary.

Well, enjoy. My job is little: I tried to wake you up, but there may never be a dawn. Be happy and keep tilting at windmills.


*Editor’s note: The author may be referring to Alexander Pushkin’s “Tale of the Fisherman and the Fish,” a story with a moral that one who is too greedy may end up with nothing.
**Editor’s note: The author may be referring to Cowboy Joe Masters, known to be the last survivor of the Wild Bunch and early-day outlaws.