The collapse of Russia is not scary. Why don't you be afraid of nuclear chaos in the Russian Federation
Bristou is the former Ambassador of the United Kingdom to the Russian Federation. That is, he is professionally known in Russia-how much the representative of the Anglo-Saxon civilization is generally able to understand the anti-civilization, into which Putin Russia is steadily transformed. A rather spreading article is the reflection of an informed experienced person on the ratio of the democratic world, first of all, the United Kingdom, to Russia after its unfair aggression against Ukraine.
These are actions that are possible today, and most importantly - strategic approaches to the future. The article is notable for the fact that most of its provisions cause not just approval, but delight. Because not only do the British interests, which naturally, but also fundamentally coincide with the vision of the sober Ukrainian analytics. But one fundamental thesis of the author, which concerns the possible collapse of Russia, crosses and denies the entire positive of the article.
I'll start with the same. The first thing is, it is a statement that there can be no sustainable peace between Ukraine and Russia until either Russia undergoes fundamental political changes, or support Ukraine with fundamental changes.
It is a transparent hint that if the allies and partners of Ukraine do not start supplying it modern weapons in volumes that the front requires a front, similar in intensity to the fronts of the Second World War, then it will take a long time to wait a change in the Kremlin's leadership.
Modern Russia is carefully monitoring the Soviet Union, which it does not reach all parameters, except for unmotivated aggression and indifference to the death of its citizens in meaningless wars, which are a projection of fears and fantasies of the country's leadership. Therefore, it is likely that political changes after the departure of Vladimir Putin from power (as a result of death or rebellion) will be similar to what happened after the death of Joseph Stalin.
That is, as the author hints, the power, similar to Putin, is initially formed, but without his fixation on his own historical mission, a kind of "collective Putin-Light". And only then will New Nikita Khrushchev come, and Putinism will be debunk how Stalin's cult was debunked. But years will take years, if not for decades. And all this time, the war of varying intensity in the center of Europe will continue.
Very like an alternative, actually imperative thesis of Loris Bistow, that the West cannot allow Russia to conquer or destroy Ukraine. On the contrary, it is necessary to do everything necessary for Ukraine to become successful in European democracy. And the statement that neither Putin nor his successors can not make concessions and, most importantly, forcing Ukraine to be a holiday of Euro -optimism.
It is difficult to disagree with the fact that sustainable peace is possible only if Ukraine is able to protect itself during the long transition of Russia from the modern Middle Ages, to which it goes by the efforts of power supported by the people, to inter -civilizational coexistence. And security guarantees of Ukraine from developed countries should not be a piece of paper with signatures, like the Budapest Memorandum, which does not restrain anyone, but real defense capabilities.
Everything is rightly laid out about the revision of the Western system of influences and the promotion of the Western system of values, which significantly lose Russian propaganda, built on a stunning lie, as J. Orwell. And now Loris Bristov is important to agree with. I mean his categorical requirement not to even discuss the scenario of the possible collapse of post -Putin Russia.
If you continue the literary associations, it is similar to the fictional Joan Rowling Lord Wolan de Mort, whose name could not be called. But he did not cease to exist, and the threat from it did not decrease, but vice versa. But it is not the funny situation, but that the author tries to deny and silence one of the very likely options for Russia's future. The Russian Federation is the largest country in the world. Accordingly, it automatically has a connection problem.
First of all, this problem is solved today by Russian aviation, which is more than 90% of imports. Given sanctions, in two to three years most of them will be bought on the ground. There will be two railways-Transybirsk and Baikalo-Amur. And they are both a legitimate military goal for Ukraine, because weapons from North Korea are delivered to them to the Russian-Ukrainian front. Looking at recent events, Russia's connection is already in question, and this is a decisive prerequisite for decay.
On the other hand, serious, although not yet public interest in decay scenarios are just Russian regional elites, because they see in their independence opportunities for their own socio-economic development. The extremely unfair Russian system of distribution of social wealth is kept on Putin's authoritarianism.
As soon as it weakens, and aggression against Ukraine critically weakens Russia in the strategic perspective, centrifugal regional trends in the Russian Federation will immediately manifest itself. And this will be an objective, not provoked process, in the avant -garde of which can just be the forces that today seem to demonstrate full solidarity with the Kremlin, in particular, Chechnya, Buryatia, Tatarstan.
In the end, only the disappearance in the process of disintegration of Russian neo-imperia, the reorientation of its irresistible aggression is not outside, but inside, to find out the borders of new quasi-state entities, and guarantees a sustainable peace both Ukraine and Europe as a whole. Of course, the issue will immediately be the issue of control over the non -proliferation of Russian nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction.
This is a really difficult task that does not exist yet. And this decision should be sought now, because it may be needed at one time. Still, the task of nuclear weapons control is easier and so to speak, more enjoyable than eliminating the consequences of its use by the Kremlin in the process of confrontation with NATO, which continues to deepen.
Moreover, the Russian leadership does not need real reasons for aggression, such as talking in the West about the collapse of the Russian Federation, because the fictional work no worse, but the chimera of the "Russian world" justifies absolutely everything. As a specialist, I argue that to neutralize the nuclear device, it must be disassembled into safe components. With a nuclear state - the same.