Kimvaldai rattling

In 1856, after the defeat of Russia in the Crimean War, the Foreign Minister Gorchakov sent a circular in French to the embassies in French, which contained a phrase that has become a textbook: “They say that Russia is angry. No, Russia is not angry.” (La Russia Boude, Dit-on. La Russian ne boude pass. La Russian Se Recueille).

In 1878, Russia signed a Berlin treatise, depriving it of almost all the acquisitions of the Russo-Turkish war in which it won, and the first world economic crisis was approaching Europe, which also affected Russia. Dostoevsky remembered the phrase of Gorchakov on this occasion, but repeated it with the holy fool:

Why do we (and especially in the present minute) contain there, in Europe, at least so many embassies with such an expensive splendor, with their subtle wit and dinners, with their magnificent, but unprofitable staff. And what are we there (and now) to some Gambett, to the pope and his further fate, even if his Bismarck oppressed? Isn’t it better, on the contrary, for a while, in the eyes of Europe, to get wooked, sit on the path, put a hat in front of you, collect pennies: they say, "la Russie again Se Recueille."

Like, it's time for us to do our own internal affairs, and there Europe will see:

Europe is cunning and smart, now guesses and, believe me, will begin to respect us immediately! Oh, of course, our independence, at first, is puzzled, but partly she will like it. If he sees that we entered into “gloomy savings” and decided to stretch our legs on clothes, see that we also became calculating and our ruble ourselves are the first to protect and appreciate it, and we don’t make it from a piece of paper, then they, too, will also begin to value our ruble in our markets. Why, they will see that we are not even afraid of deficits and bankruptcy, but we’ll break it directly to our point, we ourselves come to offer money ...

In January 2012, after the global financial crisis, preparing for an election for a third term, the chairman of the government, Vladimir Putin, entitled his programmatic article by Gorchakovsky aphorism, in which, you will laugh, there was almost no foreign policy, but there was a concern for the ruble, the welfare of citizens, complaints that citizens do not want to engage in public affairs, do not know how to get up over private interests, and A promise in every possible way to promote the development of civil society institutions.

Now Russia has already gathered with thoughts (because SE Recueille can be translated so). For the second year in a row, President Putin announces the world with a conditional Valdai Upland, as from an amvon, a good news: there is truth behind the earth, there is an intercessor of all offended by Western tolerasts and aggressors, from the east, and this star shifted in Russia!

Previously, there was progressive humanity, now conservative. It seems that Putin really believes in this nonsense. Yes, and how not to believe - the American says , no one pulls him by the tongue:

P. Lavell [as translated]: Mr. President, very glad to see you. You may be the most demonized politician in the world now. Now a lot of ignorance, the inability to speak, establish the necessary contacts are shown. On the other hand, if we look globally, you may be one of the most popular people in modern history. I would even continue that you look from the side, from the eurozone, from America, they look at you as a person-saving man, as a person who retains the situation. What do you think about this?

So he said in English - Savior, and even without any "person", these are the editors of the Kremlin site shamefully attributed. True, this Lavelle works in the Russia Today television company, financed by the Russian budget, Putin pays him for this shameless flattery with the money of taxpayers. But he is proud of his question, otherwise he would not set this new record of Lisobia to all possible networks.

In general, the world admires the bearded Cossacks and boreonos and dreams of starting the same orders.

The fact that Putin and his inner circle live in parallel reality has already been said a lot. Some commentators of his Valdai speech believe that it will "go down in history."

This gift of Valdai will not enter anywhere - precisely because it has nothing to do with reality and will not have any consequences. Valdai is far from Fulton. The paradox of the current historical moment lies in the fact that Obama is criticized by his own compatriots for inaction and lethargy in the international arena, and Putin - for the aggressiveness and breakdown of existing rules. In the United States and Europe, the words "New Cold War" are afraid of fire - and Putin exposes America in its untying.

The main instrument of starting, in Putin, is “color revolutions”, the theory of “controlled chaos”, which the extended political scientists borrowed from physics. It doesn’t work to control the chaos in America - and the chaos spreads along the planet. And Russia is a responsible player, it is for the balance of power and uniform rules of the game for all. But in the head of the responsible player is some kind of incomprehensible Meshin.

Let's say Russia is very fond of recalling the Kosovo precedent as an example of an unlawful solution to the issue. But in the Crimean case, she just refers to this precedent. Where is the logic? Or here's another expression from the Putin stream of consciousness: Ukraine is "a rather compound state education." He clearly loses his composure, describing the process of "composition":

Do you know what, after the Second World War, part of the territories was cut to Ukraine as the result of the Second World War? Part was cut off from Poland, from Hungary, in my opinion. What was the city, if not Polish? Do you know about it, or what? Why are you asking me such a question? For this, the territories were added, having expelled the Germans from a number of eastern regions. Ask, there are whole associations of the so -called expelled.

So he expected that Putin was about to call Ukraine an ugly brainchild of Yalta-Potsdam agreements-like Molotov, who called Poland the ugly brainchild of the Versailles Treaty. Poland and Hungary, as if Ukraine does not make any territorial claims, and what does Russia have to do with it? And why did the speaker in his speech constantly referred to these same Yalta-Potsdam agreements as a reliable international legal foundation of the post-war system? By the way, these agreements were not ratified by any parliaments - this is to the question that the Crimea was transferred to Ukraine by the decision of the Presidium of the Supreme Council, and not the council in full force. Does Putin with his pocket Federal Assembly doubt that the Supreme Council in 1954 would have stamped the decision of the highest political leadership?

This absurd logic can lead us far. At one time, having learned from Putin that Ukraine " did not quite legally leave the USSR, I suggested that Russia once did not quite legally come out of the Golden Horde. The commentator on Facebook deepened this thought:" Yes, it turned out badly. Now Russia will have to include Russia in the Crimean Khanate - the successor of the Golden Horde. "

But international politics is still not the show "Evening Urgant", where you can flatterly sharply about the sex of the sisters of Williams. In the world, they are somehow used to the fact that the head of state gives a report in his words. But when you are called the Savior, there is no need for this. “Try someone to refute the thesis that I had just been formulated by me,” says Putin and continues his Philippics. He now and then asks questions, seeking the answer, argues with an imaginary opponent. And there’s nothing to cover: “Why? When I ask my colleagues, why, there is no answer at all, no one answers anything, like that. Everyone shrugs: it happened.” Yes, we did not see that they spread their hands and remain silent. The event in Sochi was called a discussion, but there was no discussion. There was a monologue interrupted by respectful questions. No one objected. All agree.

In fact, there are objections - for each point. Here he is sternly asks: “Let me ask, where did the militants come from money, weapons, military specialists? Where does it come from? How did it happen that this ISIS is the so -called, notorious, has turned into a powerful, actually army group?” Of course: the Americans played into a controlled chaos. Meanwhile, the ISIS financing and supply system is the subject of a thorough investigation of the American press, analysts, intelligence, it can be read about it in American newspapers and on the sites of leading research centers. But the president does not believe in open sources, but to reconnaissance and counterintelligence reports - and they report to him what he wants to hear from them.

Or so he saddled his beloved skate - “undemocratic” American elections: “It turns out that the president is chosen by a smaller number of voters. Is this what democracy, or what? What is democracy? This is the power of the people. Where is the power of the people? Yes, there is no one power of the people. And you are trying to convince us that we do not have.” Yes, in the USA, each state elects the president separately. And the board of electors was invented so that the voices of the sparsely populated states are not lost in the common boiler, which have a mental quota relatively higher than that of the first in terms of population.

Or is it angrily outraged by the “power of monetary bags”: “One of the leaders, former leaders in Europe, said to me: what democracy in the USA - it is impossible to even think about participation in the elections without a billion or several billion! Well, what kind of democracy is this?” It is not the slightest labor to check this statement - not only the federal election commission, but also public organizations and the press are closely monitored by the expenses of candidates: in 2012, the expenses of presidential candidates amounted to two billion dollars. This money is not taken out of their own pocket, but collected, and the donor cannot introduce more than two thousand dollars to the candidate’s election box office.

Or here: “I will not call the country now, I talked with one of my former colleagues from Eastern Europe. He proudly says to me:“ Yesterday I appointed the chief of the General Staff. ”I was so surprised:“ Yes? What is this achievement? " -" Well, what about? We have not been appointed neither the Minister of Defense or the head of the General Staff without coordination with the US Ambassador for many years. ”

Again an anonymous "former colleague". Well, how to argue with this? And is it worth it? Putin most likely does not read the blocked "faces", and in the American press, they are already tired of adding a long Takochking table to every Putin's speech. You can’t drive him. He likes to think so. And sang a sang one.

Today he is still swarming, but even if his adventurism comes out sideways to him, he will not see. After all, Saddam claimed that he had won the war in the bay - and the subjects believed him.