One of the notable topics in the Russian information space this week
was the horror interview of the Secretary of the Security Council
of the Russian Federation, former director of the FSB Nikolai Patrushev, timed to coincide
with the presidential «reset» vote on July 1, along with the adoption
of his amendments to the Constitution.
Overall, it should be noted that the Kremlin is currently conducting
a hysterical propaganda campaign to convince Russians to vote «yes,»
threatening them with the adoption of Russian children by gays in
Mercedes and other horrors if they vote otherwise. Although it is
already obvious that the voting procedures are such that it does not
really matter who and how people actually vote. As the Chekist idol
Joseph Stalin said, «It doesn’t matter who and how votes, it matters
who and how counts.»
Nevertheless, understanding the social sentiments that will arise
after another violation in the midst of an economic crisis and the
coronavirus epidemic, the Chekists are already preparing for the
consequences. The main idea of Patrushev’s interview is that the
West (which is currently in a political crisis of its own) is preparing
for a «color revolution» in Russia. «To this end, a complex network
of foreign non-profit organizations and their dependent domestic
public structures is being created on Russian territory to implement
so-called democratic programs and projects that serve the interests
of Western states,» the Chekist frightens Russians.
In other words, all non-profit organizations, including human rights
organizations that highlight the Chekist regime’s ongoing repression,
are presented as instruments of a «color revolution. Special attention
is paid to the media and organizations working «abroad» or connected
with them. Of course, no mention is made of why media and public
organizations that are not under Kremlin control and criticize its policies
are increasingly forced to either emigrate or seek support from various
ECHR (European Court of Human Rights). And this is because in the
system created by the Chekists it is almost impossible for anyone to
operate in their country, to raise funds for their projects and to defend
their interests in their courts, which forces them to move their activities
beyond the country’s borders.
Moreover, Patrushev, who once defended Marxism-Leninism himself, once
again repeats the favorite tune of the ruling kleptocrats about the
threat of «undermining Russia’s spiritual-moral and cultural-historical
values,» which ultimately boils down to the same «autocracy, Orthodoxy
and nationality» that its current defenders themselves fought against
during their time as KGB officers. This is despite the fact that,
according to the still active (on paper) constitution, there is no
state ideology or state religion in Russia, which allows everyone to
have their own views on spiritual values and history. But of course
this is only in theory — in practice it has long been different. Now,
however, they want to change even these purely theoretical provisions with
their constitutional amendments.
Patrushev frightens Russians with the possible consequences of
overthrowing the power of the spiritually bound renegades of the
Chekists. «…republics that experienced ‘color revolutions’ received a
destabilized political system, an increase in corruption and organized
crime, a deep economic and social crisis, a decline in the standard
of living of the population,» he terrorizes. In Georgia, however, it
was precisely thanks to such a «color revolution» that systemic corruption
and organized crime were eradicated, and as for the standard of living,
Russians can already evaluate what the vaunted «stability» of Putin gives
them and understand what awaits them in the future with the continued
preservation of his power, which the Chekists intend to make lifelong.
The methods of achieving this have long been understood. If Patrushev
cites the negative examples of Georgia under Mikhail Saakashvili and
post-Maidan Ukraine, he cites as a positive example … the Karimov
regime, which managed to prevent a «color revolution» in Uzbekistan
in 2005. That is, he almost explicitly praises the killing of 500 to 1000
demonstrators by Karimov’s butchers in Andijan in 2005, followed by
monstrous repression.
But this is not surprising. It has long been known that in the Kremlin
and on the Lubyanka (and today, unlike in Soviet times, they are one and
the same), only those who are willing to fight for the preservation of their
power at any cost are valued and gladly supported. So Viktor Yanukovych,
who did not dare to go all the way, is considered a «sucker» and a «weakling»
by these people, but Bashar al-Assad, who has bathed the whole country in
blood and left it in ruins, is a «hero who stood in the way of a color
revolution». So from this interview with Patrushev it follows that in
Kyrgyzstan they «missed» the «color revolution» (they were «suckers»),
while in Uzbekistan they managed to prevent it (they were «heroes»).
But if Patrushev were to think about it, he should consider the following:
despite the fact that Karimov managed to drown the Uzbeks’ protests in
blood in 2005 and preserve his power for life, his cause still suffered a
defeat. His successor, Shavkat Mirziyoyev, although he himself served this
dictator during his lifetime, decided to abandon the most odious elements of
his policies, just as Nikita Khrushchev did in the Soviet Union after
Stalin’s death. And the responsibility for those elements fell on the
chief Uzbek Chekist, Rustam Inoyatov, who was sentenced to 19 years
in prison-not as a result of a «color revolution,» but as a result of the
death that befell his master, as it will befall any mortal, and the subsequent
transfer of power.
And this example teaches that no matter how much Putin, Patrushev, and
their accomplices cling to power, no matter how hard they try to prevent the
inevitable, it will inevitably catch up with them — if not from without, then
from within.