It is well established that people are exposed to selective amnesia when it suits them. So many people who support Putin do not realize that it is Putin who brought these calamities to Russia. Let us not forget that Russian oligarch Berezovsky introduced Putin to Yeltsin as they were in a frantic search for a new substitute for Yeltsin who was facing criminal prosecution. Berezovsky presented Putin to Yeltsin as a brother in crime because there was an investigation against Putin for money embezzlement at that time. That was a good assurance to Yeltsin to appoint him as PM with an agreement that Yeltsin would step down as president and Putin would take office and soon after officially Pardon Yeltsin, the whole of their criminal “Family” for all past and present crimes. Today we know that that Putin is still protecting them from prosecution. Let me remind you that in every normal and legal country, it is illegal to protect, hide, support, and in any other way to help criminals from prosecution, and yet Putin is doing it.
Putin is a personal friend of Abramovich who was his adviser (???). It was confirmed by the Russian Central Bank in 2018 that oligarchs and largest state corporations illegally “exported” over 1,7 trillion US$ of Russian money onto offshore bank accounts. Besides this amount, there was an estimated 400 billion US$ smuggled out of the country by oligarch’s private jets and mega yachts. In the West, we read how Russian Oligarchs and Mafia purchased not just real estate but factories with cash brought in travel bags. All that was happening during Putin’s tenure in Office.
During the hardest times of hardship since 2014 – 2019, oligarchs increased their wealth by 400% while real salaries dropped 25%. Remember that Oligarchs did not bring back stolen money and are quietly enjoying their exile in the West. Over 100 oligarchs who have a second passport Israeli passport live in Israel. Remember that way more than 1,7 Trillion US$ is lost for Russia and that is why Putin does not care for frozen 300 billion US$.
For your entertainment find Putin’s speech on SPIEF 2018 and see for yourself how he declares himself a globalist and neoliberal and begging the USA to accept Russia as part of Western society.
To understand the above you have to ask yourself why Putin politically eliminated the only serious counter candidate Mr Pavel Grudinin member of the Russian Communist Party. Remember that it was the Russian communist party that led Red Army into the most glorious and bloody battles against German Nazis and were the first ready to die for Mother Russia while people who are nowadays Putin’s ideals were treacherous scumbags grabbing money and running with Germans towards the bellowed West.
In this war, Putin had an opportunity to crush Ukrop in the first months, but he knew that by doing so he would eliminate even the minimal chance of ever joining the West. So in the expectation that West would get all of a sudden rush of shit to the brain and spread their arms to embrace him as long lost prodigious son. Due to his inability to think straight brave Russian heroes are dying in battles they should win hands down with absolutely minimal losses.
WHERE IS GENERAL ARMAGEDON (Surovikin)? Shoigou as well as all of his staff including Gerasimov are corrupt. General Surovikin would sweep with Ukrop forces within a couple of months but he would expose all dirt surrounding Putin and his Cabal.
Zinderneuf, thanks for bringing these Khairullin articles to us in English. This one in particular was extremely important for our understanding of this complex situation. Happy Birthday Marat!
Thank you for lifting a veil on Russian politics. It is very difficult here in the USA to find useful news to aid understanding. Instead we are subjected to a firehouse of anti-Russian propaganda to keep us corralled in the Cold War model with no differentiation between USSR and Russian Federation. There was a brief period during Gorbachev & Yeltsin when Russians reappeared as people, Metallica played in Moscow, and how the money flowed!
The color revolution playbook (written by Harvard men and starring the State Dept, CIA and USAid) is outdated, ruthless in that it treats people as abstractions and unleashes uncontrolled destruction - witness the Ukraine. Working Americans, if they had any idea of what was actually happening in the Donbass, would have supported the separatists.
But now the joke is on us, since the powers that be in DC seemed to have run a color revolution on their own citizens. I no longer recognize my country, nor know who is leading it -guessing it must be those shadowy figures from the spook world and the bossy billionaires.
Interesting how so many of those involved with Yeltsin, both Russian and American, keep popping again. Deripaska, bill browder, harvard boys, Blackrock. And in Ukraine today, yes Blackrock (who is active in buying up Lahaina, Maui after it was fire-bombed), Bill Gates, Monsanto, whoever is behind the biolabs....It goes on and on. These powers are enemies of russian people, American people and people everywhere.
Is there somewhere I can read an impartial account of the Chechen wars and events leading up to them? Every account I've read so far seems slanted towards a western perspective - the same sense of mistrust I get from reading western accounts of the breakup of Yugoslavia.
The strategic advantage of keeping the North Caucuses within the Federation is obvious, but what are the social costs? I'm guessing much of the area is a welfare case, similar to the Maritime portion of Canada, but without the cultural affinity which makes it acceptable to support them. Official pronouncements aside, are the Russian people actually interested in supporting a Muslim minority within the federation? I think of the Russian attitude towards Uzbeks and Tajiks and have to wonder if the same doesn't apply to Chechens, which is to say, better off without them.
Obviously no one want a caliphate on the southern border, but it seems to me you've got something close to that already with all the compromises made. I know I sure wouldn't want to live in Chechnya, although I do love their music, and the people seem friendly enough. What are the chances of assimilation along the lines of Tatarstan, which I consider culturally Muslim but without the religious and cultural trappings of Chechnya? Is this possible over time, or will they always be a potential thorn in the side and a drain on resources?
Along the same lines, can you really trust their current leadership? Professions of loyalty to Russia seem a bit overstated to me. Is this a long term strategy to gain independence, given the impossibility of achieving it militarily? How far can you really trust these guys, given that many of them switched sides when the chips were down?
That's a lot of questions and I apologize for that, but It's really hard to develop good sources on these issues as my Russian is not good enough to read accounts in that language and western accounts, as I said, are heavily slanted.
«Is there somewhere I can read an impartial account of the Chechen wars and events leading up to them?»
Someone should do that for you at their own expense and risk their careers, liberty and life, just to gift you "the truth"? HAHAHAHAHA! If you want to know "the truth" pay for you own spy/journalistic network that reports only to you (or even better, pay for two networks so you can compare their stories). That is what people who make money or grab power by knowing what is really going on do. For everybody else "who pays the piper calls the tunes", even sometimes to a lesser degree.
The old technique for those who cannot afford their own spy/journalistic networks is to compare the hugely biased propaganda reports of both sides, which often are not wholly invented but are simply distorted by bias, and try to reconstruct a small subset of the truth.
«the same sense of mistrust I get from reading western accounts of the breakup of Yugoslavia»
The Saker, 2017: «my military career took me from a basic training in electronic warfare, to a special unit of linguists for the General Staff of the Swiss military, to becoming a military analyst for the strategic intelligence service of Switzerland. [...] By the time the war against the Serbian nation in Croatia, Bosnia and Kosovo broke out, I was in a unique situation: all day long I could read classified UNPROFOR and military reports about what was taking place in that region [...] I was horrified to see that literally everything the media was saying was a total lie.»
Actually I was looking for a book on the subject, not a diatribe on why it's a pointless pursuit. I think I'm capable of examining objective facts, as well as comparing contrasting narratives to extract some semblance of truth. I wouldn't have found my way here if that weren't the case. Are you sure you're a skeptic and not just a cynic? Skeptics don't dismiss the possibility of discerning the truth, we simply acknowledge the difficulty and try to help each other in the endeavour. Otherwise why write at all?
That is actually not a bad idea, because books often contain less propaganda than news, because so few people read them that The Authorities are less strict with book authors. But still most books are written by academics, and academics know really well that their funding is always at risk.
PS: it also helps as to honest insights to look for books by authors wholly unconnected to the issue, e.g. hypothetically a book on the chechen war written by nigerian author.
«I think I'm capable of examining objective facts»
What "objective facts" do you know about the Chechen wars that are not hearsay? Something that most people do not realize is that almost everything they know is hearsay that is usually impractical for them to verify.
One of the great tools of propaganda is an interesting common phenomenon related to hearsay: that many people will believe pure hearsay as if it were a fact if it is repeated by several sources. That heuristic often works but only if the sources are wholly independent.
«Is there somewhere I can read an impartial account of the Chechen wars and events leading up to them? Every account I've read so far seems slanted towards a western perspective - the same sense of mistrust I get from reading western accounts of the breakup of Yugoslavia.»
Very funny, indeed very funny. Perhaps in 400-500 years in the future some non-propaganda historians will try to figure out what really happened there, in the meantime there are these hugely optimistic old articles by "George Orwell" on the subject:
"Looking Back on the Spanish War", June 1943: «Early in life I have noticed that no event is ever correctly reported in a newspaper, but in Spain, for the first time, I saw newspaper reports which did not bear any relation to the facts, not even the relationship which is implied in an ordinary lie.
I saw great battles reported where there had been no fighting, and complete silence where hundreds of men had been killed. I saw troops who had fought bravely denounced as cowards and traitors, and others who had never seen a shot fired hailed as the heroes of imaginary victories; and I saw newspapers in London retailing these lies and eager intellectuals building emotional superstructures over events that had never happened. I saw, in fact, history being written not in terms of what happened but of what ought to have happened according to various ‘party lines’»
"As I Please", 4 February 1944: «During the Spanish civil war I found myself feeling very strongly that a true history of this war never would or could be written. Accurate figures, objective accounts of what was happening, simply did not exist. And if I felt that even in 1937, when the Spanish Government was still in being, and the lies which the various Republican factions were telling about each other and about the enemy were relatively small ones, how does the case stand now? Even if Franco is overthrown, what kind of records will the future historian have to go upon? And if Franco or anyone at all resembling him remains in power, the history of the war will consist quite largely of "facts" which millions of people now living know to be lies.
[...] During part of 1941 and 1942, when the Luftwaffe was busy in Russia, the German radio regaled its home audience with stories of devastating air raids on London. Now, we are aware that those raids did not happen. But what use would our knowledge be if the Germans conquered Britain? For the purpose of a future historian, did those raids happen, or didn't they? The answer is: If Hitler survives, they happened, and if he falls they didn't happen.
So with innumerable other events of the past ten or twenty years. Is the Protocols of the Elders of Zion a genuine document? Did Trotsky plot with the Nazis? How many German aeroplanes were shot down in the Battle of Britain? Does Europe welcome the New Order? In no case do you get one answer which is universally accepted because it is true: in each case you get a number of totally incompatible answers, one of which is finally adopted as the result of a physical struggle. History is written by the winners.»
"Perhaps in 400-500 years in the future some non-propaganda historians will try to figure out what really happened there..."
It's been my observation that the more distant in time you are from an event the less likely you are to get a reliable account. Nevertheless, we all make decisions based on limited information. That doesn't alter the fact that we have to make them, since deciding not to do so (and remaining ignorant) is itself a decision.
From what you wrote I get the impression that you discount the possibility of objective truth, but how could you make an objective statement like that if objective statements aren't possible? How is that not just a 'belief system' which according to A. Korzybski we all have, but not all of us are aware of?
«the more distant in time you are from an event the less likely you are to get a reliable account»
Unfortunately in the present many people with the means to do so have an overwhelming incentive to distort or fake anything that moves markets or votes or careers or power in general. That incentive hopefully but not always fades with time and distance.
So I agree that fresh looks are better but only for topics that nobody powerful has much interest in distorting or faking.
«the impression that you discount the possibility of objective truth, but how could you make an objective statement like that if objective statements aren't possible?»
I am not making an objective statement... I am making guesses on which way to bet and perhaps win or perhaps lose.
Yeltsin, the oligarchic traitorous drunkard has been in the ground for a long while now and it is time for Putin to clean house of the crooks of the 1990s. Deripaska should at the least be in a jail cell and his stolen assets confiscated by the state.
Between the danger to the homeland and the promise made to Yeltsin, would VVP really stick to his promise? There is still a difference between persecution and protection
«would VVP really stick to his promise? There is still a difference between persecution and protection»
VVP did not have an independent power base either as a billionaire or as the head of a political movement or at least of a mob, only the votes of "nobodies" supported him and still support him. And the votes of "nobodies" do not count for much in power struggles, only those who have money, power, guns. Same as in the USA.
So obviously he has had to juggle several powerful factions over 25 years now, a long and difficult work. Among those powerful factions there are the yeltsinites.
BTW there is a claim, or probably a legend, that Yeltsin appointed Putin also because of a promise to his patriotic mother:
No, no and no. A year into his presidency Yeltsin realized that he had been deeply shafted by the “OurDemocracy” clan, and indeed his own family whoring wildly for them. Heavy drinking, anger and depression followed. After the stroke, he promised his mother, that he will repent, and rectify his sins. He chose to step down, and found a humble KGB officer, and like him an unflinching patriot, for a trustworthy successor, the Jesus 2.0. The date was a very symbolic 31 December 1999, at 12 am Moscow time. Nobody from the “OurDemocracy” clan objected, because they knew that the KGB was no in the mood to give up power, and allow themselves to be likewise shafted. Yeltsin mother died at peace with her son. The whores were then one by one either silenced, or castrated, and only Abramovich chickened out, and agreed to repent and be nice ( if only for awhile as we now know).
It is well established that people are exposed to selective amnesia when it suits them. So many people who support Putin do not realize that it is Putin who brought these calamities to Russia. Let us not forget that Russian oligarch Berezovsky introduced Putin to Yeltsin as they were in a frantic search for a new substitute for Yeltsin who was facing criminal prosecution. Berezovsky presented Putin to Yeltsin as a brother in crime because there was an investigation against Putin for money embezzlement at that time. That was a good assurance to Yeltsin to appoint him as PM with an agreement that Yeltsin would step down as president and Putin would take office and soon after officially Pardon Yeltsin, the whole of their criminal “Family” for all past and present crimes. Today we know that that Putin is still protecting them from prosecution. Let me remind you that in every normal and legal country, it is illegal to protect, hide, support, and in any other way to help criminals from prosecution, and yet Putin is doing it.
Putin is a personal friend of Abramovich who was his adviser (???). It was confirmed by the Russian Central Bank in 2018 that oligarchs and largest state corporations illegally “exported” over 1,7 trillion US$ of Russian money onto offshore bank accounts. Besides this amount, there was an estimated 400 billion US$ smuggled out of the country by oligarch’s private jets and mega yachts. In the West, we read how Russian Oligarchs and Mafia purchased not just real estate but factories with cash brought in travel bags. All that was happening during Putin’s tenure in Office.
During the hardest times of hardship since 2014 – 2019, oligarchs increased their wealth by 400% while real salaries dropped 25%. Remember that Oligarchs did not bring back stolen money and are quietly enjoying their exile in the West. Over 100 oligarchs who have a second passport Israeli passport live in Israel. Remember that way more than 1,7 Trillion US$ is lost for Russia and that is why Putin does not care for frozen 300 billion US$.
For your entertainment find Putin’s speech on SPIEF 2018 and see for yourself how he declares himself a globalist and neoliberal and begging the USA to accept Russia as part of Western society.
To understand the above you have to ask yourself why Putin politically eliminated the only serious counter candidate Mr Pavel Grudinin member of the Russian Communist Party. Remember that it was the Russian communist party that led Red Army into the most glorious and bloody battles against German Nazis and were the first ready to die for Mother Russia while people who are nowadays Putin’s ideals were treacherous scumbags grabbing money and running with Germans towards the bellowed West.
In this war, Putin had an opportunity to crush Ukrop in the first months, but he knew that by doing so he would eliminate even the minimal chance of ever joining the West. So in the expectation that West would get all of a sudden rush of shit to the brain and spread their arms to embrace him as long lost prodigious son. Due to his inability to think straight brave Russian heroes are dying in battles they should win hands down with absolutely minimal losses.
WHERE IS GENERAL ARMAGEDON (Surovikin)? Shoigou as well as all of his staff including Gerasimov are corrupt. General Surovikin would sweep with Ukrop forces within a couple of months but he would expose all dirt surrounding Putin and his Cabal.
Zinderneuf, thanks for bringing these Khairullin articles to us in English. This one in particular was extremely important for our understanding of this complex situation. Happy Birthday Marat!
Thank you for lifting a veil on Russian politics. It is very difficult here in the USA to find useful news to aid understanding. Instead we are subjected to a firehouse of anti-Russian propaganda to keep us corralled in the Cold War model with no differentiation between USSR and Russian Federation. There was a brief period during Gorbachev & Yeltsin when Russians reappeared as people, Metallica played in Moscow, and how the money flowed!
The color revolution playbook (written by Harvard men and starring the State Dept, CIA and USAid) is outdated, ruthless in that it treats people as abstractions and unleashes uncontrolled destruction - witness the Ukraine. Working Americans, if they had any idea of what was actually happening in the Donbass, would have supported the separatists.
But now the joke is on us, since the powers that be in DC seemed to have run a color revolution on their own citizens. I no longer recognize my country, nor know who is leading it -guessing it must be those shadowy figures from the spook world and the bossy billionaires.
Interesting how so many of those involved with Yeltsin, both Russian and American, keep popping again. Deripaska, bill browder, harvard boys, Blackrock. And in Ukraine today, yes Blackrock (who is active in buying up Lahaina, Maui after it was fire-bombed), Bill Gates, Monsanto, whoever is behind the biolabs....It goes on and on. These powers are enemies of russian people, American people and people everywhere.
Is there somewhere I can read an impartial account of the Chechen wars and events leading up to them? Every account I've read so far seems slanted towards a western perspective - the same sense of mistrust I get from reading western accounts of the breakup of Yugoslavia.
The strategic advantage of keeping the North Caucuses within the Federation is obvious, but what are the social costs? I'm guessing much of the area is a welfare case, similar to the Maritime portion of Canada, but without the cultural affinity which makes it acceptable to support them. Official pronouncements aside, are the Russian people actually interested in supporting a Muslim minority within the federation? I think of the Russian attitude towards Uzbeks and Tajiks and have to wonder if the same doesn't apply to Chechens, which is to say, better off without them.
Obviously no one want a caliphate on the southern border, but it seems to me you've got something close to that already with all the compromises made. I know I sure wouldn't want to live in Chechnya, although I do love their music, and the people seem friendly enough. What are the chances of assimilation along the lines of Tatarstan, which I consider culturally Muslim but without the religious and cultural trappings of Chechnya? Is this possible over time, or will they always be a potential thorn in the side and a drain on resources?
Along the same lines, can you really trust their current leadership? Professions of loyalty to Russia seem a bit overstated to me. Is this a long term strategy to gain independence, given the impossibility of achieving it militarily? How far can you really trust these guys, given that many of them switched sides when the chips were down?
That's a lot of questions and I apologize for that, but It's really hard to develop good sources on these issues as my Russian is not good enough to read accounts in that language and western accounts, as I said, are heavily slanted.
Thank you.
«Is there somewhere I can read an impartial account of the Chechen wars and events leading up to them?»
Someone should do that for you at their own expense and risk their careers, liberty and life, just to gift you "the truth"? HAHAHAHAHA! If you want to know "the truth" pay for you own spy/journalistic network that reports only to you (or even better, pay for two networks so you can compare their stories). That is what people who make money or grab power by knowing what is really going on do. For everybody else "who pays the piper calls the tunes", even sometimes to a lesser degree.
The old technique for those who cannot afford their own spy/journalistic networks is to compare the hugely biased propaganda reports of both sides, which often are not wholly invented but are simply distorted by bias, and try to reconstruct a small subset of the truth.
«the same sense of mistrust I get from reading western accounts of the breakup of Yugoslavia»
The Saker, 2017: «my military career took me from a basic training in electronic warfare, to a special unit of linguists for the General Staff of the Swiss military, to becoming a military analyst for the strategic intelligence service of Switzerland. [...] By the time the war against the Serbian nation in Croatia, Bosnia and Kosovo broke out, I was in a unique situation: all day long I could read classified UNPROFOR and military reports about what was taking place in that region [...] I was horrified to see that literally everything the media was saying was a total lie.»
Actually I was looking for a book on the subject, not a diatribe on why it's a pointless pursuit. I think I'm capable of examining objective facts, as well as comparing contrasting narratives to extract some semblance of truth. I wouldn't have found my way here if that weren't the case. Are you sure you're a skeptic and not just a cynic? Skeptics don't dismiss the possibility of discerning the truth, we simply acknowledge the difficulty and try to help each other in the endeavour. Otherwise why write at all?
«looking for a book on the subject»
That is actually not a bad idea, because books often contain less propaganda than news, because so few people read them that The Authorities are less strict with book authors. But still most books are written by academics, and academics know really well that their funding is always at risk.
PS: it also helps as to honest insights to look for books by authors wholly unconnected to the issue, e.g. hypothetically a book on the chechen war written by nigerian author.
«I think I'm capable of examining objective facts»
What "objective facts" do you know about the Chechen wars that are not hearsay? Something that most people do not realize is that almost everything they know is hearsay that is usually impractical for them to verify.
One of the great tools of propaganda is an interesting common phenomenon related to hearsay: that many people will believe pure hearsay as if it were a fact if it is repeated by several sources. That heuristic often works but only if the sources are wholly independent.
«Is there somewhere I can read an impartial account of the Chechen wars and events leading up to them? Every account I've read so far seems slanted towards a western perspective - the same sense of mistrust I get from reading western accounts of the breakup of Yugoslavia.»
Very funny, indeed very funny. Perhaps in 400-500 years in the future some non-propaganda historians will try to figure out what really happened there, in the meantime there are these hugely optimistic old articles by "George Orwell" on the subject:
"Looking Back on the Spanish War", June 1943: «Early in life I have noticed that no event is ever correctly reported in a newspaper, but in Spain, for the first time, I saw newspaper reports which did not bear any relation to the facts, not even the relationship which is implied in an ordinary lie.
I saw great battles reported where there had been no fighting, and complete silence where hundreds of men had been killed. I saw troops who had fought bravely denounced as cowards and traitors, and others who had never seen a shot fired hailed as the heroes of imaginary victories; and I saw newspapers in London retailing these lies and eager intellectuals building emotional superstructures over events that had never happened. I saw, in fact, history being written not in terms of what happened but of what ought to have happened according to various ‘party lines’»
"As I Please", 4 February 1944: «During the Spanish civil war I found myself feeling very strongly that a true history of this war never would or could be written. Accurate figures, objective accounts of what was happening, simply did not exist. And if I felt that even in 1937, when the Spanish Government was still in being, and the lies which the various Republican factions were telling about each other and about the enemy were relatively small ones, how does the case stand now? Even if Franco is overthrown, what kind of records will the future historian have to go upon? And if Franco or anyone at all resembling him remains in power, the history of the war will consist quite largely of "facts" which millions of people now living know to be lies.
[...] During part of 1941 and 1942, when the Luftwaffe was busy in Russia, the German radio regaled its home audience with stories of devastating air raids on London. Now, we are aware that those raids did not happen. But what use would our knowledge be if the Germans conquered Britain? For the purpose of a future historian, did those raids happen, or didn't they? The answer is: If Hitler survives, they happened, and if he falls they didn't happen.
So with innumerable other events of the past ten or twenty years. Is the Protocols of the Elders of Zion a genuine document? Did Trotsky plot with the Nazis? How many German aeroplanes were shot down in the Battle of Britain? Does Europe welcome the New Order? In no case do you get one answer which is universally accepted because it is true: in each case you get a number of totally incompatible answers, one of which is finally adopted as the result of a physical struggle. History is written by the winners.»
"Perhaps in 400-500 years in the future some non-propaganda historians will try to figure out what really happened there..."
It's been my observation that the more distant in time you are from an event the less likely you are to get a reliable account. Nevertheless, we all make decisions based on limited information. That doesn't alter the fact that we have to make them, since deciding not to do so (and remaining ignorant) is itself a decision.
From what you wrote I get the impression that you discount the possibility of objective truth, but how could you make an objective statement like that if objective statements aren't possible? How is that not just a 'belief system' which according to A. Korzybski we all have, but not all of us are aware of?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_Korzybski
«the more distant in time you are from an event the less likely you are to get a reliable account»
Unfortunately in the present many people with the means to do so have an overwhelming incentive to distort or fake anything that moves markets or votes or careers or power in general. That incentive hopefully but not always fades with time and distance.
So I agree that fresh looks are better but only for topics that nobody powerful has much interest in distorting or faking.
«the impression that you discount the possibility of objective truth, but how could you make an objective statement like that if objective statements aren't possible?»
I am not making an objective statement... I am making guesses on which way to bet and perhaps win or perhaps lose.
Yeltsin, the oligarchic traitorous drunkard has been in the ground for a long while now and it is time for Putin to clean house of the crooks of the 1990s. Deripaska should at the least be in a jail cell and his stolen assets confiscated by the state.
Between the danger to the homeland and the promise made to Yeltsin, would VVP really stick to his promise? There is still a difference between persecution and protection
«would VVP really stick to his promise? There is still a difference between persecution and protection»
VVP did not have an independent power base either as a billionaire or as the head of a political movement or at least of a mob, only the votes of "nobodies" supported him and still support him. And the votes of "nobodies" do not count for much in power struggles, only those who have money, power, guns. Same as in the USA.
So obviously he has had to juggle several powerful factions over 25 years now, a long and difficult work. Among those powerful factions there are the yeltsinites.
BTW there is a claim, or probably a legend, that Yeltsin appointed Putin also because of a promise to his patriotic mother:
https://www.unz.com/runz/playing-a-game-of-fools-mate-on-the-grand-eurasian-chessboard/#comment-5901956>
«MarylinM says: April 7, 2023
No, no and no. A year into his presidency Yeltsin realized that he had been deeply shafted by the “OurDemocracy” clan, and indeed his own family whoring wildly for them. Heavy drinking, anger and depression followed. After the stroke, he promised his mother, that he will repent, and rectify his sins. He chose to step down, and found a humble KGB officer, and like him an unflinching patriot, for a trustworthy successor, the Jesus 2.0. The date was a very symbolic 31 December 1999, at 12 am Moscow time. Nobody from the “OurDemocracy” clan objected, because they knew that the KGB was no in the mood to give up power, and allow themselves to be likewise shafted. Yeltsin mother died at peace with her son. The whores were then one by one either silenced, or castrated, and only Abramovich chickened out, and agreed to repent and be nice ( if only for awhile as we now know).
A nice story from a Russian reporter:
https://en.topcor.ru/23216-pochemu-elcin-ostanovil-svoj-vybor-na-putine.html
And a speech by Putin on his appointment https://youtu.be/CJI2_lw1gIQ»
Thanks!!!!
Great article- another piece of the elitist puzzle of who's who. And who needs to take a Hike.
Happy Birthday Marat!
Хорошая статья, читал в Телеграм.☝️
Marat allows us to repost here in English for the Western audience!
Often, the telegram translation bot gets the translations wrong.
🤝