Postrosia: towards a discussion about the future of the territories to the east of Ukraine after our victory

17:32 12 September Kyiv, Ukraine

Over the past couple of months, a number of large-scale discussions about the potential future of Russia have taken place in the information space. All these discussions are united by a single vision of where this future will begin. Almost all those participating in the discussion recognize the military victory of the Ukrainian army over the Russian invasion as such the beginning of the future.. Thus, various political currents in the countries of the West, including Russian political emigrants who oppose the Kremlin, have come to a consensus that the only format for a future that suits everyone is our victory. However, there is still no agreement on what this victory will look like and what will happen after it. Therefore, I decided to collect in this publication the options voiced by different communities and explain what advantages and disadvantages they have for Ukraine.

Why don't our little witches perish like dew in the sun?

For the first time I came across this opinion in the work of the Ukrainian writer Gustav Vodichka "The Motherland of Dreaming Angels". Vodichka wrote that Ukrainians are a nation that practices Zen on the largest scale of all the European peoples we know.

The phrase "our enemies will perish like dew in the sun" means that they will perish of their own accord, without difficulty on our part. And when this happens, we will “reign, brethren, on our side.” Again, this will happen without our efforts sometime in the future, not right now.

This principle is clearly and consistently seen in social network fights and battles.. Very often, in the comments under my posts about Russia, the Commonwealth writes: Why do we need this information? Let them breathe there!...”.

Again - “let them exhale” by themselves without our intervention. This opinion is popular in the Ukrainian information space. So, for example, in the book of the Ukrainian writer Valery Primost Jopa mira it is said that Russia is no more, because it simply disappeared and now the sea is splashing in its place, from Ukraine and Belarus to China itself.. Foreign Minister Dmitry Kuleba began his individual speeches with "Imagine there's no Russia," and sanctions ambassador Alexei Makeev even tweeted the lyrics to John Lennon's updated song.

Despite this context, which is certainly important for Ukrainian folklore, the 140 million inhabitants of Russia, that is, the territories to the east of Ukraine, will remain where they are now. Therefore, we need to figure out how to make sure that they can no longer threaten us.

Part of this discourse, the fallacy of which I am trying to explain to you, is the position “yes, let them build a democracy that is safe for us there, and we will help with advice and moral support.” A number of respected European thinkers and experts have the same position.. For example, Roland Freudenstein, deputy director of the Martens Centre, which exists with the support of the European People's Party, in the course of a recent discussion of the report "EU Relations with a Future Democratic Russia: A Strategy" published by the Wilfried Martens Center for European Studies, said: "Beyond any future, Russia will determined by the Russians themselves.

I strongly disagree with this position. First , in order to determine the future, the subject of determining this future is extremely necessary. A person or group of people who express the desire and vision of the future, the state in which these people want to be after a certain time, and the means to achieve the goal.

There are no such people now either in Russia or abroad.. The Russian society is held by force in the past by the criminal terrorist regime of a group of former KGB officers who also have no other future than a prolonged past. That is, an attempt to recreate the Soviet Union within the space that they can reach with their resources. It is noteworthy that the Russian propagandist Margarita Simonyan, in one of her last broadcasts on television, emphasized that "the best picture of the future for Russians is the general picture of the past."

There is also no vision of the future among Russian politicians, who have diametrically opposed positions, criticizing Putin for aggression against Ukraine. The limiting horizon of future events discussed by the Russian opposition in exile is the loss of power by Vladimir Putin. What happens next, they can not say ...

Secondly , even if some conditional subject appeared on the territory of Russia or outside it, who would say “I know where the Russian Federation should be led, and what it should become ...”, this also does not suit me. Because I believe that after all that has happened, what Russia will look like must be agreed with the Ukrainians. If the Ukrainians do not participate in this process, then even after replacing Putin and his gang with other people (for example, Alexei Navalny and thunderstorms, or Mikhail Khodorkovsky and his fans), these people will face the harsh realities of Russian resentment.
 
This means that there are no guarantees that in 10-20 years a Russian attack on Ukraine or any other state, including an attack with the help of nuclear weapons, will not be repeated. Only in this case, our children will be protected from this aggression, and not you and me. I do not like it.

Therefore, Ukrainians cannot let events in the northern and eastern territories take their course. Ukrainians should at least control the transformations taking place there. And most of all - to form these transformations themselves.
 
What are the advantages and disadvantages for Ukraine of the options for the future of Russia offered by different communities.
 
Practical decolonization of Russia

On July 22–24, 2022, the second Forum of the Free Peoples of Russia was held in Prague, the participants of which discussed how to carry out real work to decolonize the remnants of the empire and how to update the active actions of the Russian opposition. The Forum adopted the "Declaration on the decolonization of Russia". It begins by saying that the process of complete and general decolonization of Russia should be based on international law, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the right of nations to self-determination, enshrined in the UN Charter.

Further, the Declaration states that Russia today is a terrorist state headed by war criminals. Accordingly, today Russia is on the verge of chaos and civil war.

The forum in Prague was attended by many Ukrainian experts, who then explained in detail its advantages and disadvantages in the Ukrainian media, in particular, political scientist Yevhen Magda.

At the forum in Prague, an interesting map of Postrosia was presented, which consists of individual subjects. Drawing maps of future territories is an extremely thankless task, since none of the future formations will be satisfied with the drawn boundaries.. At the same time, the issue of decolonization in general and the decolonization of Russia in particular is popular and important for the entire world community.

First , because the fight against the enslavement of peoples remains in the mainstream of the Western liberal-democratic agenda. This segment includes, on the one hand, the events in the United States on the rights of blacks, and the policy of Emmanuel Macron regarding the former French colony of Rwanda, on the other hand, the issue of strengthening the presence of the Wagner group in Mali and the Central African Republic, and many more parts of the modern agenda. based on the concept of freedom and free choice of man.

Secondly , because the unnatural oppression of ethnic and national identities in the Russian Federation leads to the fact that incredible war crimes against humanity become possible. The Ukrainian diplomat Roman Bessmertny, who survived the Russian occupation, spoke best of all about this. According to him, the national identity of the peoples inhabiting Russia is obviously artificially suppressed. For example, Dagestanis and Chechens are called Chocks, Dags, Czechs, etc.. Therefore, people who call themselves “Russians” or “Russians” are people who do not understand their borders and borders, because their self-identification was taken away from them. If you can no longer be a Buryat or a Tuvan because the Kremlin took that right away from you, it means that you can no longer control your borders. If you were ordered to be Russian instead of a Buryat, then you can also be ordered to kill and rape other people ... And you will obey. Therefore, the removal of self-identification from the peoples inhabiting Russia makes them "hand-made Frankensteins" who will simply follow orders.
 
Thus, the decolonization of Russia carries several positive contexts at the same time, which Western experts are already massively writing and talking about.. The decolonization of Russia is the transformation of the modern Russian Federation into a certain community of state entities in the form of a confederal entity, or into a community of independent state entities.. In essence, the same as the transformation of the USSR into the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS).

The downside of this scenario is that such a configuration would essentially require a new "Helsinki Final Act" and a reconvening of the United Nations, which risks destabilizing Central Asia and the North Caucasus.

In addition, the United States, Great Britain and Western Europe will be mostly against such a scenario, since it does not provide for control over Russia's nuclear arsenal, and also does not guarantee that this will not lead to the strengthening of China or the annexation of Russia's Far Eastern territories to it.

In other words, the decolonization of Russia cannot be considered in isolation from nuclear disarmament and systemic financial and organizational support for the territories formed after the collapse of the empire.. And this, in turn, calls into question the possibility of paying indemnities by Russia in favor of Ukraine. After all, we expect the Kremlin to pay for everything it has destroyed in Ukraine. However, if the Kremlin no longer exists, then the conditional Sakha (Yakutia) or Ingria (centered in St. Petersburg) may say that it is not responsible for the criminal actions of the rabid dead dwarf.

Thus, the issues of indemnities and succession should also be considered in the context of the decolonization of Russia.. The same applies to the supply of energy carriers and other minerals from the once Russian territories to Ukraine and the countries of the European Union.

On the other hand, with the complete disintegration of the Russian Federation into separate confederate or independent entities, the constant existential threat of attack from Russia disappears for Ukraine, Finland and the Baltic countries.. Russia itself is shrinking to the territories of real residence of ethnic Russians. If the Buryats, Tuvans, Mordvinians, Ichkerians, Karelians and other peoples have their own "farms", then they will no longer need to think about how to make Russia a "great state" by destroying someone else ... In my opinion, this achievement could to be a worthy reward for the exhausting work of our generation, in order to leave to posterity a world battered by our absurdity, but safe, due to the cultivation of the values of life and freedom of each person.
 
Great opposition impetus…

From August 31 to September 2, 2022, the Free Russia Congress was held in Vilnius (Lithuania). This is also the second event of its kind - the first one took place in Vilnius in May of the same year. Then an initiative was presented, which the media called "the passport of a good Russian." Garry Kasparov, Evgeny Chichvarkin and Dmitry Gudkov proposed creating a procedure that would allow, with certain manipulations and declarative statements, to withdraw the finances and condition of individual Russians from the sanctions of Western states, to achieve the unblocking of bank accounts and permission to travel around the world.

In fact, the epitaph in honor of these initiatives was written by Russian journalist Ilya Azar in his detailed report on the pages of the Russian Novaya Gazeta. Ukrainian experts who spoke with representatives of the Register Russian Opposition confirm the general impression formed by Ilya Azar's report.

First of all, it is striking that one of the key motivations of these people is personal comfort, and not changes within Russia. The efforts directed by Kasparov, Chichvarkin and Gudkov to unblock Russian bank accounts abroad and create legal grounds for Western governments to remove restrictions from individual Russian citizens in exchange for declaring an anti-Putin position by them are undoubtedly important. The more people on the planet declare that they are against Putin, the less support he will have. However, we are well aware that support for Putin does not depend on declarations, but on who manages Russian television broadcasting, which explains to the people of Russia that war is good, slavery is freedom, and state television channels provide all the necessary information for life and to read. - which is not needed on the Internet.

Thus, the actions of the Russian opposition in exile, aimed at arranging the life of Russian citizens in Western countries and organizing the departure of even more Russian citizens from Russia, in no way bring the end of aggression against Ukraine closer.

Unfortunately, registered Russian oppositionists do not offer any other tools to influence the situation.. In the same “reportage” by Ilya Azar, to the question of a municipal deputy from St. Petersburg, “what should those who remain in Russia do?” Chichvarkin replied "pack up and run."

Moreover, the oppositionists have created a narrative that those who remain in Russia in one way or another contribute to the Putin regime and support it with their mere presence.
 
But even such rhetoric is not the biggest problem of watching Ukrainians.. The fact is that the official Russian opposition considers the victory of Ukraine in the war with Russia the biggest horizon of the future. The most radical is Garry Kasparov, who wants to see the Ukrainian flag over Sevastopol, although he is not yet ready to take responsibility for military actions, as Ilya Ponomarev did in the case of the death of Alexander Dugin's daughter. By the way, it was precisely because of this position of Ilya Ponomarev that Kasparov and his comrades were forced to refuse to accept this Russian politician in their environment.. However, what form the Ukrainian victory over the Kremlin can take and what happens next, the registered oppositionists do not say.

Nor do they know that after the Ukrainian victory. They only believe that they will gain power in Russia when they wallow in no man's land under the tracks of Ukrainian tanks. At the same time, they refuse to discuss what will happen the moment they try to pick it up.. This may indicate either that they do not know this, or that they already have certain agreements with various parts of the Russian elites who have lost hope in Putin.

One way or another, both options do not suit the Ukrainians, who are interested in guarantees that Russian resentment from defeat will not lead to a new war in 10-20 years.

Opposition Russian politician Vladimir Milov, who was recently invited to join a discussion on the future relations of the European Union with Russia, publicly rejects any hypotheses regarding the disintegration of the Russian Federation, since, in his opinion, separatist sentiments in Russian regions are so marginal and immature that they have a statistical error. .

At the same time, Milov rejects the idea of uniting the Russian opposition abroad to create a unified strategy.. Because, according to him, if such a path is chosen, the discussion within the Russian opposition environment will stall on the question “who is in charge?”.

Those Russian oppositionists who from time to time appear in the information environment support Ukraine's victory over Russia, but not the idea of Russia's collapse. In addition, they do not have a program of specific actions necessary to transfer power from the Putin gang to another entity.. Unfortunately, such a hypothetical entity does not exist and it is not even planned to be created.

Meanwhile, in the event of the destruction of the Putin regime, lustration procedures will be needed, through which tens of thousands of people will go through, one way or another connected with the support of the Putin regime. It is not clear who will do this lustration and under what program. And this means that if the same people with the same ideology remain in power, even the removal of Putin, his trial and execution cannot guarantee that Russia will not attack us again in ten or twenty years.. And this brings us back to the questions already raised above.
 
In the dry...

The victory of Ukraine over the Russian army is the only possible picture of the desired future for political elites. Not everyone, for various reasons, voices this. One of these reasons is a deep fear of uncertainty, the generator of which will be the Ukrainian victory.. It was this fear that prompted Republican George W. Bush to deliver a speech in the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine on August 1, 1991, which later became known as the Chicken Kiev speech. Bush invited Ukrainians to build democracy while remaining an integral part of the Soviet Union, three weeks before the fate of Ukrainian independence was sealed forever.

It is this fear of uncertainty that formulates the questions “what will happen to the nuclear arsenal?”, “what will happen to Central Asia and the North Caucasus? Who will control and stop them in case of anything?”, “And what will happen to the millions of Russian refugees who will leave for Ukraine and the EU, in case of unrest in Russia?”.

This fear of uncertainty must be overcome. However, experience shows that “registered Russian oppositionists” in no way help in this process.. The disintegration of the Russian Federation into confederate or independent territories in a package with nuclear disarmament and demilitarization of territories (as they did with Ukraine in 1994) can become a clear and transparent scenario for the future that will come after the Ukrainian victory.

This is exactly what Valery Pekar and Mikhail Vinnitsky write about in their new article The deconstruction of Russia and reconstruction of post-Russia space: risky but inevitable scenario on the New Eastern Europe website.

However, in order to create this scenario and convince the planet of its likelihood, Ukrainians need to do hard homework. We need to take responsibility for the fact that we will determine what and how will happen on the sixth part of the earth's surface in the next 200-300 years. This is a great responsibility and a difficult task for a people who do not get out of the traumatic experience in the last few centuries.. But it looks like we have no other choice.