Putin as Gorbachev

I decided to look at the news retrospectively and from the perspective of a fierce statesman (as the statesmen are now represented in the official Russian mainstream). I must say, the picture turned out to be depressing.

Let's go to the points. We have Mikhail Sergeyevich Gorbachev, officially scolded by the current statesmen for leaking the positions of the Soviet Union to the West, making the cursed capitalists concessions in the expectation that they will feel gratitude in response and will also do something useful for us later. As a result, the West received from the USSR everything that he wanted (the unification of Germany, the withdrawal of the Soviet troops from Eastern Europe, the collapse of the Soviet Union itself, then on the list) - and in return did not provide us with anything. And why pay, if they already drained everything for free? Universal values are good when they talk about them, especially if one -sided concessions are also made, but the tobacco is still apart.

So we were left without pants, without geopolitical positions - and without response concessions from the imperialists, because they were illiterate foreign policy. A familiar description of Gorbachev’s acts, comrades fierce statesmen?

Now let's look together at the fresh - and relatively fresh - news. Having got involved in the adventure on the "protection of the Russian -speaking population of the East of Ukraine", Russia has lost preferences in relations with the West - and in the order of compensation began to look for similar preferences in the East. Loans end in Western Europe? Take in Southeast Asia. But in order to persuade Chinese bankers to give us money, we must somehow position them to themselves-and as a result, the head of the Russian state personally intervenes in the process of negotiations on the price of gas for China and puts it "at the level below the level of" the profitability of the project. What do we get from China in gratitude? The message that there will be no loans for the construction of the Siberian force gas pipeline, build yourself. Little, therefore, appealed.

Previously, this was called "universal values", and now - "the search for geopolitical allies"

Then we put the Su-35 planes to China, which in Beijing for a long time we openly wanted to copy (otherwise why we asked them to sell only ten aircraft-not to fly on such quantities!), And we had not given it before copying; The nuclear submarine of the 885th project (that is, "ash"), whose technology is needed to build its own atomic underwater fleet-and now the S-400, four divisions. For a large amount of two billion dollars, just incredibly a lot for China! Almost all of the new military developments available today, which Chinese engineers wanted to look closer, feel and vomit them - we gave all this to China cheaply. Note, long before any reason, but even just promises of response concessions from the outside. Since we create a favorable background so that grateful Chinese later in response ... - Further look about Gorbachev. Previously, this (if in a lovely state) was called "universal values", and now-"the search for geopolitical allies."

However, in China, the light of the wedge, of course, did not agree, it is necessary to diversify foreign policy, so Russia decided to strengthen its positions in Iran. And then the embargo is removed to the supply of Tegran of the anti-aircraft missile systems-and the Minister of Defense of Iran announces that he will receive the S-300 (it is unclear, however, which is specific, but this is not so far) already in 2015. The announcement of the supply of “three hundred”, as you probably noticed, the comrades of fierce statesmen, are by no means accompanied by announcements of large oil and gas concessions for Russia on Iranian land, a new line of the nuclear power plant of Russian production in Iran or something else like that. That is, we essentially make generous investments in improving our chances of Tehran’s favorable attitude towards Russia in the future. That is, we look forward to gratitude. It is quite Gorbachevsky, judging by retrospectively from the perspective of a fierce statesman.

In the east, however, as I heard, the one who, without fierce trade, makes unilateral concessions, consider it weak, unworthy of respect - and worthy of further milking. But even without this, some suspicious suggest-if, from the position of a fierce statesman-parallels: then they drained their trump cards (which, otherwise, our expected partners would have to scratch the real, and not just expected concessions in the fierce bargaining), now we drain the cousins ... So the question arises: how is Putin in the eyes of the fierce statesmen different from Gorbachev? Only because it merges our positions not in the West, but in the East? And this is so importantly important, where to drain?

By the way, explaining in the Foreign Ministry’s statement to the West to supply the C-300 Iran with the fact that this is “the system is extremely defensive and does not threaten anyone,” Moscow involuntarily fell into another logical trap. How now to make statements for the West that it is impossible to build an American-NATO Pro in Europe, because it threatens us? No, it is "the system is exclusively defensive and does not threaten anyone, by virtue of it," they will quote us in NATO - and you will have to show Lavrov again the miracles of verbal flexibility. Well, yes, it doesn’t matter - if we retrospectively look at the drain of our positions and our propaganda arguments. Because the picture is already rather depressing, the forecast of further success looks faded if it is made from the Gorbachev retrospective. What will we do in such a situation? Again, together - to the previous rake? What will your fierce council be?

Igor Sutyan-London Military-Political Expert. Former employee of the Institute of the United States and Canada