Instead of an epigraph, a quote from an interesting article on the topic :
“About the dismantling of the Russian Federation, they talked about the impossibility, they talked about the ability, it’s easy to talk like about the bugs, sometimes like the main scenario, they say it’s about the inevitable.”
Why in Russian? - for my relatives and acquaintances in Poland, Belarus, the States (maybe a few percent of the Russians who read the text will feel their future).
Imitating Herodotus, from left to right and around:
Transnistria - "returns to its native harbor" - Moldova.
The Kaliningrad region is divided along the E28 highway and departs to Lithuania and Poland. Kaliningrad with a peninsula between bays is an extraterritorial policy under the control of a pool of Civilizing countries. Toponyms hereinafter everywhere can change at the will of the population and/or protectors of territories.
Belarus - options are possible depending on the activity of civil society, but the basic one for the country - an ally of the aggressor (accomplice in crime) is the same as that of the direct aggressor (RF) - splitting into 6 territorial units with a quarantine period of 20-30 years until the moment of self-determination under the protectorate of the Civilizers. The following options are possible:
1) Reunification to Belarus (with the possible annexation of (parts of) neighboring regions of the ex-Russian Federation - Pskov, Tver, Smolensk, Kaluga, Bryansk) or
2) Accession of the regions following the results of referendums (possibly by separate regions) to Ukraine, Poland, Lithuania or to the Moscow (historical Vladimir-Suzdal) confederation of regions. Yes, the MK (Moscow Confederation) is possible at the end of the quarantine period of post-RF re-civilization, and the choice of Belarusians in their favor is possible, at least theoretically. In the diagram, possible boundaries are shown by dots, respectively - yellow, crimson, green and white.
All other 80+ subjects of the Russian Federation fall under the options:
A. National proto-states with a possible accelerated procedure for recognition by the world community - the North Caucasus and possibly Tatarstan.
B. National autonomies of indigenous peoples - the Urals, Siberia, the Far East of the Russian Federation.
B. Administrative autonomies - the European part of the Russian Federation by regions, also in some places Trans-Urals + ...
D. Extraterritorial city-states with the possibility of changing the status after 49-99 years (similar to Hong Kong) - we can recommend St. Petersburg, then policy-ports on the Northern Sea Route - Murmansk, Severodvinsk, Vaygach, Dikson, Tiksi, Pevek, Uelen, then Magadan, Ust-Kamchatsk, Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk, Vanino, Vladivostok, Khabarovsk, then Novorossiysk and close the circle with Moscow.
Based on political and logistical considerations, a dozen more such policies can be isolated in the depths of the ex-Russian Federation, such as Novosibirsk, Krasnoyarsk, N. Tagil, etc.
Such a configuration of this part of the Eurasian space is a fixation of a 100% victory for Ukraine. In fact, this war is civilizational, so we take it wider - the victory of the Civilization of people.
This is an ideal situation, but one must strive for it. Any exits of the Armed Forces of Ukraine to the borders of either the 22nd or 14th year, while maintaining the Moscow state status quo, is only a postponement of the future (historical) revenge of the Russian Federation (yes, the analogy with Hitler's revenge for World War I is direct). Just ask yourself the question - what is the motivation for the Muscovites to peacefully coexist with anyone, and even more so with Ukraine?
If the entire previous history - the last 300 years (wider - 800) they did exactly the opposite - they attacked (including preparing to cross the border in June-July 1941, Hitler just struck a preemptive blow for several weeks), ruined, conquered, colonized ( in their perverted slang - united), oppressed, killed, starved, overworked / senseless work and cold, psychologically and physically mocked millions and millions of people ...
This picture of the Future echoes the proposed post-Russia project ( part 2 here). With one fundamental difference - the authors write that "the will of the inhabitants (of the territories of the ex-RF) in referendums / plebiscites is not important." I am sure, in principle - after 4-5, 4-5-year electoral cycles in the "quarantine" period of limited sovereignty. The exception is Transnistria and the Kaliningrad region.
There are a few more non-principal clarifications - the authors propose to transfer border regions / regions of the Russian Federation to Ukraine. Agree. Perhaps for these territories it makes sense to shorten the quarantine period of “learning democracy” - derashization, followed by a plebiscite on accession. As for all other border territories of the post-Russian Federation to the corresponding neighbors - whole regions or separate areas to: Finland, China, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Estonia.
But, in general, where is it written that politically unitary states should have an integral (unitary) territory? Especially with the current development of communications. It is quite possible that in the referendums different subjects and in the depths of the ex-RF will want to join Ukraine, and not choose the hard path of independence.
Also, these interesting articles talk about denuclearization, demilitarization of the Russian Federation, derashization of the population, security zones along the borders of the ex-Russian Federation, payment of reparations to Ukraine ... It should be noted that all these principles automatically follow from the fact / process of dismantling the quasi-empire of the Russian Federation.
It is impossible not to agree with the ideas of “introducing a ‘global natural patronage’ in nature protection zones in the Arctic, the Arctic, etc., where anthropogenic activities will be strictly limited”, as well as “The Nenets and other peoples of the North are given broad self-government and the right to traditional land use, as well as an unconditional basic income from the use of the subsoil of the region is allocated. The development and extraction of minerals, as well as marine products, is transferred under the control of an international corporation.”
However, it's all smooth on paper. In reality, the prospect is 6-8 years. It seems far away, but in the historical sense, “there is no time for buildup,” as one mustachioed potato grower used to say. At the same time, such a future is not at all predetermined. To achieve it, human civilization will again require a lot of “blood, hard work, tears and sweat”, literally and figuratively. More on this later in the concept -
"Terra nullius 80"
Seven years ago, in a book, the author of this article suggested that in the perspective of 8-15 years, five subjects will make a key contribution to the course of History - the USA, China, Belarus, the EU and Ukraine. In this case, the last two will be weak links. He also noted that there is a vision of new outlines of the political map of northern Eurasia, but it is too early to talk about this because of the unwillingness of the absolute majority to accept the inevitability (after the rush aggression of 2014, which cannot pass without consequences) of such global changes. Yes, the outlines were about the same as in this and other articles on a similar topic. Now the time has come.
The prediction of "strength" came true 50/50. The United States lived up to expectations with a firm civilizational (allied) position. China also demonstrates the integrity of the policy of non-intervention, which is the norm at this stage. The EU (including and especially Britain) exceeded expectations (fortunately) with its rather resolute rejection of Russian aggression - especially recently, after the start of the German awakening process.
Wrong with Belarus . I did not take into account how deeply the metastases of the “Russian world” penetrated into Belarusian society. But, the end of History is not yet and she can still play for Civilization, and secondly, in future hands she will almost be replaced by Poland (more broadly, + the Baltic States), which understands everything correctly and reacts accordingly.
Ukraine. With all the military successes since the beginning of the large-scale invasion of the Russian Federation, now the most we can count on is reaching the borders on February 24, 2022 - miracles do not happen, unfortunately. In order not to demotivate the military, and even the civilian public, we will not delve into explanations.
However, “borders on 02/24/2022” at an intermediate stage is a full-fledged military victory for Ukraine. At the same time, "the borders for 1991 (2014)" have a purely emotional meaning, and even then mainly for a hyper-exalted couch audience. Without a new civilizational thinking of mankind (a pool of Civilizers), the security of Ukraine (and the World) will be as unstable as in the "borders of 02/24/2022".
Metropolitan Andrey Sheptytsky left us a wise formula - a guide to action: “The key to the transformation of Ukraine lies in itself. It is important for us to change the surroundings, prote in our will to change ourselves.” Unfortunately, practically no innovative socio-economic changes have been, and still are not. Or they are in their infancy.
Still, society tolerates corruption, nepotism, affiliation, hopes for a "ball" - low tariffs, high payments, benefits, subsidies, bonuses, subsidies ... The country's leadership in economic policy still uses the vicious experience passed down by officials from generation to generation, absolutely not trying to introduce any innovations in tax policy, etc. Populist politicians parasitize on all this, degrading the population from cycle to election cycle with promises of various freebies.
Without innovative development models in all areas, very soon after the guns fall silent, few people will be interested in Ukraine. Except perhaps for the "little" oligarchs, who will certainly be reborn on the fertile soil of populism. Especially in the surrounding areas. And the stronger will be revanchist sentiments in the under-disintegrated Russian Federation.
I want to make a mistake, but here my expectations are y (m / w) very pessimistic. I have to agree, there is a danger/probability that Ukraine may lose the war (in a broad socio-political sense).
Of course, “as if it won’t be” - the funds of allied donors will be “assimilated”, they will even build some new production facilities, the oligarchs will restore the destroyed metallurgical plants (for compensations privately sued from the Russian Federation). But there will be no structural changes in the industry - the same raw-material-semi-finished mining and grain-bean agrarian industry.
I also do not expect revolutionary mental changes in society, and therefore in education, medicine, other social spheres, and even more so in politics. And all this will be exacerbated by the outflow of high-quality human capital - the non-return from Europe, where the most capable children (and also their parents) assimilate. I talked with several refugees - it’s good at home in Ukraine, but for the sake of a better prospect for children they will stay there - in France, Poland, Sweden.
In our country, many consider a reduction in the requirements for ZNO to be a good prospect for children. I also know a family that returned from Spain after several months - they are paid benefits for four children here with a guardian grandmother, and there you need to learn the language and generally study ...
Hope for external management by Western allied donors. Sheptytsky's quote is strong, but it was said during the Second World War, when Ukraine was sandwiched between two cannibalistic regimes - the hammer / sickle and the swastika, was not subjective and had no allies. Now the external situation is the most favorable in the entire annalistic history of these lands.
At the same time, as everyone understands, but the majority does not want, cannot or is afraid to think about it - the borders of 2014 do not fundamentally solve the issue of sustainable security in Europe, and in the world as a whole there is still a source of instability - a single Russian Federation.
The problem is practically unsolvable by military means due to the unacceptable level of possible losses. Yes, and these are not our methods - having defeated the Moscow dragon, for example, with preemptive strikes, the winners themselves will turn into dragons from which the rest of the world will recoil, and even fragments of the Russian empire. The situation should mature and when the territories of the Russian Federation themselves ask for a protectorate ... -have a plan of action. Ripening can be accelerated.
It's like in that Soviet movie, when one criminal in prison lost the gold tooth of a politician to another and the winner asks the loser, how can you repay the debt if you can't knock out the tooth? (the rules of the prison forbid) - loosen with one finger! (it is clear that the wisdom of the decision is cute here, not the characters).
The USSR collapsed due to the inconsistency / lagging behind of internal postulates in all spheres of the functioning of society, progressive from the beginning of the 70s, to changing external conditions. But due to the inertia of a fairly effective development of the period of industrialization, the moment of possible adaptation / transformation was overslept in "stagnation". And when, 15 years later, they realized to change something in the “perestroika” - it was too late. It's like if you feed a starving person for a long time to satiety - he can die. So the Union, choking on the euphoria of "glasnost" and "new thinking", quite peacefully "fell asleep", that the fish caught on the shore from oxygen saturation, relatively quietly and bloodlessly.
So, civilization must create conditions for the collapse of the Union for the Russian Federation - only this time it's the other way around - by imposing them from the outside. At the same time, economic sanctions are a very important, but insufficient component of the “sprinkling” process.
In terms of psycho-emotional, and also moral and ethical development, the vast majority of the population of the Russian Federation corresponds to 10-12 years of age. The Kremlin knows and uses it. Hence the kindergarten-school aesthetics of the Sabbaths, like the autumn one with the uncomplicated goyd and Putin's cheers - "so that they (on the ordlo) will be heard." I instantly remembered children's matinees “let's call loudly so that he hears - De-dush-ka Frost!”.
Cultivation of victorious madness, besides justifying the future (accomplished) aggression, also had/has a prosaic function - just something to fill the emotional vacuum of civilizationally underdeveloped individuals. Not with the ideas of philanthropy, diversified development, etc. "Decadence" to fill their brains and souls?
At the same time, most of them are direct in their 11th birthday and information like “The Russian Armed Forces bombed Ukrainian cities” is perceived by them at the level of “they dropped the bear on the floor, tore off the bear’s paw” - well, nothing - we’ll sew / rebuild / heal. This does not justify them, but partially explains them.
In socio-political terms, the percentage of active people (in any direction - active in principle) there is several times (perhaps an order of magnitude) lower than in an average society. Let's estimate: in 1991, during the putsch in Moscow, several hundred thousand people came out to defend Gorbachev's democracy (August 21), in 2014, anti-war rallies gathered an order of magnitude less - several tens of thousands of people each in Moscow and St. Petersburg, the same number of demonstrators cumulatively, it was throughout the Russian Federation and in 2022, almost all of them were detained - about 15 thousand people. From the population, that of Moscow, that of the Russian Federation, these are scanty thousandths of a percent.
In such passivity (corrosion), on the one hand, the guarantee of the possibility of unleashing a war, which Putin took advantage of. However, as often happens in life situations, a source of weakness lies in an exaggerated advantage. Dialectical materialism teaches the same thing, and Newton’s law “action is equal to reaction” in the real world has not yet been refuted by anyone - that is, there are just as few ideological supporters of the war to destroy Ukraine (real, effective, and not victoriously-abandoned), as well as opponents.
It will be enough for us to neutralize (with sanctions - it is still impossible to hit) only fifteen thousand federalist militarists for all 80-something subjects of the Russian Federation (they themselves have not decided how many there are).
As an example, here is what ex-President Kuchma writes about the events of 1991 in his book: “Many people were enthusiastically looking forward to how they would smash the hated ‘democrats’, arrange a bloodbath for the ‘Popular Fronts’ and ‘Rukhs’, journalists, nationalists, cooperators and other nits (*note Ukraine, opponents of Putin). But they will arrange it only by order, and certainly in writing. No one would have rushed to do it headlong - the last Mujahideen of communism in the USSR were exterminated during the Stalinist purges, and new ones are not born in such conditions.
If Yeltsin (*note West, Ukraine, China are civilizers) then blinked his eyes or suggested "negotiations", "mutually acceptable consensus" or something else equally pitiful, it would have been bad for all the republics. But Yeltsin was not in the least afraid, but immediately began to aggressively attack. Anyone who opposes the GKChP (*Putin), Yeltsin guaranteed "legal protection and moral support." It was then that the conspirators began to shake their hands.
After the failed assault on the Moscow White House on the night of August 20-21, when it became clear that the coup had failed... Starting from that moment, I had no doubts that the upcoming session (SC of the Ukrainian SSR) would proclaim the independence of Ukraine. I think that most of the deputies reasoned these days in much the same way: “This time it has passed, but why should the fate of Ukraine (*Perm, Buryatia, Tver, Kuban...) continue to depend on events taking place outside its borders (*in the Kremlin)?” ?“
From personal recollections - in the summer and autumn of the distant 93rd guest worker with several friends from the Polytechnic University at one of the Bodaibo mines in Siberia. We, like everyone else, in that story of the anti-Yeltsin coup were interested in one thing - the absence of problems with the payment of what we earned and the opportunity to return to Kyiv without hindrance. On the day when the tanks fired at the Moscow White House, the head of the section gathered everyone in front of the canteen and announced: “Lenzoloto guarantees - nothing changes here, we continue to work, all salary obligations will be met, all our / your plans to extend the contract or pay in strength." And so it happened.
Those. no one really fits in specifically for Putin, and for the integrity of the Russian Federation in general.
The civilizers can and must guarantee the “deep people” in the Russian Federation almost complete continuity of their usual way of life in the process of transforming the Russian Federation into New States (NG-80).
Outwardly, everything in the Russian Federation is still moving by inertia, it seems to be a wall! However, as the notorious V. Ulyanov once perspicaciously put it about the Russian Empire, “a wall, but a rotten one, poke it, and it will fall apart!” - which happened to the 500-300-year-old empire just three decades later in 1917.
At the same time, it should be noted that no one is going to destroy or conquer the historical 600-800-year-old principalities / uluses, on the contrary, their status will increase - they will be transformed into independent states if they want.
In 1968, only 7 people came to Red Square to protest against the USSR's invasion of Czechoslovakia - it would seem that this block - the Union will stand for centuries! But, in just over twenty years, only 8 gkchpists moved to protect themselves from the collapse of the USSR. Of course, I exaggerate, but there is no fundamental mistake. At the same time, the active phase of the collapse of the Union lasted only five years - since 1986, with the announcement of the concepts of “perestroika, glasnost, new thinking” ...
The analogies with the current "block" - the Russian Federation and the number of its possible defenders (as well as opponents) are direct, with one exception - the Russian Federation does not have that much time (I think everything will be decided in the current decade).
During the dismantling of the USSR, the main political and economic beneficiaries of the collapse were the elites of 15 republics and another half a dozen national subjects of the RSFSR. Now the transformational civilizational wave will be several times more powerful - 80+ vacancies for neo-elites will immediately open in the civilizational project "Terra nullius 80" in place of the Russian Federation (lat. no man's land; further project TN-NG-80). Everything will be as it should be - presidents, ministers, generals, customs, police, heads of administrations...
They will have hitherto unseen opportunities to create modern history - to become the founders of new dynasties, to enter the national and state epics of their formations.
There will be no armies in the classical form, because no one is going to attack them and the vast majority of them will have no one to fight with, for nothing, and nothing. The RF Armed Forces are being transformed/dissolved into interregional peacekeeping forces.
Taking into account the period of turbulence of 5-10 years, almost all employees of the police, army and other special services will remain in their positions with a gradual natural pension reduction. With the exception of a few thousand war criminals, who will be brought to justice as they are caught around the world.
Civilizers guarantee the inviolability of property - immunity from persecution and payment of reparations to the first few dozen oligarch-businessmen who renounced the "heavy legacy of the past" and went over to the side of some independent entity.
At the same time, after serving half of the quarantine period in (from the full to 20-30 years), the subjects of TN-NG-80 will be able to choose a form of government - whether it is a republic, a monarchy, or even a satrapy. The main thing is that exotic preferences do not go beyond the boundaries of the subject - but, if anything, the peacekeeping forces of the Civilizers will take care of this.
Moscow and other extraterritorial policies will serve as communication hubs for the subjects of TN-NG-80 neo-Eurasia. So they will hardly lose their administrative significance and will not turn into post-apocalyptic ghost towns. Although the former oligarchic chic and bureaucratic gloss will diminish.
In all this, the most difficult thing is the mobilization of humanity for such a project. Next, I will try to argue-motivate.