ROUND TABLE OF THE NEWSPAPER “TOMORROW”
Sergei Glazyev, Mikhail Delyagin, Alexander Nagorny,Vladimir Ovchinsky, Shamil Sultanov
Alexander NAGORNY, Executive Secretary of the Izborsk club.
Dear colleagues, today we are gathered to consider and evaluate a “chain reaction” of change in the modern world, whether developed, whether manifested very unexpected withdrawal of Britain from the European Union. Review and assess — especially in terms of those new threats and opportunities that this “chain reaction” can represent for Russia in the short and medium term. We see — or rather feel — that the architectonics familiar to us economic, political, and ideological processes changed in some subtle but very fundamental way. We assume that these changes are associated primarily with the systemic crisis of the entire mode of production and consumption of our civilization, when a person loses the function of main source of added value which he carried out — in different forms — over many millennia, almost from the time of the “Neolithic revolution”. It seems that Marx predicted the collapse of private property and exploitation of man by man is not part of communism, and in the framework of ultra-liberalism, Maxim “Man is a wolf” is replaced not by the Maxim “Man is to man a friend, comrade and brother” and the Maxim “Man is nothing.” Not accidentally, the ideology of “recycling” the greater part of humanity becomes the leading ideology of the modern world. And “disposal” are not in concentration camps, famine, executions and gas furnace, a “humane disposal” through virtual reality games, the use in food of genetically modified organisms, the destruction of traditional social institutions and so on.
In these conditions Russia willingly or unwillingly took the place of the alternative leader of the modern world, with the actions which supporters of traditional societies pin their hopes for overcoming this ultraliberal “matrix”, out of it. As such, Russia is back again “line of attack”, again proclaimed “evil Empire”, again subject to attacks by the “collective West” headed by the United States. However, the crisis of this magnitude cannot be fully “exported” from the “first world”, “Golden billion” to the rest of humanity. We have seen attempts of this “export” boomerang back to state “the collective West” experiencing for revealing with the exception of Japan — “migration crisis” of terrorists, and — without exception — an unprecedented economic recession and a debt shock. Can we hope that the elite of the “collective West” — in any foreseeable future — will understand what they have done in a deadlock brought humanity and ourselves will shift from a policy of aggression and confrontation to a policy of cooperation in the face of global systemic crisis?
Vladimir OVCHINSKY, doctor of juridical Sciences.
I believe that it is not excluded. As one example, a recent publication of Jeffrey Sachs “Why it is still alive ISIS?”. The impression that it was written not even in the Kremlin, and then we have, in the Izborsk club. They contain direct accusations “of the Obama team, including Hillary Clinton — that they, together with the CIA and other U.S. intelligence agencies created ISIS, as they behave completely wrong, that Assad should not overthrow, and to strengthen, since in this case “the cure is worse than the disease”. And the conclusion is that you need to stop all the strife with Russia together with Putin in the fight against terrorism is not only Islamic, but only of international terrorism, to subdue the Ukrainian nationalists. When I read all this, just couldn’t believe it: maybe it’s some other Jeffrey Sachs, not the one we all know and remember? But no, the same.
Earlier in the same spirit, but not so hard and straight, made by George Soros, who acknowledged that Russia, despite all attempts to “isolate”, became a great power, and it cannot be ignored, since it is necessary to negotiate rather than to confront. The number of such publications and statements to the West are multiplying: it’s not some marginal views, and a well-defined political line, the proponents of which — such as Donald trump in the United States — are increasingly influential and are in the forefront of world politics. Yes, it’s not a rapprochement with Russia is likely to attempt to “suffocation in the arms” — about the same, which could be observed during the time of Gorbachev, when just a month the Soviet Union emerged in the West from the “evil Empire” and the object “star wars” in the country of perestroika and democratic reforms. Of course, trump is somewhat similar to Reagan, but Putin is not like Gorbachev. And the situation in Russia in 2016, in my opinion, radically different from the situation in the USSR thirty years ago.
Sergey GLAZYEV, academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
Jeffrey Sachs — renowned “anesthesiologist. When he first appeared in our country just before the collapse of the Soviet Union, its main function was to convince Yeltsin not to pay attention to Soviet economists, the Academy of Sciences, does not consider them people worthy of any attention by the new Russian government, because they allegedly do not understand the modern market economy, its laws and trends. So, inspired sax, they are useless and nothing but harm can not bring.
Arriving with the image of a great expert on the transition from Directive to market economy, had time to practice in Poland and other Eastern European countries, Jeffrey Sachs spent the afternoon Yeltsin, “explaining” to him the subject. Gaidar, Yeltsin imposed his as the leading world expert, and the two hours five or six urged “elected” to listen to you need only the “young reformers”-Gaidar, and all the rest — the last day and give futile advice. The main purpose of this treatment was to persuade Yeltsin to make a political decision about the start of the program of Shock therapy, the author of which was Saxon, despite strong criticism from the Russian scientists-economists of the Academy of Sciences. By that time it was known the disastrous consequences of this approach in Bolivia and other countries where practiced Sachs, projections were made and on the expected consequences of its implementation for our economy. But puppets of the West was not interested in development of the Russian economy, and in the speedy passage of the “tipping point” toward socialism, so they were told Yeltsin the need for radical reforms that were implemented in the notorious program “500 days”.
The same thing is happening now — the same “anesthesia”. The purpose of these publications, apparently, is the acting Russian President, for which they are written. They say, Vladimir Vladimirovich, you see, the healthy forces in the West are willing to meet us halfway, but you have to take the first step to start a dialogue. But we’ll need a second, third and so on. Most importantly, you need to wait, not to change anything in macroeconomic management, not to create internal mechanisms of economic growth. They say that Western policy will change soon, Russia will again have access to Western investment, Western technology, and there is nothing to worry — everything will be fine again. This is pure anesthesia before surgical operation in order to stop the President from taking steps to rescue the Russian socio-economic organism. A year later, before the presidential election, when as a result of ongoing macroeconomic policy the standard of living of the population will fall by another third, unemployed office workers, and bankrupt small businesses will be displayed on the streets of the capital for other Western agents-experts in color revolutions.
Plus the Chinese situation. After a series of meetings with XI Jinping, the convergence goes in all directions. The heads of Russia and China announced a pair of initiatives of the silk road and the Eurasian economic Union, which is terribly annoying Washington. Scares them stated at the St. Petersburg economic forum, Vladimir Putin’s idea of Eurasian integration. So aktiviziruyutsya anti-Chinese propaganda, the Russian leadership inspired the idea that the West’s relations are normalized soon and try not to rush too much in the arms of the Chinese…
How do you view the situation as a whole?
First, let’s start with defining what the European Union. In my understanding, the EU is a bureaucratic Empire seeking expansion through us. Empire, which is so aggressive because there is no political independence — bring it against us Americans. Therefore, the anti-Russian vector of the policy of the Brussels — consistent, incremental goals and system. It resulted in the famous campaign of “Eastern partnership”. No one even did not hide that the main objective of the EU — Russia to tear off all those possible.
In the current environment, NATO—EU—USA is a monster, which is absolutely impossible to agree about anything. All attempts of our President to reach out to the “Western partners” had no success. The attempts to explain their interests. Now Breksa, in my opinion, has a chance to seize the initiative. The EU has close to us countries that nothing good can be expected — they’ve got no prospects. This is Greece, Cyprus and Bulgaria. Bulgaria, for example, if nothing changes, will lose national identity in about 20-25 years. These are the countries that the EU is just doomed. And, another important point is Orthodox country.
At one time we had a chance to escape from the clutches of the Pro-American European bureaucracy Cyprus, we missed the chance with Greece, we miss the chance with Bulgaria, but Breaksit us all these chances on returns. These three States in the European Union is threatened with destruction: ethnic, ideological, and structural. At the same time, in the Eurasian Union, in Alliance with Russia for them are just huge opportunities. They wonderfully complement us both economically and climatically, geographically, and many other parameters. We benefit from an Alliance with them, they benefit from the Alliance with us.
And, more importantly, Brickset gives you the chance to start working on release from the us-Nazi occupation of Ukraine, on restoration of its independence from European bureaucracy. We see how the European Union is in chaos, as there begins the rise of separatist movements, many are already talking about the collapse of the UK itself. It is not up to external aggression, the growing influence of the healthy forces interested in restoration of normal cooperation with Russia and termination of the growing Ukrainian Nazis.
And the last thing I wanted to say: because we have, through the fault of Brussels and Washington arose a fierce conflict between European integration and Eurasian integration and all the offers of our President on forming the common economic space “from Lisbon to Vladivostok” are rejected — that the weakening of European bureaucracy opens the way independent of the United States to the European politicians.
In the global economic and financial situation, I think, Brickset little, in fact, change. The crisis center is still in London, but in Washington, and U.S. plans to establish a Transatlantic partnerships have been linked with an attempt to expand their competitive advantages on the European market. Withdrawal from the EU’s main partner, I think, inflicts on them a significant blow, reduces the possibility of the Americans to maneuver in the European direction. The fact that Britain itself has long been a de facto part of the Transatlantic partnership by signing a free trade agreement with Canada, part of NAFTA, and therefore works according to the rules identical to the rules of the Transatlantic partnership, the situation does not change. Yes, they have created what I would like to throw the whole of Europe. In this sense, Brickset means for Americans, the narrowing of opportunities for the involvement of Europe in the Transatlantic partnership with the UK. This reduces the possibility of Americans in the Old world and the throwing of the crisis on other…
Mikhail DELYAGIN, Director of the Institute of globalization problems.
I see, as usual, two main threats to Russia, which remain unchanged for many years. This is, firstly, our socio-economic crisis, and, secondly, it is a global systemic crisis. The point of their superposition is constantly shifting, but not disappearing. Our situation is extremely simple: the economy is destroyed artificially created shortage of money, and according to some indirect data we can assume that a certain part of the power of the liberal clan exacerbates the situation consciously, having in mind the collapse of Russia in turmoil (roughly — after the presidential election in 2018) and catch the goldfish for himself in the resulting muddy water. Too much there is a “stuffing” with unpopular decisions, and it is for any bureaucracy is something deeply unnatural — any bureaucrat against his bound figure something unpopular, so while possible, it is not unpopular decisions articulates and discusses, particularly in advance. And when that rule starts to massively violated, then it is a buildup of public opinion. Not because someone is someone’s “agent of influence”, although this cannot be ruled out, but because their interests lie in the field of “energy collapse”. Other “food chains” they simply do not accept. As it happens, you can watch on the situation around the Federal budget. Budget reserves are used as the basis for “drank and rollback”, they flatly refuse to let the deficit between ongoing revenues and expenditures, so at the end of the year, after prudently postponed from December to September parliamentary elections, they, I believe, will organize another devaluation of the national currency. That is, again, put everything on the shoulders of the population, while maintaining their usual lifestyle. If this continues, the centennial of the revolution of 1917, our country will again meet in an objectively pre-revolutionary situation when tops cannot, bottoms do not want”.
On the other hand, in this state of half-life, we are in a global systemic crisis, where the world will be re-divided into “zones of influence” in the regions, which will be in a state of “war of all against all”. It is a kind of analogue of “magwenya” 20-ies—30-ies of XX century, when it was possible any Alliance, no matter how situational, fragile and unnatural, and the outcome of the case a new world war with hundreds millions casualties. Now the account can go already in the billions. Nothing new under the sun and nothing under it is not repeated. But when you need every day to start life anew, reacting to the continuously changing situation, the current system of management of the Russian state is a death sentence and a path to the grave at the same time.
The problem is in the fact that the formation of the economic macro-regions means a reduction in their domestic markets compared to the global market, which means that many technologies that today are economically justified, will simply cease to pay off. And need or a new, more efficient technologies, or technological regression. For clarity: the big fields need the processors and on six acres is only effective in manual labor, in the best case — with cultivator. That is ahead of us — the prospect of a resonance superposition of two crises, external and internal, that can happen suddenly and unexpectedly. Since the external crisis we can affect in a very small degree, it is necessary to focus on overcoming the crisis, but this is just not happening.
With regard to articles Sachs and Soros, if it was written by the people who rely on the formation of economic regions, their words could be mistaken for sincere. But since it is written by people who rely on the creation of a global government, a single world currency and so forth, their words cannot be trusted.
Sergei GLAZYEV.
I would have added analysis Michael G. indications of some differentiation of interests of major players. The thesis about the reduction of inflation to 4%, and they now report on the progress in this direction, contrary to the thesis that they will bring down the exchange rate. However, there is an influential group of senior players that can play against their formal leaders. They manage the Moscow exchange, they forced the Central Bank to leave the market, leaving the ruble in “free floating”, and therefore have the ability to manipulate the exchange rate, and use this opportunity. Thus they perfectly feel, generating a giant profit literally out of thin air. I think their strategy is to safely wait until after the election because during the election campaign can be hard to obtain at the hands of economic sabotage, and then at the end of the year to arrange the collapse of the ruble, to bring all offshore and there own time to hide. To bankrupt their structures, to nullify their presence here, and with a huge profit, about $ 70 billion, to draw a line in its relations with Russia, adding to the ranks of exile in London. And then — the grass does not grow.
To agree “on good terms” with them will fail because they are afraid of a new presidential election in 2018, they have the feeling that after the elections will change politics, and their activities will be recognized as a criminal, which she, in fact, is.
Therefore the biggest threat, regardless of what will make the government and the Central Bank, is that manipulation of the national currency will continue to be in the commercial interests of this group of people that really control this segment of the Russian economy.
Vladimir OVCHINSKY.
In my opinion, Brickset — a conspiracy of elites under the guise of “people’s democratic choice”, as was Hitler’s rise to power in Germany in 1933. Why did this happen? Because the “second wave” of global crisis is rising, it threatens to cover a first of all Europe, so the UK and jumped from the Titanic of the European Union. And the “old Europe”, Germany, France, the Netherlands, Denmark, Belgium and Luxembourg, as we saw, is not eager to pay other people’s debts: not only Greece, Bulgaria, Cyprus, but even Italy and Spain… And in this situation is not accidental is already voiced the idea that in the short term, management centre Europe will become EU and NATO. Although within NATO, as demonstrated by the Warsaw summit and subsequent events in France and Turkey, too, not everything went smoothly. Besides withdrawal from the EU is a much more complicated procedure than to withdraw from NATO.
Mikhail DELYAGIN.
I must say that the European Union was created and has always been a zone of guaranteed profit for the corporations of “old Europe”. And Breaksit was largely due to the fact that the UK ditched its real sector, becoming the only “financial boutique”, so she to the EU ceased to be interesting. A “financial boutique” systems are better to be outside than inside: all of them built on this, Switzerland is the first historical example. And the second: Greece, Bulgaria, and other financial and economic bodies of eurocantera refuse only when the amount of taxes that they pay for their conservation, will exceed the amount of profit derived from their utilization.
Sergei GLAZYEV.
Generally speaking, the Greek crisis German bankers have learned a lot of dividends that the Greek crisis was a very profitable operation. And motives in Germany or the EU to get rid of the trio and I can’t see. The European bureaucracy — it is generally no one never intends to get rid of, because every new territory for her expanding the living space, and it keeps all of their stranglehold. And what would members nor sat in the same EP, they understand very well that without a “United Europe” they will lose their influence. In all conflicts between the European bureaucracy and the national governments of European States, European bureaucracy always comes out the winner. And care in the UK further strengthens the position of the European bureaucracy, as it becomes more homogeneous, more dependent on Germany, which has now become almost half of Europe. Therefore, special cost to EuroGrand no. At the Astana economic forum were made by the expert from Germany, who said that the migration crisis, in General, has basically the PR of a political nature, because German corporations are happy with the mass influx of a new workforce: healthy, cheap and more or less skilled. In this sense, for the European business, from his point of view, there are no threats.
Now for the money. Number world money, if you take the dollar, the Euro and the yen, grew in less than eight years, starting in August 2008, almost three times. So the money, in fact, very much, and their excessive amount in relation to the real sector. However, the money 80% crash in the financial “bubbles”, generated by the avalanche growth of unsecured debt. The only problem is, how many more of these “bubbles” will grow, and at what stage they will start to “shrink”. And it largely depends on the situation in the US, where the large inflated “bubbles”.
Here, from my point of view, there are two basic scenarios that are associated with the main applicants for a post of the 45th President of the United States. If trump seems to be leaning towards the minimization of losses from the collapse of bubbles by a sharp reduction in spending on foreign policy of endless aggression and try to concentrate on the internal problems of the United States, Hillary Clinton is clearly the continuation of a hybrid war of America against the rest of the world, one of whose goals — reset of US debt before other participants of the global process. That is why now the Chinese are preparing for such a scenario, began a massive dumping of us debt receipts. Just a few months, the share of treasuries in the Chinese reserves have decreased by almost a third. And the reason is political uncertainty in the United States. That is, the global financial “bubble” burst, in this no doubt. But the main negative consequences of this global cataclysm will either be focused within the United States, or will lead to chaos all over the world. And a very important milestone — the end of the year. Because this financial “bubble” — he had his own internal rhythm is compressed every seven years. Local financial collapse in America happened in 2001 and in 2008-2009, now nearing the time for another collapse, which could be the detonator of a much larger explosion…
Shamil SULTANOV, head of the research center “East—West”.
I think Putin has no illusions about what the “collective West,” he sentenced, and none of the Kudrin—Medvedev—Chubais will not save him. I think he’s preparing for a fight, which would begin around 2020-2025 years, but it needs time to re-equip all the security agencies, including those operating in the main media. Money is not regret, but on the matter, as a result of corruption, there is less. Even in the army now, despite all the visible progress, the situation is more complicated than it was when Serdyukov. And off almost daily the entire GLONASS satellite system is generally as the emergence of commando Otto Skorzeny in the Kremlin during the great Patriotic war. They are here to kill anyone, blow up anything: just a thought — and all…
Take the same situation with Erdogan. In February, we were on the brink of direct war with Turkey. And this war, which could quickly become nuclear. Turkey has nuclear weapons, which granted to the United States within NATO. At Incirlik is based a squadron of the Turkish air force capable of carrying nuclear warheads, there’s 40, I think. The situation was so acute that Putin rushed Kissinger, then it was Lavrov’s statement and began the contacts between Moscow and Ankara, who in April moved into a full-fledged negotiation process, while not yet official. The problem here is that neither Russia nor Turkey in these contacts are not completely independent, that they “lead” the various segments of the global financial-information community, a factor difficult to account. But, in any case, both Russia and Turkey realize that they almost got involved in a war that can not win any of the parties, moreover, from which it is impossible adequately to leave.
Therefore, in parallel in Algeria, which acted as the intermediary, in April, negotiations began between Turkey and Syria, I mean the Assad government. Here, Turkey has realized that, chasing Damascus, she will lose her Kurdish areas because the Kurds today help Russia, and the United States, Europe and Israel — an incredible change…
But I believe that Putin was, is and will be the main factor uniting the American and broader Western elite. Whoever becomes the 45th US President Hillary Clinton or Donald trump, they will wage a tough anti-Putin and anti-Russian policy, whatever was written today Sachs, Soros and other “financial guru”.
For consolidation of the country Putin has only one way: the politics of restoring social justice, and the first step in this direction — the fight against corruption is the “top”.
Alexander NAGORNY.
Dear colleagues, I sincerely thank you for participating in our round table. Hope that made your assessment will serve as the Foundation for understanding the new historical period, which includes both our country and the world.
The cornerstone of this Foundation is the thesis about the crisis nature of the whole of modern human civilization, which will go through a very long, narrow and not straight, and with numerous twists and turns of the “bottleneck” of energy, environmental, technological, military, political and, most importantly, ideological, behavioral constraints and transformations. By analogy with the “Neolithic revolution” five thousand years ago, this “bottleneck” is called “neolitichesky revolution”, the transition from the “age of stone” to the “age of reason”, to a global noosphere, predicted by our great compatriot Vladimir Vernadsky. That is the purpose, in my opinion, we should never lose sight of. Otherwise we run the risk of “getting stuck”, not to get out of another crisis situation that we deem already completely hopeless and disastrous.
Russia in General, the extremum, the country is not “the Golden mean”, and UPS and downs. We proceed from the fact that the next period of Russian falling over and in all directions to prepare for takeoff.
