— We're going full speed to the "gas war", as I warned before, including and in the pages of KM.RU. There are no prerequisites that it will be avoided, and because the media is currently lining up in fighting ranks begin to transmit appropriate in such cases the application. It is — as long as the beginning. The real show will unfold before us, I think, in October.
In fact, except for gas as the main reason and the central theme, there is still a basic problem — the self alignment of Russian relations with the former republics of the USSR, the first Slavic — Belarus and Ukraine. We litsezreem that takes place to be an illusion, according to which can be purely economic means, methods of economic imperialism, absolutely keep control of the country and adjacent to this building all its policies — with an eye on the example of the United States and the European Union.
Certainly, it is inadequate as a general theory of liberal imperialism, which Chubais has put forward 10 years ago, not only did not actually achieved, and shows its emptiness in a situation of real financial crisis. And if you say that this model is collapsing in the world, organize it, the post-Soviet space — just insane.
The problem is that the Russian Federation has no idea about how to build the post-Soviet space in general. This raises all sorts of fantasies, which can be summarized by the term "pro-Russian president"Whether it is used in relation to Belarus, Ukraine or Kyrgyzstan. Begin deepest discussions, write analytical notes hidden with layouts that what of the presidential candidates 'pro' or 'anti-Russian'. This is — an absolute mental voluntarism, which is not based on any reality. In fact, it is — fantasy and fairy tales, which appear in the heads of the responsible officials. But after a while there comes a natural disappointment when the next "pro-Russian" president begins to act on the basis of the realities of their own independent state, not from the fact that our ponapridumyvali dreamers.
In this case, we litsezreem that, apart from the whole gas issues and other contradictions in the economy, and interpersonal relationships, there comes a "sverhneozhidannoe 'surprise, it turns out that Yanukovych in fact politician pro-Ukrainian, not pro. And for this, apart from the general inadequacy and inability to put forward a draft for the entire post-Soviet space, is also what I call "the Moscow nationalism" or "Moscow-Russian nationalism" which, in fact, destroyed the Soviet Union. Then, as we recall, the main initiator of the collapse of the Russian Union spoke specifically of the RSFSR.
And to this day a huge number of members of the elite consider it a great fortune is that Russia managed to shake off the margin that they can now exploit all sorts of way (through guest workers, financial, gas imperialism, etc.), but with all this behind them now no longer need to carry what-or responsibility. I shall mention only nedavneshnee performance (it seems to "Rossiyskaya Gazeta"), actor Alexei Petrenko, who simply referred to Ukraine, the Caucasus and Transcaucasia "ballast" and endorsed what we did 20 years ago back to himself overthrown.
What's all the same for the words that Ukraine and the EU is not interested, then I can only say here that the rhetoric is a logical extension of the existing inadequate awareness of the issue, because without it quite clear that Yanukovych does not need Europe, as Lukashenko. As well as Azerbaijan, where newspapers almost every day writing about the imminent entry into the European Union. The question is not whether "pro-Russian" if the president, "pro-European" or "westernized". Politician, being in a particular situation is valid based on the events. This is — karma, fate of all politicians. And our homeland should act as a power, and not as a miser, which robbing adjacent to this, they abandoned the country.
Hence, there are these discussions — "pro-Russian", "pro-European" … Forget! Pro-Ukrainian, probelorussky, pro-Azerbaijani, prokirgizsky … "