Yuri Felshtinsky: Russia May Launch Nuclear Strikes Against Europe From Belarus

7.06.2022, 11:38
63,372

NATO should enter the war against the Russian Federation now.

The well-known American historian Yuri Felshtinsky stated this in an interview with the Studio X97 сайта Charter97.org show by the Charter97.org website. Together with Alexander Litvinenko, he wrote the book Blowing Up Russia, which was translated into many languages of the world later. Litvinenko, as we know, was poisoned and killed by the Russian special services, while Felshtinsky continues to write, expose the Kremlin and the FSB.

Today we will talk to the historian about the fascist Russian state, the Kremlin's "flunky" who's name is Aliaksandr Lukashenka, the full-scale war that Russia unleashed in Ukraine on February 24, and the ways to win this war. Host Eugeniusz Klimakin.

Subscribe to the Charter'97 Youtube channel - charter97video. Share the video with your friends. Like and write comments.

— Yuri, first of all, I would like to talk to you as a well-known historian, a person who studies processes and understands process logic. Three months of war, Russia brutally destroys Ukraine, kills, rapes, robs Ukrainians. But, nevertheless, they miscalculated: they did not manage to make all this in three days. I want to ask about the logic of historical processes, which is of scientific interest to you. What is the current historical direction, in your opinion? And what shall we expect?

— I think that we already know and understand the answers to many questions. First, about miscalculations. Absolutely all the wars that were ever planned by some commanders, some political figures, were always planned as a blitzkrieg and never became a blitzkrieg. Even the Russian invasion in 2014. With regard to Crimea, this blitzkrieg worked, but not with regard to Donbass, and they had to stop.

So the blitzkrieg did not work out this time, but I would say it was expected, because, I repeat, all wars were always planned as a blitzkrieg, however, as we know, often turned into long-term conflicts, moreover, the victory was on the side opposing the one that expected to win.

Putin underestimated the strength of the Ukrainian army and overestimated the strength of the Russian army, but it must be added that he was not alone in making such a mistake. In fact, almost everyone...

— Western politicians, including those who offered Zelensky to leave the country before February 24.

— Exactly. So all Western intelligence agencies, I would say, made the same mistake. They overestimated the strength of the Russian army and underestimated the strength of the Ukrainian army. On the other hand, the fact that Russia is losing more people than everyone probably expected, and the fact that tens of thousands of Russian military are dying there, even this, just between us, is expected. Because historically, Russia has always lost more people in all wars than all other countries.

Therefore, I believe that Putin will not stop this war, will not retreat and will not stop because of the losses of the Russian army. It happened historically: the more Russia loses people in the war, the more justified it becomes for the country, people and government.

— Then the main question, which, I think, should worry every decent person. How can we, the normal, civilized world, eliminate these two creatures, Putin and Lukashenko, the last is often forgotten by the way?

— No, Lukashenka, of course, is not forgotten. He is quite remembered too. He is not an independent player in the current events, and this is clear to everyone, that's it.

— How to eliminate them?

— It became easier in one sense after February 24. First, the enemy was identified, it was unclear before. Many Western politicians, and perhaps even all Western politicians, were perceiving Putin as some kind of partner until February 24. Closer to February 24, he became, of course, a very difficult partner, but, nevertheless, a partner, a possible subject for talks or any sort of agreements. Accordingly, it was incorrect before February 24 to raise, for example, the question of regime change in Russia, the overthrow of Putin, and so on. But after February 24, all this changed in one day.

— He's just a politically undesirable person right now.

— Politically undesirable person is a too mild wording for the current situation. We are dealing with an absolutely fascist regime in Russia. We are dealing with an absolutely fascist leadership in Russia. And we are dealing, of course, with war criminals who, one way or another, must face punishment.

The death penalty is now abolished in the world, so there can be no execution by hanging, as in the case of Nazi criminals in 1945. But the fact that all of them should be punished is clear to everyone. Yes, we still have individual European countries, individual European leaders...

— Do you mean corrupt politicians?

— Some of them are corrupted, some are not. If we are talking about Viktor Orban, then he is simply purchased. If we are talking about Emmanuel Macron, then, of course, we cannot say that he is purchased. but he, also by virtue of historical French traditions, is trying to play some kind of his own, not even a game...

— He is simply living too far from the Russian borders.

— Let's remember that France did not join NATO for a very long time. After all, France was outside NATO membership throughout the Soviet time. France, to be honest, played a completely different game with Hitler and the Nazis during the Second World War. Their political position differed even from that of the United Kingdom even after the outbreak of the war. This is their eternal nature, always trying to be a kind of buffer between absolute evil and absolute good.

— If I may, I want to leave Macron for the topic of war and current events. How can we defeat fascist Russia in today's conditions, as you said during the interview?

— We can perceive Putin in two ways. You can consider him a lone dictator who emerged from the depths of the KGB, surrounded himself with some kind of like-minded people, most of whom are also from the KGB. If we perceive Putin in this way, then indeed, in the end, you can somehow eliminate him, help him die, perhaps, as they helped a lot of people in Soviet times.

— Sounds too easy.

— Yes, it is. Frankly speaking, I think that we will not be able to draw this lottery ticket, and it is very frivolous and naive to count on it. I believe that state security as an institution is in power in Russia. And until this institution is dissolved without the right to be recreated under any new three or four-letter abbreviations, which they are very fond of doing, nothing good will happen. Because they carried out reforms through the reorganization of structures and renaming, while Lubyanka has always remained the center of Moscow. Nothing can be done in Russia as long as Lubyanka remains the center of state security. We are very far from it.

I think that this can only happen in the event of a military defeat of the Russian Federation, comparable to the defeat of Germany and Japan in 1945. Actually, if such a defeat happens, then Russia will finally have the opportunity to become a normal country.

— Yuri, you write books about the FSB. I would like to ask you, in what condition are the Russian special services now? Is there any unrest going on there?

— They are in excellent condition and no unrest occurs there. There has never been any unrest in state security since 1917. Yes, in fact, there were repressions that the party subjected to state security because the party created this body and really needed it to fight against numerous "enemies". It was no coincidence that they said that the KGB was an armed detachment of the party. On the other hand, it was clear that this armed detachment of the party wanted to eat up the party itself and seize power.

This tug-of-war has been going on since 1917 with varying success. Usually the party won. Therefore, if you look at the heads of state security you will see that almost all of them were killed. Some were openly shot, others secretly killed. Moreover, every time the leaders left, there was a purge of the top generals of state security. Therefore, the Communist Party was the main enemy from the point of view of state security. Not fascists, not White Guards, not dissidents, not counter-revolutionaries, but the party.

— But what about the current situation?

— The current situation is perfect. In 1991, when the putsch took place, democracy finally won, and this made us all very happy. The Communist Party's monopoly on power was abolished, however, very only political control that existed over state security was also removed. State security was extremely pleased with this, because that is what they wanted and for that reason took part in the August revolution.

State security was primarily interested in the fact that this political control was finally eliminated. State security has existed without political control since 1991. We are seeing the result of this right now.

State security controls the state for the first time in world history since 2000. There are no such examples in history and there is no split there. Only those people were selected for management who agree with the policy that is planned to be pursued. This general political program actually appeared a long time ago. Putin's 2007 Munich speech was a clear description of what would happen.

— Where do these "Chekists" have a weak spot, a heel of Achilles?

— They are not used to it, it is very difficult for them to act openly, because this is a structure that prefers to act secretly and not be exposed. As it was in the situation after February 24, when all the masks were removed and they said everything they thought, and, accordingly, about them too... Of course, under these conditions it is much more difficult for them to operate, because they have lost the protection that they had, secret and privacy, when they could operate in the dark and in the shade.

Unfortunately, it is impossible to come to an agreement on anything with these people. Putin created at least the appearance that something could be agreed with him before February 24. They were negotiating, smiling, signing, and discussing. Though all spoke about Putin that he nowhere doesn't concede anything. What kind of negotiations are these if the result is a one-way street? Nevertheless, at least there was an appearance of any conversations, negotiations.

— How do you assess the Western sanctions?

— The sanctions are pretty strong. I will explain why I think so. They are interesting not only because they come from above, because there are some sanctions that the government imposes centrally, but in fact, they are now being introduced from below: by private companies, countries, and some separated groups.

I was very impressed when Finland stopped the railway connection with St. Petersburg, although no one asked the country to do it. The feeling that everyone is sitting and thinking what kind of sanction to impose against this nasty regime. And this, of course, is reassuring.

— They don't work immediately, do they?

— Exactly. Everyone understands that sanctions are a slow thing. We cannot hope that sanctions will stop the war in Ukraine. Sanctions will not stop the war in Ukraine. Sanctions certainly weaken the Russian state in the long term and the ability of the Russian state to wage war.

Therefore, if you look back in history (after all, history helps us to conduct a comparative analysis), what is happening now with the West’s reaction to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is happening much faster than the West’s reaction to Germany’s invasion of Poland. Hitler planned to attack Poland on August 26, 1939. On August 25, Britain and France signed a mutual assistance treaty with Poland to stop his invasion.

— This didn't help at all.

— This didn't help at all. Therefore, of course, this cannot be compared with the rapid reaction that has taken place now, when sanctions were introduced from the first day after February 24. Sanctions are growing both quantitatively and qualitatively. They began to provide all possible assistance with weapons to Ukraine from the first day of the war. Yes, this is not enough to defeat Russia, but I think that we are moving towards this.

— You remember, for sure, Putin's quote about terrorists, whom "we will rub them out in the outhouse".

— Certainly.

— Do you think the collective West has already made a decision for itself that the Kremlin terrorist should "rubbed out"?

— I don't think anyone has a problem with this topic. I am far from the idea that the secret services of the West are now developing a plan to eliminate Putin. But I am far from this idea precisely because the Western secret services also understand that the elimination of Putin does not necessarily lead to a correction of the general situation.

— This is what we've been talking about.

— Yes, they also understand that the problem is more serious than just Putin.

— What is the role of Lukashenka today, this Kremlin "flunky " and helpless pawn?

— The fact that he was left as the “flunky” until today is also part of a certain game. I have constantly been asking myself the question since 2014: why is Putin not annexing Belarus? There is no reasonable explanation for this, since we are already talking about the annexation of Crimea, about an attempt to seize Ukraine. It is completely unclear why he left Belarus as an independent state. Let's be honest: if you recreate an empire, then Belarus is a very important and very tasty morsel, it is located in the center of Europe, it brings the Russian army to the borders of several very important states at once, these states can be threatened.

— There is a theory that just before the centenary of the USSR, they will grab it this year.

— We'll see. But I still have some assumptions. Belarus was left an independent state for one single scenario, and we may be witnessing the application of this particular scenario.

Belarus was withdrawn, as we know, through an absolutely fraudulent referendum from the non-nuclear agreement. I suspect that this is the main reason why Belarus was left independent. To try to transfer there, as Lukashenka said, weapons that were taken to Russia in 1993, and launch nuclear strikes on Europe from Belarus, and not from the territory of the Russian Federation.

I believe that this is the most dangerous scenario that awaits us. We need to finish off Putin in Ukraine to avoid this scenario. We need NATO to enter the war with all the might of its structure now in order to finish off Putin in Ukraine.

— Do you see such readiness?

— I see not so much a willingness to do this as a gradual understanding that there will be no other option. That's what I see. This should be done not out of some kind of sympathy, but out of practical, rational considerations. Because this is the easiest and cheapest way to end this war quickly and with minimal losses.

Yuri Felshtinsky: Russia May Launch Nuclear Strikes Against Europe From Belarus

Follow Charter97.org social media accounts

Interview

Opinion