Translated
by Maria Razdiak
Edited by S. Naylor
Edited by S. Naylor
Fursov A. I. is a political historian,
sociologist, and Head of Department at
Moscow State University (MGU)
Moscow State University (MGU)
The Anglo-Saxons continue to support Ukraine, hoping to grow out
of her neo-Nazi state, the new Third Reich. They also let in Russia, as Hitler
incited them against the Soviet Union in the middle of the last century. This,
of course, the controversial hypothesis that many today do not dare to voice.
What is the West trying to accomplish with Ukraine? Our resident expert
historian Andrew FURSOV believes that the main task of the West – is the
destabilization of the whole of Eurasia. But after the “Crimean Victoria,” says
FURSOV, Russia is experiencing withdrawal from the area of historical
defeats. After the most important victory of the 20th century, our win
over the German fascists, are we facing a new Third Reich we have to fight
later this century?
Q: Recently, you’ve said that right now Russia is no going through a withdrawal from the area of historical defeats. The most important victory of the 20th Century was the defeat of German Fascism, but there is a looming sense that we’ll be faced with a new Third Reich this century.
A: In history there are not identical repetitions, and, of course, we can compare the current situation, but we must not forget that it is very different today than it was in 1939-1941. Then, there was an obvious aggressor, who approached our borders. The current situation is different, but, nevertheless, the USA is starting, after the Syrian front (and Syria was a definite stand-off between Russia and the US), an opposition in Ukraine. I would go as far as to call it the “Ukrainian Front” of the Russian-American opposition. And Americans, in Ukraine, attempted to use the American-Banderian revolt to resolve a very simple predicament. They wanted to create a foothold for a political and, if necessary, for an armed, provocative, pressure point with which to push Russia. They sought to create an even more Russophobic Slavic society than Poland, which could be used, if required, against Russia. It is the creation of hotbeds of tension around the perimeter of national and strategic borders of Russia.
Q: The paths of the modern, Russophobic governments are as artificial as the during rise of Hitler, who was sponsored by the USA and the financial clans of Britain. Is this a same situation?
A: Everything comes down to this: the enemies of Russia had always expanded their forces, which they were planning to throw, as an armed entity, against Russia, but, nevertheless, in any case the current Ukraine could never be compared with the Third Reich – even by economic potential. In addition, within the Ukraine, half of the population opposes the Bandera neo-Nazis, so it is a very, very, different situation.
Q: If we are to bring up the subject of neo-Nazism in Ukraine, and Europe in general… the recent European Parliament election. Here we observe the victory of nationalists and “Euro-sceptics” in the French and British elections. Does that shift the direction of the EU?
A: The election speaks to the deep, on-going crisis of the European Union. It demonstrates that this structure, which was initially viable, is coming to the end. And the rise of the right and the left, parties who together don’t want to be in the EU, who don’t want to lose their identity – all this shows us the current situation.
Q: We start with Ultra-Right parties; do we end up with the rehabilitation of Nazism?
A: The correlation is only partial. I do not think that people, like Marine Le Pen, will be rehabilitating Nazism. But, of course, one of the byproducts of the collapse of the European Union can be rehabilitation of Nazism. The fact is, the rehabilitation of Nazism is, primarily, linked – not to the European crisis – but to the target of the current western Elite. This Elite can no longer solve their problems with liberal methods, and require Neo-Nazism as a resolution to their own crisis. In this respect, Ukraine is a certain rehearsal; here we observe an attempt at a union of the liberals, who failed to tear Ukraine away Russia with the aid of the “orange” revolution (in 2004), and the Banderian Neo-Nazis.
Q: What do you think, will there be a large-scale war?
A: Not in the near future. But, history proves that the Anglo-Saxons always have enduring plans, and their constant task is to create an on-going source of tension on the Russian border. Moreover, this new state [Ukraine] is to serve as an example of “democracy” and “freedom”, as opposed to “totalitarian” Russia. Unquestionably, this is a hotbed of tension, and the aim is to create such tensions along the whole perimeter of our borders. To be fair, the Americans strategists are not concealing the fact that USA desperately wants to destabilise Eurasia. Destabilising Eurasia is to destabilise Russia.
Q: What role did Crimea play in this opposition?
A: “Crimean Victory” concluded the humiliation, which started on the 2nd of December 1989, when Gorbachev followed his meeting with the famous Russophobe Pope John Paul II, with a trip to Malta. There, he betrayed and handed over the socialist camp to Bush. After that Russia was stained with the humiliation of Yeltsin and his government, as we continued to give up our positions. And now, finally, we have started to pick-up our bits and pieces, and it is evident: the west doesn’t have a game plan to match Russia.
Furthermore, the Ukrainian crisis showed the utterly inadequate western position, their inability to play the games of world politics. They have nothing to oppose Russia.
Q: And what do we have? Do we have actual allies, whom we can trust?
A: Our tactical ally is the People’s Republic of China, our interests, right now, are coincide on a variety of issues. But, when we speak about Russian allies, we must always remember the phrase of Alexander III: “Russia has only two allies: the army and the fleet”, as of now, I would also add in the intelligence agencies. We must be strong, and then the allies will be unnecessary.
Q: China and Russia are currently becoming close, and they are making that fact well known. What does this mean?
A: It says that in the world there are no permanent allies and permanent friends. For the next 10 years, we have common interests and a common geostrategic enemy, and then it is difficult to guess – is changing rapidly.
Q: After the official visit of Joe Biden to Beijing, in December 2013, everyone started speculating that the deciding factor in world politics would be the US-China relationship. That USA and China were negotiating on how to “divide” the world. But today, things have changed?
A: Well, first of all: there never was such a situation, where USA and China would “divide” the world. We recall that the only country which can cause irreparable damage to the United States – is Russia. This, of course, is generally obvious. Well, the current situation, after the Ukrainian crisis, has completely changed everything: we now have a bloc situation, when the west is overrun by complex, disorganising processes; and a certain tactical, some claim strategic, union of China and Russia.
Q: So, China has turned the USA down? Refused to cooperate?
A: At this this point in time, yes. But the Chinese understand well that the Americans, who constantly tricked the Soviet Union and still deceive Russia, will try to trick China. The Chinese do not trust the USA, and rightly so.
Source: Slavyangrad.org 27-08-2014
