Dmitry Medvedev
Dmitry Medvedev sees a way out of the conflict in taking into account the interests of Russia, a new document such as the Helsinki Act, the "reassembly" of the UN and other international organizations.
Dmitry Medvedev, Deputy Chairman of the Russian Security Council, on how the tectonic civilizational rift can and should be resolved


Comment: This article has been translated from the original Russian. The translator has offered alternative renderings of some passages in square brackets.


When it seems that the whole world is against you, remember that the plane does not take off in the wind, but against it. — source unknown, but attributed to Henry Ford and mentioned by Ayn Rand.
Once again, the West has raised a white noise and continues to pour accusations against Russia with all its might. Everyone is trying - from the [senile] senators in the U.S. Senate, sick with heavy Russophobia, to the unstable old men in the White House. It would seem that everything has long been said and done. Why are Western politicians again spouting nonsense about the need for a "strong signal" about Kiev's protectorate's participation in the North Atlantic Alliance? Why do they continue to conjure peace for Ukraine only on the terms of the Nazi Kiev regime? Why so much rage after almost a year and a half of the SMO?

Of course, our enemies, both external and internal, were hardly pleased with the result of the recent armed rebellion. The government in Russia has convincingly proved its strength and stability, and the people of the country have demonstrated their readiness to rally around Supreme Commander-in-Chief Vladimir Putin for the defense of the Motherland. On the other hand, it is unlikely that our opponents were so upset when we finally took Artemivsk, aka Bakhmut. The defeat of the AFU on this front was a foregone conclusion. Another thing is that the beginning of the counteroffensive [turned out to be] was unexpected for the Western political morons. They firmly believed in the genius of their instructors, the omnipotence of unlimited money and the power of the vaunted NATO technology.

Nevertheless, here and there, Western officials and not very, but this is no less disgusting faces are saying: Russia has already lost, we have won. [Nevertheless, here and there, Western officials (or no less disgusting semi-officials) harp on: Russia has already lost, we have won.] Why all of a sudden they began to sing such bravura songs? Facts are stubborn things, there is no place for illusions. First let's understand their arguments.

1. "Russia is in isolation." Not at all. Political contacts with Asia, Africa and Latin America are actively developing. Their markets are open, their companies are working with us in our country, despite the sanctions. The end of the era of the almighty dollar looms. The transition to national and digital currencies is on the agenda.

Yes, ties with Europe have significantly decreased (but not disappeared, to put it bluntly). But with the global South and no less global East, they have grown considerably. Goods from Europe that we needed have been replaced by others. The Europeans lost our market for a very long time, their investments burned out, although the industries themselves remained. Thanks to them for free or much cheaper facilities that have been taken over by Russian companies. Their companies kick themselves, cleaning their balance sheets from losses, but due to notorious political correctness and, let's talk openly, cowardice to overseas suzerain [cowardice in front of the overseas overlord], they keep silent, swallowing tears of lost income.

2. "The Russian economy is falling apart." Not at all. Manufacturing growth is much higher than in Europe. Even Reuters admitted that in April 2023 activity in the manufacturing sector in Russia showed an increase for the 12th month in a row. At the same time, our inflation rate is much lower than in many Western countries. It is close to a historic low of 2.9 percent. It won't rise above 5% by the end of the year. Whereas, according to the European Commission, inflation in the Eurozone will be close to 6 percent in 2023. Unemployment in Russia is at its lowest historical level: 3.3%.

There is development in all sectors of the economy. According to Federal State Statistics Service, in March this year industrial production increased by 1.2 percent compared to last March. In April, they already grew by 5.2 percent. There has also been impressive progress in construction sector. In 2022 alone, the volume of construction work increased by 5.2 percent. Last year's growth in agricultural production was more than 10 percent. And regarding all commodity positions in this sector, we actually cover our own needs and are actively working for export. By the way, everyone has realized everywhere that we are dependent on agricultural products and food from our country, hence the endless chants on the topic of the grain deal. [By the way, dependence on agricultural products and food from our country has been realized everywhere, hence the endless dancing around the grain deal.] Although it is already clear to everyone that in its current form it is not needed and must be terminated without fail. We can help our partners anyway, and it is not our task to feed the fat-faced European burghers. They have their own old and bald "liver sausage" [reference to Olaf Scholz] and a lot of well-educated gynecologists who are brilliantly managing the European economy.

3. "Russia wanted to contain NATO, and the alliance expanded at the expense of Sweden and Finland." This is pure lie. We never tried to contain NATO. This is beyond our power and capabilities, and these two Scandinavian countries were already associated with the alliance. We have always asked only that our concerns be taken into account and not to invite former parts of our country into NATO. Especially those with which we have territorial disputes. So our goal is simple - to remove the threat of Ukraine's membership in NATO. And we will achieve it. One way or another. Today, even the stoned leaders of the Kiev regime admitted that in the state of conflict, Banderoukraine (or as it is now customary to call her rotting remains) will not be accepted into the alliance. Hence, however, a very simple and sad conclusion: if the conflicting countries are not accepted into NATO, this means the conflict will be permanent, because it is a question of Russia's existence.

So the reasons for their indignation are obvious. Russia has not been broken, the anti-Russian front has failed. And it is not about politics, not about strategy, and not even about tactics. It's just that the end is very near. The time has come [The hour has struck.]. Our eternal ideological opponents are one step away from losing everything they value most of all. First and foremost, their global dominance, on which their prosperity has been based for centuries. This is why Western politicians are trying to whip up fear. But in fact, the Orwellian characters of the barnyard - the impudent English pigs and the rest of their subordinate cattle - are themselves in full animal terror [But in fact, the Orwellian characters of the animal farm - impudent English pigs and other cattle subordinate to them - are themselves in complete animal horror.]. They want, as they have always done before, to show the world their power. But this time they only show their own powerlessness. They create a lot of informational noise, but there is practically no substance to it. Everything is clear: their time is up. Not even today belongs to them, let alone tomorrow.

Here are three things the Anglo-Saxon world needs to finally realize.

The first. The confrontation with the collective West has become global.

The years 2022-2023 will go down in history as a time of a powerful civilizational rift, the peak of humanity's existential crisis in the 21st century. Its direct consequence was the start of a special military operation in Ukraine. Russia was forced to undertake it in order to protect its sovereignty and territorial integrity and the safety of millions of citizens. Our country, as we know, exercised its right to self-defense based on Article 51 of the UN Charter.

What is happening now in Ukraine and in Donbass is not just a "regional conflict," but something completely different. It is a total confrontation between the conventional collective West and the rest of the world. It is caused by diametrically opposed views on the further development of humanity. On one side are the Western countries, which do not want to admit that the world has changed radically, and to lose their dominance. Hybrid war, which they are now waging with us, is their last chance to maintain a favorable status quo for themselves, not to lose their weakened power and influence. On the other side are not only Russia, but the global East and South. Their populations make up nearly two-thirds of the world. These are countries that continue to gain strength, gradually overcoming the economic and political consequences of the colonial past. They stand for equal development of all states. Without senior and junior partners. Without the cynical division into historically developed and underdeveloped countries, into "genuine" democracies" and "authoritarian regimes", from the point of view of the West, of course.

Their desire for independence is very much disliked by the former colonizers. They are clinging to the past with all their might. The new conflict has already caused an order of magnitude greater tension than during the previous Cold War and extremely negative consequences. It has actually brought the world to the brink of World War III. Moreover, with the beginning of the conflict in Ukraine, the full package of "double standards" was once again put to use, at the instigation of the United States. Nothing new, everything is as usual: independence and territorial integrity, according to the collective West, can be defended only by those who are allowed to do so. The rest must be subdued, crushed, and preferably smeared as bloody scraps over their own territory. Russia refused to recognize this logic, did not submit to the will of others and fought back - hard and unequivocal.

Now, a new degenerate generation of Western politicians clearly do not realize what they are doing and what they are calling for. And they seem to have forgotten what our response will be if the provocations go too far. Fortunately, so far, here and there, like last year's snow, some of them still have common sense. God forbid, it will not melt completely, because then it is really over.

The second. The confrontation will be very long, and it is too late to tame the obstinate (that is, us).

The tectonic rift that has formed in the understanding of the future in different parts of the world will only get worse. You don't have to be a visionary to understand that the confrontation phase will be very long. The standoff will last for decades. One way of resolving it is the Third World War. But this is obviously a bad one, for the winners are not at all guaranteed continued prosperity, as was the case after previous world wars. Most likely, there will simply be no winners. After all, it is impossible to consider as a victory a world in which nuclear winter has come, million-plus cities lie in ruins, there is no electricity due to the destructive electromagnetic pulse, and a huge number of people dead from the shock wave, light radiation, penetrating radiation and radioactive contamination. Where terrible epidemics and starvation reign.

And here I will note one thing that politicians of all stripes do not like to admit: such an Apocalypse is not only possible, but also quite probable. Why? There are at least two reasons.

One. The world is in a confrontation much worse than during the Cuban Missile Crisis, for our adversaries have decided to actually defeat the largest nuclear power, Russia. They are, no doubt, utter morons, but that's exactly it. And the second reason is quite prosaic - nuclear weapons have already been used (we know by whom and where), so there is no taboo!

The second way to resolve this total contradiction is to seek the most difficult compromises over a long period of time. The formation of a new respectful world order that would be based on the balance of interests of all countries. And it is certainly not the notorious 'rules-based order' that can induce nothing but a gag reflex in any country independent of the United States. Yes, you will have to communicate a lot, to be patient, to show restraint, to leave negotiations and come back to them, but in the end we will create the international contours of an equitable and secure world of the 21st century. This will likely take years, perhaps decades. But it is certainly better than all dying together on Apocalypse Day.

And so the third. What are we willing to do to get out of the phase of total confrontation?

Indeed we are ready to look for reasonable compromises, as the president of Russia has repeatedly said. They are possible, but with the understanding of several fundamental points. First, our interests must be taken into account to the maximum extent possible: there must be no more Anti-Russia in principle, otherwise everything will end very badly sooner or later. The Kiev Nazi regime must be annihilated. Legislatively banned in civilized Europe as fascist. Thrown away like a rotten piece of lard to the dustbin of world history. We do not know what will replace it or what will be left of the former Nezalezhnaya. But the West will have to accept this if it does not want an apocalyptic end to our imperfect civilization.

Secondly, all the hard-won results of the total confrontation must be enshrined in a new document like the Helsinki Act, which ended the famous 1975 meeting. Only Helsinki itself, alas, is no good for obvious reasons. For us, Finland is now a hostile country, created by Lenin's ill-consideration and now a member of NATO. It would be better to suspend diplomatic relations with Finland and the like (like Poland, the Baltic states, and, of course, Britain) temporarily or at least to lower their level for the time being.

Thirdly, it is quite likely that a careful reassembly of the UN and other international organizations will be required. It is possible only with full respect for the rights of the permanent members of the Security Council, otherwise it will be totally ineffective. And then the UN will fall into oblivion as an institution that has failed to live up to the expectations of free peoples. I am not talking about the fate of the current international freaks like the ICC, the Council of Europe or the OSCE. They are already in the stinking dumpster of world development.

Whether it will be possible to find a way to compromise, I do not know. I am not sure. So far, the finally degenerate Western political class is trying to up the ante in a bloody clown horror show, in a state of persistent dementia that pushes our little world toward World War III. The stoned Kiev regime is inciting the war to the last Ukrainian.

In other words, I am not an optimist. No wonder Anton Pavlovich once remarked that "life is, in fact, a very simple thing, and it takes a lot of effort for a man to ruin it."

But there is always hope.