Tag Archives: geopolitics

USA-Israeli aggression against Iran

Posted on by
Reply
Reading time: 5 minutes

Iran is being attacked by the USA and its proxy, Zionist Israel. The atrocities, war crimes an genocide that follows in the wake of the USA aggression is heart-breaking. And just as righteous fury was rising in the face of the Nazi German aggression against the USSR, do does the the fury in the face of the Zionist USArian aggression against Iran!

We keep the record at our Telegram channel Beorn And The Shieldmaiden. Here we would liek to publish the call to the American people, and fragments of an insightful analysis by Brian Bertelic.

DEAR AMERICANS: Your enemies are NOT in IRAN. They are in THE EPSTEIN FILES.

The private wealth of the ruling capitalist class was created by YOU! Your task as a class is to organise against the class that grinds you down into poverty and despair and reduces you to by-standing witnesses of their debauchery and perversions.

The capitalist ruling class have stolen what rightfully belongs to the collective creators of society’s wealth: YOU! For the future of your children, rise up and take back the fruits of your labour!

Capitalism starts world wars – Socialism ends them!

We need only one Victory for all!

The 2009 Brookings “Which Path to Persia” outlines this ENTIRE operation as it has unfolded over the course of the Obama/Trump/Biden/Trump administrations.

This includes plans for US-sponsored protests and terrorism through “insurgents.”

The report openly notes this would include US support for terrorist groups designated as such by the US State Department and even guilty of previously killing Americans like MEK.
Continue reading →

The head of the Human Rights Council will write an economics textbook without “myths about a flourishing democracy”

Posted on by
Reply
Reading time: 7 minutes

Finally, the honeymoon with the liberal democracy is drawing to a close in Russia, and a more pragmatic, reality-based approach is prevailing! This article was published in the Russian economics newspaper RBC on January 12, 2026.

Valery Fadeev became the editor of the textbook on economics for universities “without excessive mathematisation”. He says that there will not be a lot of formulas, myths about free-trading, but Glazyev and Stalin will be there.

The proposal to lead the work of a group of authors and become the editor of a new textbook on economics for higher education institutions was received by the head of the Human Rights Council (HRC) from the Ministry of Science and Higher Education in the spring of 2025, Chairman of the Presidential Human Rights Council, former editor-in-chief of Expert magazine Valery Fadeev told RBC. The textbook will be intended for students of non-core universities, primarily for sociologists, political scientists and historians.

The new 350-400-page textbook will be called “Essays on Economics and Economic Science.” “This is the first time, we need to find the teaching methodology, so we decided that it would be wrong to call this the final textbook. Essays are a more free genre, they do not require completeness,” says Fadeev.

Two teams are working on the textbook — from the University of Finance and St. Petersburg State University. According to Fadeev, the work is in its final stages, and teaching according to the new textbook may begin as early as next academic year.

The main task is to show students the overall picture of the complexities of the economic system, Fadeev told RBC: “The economy cannot exist separately from social and political systems. Our task is not to refute anything, not to expose liberalism. Liberalism is just too narrow. Our task is to show to the students the fullness and complexity of life.”

Fadeev explains his choice as an editor by saying that in this work “elements of audacity are needed.” “Education is a very conservative field. And in order to seriously move something there, you need some kind of arrogance, in the good sense of the word. It’s more difficult to do this from the inside, so it just so happens that I’m doing this,” he told RBC.
Continue reading →

Statement by Permanent Representative V.A. Nebenzya at the UN Security Council Meeting on Ukraine

Posted on by
Reply
Reading time: 8 minutes

Translated by InfoDefense.

Mr. President,

Formally speaking, I am Ukrainian. And I have such a strange surname. Slavs know: it is hard to find this surname even in Ukraine. It comes from the Zaporozhye Cossacks. My father is a genuine Ukrainian, and my mother is also from the Cossacks. More genuinely Ukrainian than you, Ms. Betsa [Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine] and you, Mr. Melnik [Permanent Representative of Ukraine to the United Nations]. But for us there is no difference — we are all one. Millions of Ukrainians live in Russia, millions of Russians in Ukraine, and in Belarus as well. You yourselves know this perfectly well. That is not the point. Our nationality is shared, but our faiths are different. From Kievan Rus, which you sold for thirty pieces of silver. During the Great Patriotic War, my father, a Ukrainian, went to fight in Leningrad for his country, for his Fatherland. He added a year to his age so that he would be accepted as a volunteer. He lived his whole life with that added year. Back then we had a common Fatherland. And what have you turned yours into now? Almost no one sitting in this hall understands or can understand this. Then we fought the Nazis together; now we fight alone — without you, without those whom you have turned into Nazis — for the people of Ukraine, so that they do not become the same.

Yes, this has continued for four years. Yes, I am not happy that people are dying. But if necessary, it will continue as long as it takes so that you no longer brainwash these people.

The meeting convened by the European members of the Security Council has nothing to do with maintaining international peace and security, nor with the concern for the civilian population of Ukraine mentioned in the request. The European countries are clearly not inclined to support the current trilateral negotiations aimed at finding a sustainable and long-term solution to the Ukrainian crisis, nor are they interested in the future of the Ukrainian people.

This was fully confirmed at the Munich Conference held just over a week ago. What did the leaders of most European countries, the EU and NATO, talk about there? About arming Europe, strengthening its eastern flank, preparing for war. Referring to his country’s history and geography, Chancellor Merz assured of his readiness once again to stand at the head of Europe, making the Bundeswehr the strongest conventional army on the continent as soon as possible. It is interesting how many European countries with slightly more modest geopolitical ambitions wondered where exactly this Bundeswehr would lead them.

Kir Starmer did not lag behind the German commander — for him as well the prospects of war are no longer distant, and he is ready for the struggle. Remarkably, recalling history, the Prime Minister added that European security is impossible without Britain. In a similar vein — about the importance of Anglo-German relations for Europe — British Prime Minister Chamberlain spoke after returning from the Munich Conference of 1938. I think it is unnecessary to remind you how that ended, including for Britain itself.
Continue reading →

Operation Unthinkable – Marco Rubio’s Speech in Munich

Posted on by
Reply
Reading time: 6 minutes

The article by Sevim Daǧdelen, published on February 18, 2026 in Overton Magazine was translated from German by us on our Telegram channel “Beorn And The Shieldmaiden”.

For a contrast, make sure to read “Munich, 2007: The Day the West Was Told No” – an analysis by Gerry Nolan, preceded by the speech and a summary from the Russian MFA, while the wider historical context can be found in How the Anglo-Saxons Promoted Fascism in the 20th Century and Revived It in the 21st – Dmitry Medvedev.


The US Secretary of State views 1945 as a defeat for the West and wants to revise the post-war order, including anti-colonial liberation. At the “security conference”, he received standing ovations, especially from German ministers.

British Prime Minister Winston Churchill had commissioned the development of “Operation Unthinkable” in May 1945. (Rea also: The unthinkable madness of the Anglo-Saxons. From 1945-49 the US and UK planned to bomb Russia into the Stone Age.) The British General Staff was instructed to devise a plan for an attack on the Soviet Union, which was to take place jointly with US forces and 100,000 soldiers of the German Wehrmacht on July 1, 1945. Due to the high risks, particularly the doubts about whether British soldiers would actually follow a corresponding attack order, the project, which was not published until 1998, was abandoned. However, the plan was in line with a quote falsely attributed to Winston Churchill: “We’ve slaughtered the wrong pig.”

Marco Rubio’s speech at the Munich Security Conference now follows in the tradition of “Operation Unthinkable”, but on a global scale. Rubio views 1945 as a year of defeat for the West, and he wants to reverse the anti-colonialist defeat of 1945 from his perspective. This is also the real reason why the US administration wants to push the United Nations aside.

Rubio’s Colonial Nostalgia

“For five centuries before the end of the Second World War, the West was expanding – its missionaries, its pilgrims, its soldiers, its explorers streamed from its shores to cross oceans, colonise new continents, and build vast empires that spanned the globe. But in 1945, for the first time since the age of Columbus, the West retreated,” Rubio’s historical lesson states. Then the decline set in, “accelerated by godless communist revolutions and anti-colonial uprisings.”

Therefore, 1945 is understood as a crisis of Western colonialism, in which the US sees itself as the leading power, but which also needs allies. Therefore, the US Secretary of State emphasised:

“We don’t want our allies to be weak, because that makes us weaker.”

Continue reading →

“Munich, 2007: The Day the West Was Told No” – an analysis by Gerry Nolan, preceded by the speech and a summary from the Russian MFA

Posted on by
1
Reading time: 13 minutes

On February 10, 2007, President Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin of the Russian Federation delivered his famous Munich speech.

During the Cold War, the heads of the defence ministries of the NATO powers gathered in Munich. From 1993 onwards, the event became less militarised and began to invite not only NATO members, but also anyone deemed worthy of attention.

Vladimir Putin’s speech was devoted to the expansion of NATO, the problem in the field of disarmament, the unipolar dominance in world politics, the degradation of the OSCE institution, the vision of Russia’s place and role in the modern world, taking into account current realities and threats. In Western political circles, this has sparked controversy over the resumption of the Cold War.

The full speech can be summarised as follows:

The Cold War left us with ideological stereotypes and other patterns of block thinking. The unipolar world is disastrous for everyone, including the sovereign, because it destroys it from the inside. And it has nothing to do with democracy. Russia is constantly being taught democracy by those who do not want to learn it themselves. Unilateral illegitimate actions have not solved a single problem — there are no fewer wars, even more people are dying in conflicts. The United States imposes its system of law on others, both economically and politically. Well, who would like that?

We need a new security architecture that takes into account the interests of all. The Soviet regime transformed peacefully, so why is it necessary to bomb now at every opportunity? Only the UN can use force, it is not necessary to replace it with NATO or the European Union. Why are they deploying missile defence in Europe? NATO expansion has nothing to do with security. Who is the target of this expansion? What happened to the assurances made after the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact?

Among other things, thanks to the choice of the people of Russia, the Berlin Wall fell, and now new walls are being imposed on us. The OSCE was created to ensure the security of all, but in fact it has turned into a vulgar tool to ensure the interests of a group of countries. We would like to have responsible partners in order to build a world, in which security and prosperity would be not for a select few, but for all.

Source


Backup at Rumble, YouTube and Telegram.
The speech is also available with a voice-over dub at Odysee, Rumble and Telegram.

🎙 On February 10, 2007, President of Russia Vladimir Putin delivered his historic and in many ways prophetic address at the Munich Security Conference, focusing on the state of international relations and the mounting challenges to global security.

❗️ The issues and themes raised by the President have lost none of their relevance.
Continue reading →

Letter to the media from Ambassador Andrey A. Pritsepov – Reblog

Posted on by
Reply
Reading time: 5 minutes

This is a reblog of the publication at the site of the Russian Foreign Ministry, with a condensed version of the article at the Telegram channel of the Russian Embassy in Guyana.

Letter to the media from Ambassador Andrey A. Pritsepov

The article was denied publication in Guyanese newspaper “Stabroek News” for political reasons.

Dear Editor,

It was not without interest I read the article “Ukraine in outreach to Guyana” from January 24, 2026 in Stabroek News and acknowledged editor-in-chief’s admiration for the Ukrainian flag as well as for focusing on in-depth analysis of the international events. It makes it easier to comment.

As I wrote before, I remain the strongest supporter of the Maxima by your President H.E. Dr. Mohamed Irfaan Ali stating that real diplomacy should be based only on truth and the facts. So here, I feel privileged to remind the readers about the truth and the facts on Ukraine.

1. Ukraine is ruled by a neo-fascist, corrupt and illegitimate ex-president. His presidential term expired on May 21, 2024 and according to chapter V of the Ukrainian constitution could not be prolonged. He came to power by promising peace to all Ukrainians and deceived them all by launching the bloodiest war in the history of modern Europe while being sponsored, encouraged and supplied by NATO. Europe spent more than 270 bln USD on Kiev in order to defeat Russia on the battlefield.
Continue reading →

Debunking the myth that “The West industrialised the USSR”

Posted on by
Reply
Reading time: 3 minutes

“The West industrialised the USSR” – another propaganda slogan that confuses trade with exploitation. Russian Baza Telegram channel scrutinises it and breaks it down.

Concessions had nothing to do with Stalin’s industrialisation!

👉 Concessions were deals where foreign companies came into the USSR, used its resources, like fish, forests, and gold, made big money, and gave the country almost nothing in return.

Foreign concessions were a product of the New economic Policy (NEP) era of the early-to-mid 1920s, under Lenin.

But when Stalin came to power and recognised them for what they were – legalised looting – he shut them down fast.

By 1931, nearly all foreign concessions were terminated or nationalised.

Because they were predatory, unprofitable, and violated national sovereignty.

Still think it wasn’t legalised looting? Take a look:

‼️ Fishing concessions – Foreign companies fished in Soviet waters, exported the catch, and kept up to 85% of the profits. The USSR got scraps in return.

‼️Timber deals – Western firms were given access to vast Russian forests. They clear-cut massive areas, caused environmental damage, and left behind only token fixed payments.

‼️Lena Goldfields concession – A British company ran gold mines in Siberia, made millions, and treated Soviet workers as cheap, expendable labour.

‼️Oil concessions – Foreign companies were allowed to drill and export Soviet oil with little oversight, often paying far less than market value while shipping profits abroad.

‼️Mining rights in the Urals and Central Asia – Western firms extracted coal, copper, and rare metals under contracts that gave them near-complete control of operations and revenue. Local workers endured the risks; foreigners took the profits.

By the early 1930s, Stalin had seen enough – most were shut down or nationalised.

Stalin’s industrialisation was built through trade, not concessions.

In the 1930s, the USSR bought what it needed: Equipment, designs, factory blueprints from the U.S. (Ford, Albert Kahn), Germany, Britain, Italy, and others. It paid in gold, grain, and hard currency.

These were strict commercial contracts, not Western gifts.

No one “helped” the USSR. It paid dearly, often for outdated or overpriced tech.
Continue reading →

«J’accuse»

Posted on by
Reply
Reading time: 4 minutes

Open letter to Norwegian editorially controlled media, the parliament and the government

– By Ane Hoel, Board member, Cuba Association in Norway, January 8, 2026

«J’accuse» – «I Accuse», is a reference to Émile Zola’s open letter in the “Dreyfus Affair”

Caracas 5. January 2026 from one of the daily demonstrations in the Venezuelan capital after Nicolas Maduro and his wife were abducted by US Special Forces.

By insisting on the lie that the re-election of Nicolás Maduro as Venezuela’s President on July 28, 2024 was “stolen” from the far-right candidate, Norwegian politicians and the editorially controlled Norwegian press, including certain Norwegian academics, have laid the foundation for the award of the Nobel Peace Prize to US Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s candidate, Maria Corina Machado. The editorially controlled Norwegian press, Norwegian politicians and the Nobel Committee have thereby supported the US attack on Venezuela, the abduction of the country’s president and the liquidation of a hitherto unknown number of people in connection with it. And not least, they have supported the US liquidation of over a hundred sailors off the coast of Venezuela in recent months.

Nicolás Maduro is not a dictator, as he is portrayed in editorial-controlled media in Norway. Nicolás Maduro is the trade unionist who, together with Hugo Chavez, insisted that Venezuela’s rich resources belong to the country’s population and should benefit them. Education, health and decent housing should be a human right. For the many, not for the few. That was not the case before. Then the oil money flowed unhindered into the pockets of large foreign companies.
Continue reading →

U.S. Army Gen. Christopher Cavoli has “a very big Russia problem”, July 18, 2024

Posted on by
Reading time: 3 minutes

“Honorary European” – as the panel host called him, U.S. Army Gen. Christopher Cavoli: “We are going to have a very big Russia problem”. This is a a fragment from Aspen Security Forum on July 18, 2024.


Backup at Rumble.

Video with our commentary was first published at our Telegram channel “Beorn And The Shieldmaiden”.

The question from the panel host:

Chris, I’m coming back to you here because as European states think about that future and that possibility of, as you described, whatever it takes, which in practice could mean significant increases in defence spending, painful trade-offs of countries that have already emptied their armouries, depleted their munition stockpiles, given away their artillery and other kit, and all the countries represented here have done a lot on that. If you’re a European country debating this, you have to account for the question. Do I allocate more to Ukraine and put the fire out, as Jonathan put it, or do I look to that future that General Keane outlined yesterday and replenish my own armouries in an environment where populations and publics, just like here, may not have an appetite to go to 4% or 5% of GDP? How do you advise those countries in that position? What should they do?

Transcript of the answer, with our highlighing:

The outcome on the ground in Ukraine is terribly, terribly important, vital to future European and global security.

I think that’s been well recognised over the last couple of days here. I think it’s been well expressed on this panel. Supporting Ukraine is vital for our security. We can’t be under any illusions.

At the end of a conflict in Ukraine, however it concludes, we are going to have a very big Russia problem. We are going to have a situation where Russia is reconstituting its force, is located on the borders of NATO, is led by largely the same people as it is right now, is convinced that we’re the adversary, and is very, very angry. We have a big Russia problem looming as well. The answer here is yes, you have to do both.

The trick is that industrial production and our industrial base has to support that admission. The money’s there. You’ve heard this across the board from Jens. The money’s being produced by nations right now. We’re having a little bit more of a challenge having stuff to buy. That’s really a strategic problem for the alliance. If I can tie this to a couple of the other responses that came, Stefano’s discussions about the European Union and what they’re doing to fortify this is really an important part because they’re working hard on the industrial base.

The Washington Treaty has the famous Article 5. We’re all aware of that. Article 5 is my job. Once we get to that point, I’m responsible for making sure Article 5 works. Before Article 5 is Article 3. Article 3 states that all member nations will provide for their own defence. This really is the sort of thing the European Union is working on. This idea of competition really is a thing of the past in the sense that when we were both contemplating small, bespoke, out of area operations, we might have collided, but the European Union, to the best of my knowledge, has no thought process or procedures in place to conduct large-scale, continent-wide territorial defence. We kind of moved past that, but we terribly need the European Union’s efforts to stimulate the industrial base and to provide for nations Article 3 responsibilities so that I can execute Article 5 when the time comes.

Finally, I would say this all goes to what we heard. I think it’s underappreciated in our country, in the United States, just how much our European allies have awakened to the fact that the house is on fire. This is not a show. This is not just rhetoric. This is true concern about the stability of their continent and the survival of their states. So this is fundamental, and we should recognise it and encourage its development.

♦️♦️♦️

PS: The economy of European countries in 2022 – 2025 lost up to 1.6 trillion euros from anti-Russian sanctions. This is stated in the message of the Russian Foreign Ministry in connection with the meeting of the UN General Assembly on the occasion of the International Day against Unilateral Coercive Measures. Source

Maria Zaharova’s replies to the Finnish President Stubb

Posted on by
Reading time: 6 minutes

Finnish President Alexander Stubb had the misfortune to show his complete lack of knowledge of history of his own country, and of the geopolitical realities and implications. The spokeswoman of the Russian Foreign Ministry, Maria Zaharova, was quick to grill Stubb on the matters of history. Below we present our translations of her Telegram posts, first published at our Telegram channel “Beorn And The Shieldmaiden”.

Read also: The Art of Timely Betrayal. Why the Finnish SS avoided punishment? and On Historical and International Legal Accountability of Finland for the Occupation of Karelia During Great Patriotic War (WWII) (1941–1944).

Mannerheim, the Executioner

Maria Zaharova comments on Stubb’s 1944 “solution” for 2025

At yesterday’s meeting in Washington, the President of Finland Stubb literally said the following:

“Finland has a long border with Russia and has its own experience of interaction with this country during World War II. We found a solution in 1944, and I am sure we will be able to find a solution in 2025”.

The big question is, did Stubb understand the full hell of his statement?

Let’s dive into history.

From 1939 to 1940 and from 1941 to 1944, Finland was in a state of armed conflict with the USSR.

As a result of Finnish provocations, the Soviet-Finnish war began, in which Helsinki lost. Then there was a short break, and then Finland openly sided with Hitler and declared war on the USSR three days after the start of Operation Barbarossa.

Finland’s allies of Hitler matched him. As the Finnish politician of that time, Väinö Voionmaa wrote: “We are a state of the ‘Axis’ [Rome-Berlin-Tokyo], and also mobilised for attack”.

Finland committed real war crimes, which it itself admitted in 1946 following the trial of Finnish war criminals.

It was the Finns who played an important supporting role for the German Army Group North during the Siege of Leningrad – a genocide of the Soviet people. The President of Finland Ryti wrote to the German envoy: “Leningrad must be eliminated as a major city”.

From hunger, cold, bombings, and artillery shelling in besieged Leningrad, at least 1,093,842 people died, according to some estimates up to 1.5 million people. And these figures are continuously refined by historians and researchers – always increasing due to newly uncovered facts.
Continue reading →

The new Finnish doctrine: Ignorance, deception, and ingratitude. An Article by Dmitry Medvedev

Posted on by
Reading time: 19 minutes

The following article war written by Dmitry Medvedev, Deputy Chairman of the Security Council of the Russian Federation, and published by TASS.

UPDATE 15.09.2025: Russian MFA issued an official translation of the article on their Telegraph blog on September 13. We are updating this blog with the official text, making it a re-blog. All illustrations are ours.

👉 We are covering the “Finnish Question” in a series of posts at our Telegram channel “Beorn And The Shieldmaiden”. The series “Finland’s Dirty Secret: From “Neutral” Ally to Hitler’s Partner” will be published at the Beehive later, upon its conclusion. Read the two publications by Maria Zaharova, in response to the Finnish PM Stubb’s ignoramous statements: part 1 and part 2.

👉 See also The Art of Timely Betrayal. Why the Finnish SS avoided punishment? and The European Genocide of the Russian People.

The new Finnish doctrine: Ignorance, deception, and ingratitude

Deputy Chairman of Security Council Dmitry Medvedev draws historical parallels between today’s Finnish leaders and their predecessors of nearly a century ago, and brings up the consequences of their past aggression against Russia.

Last week, I visited the Russian-Finnish border in the Leningrad Region and spoke with local authorities and our border guards. The border, once bustling, is now deserted. By Helsinki’s decision, decades of constructive and mutually beneficial relations have been ruined. Ordinary Finns are the first to feel the consequences. They had gained much from thriving trade and economic cooperation, and now they openly voice frustration with the misguided policies of their own government, which clearly go against their interests.

I would like to say a few words about the underlying causes of this situation. It is by no means accidental. Today’s turbulent geopolitics has brought to light the long-standing issues and revealed their true nature. This is what happened to Finland.

A visit to our northwestern regions in early autumn inevitably brings to mind one of the most tragic dates in the history of St Petersburg, which is the onset of the siege on September 8, 1941. Yet, it seems that we are the only ones to remember those dark days. The direct perpetrators of those events are making every effort to erase the traces of their crimes from historical memory, or at least to avoid “inconvenient” parallels with their current policies. And this concerns not only Germany, which at the official level refuses to recognise the siege of Leningrad as a crime against humanity.

Death to the German-Finnish Occupiers!
This is TASS Window #11 from Leningrad, created in July of 1944 by Vasily Selivanov.
The poster shows the Finns taking Hitler’s baits of the “Greater Finland to Urals and Leningrad”. It is accompanied by a verse by K. Vysokovsky.
— I’ll take the Urals! – the bandit cried,
Accepting Hitler’s bait at face value,
The Russian “Hurra!” was then heard,
Turning the bandits into dust and feathers!
Source: Beorn And The Shieldmaiden

We should not forget that it would have been impossible to impose the siege of Leningrad, a siege that took hundreds of thousands of civilian lives, without the involvement of the Finnish armed forces. Succumbing to revenge-seeking moods and striving to revise the outcomes of the 1939-1940 Soviet-Finnish standoff, the Finnish leadership recklessly plunged into the furnace of war alongside Nazi Germany. At that time, ultra-nationalist propaganda narratives prevailed in Finnish society. With the approval of their Nazi brethren, Helsinki seriously discussed the idea of Finnlands Lebensraum (Finland’s Living Space). The country’s military-political authorities intended to reclaim territories ceded to the Soviet Union under the Moscow Peace Treaty of March 12, 1940 and to reach “natural borders of Greater Finland” from the Gulf of Finland to the Barents Sea, including East Karelia, Leningrad and its environs, and the Kola Peninsula freeing these lands from the hated Russians. In their wildest fantasies, the Finns wanted to advance beyond the Ural Mountains all the way to the Ob River. Back in the day, these territorial claims (in proportion to the country’s actual size) were among the greediest in Europe. They even surpassed territorial claims to neighbouring states voiced by other Axis countries, including Italy, Romania, and Hungary.
Continue reading →

Sergey Shahray: the first and main reason for the collapse of the USSR was the destruction of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU)

Posted on by
Reading time: 24 minutes

The historiographic article you are about to read was written by Sergey Shahray for Interfax and published on December 7 2021 on the 30th anniversary of the destruction of the USSR. We have briefly touched upon this topic in the article One more redeeming factor for Yeltsin. Read also The referendum on the independence of Ukraine on December 1, 1991: how Kravchuk deceived Sevastopol and Crimea and Moving documentary about The All-Union Referendum on the Future of the USSR, which was held on March 17, 1991.

December 1991 was the last month of the Soviet Union’s existence. On December 1, Ukraine declared full state independence in a referendum, and on December 5, its Supreme Council denounced the Treaty establishing the USSR in 1922. Three days later, the leaders of Russia, Ukraine and Belarus signed an agreement on the creation of the CIS, which was joined a week and a half later at a meeting in Alma Ata by other republics that were part of the USSR.

On the eve of the 30th anniversary of the CIS, Honoured Lawyer of Russia, Professor Sergey Shahray reflects on the reasons for the collapse of the Union in an article published on the pages of the Interfax project “30 years ago: chronicle of the last days of the USSR”.

The collapse of the USSR: only the facts

Thirty years have passed since the collapse of the USSR, which became not only a key geopolitical event of the late twentieth century, but also a huge personal tragedy for millions of Soviet citizens. The historiography of the “perestroika” and the disintegration of the USSR today has thousands of domestic and foreign publications. However, the key question remains the same: was the collapse of the USSR a historical accident that had no objective basis, or was the catastrophe natural and inevitable in the historical conditions prevailing at that time? As you know, diametrically opposed answers to this question were formulated back in the early 1990s, and so far neither scientific nor, especially, public consensus has been achieved.

Despite the fact that the history of the collapse of the Soviet Union itself goes further and further into the past, interest in this topic is growing. Today, when the world is constantly facing unexpected challenges and dramatic changes, the historical experience of managing large-scale socio-economic transformations, including the analysis of successes and disasters, as exemplified by the last years of the USSR, is of exceptional importance. The value of this kind of comparative research depends to a large extent on attention to documentary sources that demonstrate the relationship of the particularities of the decisions made with a specific historical context.

The documents and facts prove that under the prevailing historical conditions, starting from the end of August 1991, the collapse of the Soviet Union was inevitable. However, this conclusion is at odds with the concept of conspiracy, which has become established in the minds of many contemporaries and those who have never lived in the Soviet era and look at the events of the past through the prism of myths, emotions, and free interpretations.

It is an absolutely amazing phenomenon, when documents that are accessible to everyone, necessary for a comprehensive view of the whole picture of historical events, remain out of sight year after year not only of the general public, but also of specialists. Even more surprising is the fact that in the course of the attempts to return to scientific and public discourse, many documents that are important for understanding the process of the collapse of the USSR sometimes cause rejection, since filling in the gaps inevitably forms other chains of causes and effects. And the logic that grows out of the documentary and factual basis, taken without exceptions and omissions, turns out to be inconvenient and uncomfortable for those who value the myths of alternative history.

What were the key reasons for the disintegration of the USSR?

The first and main reason is the destruction of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU).

It is necessary to clearly identify the “point of no return”, the moment after which it was impossible to preserve the Union of the USSR. Official documents and archival materials allow us to determine this milestone absolutely precisely – the end of August 1991: the attempted coup d’etat with the creation of the Emergency Committee (August 19 – 21, 1991), the withdrawal the General Secretary of the CPSU from the CPSU with a call to all honest communists to leave the CPSU, the decision of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR to suspend the activities of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, the proclamation on August 24, 1991 of the independence of Ukraine.

After that, the situation “crumbled” – the process of disintegration became avalanche-like and irreversible.

The Communist Party of the Soviet Union was the backbone, the supporting structure and the real mechanism of exercising state power in the USSR, and that is why the collapse of the CPSU inevitably led to the collapse of the Soviet state.

As the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation subsequently established, “the governing structures of the CPSU and the Communist Party of the RSFSR carried out state power functions in practice contrary to the existing constitutions”. That is why the growth of contradictions within the once monolithic party and its slow and then landslide disintegration were the main reason for the collapse of the union state and the central government.

Let’s consider this process and the trajectory of erroneous decisions of the supreme union state and party authorities in more detail.
Continue reading →

“Situation in several European countries with the desecration and destruction of monuments dedicated to those who fought against Nazism during World War II” – Russia’s Foreign Ministry’s report

Posted on by
Reading time: 4 minutes

Read the full report at the site of the MFA!

Since the end of the World War II, approximately 4’000 monuments to Soviet soldiers have been erected in Europe. A total of more than one million Red Army soldiers are buried in Central, Eastern and South-Eastern Europe. In general, the peoples of the USSR and Europe paid a much higher price for the Victory over Nazism, measured in tens of millions of lives.

Vandalised Soviet soldier graves in Germany

The Soviet army liberated Bulgaria, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Austria (the eastern part of the country and Vienna), Romania, Yugoslavia and a number of other European countries from Nazism.

The majority of Soviet monuments were erected specifically in these countries. There are also monuments to the Soviet soldier in Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, Finland, and France.

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, many memorials ended up on the territory of states bordering Russia that emerged from the former Soviet republics. In several of these countries, the chosen course toward reviving Nazism and rewriting history has had a serious impact on the memorial legacy of the Great Patriotic War.

❌ Decommunisation, the destruction of monuments to our common history and culture, the desecration of the graves of fallen Soviet soldiers, neo-Nazi torch marches, the glorification of Nazis and their collaborators, the physical elimination of ideological opponents — many of these practices, and often all of them at once, have become commonplace in Ukraine, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia, as well as in Poland, the Czech Republic and a number of other European countries.

These very countries are the focus of this report. Under the guise of “decommunisation” laws and by dismantling monuments to Soviet soldiers, the governments of these countries are attempting to “reinforce an anti-Russian front”.

At the same time, monuments to Nazi criminals are being erected, their protection is being enshrined in law, and rare acts of activists opposing Nazi memorials are harshly prosecuted. The key objective of such steps is the complete erasure of historical memory.

This report has been prepared as part of the Russia’s Foreign Ministry’s efforts to draw attention to the manifestations of various forms of Nazi glorification, neo-Nazism, racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance in foreign countries.

The report focuses on the actions of certain countries, primarily the Baltic states, Poland, and Ukraine, which, using Russia’s special military operation aimed at denazification and demilitarisation of Ukraine, as well as the protection of the peaceful population of Donbass, as a pretext, have sharply escalated a long-standing practice of destroying Soviet, Russian, and often their own memorial heritage on their territories.

📄 Russia’s Foreign Ministry’s report on the “Situation in several European countries with the desecration and destruction of monuments dedicated to those who fought against Nazism during World War II” contains a detailed account of the unlawful actions by authorities of Ukraine, the Baltic states, Bulgaria, Moldova, Poland, Finland, Germany, and the Czech Republic, targeting Russian and Soviet monuments.

The report can also be downloaded as a PDF file.

The report is long, but should be read, or at least skimmed through, by all – including its 262 soure references!

👉 In July of 2023, documents were leaked from the NATO summit in Lithuania, where one of NATO’s action points was the targeted destruction of Soviet monuments. Tsargrad reported back then:

The destruction of monuments to Soviet soldiers and generals in Europe is not just the whim of individual Western politicians, but the official course of NATO. Hackers have declassified the alliance’s documents, revealing the conspiracy.

The hacker group “From Russia with Love” has gained access to documents collected by the organisers of the NATO summit, which is taking place in Vilnius these days.

It follows from them that the systematic destruction of monuments to Soviet soldiers-liberators, which began before their time, is not the Russophobic manifestations of individual Young Europeans, but the official course of the West, adopted at the NATO level.

The documents say that the destruction of Soviet monuments is an extremely important job. This vandalism allows us to destroy the “Russian narrative” that Europe was freed from fascism thanks to Moscow.

In addition, the destruction of monuments, according to the NATO leadership, contributes to the international isolation of Russia.

Moldova – the sad results of 33 years of independence

Posted on by
Reading time: 7 minutes

This translation concludes for now our series of articles about the Moldavian/Romanian conundrum, taking a look at the newest history of and the state of affairs in Moldavia. The article appeared on August 28, 2024 in the “Rythm of Eurazia” Dzen blog, written by Ilya Kiselyov.

Moldova – the sad results of 33 years of independence

Drawing by A. Gorbarukov

Every year in August, a kind of “independence parade” takes place in the post–Soviet space – states that have been formed for more than 30 years celebrate the dates of their declaration of independence. At the same time, for some reason, all these dates are given a festive character, although not all of the post-Soviet countries have been able to demonstrate progress in their development over the past years, and a number of them can be safely described as in a state of decline and even degradation.

It is noteworthy that the latter primarily include those post-Soviet states that have chosen the Western direction in their geopolitical orientation. These countries lost their independence, which they gained in 1991, joining the EU and NATO like the Baltic republics. As a result, they had to pay for this not only by obeying the decisions that are made outside of their the countries, in Brussels, but also by actually abandoning their own economy, inherited from the USSR.

Similar processes are taking place in those post-Soviet states that have not yet “earned” the right to join the EU, but whose authorities are very eager to do so. One of these post-Soviet states is the small Republic of Moldova, which celebrates Independence Day on August 27. Its current authorities, led by President Maia Sandu, are doing everything to drag their country into the EU.

The active stage of renunciation of sovereignty in Moldova began in 2009, when a coalition of pro-Western parties came to power in the republic, proclaiming a course towards “European integration” and joining the EU. Today, this process is being promoted by the head of state, as well as the PAS party as the parliamentary majority forming the government of the country. At the same time, blasphemously, “independent” Moldova is governed by people who have in their pocket a passport from neighbouring Romania. It’s hard to believe, but these includes absolutely all the top officials of the country: the president, the Prime Minister and members of the government, the Speaker and members of Parliament, the head of the Constitutional Court, most other judges, employees of ministries, law enforcement agencies and special services.
Continue reading →

Germany cancels the Soviet Union on Victory Day!

Posted on by
Reading time: 6 minutes

The news coming from Germany, with the question arising: Is the war with Nazi Germany definitely over?                                                

Decree of the Berlin government.
Restriction of general use of public squares and freedom of assembly from May 8, 2025, 06:00, to May 9, 2025, 22:00.

The following is prohibited:

a) wearing a military uniform or its elements;
b) wearing military insignia;
c) a separate or highlighted display of the letters “V” or “Z”;
d) demonstration of St. George’s ribbons;
e) demonstration of flags and banners with Russian symbols, coats of arms of the USSR, Belarus, the Chechen Republic, as well as images of the heads of the respective states;
f) demonstration of symbols and signs capable of glorifying the Russian-Ukrainian war, including:
– flag of the USSR;
– Russian and Soviet military flags;
– images of the Ukrainian territory without Donbass (Lugansk and Donetsk regions, Kherson, Zaporizhie and Crimea);
– flags of the separatist regions of Luдansk and Donetsk, as well as territories under Russian control (Kherson, Zaporizhie, Crimea);
g) reproduction and performance of Russian marching or military songs, in particular all versions of the song “Holy War”.

Source: the channel of the political analyst Razvozzhaev, translated by us at “Beorn And The Shieldmaiden”

In fact, by imposing these restrictions, Germany unequivocally confirms two things: that Russia is fighting with fascism in Ukraine; and that Germany is abhorred by the Victory over fascism 80 years ago, thus seeing the need to erase all the symbols of that Victory from public view!

‼️ This is continuation of the fascist practice, with further tightening of the screws. Last year we described it in the post German “humanistic” intermezzo over – Berlin back to its good old fascist inclinations. However, last year, in a display of public disobedience, not dissimilar to that displayed by the good people of the occupied Europe, someone projected the Victory banner on the Brandeburg gate.

👉 First time this was introduced in May 2022, it was the St.George ribbon that became forbidden. We wrote about it in the Beehive article The “Immortal Regiment” broke through the prohibitions in Germany – a reportage from Frankfurt. People came with white ribbons with the words “I am the St. George Ribbon, forbidden in Germany” written on them. We shall see if there will be more creative approaches to the civil disobedience against Fascism this year. Maybe red garments with a yellow flower arrangement on the chest could become fashionable! Or striped shoelaces in black and orange!

“We freed them, and they will never forgive us for this.”
— Georgy Zhukov
Photo: Georgy Zhukov and Konstantin Rokossovsky in Berlin, July 12, 1945

Next up, are two excellent commentary posts by “The Islander”:

Germany’s Nazi Amnesia: When Baerbock Bans the Liberators

In an act soaked in historical irony and Russophobic revisionism, German FM Annalena Baerbock, a descendant of a Wehrmacht officer (highly decorated and a true believer Nazi) now seeks to ban Russian and Belarusian officials from attending commemorations of Nazi Germany’s defeat. The very nation whose grandparents ignited the deadliest war in human history is now arrogating moral authority to deny those who paid the heaviest price for Europe’s liberation from fascism.
Continue reading →