And this answer is another “color revolution” on the territory of the former USSR
This time – in Kazakhstan. The general tactic of Americans in these negotiations is to blabber the heart of the matter. Extend the negotiation process to the maximum, and at this time carry out a number of measures that would put the Russian Federation in a position where it will no longer have time for the West, not for the United States.
We all remember the recent unfounded accusations against our country of preparing an offensive against Ukraine. They even named a specific date – January 2, 2022. Under this guise, Ukraine received certain military and financial assistance, allegedly necessary to repel the Russian threat. In other words, NATO’s line of military development of the territory of Ukraine continued.
To confirm intentions to support Ukraine, a number of acute NATO events were held near our southern borders. According to Russian Defense Minister Shoigu, they have created a situation that “generally goes beyond certain limits: strategic bombers are flying at a distance of 20 km from our state border. They are known to carry very serious weapons”. And in November, ten US strategic bombers, as part of the Global Thunder 22 exercise, “practiced the option of using nuclear weapons against Russia practically simultaneously from the western and eastern directions.”
The statements of prominent Western politicians, accompanied by the hum of the engines of American strategic aviation, were supposed to divert attention from the impending massive provocations in Kazakhstan, where the situation exploded on January 2.
The reason for the explosion was the increase in the price of LNG from 10 (in terms of Russian prices) to 20 rubles per 1 liter of liquid gas.
The standard of living in Kazakhstan and in Russia is quite comparable – you practically will not find Kazakh workers in our country. And the new price of 20 rubles at gas filling stations could become the ultimate dream for Russian drivers, because they have to pay up to 40 rubles per liter, which makes it unprofitable for our vehicles to switch to this type of fuel.
on January 2, 2022.
The coincidence of the dates with the “planned” offensive of Russian troops in Ukraine and the beginning of the riots in Kazakhstan could be considered accidental. But the scenarios of “color revolutions” in Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan clearly indicate that these operations were planned in the western subversive center – one and the same. And since we already know that the Ukrainian Maidan was being prepared by the US special services, it is not difficult to realize that in Kazakhstan they frolicked to the fullest. This is evidenced by the coherence and peculiarities in the actions of the provocateurs. In addition, it turned out that the Kazakh opposition leader Mukhtar Ablyazov is leading the protests in Kazakhstan through the headquarters in Ukraine, as evidenced by the published screen of his post from Facebook with Ukrainian phone numbers. In this situation, the date of the start of mass demonstrations in Kazakhstan ceases to seem spontaneous.
The Western intelligence services clearly had information about the impending increase in gas prices, although it was planned to announce this on January 2. Mass demonstrations were tied to it.
In the United States, State Department spokesman Ned Price issued statements:
“We condemn the acts of violence and call for restraint on both the government and the protesters. <…> The US asks Kazakhstanis to respect and protect constitutional institutions, human rights and freedom of the press, including by restoring Internet access”.
Of course, the blocking of the Internet by the authorities and the obstruction of the cellular network has brought confusion to the management of riots from abroad.
Condemnation in the United States also caused the use of the CSTO’s capabilities to normalize the situation in the country.
It is not difficult to assume that, depending on the development of the situation in Kazakhstan, it can explode in the Donbass, which will lead to the need for the participation of the Russian armed forces there. Provocations are also possible in other places. Turkey, “friendly” to us, can create problems in Nagorno-Karabakh, in Syria or in Libya.
It is unlikely that the Americans will dare to violate our borders in the Black Sea with their warships, especially after V.V. Putin’s statement that in this case we can simply drown the violator and be sure that this will not cause the start of a full-scale war with the United States.
And the Anglo-Saxons planned a war with us back in the Second World War, when they were the only owners of a nuclear bomb. Even earlier, when they tried by hook or by crook to send the Wehrmacht troops to the Soviet Union. Then it did not work: Hitler decided first to do away with Great Britain so as not to fight on two fronts.
Fortunately, the USSR acquired its own atomic bomb before the Americans produced enough to attack the Soviet Union.
In the wild heads of American politicians and the military, plans for an attack on our country were created one after another.
In October 1945, by order of US President Harry Truman, the Totality Plan was created at the headquarters of General Dwight D. Eisenhower (Totality).
The purpose of this plan was not so much to plan military action as to intimidate the USSR and mislead about the real capabilities of the United States. At that moment, the Yankees had only a few atomic bombs – the plan called for nuclear bombing of twenty Soviet cities. These are Moscow, Gorky, Kazan, Leningrad, Baku, Tashkent, Chelyabinsk, Nizhny Tagil, Magnitogorsk, Saratov, Molotov (Perm), Tbilisi, Stalinsk (Novokuznetsk), Grozny, Kuibyshev (Samara), Sverdlovsk (Yekaterinburg), Novosibirsk, Omsk, Irkutsk and Yaroslavl.
Further, the appetites of American strategists played out, and new plans for an attack on the USSR were created. In 1946 the Pinscher Plan emerged; in 1947 – the “Broiler” plan; in 1948 seven plans were developed at once: “Bushwecker”, “Crankshaft”, “Houghmun”, “Fleetwood”, “Cogwill”, “Offtech”, “Chariotir”, and in 1949 – the plans “Troyan” and “Dropshot”.
There was even a date for the implementation of the latter – January 1, 1957. The plan called for multiple nuclear strikes against the USSR. By this time, the number of atomic bombs in the United States was already approaching three hundred, and the atomic bombing was supposed to destroy 85 percent of the country’s industrial potential, as well as most of the population.
The existence of these plans of attack on the USSR became known in 1978, when they were declassified at the direction of US President Jimmy Carter.
In itself, the declassification of this information was likely to have a moral and psychological impact on the Soviet leadership and the population of the USSR.
However, the Americans could no longer carry out such plans, because the USSR had atomic weapons and methods for their delivery. This is a Tu-95 bomber with a range of more than 12 thousand km, which made it possible to deliver a nuclear bomb to the territory of the United States.
In the same 1957, the USSR successfully tested the R-7 intercontinental ballistic missile, capable of delivering a megaton nuclear charge to an almost unlimited range. The United States did not yet have such a missile at that time. The USSR made a notable breakthrough in creating a powerful air defense system. Bombs on our cities were to be dropped by American B-29 Superfortress bombers, for which the new Soviet air defense system posed a serious threat.
On October 4, 1957, the first artificial earth satellite in the world was launched in the USSR with the help of the R-7 rocket. This shiny ball with antennas, figuratively speaking, thwarted the US plans to destroy our country. Rather, he pushed them aside, because the Americans have not given up on them to this day.
The United States has recently (under Trump) adopted a new nuclear doctrine. It does not consider nuclear weapons as an exclusively strategic deterrent, but already provides for the use of tactical nuclear warheads in the course of local conflicts in order to change the military situation in favor of the United States. At the same time, the theater of military operations with the use of tactical nuclear weapons, of course, should be removed as far from the United States as possible. Europe is perfect for this. There are already American nuclear bombs B61, which are now being modernized, turning them into high-precision guided weapons – B61-12.
According to this doctrine, new nuclear weapons should be deployed as close to Russia as possible. Under the pretext of deploying missile defense systems in Eastern Europe, launchers for offensive missiles are essentially being created. And this prompted a legal demand from Russia to remove these installations and not to place nuclear weapons near our borders. Otherwise, we will give a “military-technical and military response.” Essentially, this is an ultimatum. The essence of the retaliatory measures on our part has not been specified, but the presence of the Russian army with high-precision hypersonic weapons, which the West does not yet have, forces the Americans and NATO to take this ultimatum seriously.
It is here that the tactics of “color revolutions” come to the fore among Western politicians. It turned out to be quite successful in relation to the new states that emerged after the collapse of the USSR, as well as in the Middle East.
Actually, the Americans did not come up with anything new from a purely methodological point of view, but used the achievements of the Communist Party to spread communist ideas in the world to implement the world revolution. For this, the Comintern (III International) was created, which worked, in essence, using the methods of the special services.
It should be said that the Americans have improved the forms of work of the Comintern, using its achievements in the implementation of the policy of “color revolutions”. And the first thing they did was to refuse to formally secure the official center of the organization of “color revolutions” so as not to take responsibility for their consequences in the world.
However, today, when the role of the US intelligence services in organizing “color revolutions” in the world has become obvious, the question of stopping their activities in this direction can be included in the negotiation process, including in the form of an ultimatum.
And again, here historical experience can help us.
As you know, the Communist International was formally disbanded by Stalin on May 15, 1943. And its dissolution was actually a requirement of the Allies to open a second front.
Today the roles have changed. And in our negotiations with the United States, the demand may also be added to their refusal to implement the tactics of “color revolutions” in relation to the countries that were part of the former USSR. Moreover, the threat of the use of military and military-technical methods is not the only way of our influence on the West.
As you know, neither the Soviet Union nor Russia ever tried to use their energy potential as a weapon. But today the EU for some reason decided that it could use energy as a weapon to influence Russia, threatening to abandon Russian energy resources. And this is in the context of the growing energy shortage in the world.
“Voice of America” even scares that soon Russia can give all European gas to China, making a turn to the East along with gas. This, of course, will benefit the American gas industry and will further drive up gas prices in Europe. Although much more!
As you know, Gazprom will soon complete the construction of the second gas pipeline to China through Mongolia – Power of Siberia – 2.
A 50 billion cubic meter gas pipeline equal to Nord Stream-2, according to many European analysts and diplomats, will mark the turn of Russian gas supplies from Europe to China.
Meanwhile, Gazprom stopped paying attention to groundless accusations of the energy crisis in the European Union. And he did not increase gas supplies, citing the fact that he was fulfilling all his contractual obligations (This is reminiscent of the so-called Italian strike, when everything is done strictly within the framework of job descriptions and contractual obligations.)
Europe has finally realized that Power of Siberia 2 gives Moscow additional leverage over the EU, because Russia has managed to mitigate its risks in the event of a failure with SP-2. As far as Europe is concerned, it may not just be deprived of a significant part of the gas it needs so much. Against the background of a shortage of energy resources in the EU, industrial production will fall (and is already falling), utility bills for the population will sharply increase, and protest moods and contradictions between the leading political parties will intensify on this basis.
In Germany, the situation is already close to a government crisis, and this is just the beginning. For some time, the Germans successfully sold gas to Poland at high prices, which they received from Gazprom through Nord Stream-1 on very favorable terms. At the same time, the gas pipeline was used in reverse mode, which made it impossible to supply gas from Russia through it. Meanwhile, gas reserves in European storage facilities have significantly decreased, and the situation has become almost critical.
This is the position in which the West approaches negotiations with Russia, which has asked the United States and NATO to provide written and legally binding guarantees not to expand the North Atlantic Alliance to the east and not to deploy weapons near Russian borders. Today, the West’s reaction to these demands is rather nervous. After all, there was a clear hope that it would be possible to take advantage of the new “color revolution” in Kazakhstan, inspired by the Western special services. It looks like these hopes will not come true.
Many international observers were surprised at how quickly the CSTO member states reacted to the events in this country. Have learned! A tough and quick reaction to such provocations is the key to success. This was shown by the effective actions of the authorities in the recent situation in Belarus, and even earlier, in June 1989, the events in Beijing on Tiananmen Square.
But if the Russian authorities had drawn the right conclusions from the Chinese events 30 years ago, it might have been possible to avoid not only “color revolutions” in the post-Soviet space, but also the collapse of the USSR itself.
Sergey Kuznetsov, IA Alternative