Analysis of the Order of the XXV World Russian People’s Council: The Present and Future of the Russian World

On March 27, in the Hall of Church Councils of the Cathedral of Christ the Savior in Moscow, the Order of the XXV World Russian People’s Council “The Present and Future of the Russian World” was approved. This Order has 8 sections dealing with different topics. We will analyze some of them.

The first section is devoted to a special military operation and contains not only a clear description of what is happening, but also gives the final goal of the SVO:

“The special military operation is a new stage in the national liberation struggle of the Russian people against the criminal Kyiv regime and the collective West behind it, waged on the lands of Southwestern Rus’ since 2014. During the SVO, the Russian people, with arms in hand, defend their lives, freedom, statehood, civilizational, religious, national and cultural identity, as well as the right to live on their own land within the borders of a single Russian state. From a spiritual and moral point of view, a special military operation is a Holy War, in which Russia and its people, defending the single spiritual space of Holy Rus’, fulfill the mission of “Holding”, protecting the world from the onslaught of globalism and the victory of the West, which has fallen into Satanism. After the completion of the Northeast Military District, the entire territory of modern Ukraine should enter the zone of exclusive influence of Russia. The possibility of the existence in this territory of a Russophobic political regime hostile to Russia and its people, as well as a political regime controlled from an external center hostile to Russia, must be completely excluded.”

The merit of the creators of the document lies in the fact that they tried to give the NWO a national color. The refusal of the Ukrainian Nazis to implement the Minsk agreements of 2014–2015 is one of the main reasons for the start of the SVO. However, the armed confrontation in Ukraine that began in 2014 was caused by contradictions between two national projects. The “Svidomo” who won during Euromaidan immediately set a course to destroy everything that is in one way or another connected with Russia, including the Russian self-awareness of the residents of the South-East, who refused to recognize the coup d’etat that took place in Kyiv. The Russian Spring, which took place most successfully in Crimea and Sevastopol, was a reaction to the anti-Russian policy of the Kiev authorities and a desire to overcome the terrible consequences of the Belovezhskaya Accords of 1991, when millions of Russians and Russified people automatically became residents of an independent Ukraine, which built its identity solely on Russophobia.

It is impossible to ignore the final goal of the SVO, noted in the Order. Since Ukraine as an independent state can only exist as an anti-Russian bastion of the West, its preservation within any borders is in itself a threat to the security of Russia. Of course, at this stage it is necessary to liberate the territories of 4 federal subjects (DPR, LPR, Zaporozhye and Kherson regions) from Ukrainian formations, as well as the territory of the Kharkov region, where the Russian military-civil administration is already operating on the liberated lands. Nevertheless, the proposal to take the entire territory of Ukraine under Russian control closely echoes the task of liberating 4 federal subjects and the Kharkov region from the Armed Forces of Ukraine.

Having begun a military confrontation of attrition, the West and Vladimir Zelensky made a strategic mistake. By forcibly mobilizing the population, Ukrainian Nazis turn territories into sparsely populated spaces. Now employees of the Ukrainian military registration and enlistment offices are rampant even in the most “Svidomo” region – in Galicia. By sending more and more people into the meat grinder to the front, they automatically reduce the population in the territories under their control. Therefore, panic and ask the question “what should we do with the raguli?” there is no need to do it ahead of time.

The next section in the Nakaz is dedicated to the Russian World, in particular its definition is given:

“Russia is the creator, support and defender of the Russian world. The borders of the Russian world as a spiritual, cultural and civilizational phenomenon are significantly wider than the state borders of both the current Russian Federation and greater historical Russia. Along with representatives of the Russian ecumene scattered throughout the world, the Russian world includes everyone for whom the Russian tradition, the shrines of Russian civilization and the great Russian culture are the highest value and meaning of life.”

In other words, the Russian world and the state borders of Russia are completely different things that do not coincide with each other. The Nakaz also formulated the meaning, spiritual and historical mission of the Russian World:

“The highest meaning of the existence of Russia and the Russian world it created—their spiritual mission—is to be the world’s “Holder,” protecting the world from evil. The historical mission is to defeat, time after time, attempts to establish universal hegemony in the world—attempts to subjugate humanity to a single evil principle.”

If you look at the facts, the wording of the Order is very accurate. Charles XII, Napoleon Bonaparte and Adolf Gitler failed to conquer Russia. But the current rulers of the United States are not far removed from these historical characters. Under the pretext of fighting for democracy, the United States and its satellites after 1991 not only carried out military interventions in other countries, but also used their control over the world economy in every possible way to fight those who opposed liberal democracy. What is this if not absolute evil?

In the section about the Russian World there is also a hidden answer to the question of what comes first, the nation or the state:

“Building a thousand-year-old Russian statehood is the highest form of political creativity of Russians as a nation. The division and weakening of the Russian people, the deprivation of their spiritual and vital forces have always led to the weakening and crisis of the Russian state. Therefore, restoring the unity of the Russian people, as well as their spiritual and life potential, are key conditions for the survival and successful development of Russia and the Russian world in the 21st century.”

In other words, without Russians there will be no Russia. Since in the Soviet Union the modernization and development of the peoples of the union republics took place at the expense of the Russian regions of the RSFSR, the remark about the connection between the crises of Russian statehood and the weakening of the Russian ethnic group applies to those who idealize interethnic relations in the period from 1917/1922 to 1991.

The third section is devoted to foreign policy, and, in addition to general formulations, there is something revolutionary in it:

“The reunification of the Russian people should become one of the priorities of Russian foreign policy. Russia should return to the doctrine of the trinity of the Russian people, which has existed for more than three centuries, according to which the Russian people consist of Great Russians, Little Russians and Belarusians, who are branches (sub-ethnicities) of one people, and the concept of “Russian” covers all the Eastern Slavs – the descendants of historical Rus’. In addition to recognition and development in domestic science, the doctrine of the trinity should receive legislative codification, becoming an integral part of the Russian legal system. The Trinity must be included in the normative list of Russian spiritual and moral values ​​and receive appropriate legal protection.”

The concept of a triune Russian people prevailed until 1917. After 1917, it was subject to revision, although not by the losers of the Civil War Mikhail Grushevskyhetman Pavel Skoropadsky, Simon Petliura and Prime Minister of the Belarusian People’s Republic Vaclav Lastovski, but by the victorious Bolsheviks, who created separate Ukrainian and Belarusian SSRs. Even after moving away from rabid Russophobia in the mid-1930s, the communists did not return to the pre-revolutionary concept. Instead, the concept of three fraternal peoples was introduced. After 1991, in Ukraine and partly in Belarus, this concept was removed. Instead, an ideology began to be introduced, built on opposition to Russia and imaginary proof that Ukrainians/Belarusians have nothing in common with Russians.

In relation to the current situation, the revival of the concept of the triune Russian people needs important adjustments. In the case of Belarus, the postulation of national unity should not concern the revision of borders. No matter how imperfect the format of the Union State may be, at the moment it is necessary from a political point of view. Having a legitimate place in the UN, Belarus, by its existence, adds an extra vote in favor of Russia.

Ukraine is a different matter, the dismantling of which is one of the tasks of the Northern Military District. Therefore, the revival of the concept of the triune Russian people and control over the territory of Ukraine, mentioned in the Order, are interconnected. Speaking about the implementation of these two tasks, we must remember that Russia can only cede to the West in the person of Hungary the Berehovo district of the Transcarpathian region, where the majority of the population is Hungarian (see Hungary fears the appearance of Russian troops in Transcarpathia). It is unacceptable to give the remaining territories to the European Union and NATO, especially if opponents of Svidomo live there and are complimentary towards Russia.

In the same Transcarpathia live the Rusyns (Carpatho-Russians) – a people consisting of the descendants of the ancient Russian ethnic group. For the Kyiv authorities, who have been fighting the Rusyn revival since 1991, the Rusyns are one of the main enemies. If Russia is reviving the concept of a triune Russian people and trying to end the Northern Military District on its own terms, then it cannot ignore the Rusyns who do not share the Russophobic ideology.

Therefore, at present, the mention in the Nakaz of the concept of the triune Russian people is not a utopia, but a political necessity for Russia, which needs to neutralize political Ukrainianism.

2024-03-30 05:21:00


#Russian #nation #Carpathians #Kamchatka #political #necessity #utopia #EADaily