The Russian Heartland

These are excerpts from the article, which can be read in full at Gefira Financial Bulletin #68.

Nowadays, the situation is different: In the Euro-Asian heartland, China is making progress as a rising world power (the New Silk Road), and the world islands continue to be controlled by the former maritime powers (France controls most of the countries in West Africa and Sub-Sahara politically, economically, and through a strong military presence), half of the inhabitants of the remotest countries and islands kneel before the late Queen (no one in Central Asia, mind you), and Germany was flattened into a buffer state by the U.S., England and France after the war (especially when it comes to national identity and strength) and disempowered (their “decision makers” cannot decide whether they want to continue to act as a buffer state, a major Western country, or Russia’s stooge). Despite the new circumstances, Mackinder’s thesis remains relevant and the new/old world powers are striving for the heartland.
The “colonies” of the tsars were given the status of autonomous republics in the USSR by the Bolsheviks, which Putin always considered a mistake and questioned their autonomy. One could risk the statement that the Bolsheviks to some extent used soft power towards the autonomous republics, while Putin’s policy is always aimed at collision course towards the 21 autonomous republics: Chechnya, Ossetia, Abkhazia, Moldova are the examples. Putin wanted and wants to fix the mistake of the Bolsheviks, which after the end of the Soviet Union led to the independence of many resource-rich autonomous republics such as Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, and to the fact that Russia can no longer be supplied with fresh blood (raw materials) from its former colonial veins. The West has failed to understand that by trying to lure Ukraine into its Anglo-Saxon, German, Polish zone of influence, it is threatening the domination of the Heartland. Hence the whole war. If Russians tried to install in Canada an autonomous, Russian republic with traditional, conservative values, a republic, let’s say, of Indians so closely related to Siberian peoples, and supplied them with tons of weapons as First Nations, what would be left of Canadian cities? Are we crazy? No! The enemy, the friends, the target can be chosen at will in today’s times. It may be paradoxical, unrealistic and unfounded, but that’s the way wars are. Once they appear, they are full of idealistic contradictions and their consequences are worse than anyone could have expected. And everyone always wonders: why such a thing in the XXI century? Well, because the human mind and geopolitical points of view do not develop as fast as, say, the electronics and entertainment industries.
Speaking of the “absurd” idea of Canada being occupied by Russians: Yakutia, an autonomous republic in the Soviet Union and the Russian Federation, may become the next target of the West. In an area the size of India, there lives on average one person per square kilometer. Actually, they all live in Yakutsk or in small towns, otherwise there are only deserted, frost-soaked, but resource-rich large areas. “One tells that when God created the earth, he sent an angel over Siberia with a sack full of riches. When this flew over Yakutia, his fingers became stiff with cold, and he dropped everything. All the riches, , silver and platinum fell to the earth. However, out of anger at his loss, he punished this region with eternal winter”. 1

Yakutia (number 14 on the map) – the largest of the 22 autonomous republics within the Russian Federation.

Amazing how history repeats itself

These are excerpts from the article, which can be read in full at Gefira Financial Bulletin #68.

Historical precedent
Germany, 1918. The war has been going on for several years, a devastating war. The Germans occupy a sizable portion of French territory and also all of Belgium, not to mention the vast territories that German soldiers have managed to snatch from Russia. But the war is destroying all sides, and since there is no end in sight, the Germans decided to make concessions and, at least in the West, bring the hostilities to an end. The Entente promised to sit down at the negotiation table. An armistice was concluded. The famous armistice. The armistice or truce is not a surrender, right? A truce is a ceasefire, a truce is the creation of conditions for peaceful talks, a truce is a way to make peace. Aha, said the Western countries. Germany asked for a truce, that is, Germany does not have the strength to continue to fight, that is, we are the victors, that is, we should behave like victors, and treat the Germans as defeated! And to think of it: the Entente states thought so in a situation where a large part of France and all of Belgium were in the hands of… the German army!


The defeated and humiliated enemy morphed into an avenger. Amid the fierce battles that took place between the Communists, Social Democrats and National Socialists for the seizure of power in Germany, the last of the mentioned ultimately emerged victorious and implemented a program to rebuild the country, its economy, armed forces and international standing. It didn’t take long for the National Socialists to make Germany into a powerhouse, which began to dictate political solutions to the former victors. Finally, as is well known, there broke out a war, a world war. And yet, it might not have happened that way, and after all, neither the National Socialists nor the Communists had to have come to power. If Germany had not been psychologically humiliated, if hard peace terms had not been imposed on it, if it had not been debased, the political forces that demanded a rematch would not have come to power. They would not have gained so much support: consequently, the Second World War would not have erupted.

History likes to repeat itself


Didn’t the West act in the case of the Soviet Union of the late 1980s and in the case of Russia since the 1990s almost exactly the same way it once did with Germany? Let’s remind ourselves. Lo and behold, the Cold War has been going on for decades and the Soviet Union decides to end it, reaches out to the West and – wonder of wonders! – liquidates itself! Would such a course of events have dawned on anyone before 1991? Without a single gunshot, what was commonly referred to in the West as the SOVIET EMPIRE, crumbled, the states that emerged from its ruins rejected communist ideology and adopted capitalism as an economic system, the states – former satellites of Moscow – came out from under its influence and joined the Western camp. Russia and other post-Soviet republics looked up to the United States as if it were a deity, the disarmament and withdrawal of Soviet then Russian troops from bases outside Russia was taking place. It seemed that a miracle had occurred, that the world had entered an era of peace, international friendship and international cooperation, the “end of history” was even trumpeted. And what?


Not only did the West expand NATO to include more countries: it established missile launchers in Poland and Romania, and brazenly claimed in the process that they were not directed against Russia but against terrorists from…. Iran!, or that the missiles are purely defensive missiles. Arguably, the Russians should have taken this on faith. President Putin explained to Western journalists, among others, that a missile silo is a missile silo and can hold a defensive and an offensive missile. A child understands this, but not Western politicians.

Russia – like Weimar Germany – was subjected to constant pressure, humiliation, constant swipes, taunts and accusations.

① Khodorkovsky was imprisoned – this was not because he broke the law, but because dictator Putin abhors independent business entities;
② the so-called dissident Nemtsov was killed near the Kremlin – aha! Putin shot him with a rifle aiming from a Kremlin window;
③ Navalny lost consciousness – it’s obvious: Putin, a former KGB officer (we all know what atrocities KGB officers are capable of, don’t we?), had him poisoned (ineffectively as it were, and then had him immediately sent to Germany to enable German doctors to discover the poison in Navalny’s blood!);


And couldn’t Russia have been treated humanely after 1991? Couldn’t one have had an ally in her? Couldn’t she have been offered substantial financial assistance in the 1990s? After all, this is what was done to Germany after 1945, as a result of which nothing along the lines of National Socialism in Germany has been revived since then! At least here the lessons of history were learned. Why was this not done after 1991 towards Russia? What took the upper hand in American politicians? Arrogance? Risk-taking? Stupidity? Disregard for Russia? Belief in America’s mission? Belief that Americans are the chosen nation to be served by others?

Gefira 68: Appearances as an adornment of reality

Russia’s war with NATO continues. Did it have to happen? Of course not. However, this war was wanted. If you review the media over the past 30 years, that is, since the collapse of the USSR, you will find that Russia (as well as Belarus) was constantly portrayed in the media in an unfavorable light. Russia was allegedly ruled by a dictator, there was no democracy or freedom and so on, we all know it by heart. Russia was subjected to constant sanctions, constantly accused of various bad things. Suffice it to recall the comedy that unfolded around Navalny, a Russian renegade (for the Western media: a Russian dissident), whom the Russian special services failed even to poison, whom the intransigent Russian government extradited to Germany only for German doctors to determine the presence of poison in Navalny’s body, who, as soon as his health improved, willingly returned to Russia, to a cruel dictator and an inhumane system.

One need only recall the case of the NordStream pipelines. These pipelines allegedly threatened Europe’s energy security, but the most important member of the European Union – Germany – nevertheless built them together with Russia (Europe’s enemy) and somehow did not care about the energy threat. Leaders of other EU member states protested and wailed that they felt betrayed by the European Union, although they had previously told their own citizens that only in the Union was their safe and prosperous future. After all, one NATO country (the United States? the United Kingdom?) blew up the pipeline, and the supposedly sovereign German state didn’t even squeal about it. After all, everyone knows that the pipeline was blown up by the Russians because they didn’t want to turn off the gas tap and decided that bursting the pipe would be faster, cheaper and easier.

Such absurdities can be enumerated in abundance. Gefira 68 takes up some of them. For example, it debunks the myth that nations can determine how they want to live. Gefira 68 also considers whether people are better off under the dictator Lukashenko or the liberal democrat Zelensky. Gefira 68 marvels at the repetition of historical events and the fact that, unfortunately, no one is able or even willing to learn from the past, even the most recent. Isn’t the defeat of Imperial Germany in 1918 similar to that of the Soviet Union in 1991? Don’t the economic problems and resulting social unrest of Weimar Germany resemble the same problems experienced by Russia in the 1990s? Finally, aren’t the resulting wars unleashed then by Germany and now by Russia somehow similar in their genesis?

It is also necessary to take into account that history can repeat itself and the West might “take over” Russia, like many other states around the world, and something “entirely” new, Western might emerge on the Russian ruins. We are trying to confront the concept of the “heartland”, the strategic, untouchable center, thanks to which one can control the world and which must be defended cost it what it may, with the fact that Moscow’s authority in the Russian regions, as in the former Soviet republics of Central Asia, is not so secure at all. Note that just before the Ukrainian war there was unrest in Kazakhstan, to which Moscow reacted very strongly. We immediately drew attention to this in our bulletin. In this context, this time we turn our attention to Siberia, where Russia’s treasures rest.


Gefira Financial Bulletin #68 is available now

  • Amazing how history repeats itself
  • What if Ukraine had chosen the path followed by Belarus?
  • If nations really could decide…
  • The Russian Heartland

They view Western morality with disgust

Do you know how in Russia they view the armed conflict between Russia and the West, which is taking place mainly on Ukrainian territory? They view it as a struggle between good, which is Russia, and evil, which is the West; as a struggle between God, in whose name Russia is fighting, and Satan, in whose name the West is fighting. No more and no less. Note that this view is held by both Russian Christians and Russian atheists; Russians who pray in Orthodox churches and Russians who could be called neo-Bolsheviks. What’s more, these two groups work together in this regard, and although they represent different (once hostile to each other) worldviews, each group is closer to each other than to what the West represents.

Why do Russians consider the West to be forces of evil, forces of Satan, forces from hell? Here’s why. The so-called values that are promoted in Western countries – in the United States, Canada and the European Union – are abhorrent to most Russians. These include:

blatant propaganda of sexual perversion, gender reassignment and also denial of the existence of biological sex;

the populating of the West with anthropological types from the Third World;

the cutting off of the West from its own past, its own national heroes, its own cultural and religious roots, i.e. Christianity;

promoting the worship of Satan (as President Vladimir Putin has also mentioned in statements on more than one occasion), e.g., the opening of Satanic temples, the so-called artistic Satanic performances (rituals?) accompanying the opening of the London Olympics (2012) or the diabolical rituals accompanying the opening of the St. Gotthard Tunnel (2016);

supporting Nazis and bandits in Ukraine (whose photos of bodies covered with tattooed swastikas circulated throughout Russia).

The notion, belief or even deep conviction that Russia is defending European civilization and Christian faith as well as elementary morality is drawn by Russians from the works of Russian literature (Fyodor Dostoevsky), the prophecies of mystics (the Bulgarian visionary Baba Vanga, extremely popular in Russia) and common sense (i.e., a mind that Western propagandists have failed to poison as they have managed to do so with minds in the West). The West’s aggression against Russia, against Russians and everything Russian proved to be the last straw: it made the vast majority of Russians rally around their own national interest.

Consider that Russia was already acting as the liberator of Europe when it defeated the anti-Christian and anti-civilization forces spawned by the French Revolution of 1789. Let’s remind ourselves that before Russia liberated Europe in general and France in particular, huge numbers of Frenchmen (and not only Frenchmen!) fleeing the Jacobin massacres found refuge precisely in Russia. The future post-revolutionary King Louis XVIII of France found sanctuary in the Russian Empire. The world-famous military theorist and author of the work “On War” Carl von Clausewitz fought on the Russian side from 1812 to 1815, along with many other Prussian officers as part of the Russian-German Legion against revolutionary France, disagreeing with the fact that his homeland of Prussia had gone along with Napoleon Bonaparte. Continue reading

A lesson for China

Beijing, the Chinese Communist Party, the Chinese government and Chinese patriots are certainly keeping a close eye on what’s going on in Russia, what’s been going on in Russia for the past 30 years and what preceded these events while the Soviet Union still existed from Sakhalin Island to Belarus, from Leningrad to Almaty. What lessons do they draw? Here they are:

Never, ever and under no circumstances, believe what Western politicians promise. Western politicians promised the leaders of the Soviet Union that they would not accept countries bordering on the Soviet Union into NATO, and they have not kept that commitment.

Never, ever and under no circumstances should you trust Western politicians to treat you as an equal, as a partner. Yes, these will be the promises, yes, this is how Western politicians will pretend to be during the flirtation period, during the seduction period of the country in question (in this case China), but the moment the country in question (China) is seduced, Western policy will change: the partner will gradually turn out to be the dominator.

Never, ever and under no circumstances should economic reforms proposed by the IMF or WB or similar institutions be adopted. Such reforms are calculated to turn the economy of the country receiving aid upside down and to subordinate that country to the global financiers.

Never, ever and under no circumstances should one be dragged into international projects because sooner or later they will serve to subordinate a member country to supranational organizations that serve the United States, the European Union or the financial international circles, but certainly not the member country.

Never, ever and under no circumstances should one rely on the international division of labor, that is, on the arrangement that some produce this and others produce that, or on the scheme that Russia is to be the supplier of raw materials, China – the global factory and the West – the brain of the world, the world’s manager. The state should be self-sufficient, at least when it comes to the most important branches of the economy or else the sanctions imposed by the West might ruin the country thus punished. Continue reading

Pro-Western fifth column in Russia by default

It’s not just a question of how much military power a given side to the conflict has at its disposal; it’s not even a question of whose economy is stronger. It’s more a question of which side prevails culturally, spiritually, or psychologically (psyche is Greek for soul or spirit).

Consider. The names of the months in Germanic and Romance languages, i.e. languages spoken in the West, have Latin origin. The names of the same months in Russian… also have Latin origin. Russians could have named the months giving them names in their native language, as the Poles or Czechs did; or they could have created the names of the months by drawing from Greek. The latter would have been more natural and understandable than taking those names from Latin: after all, the Russian principalities modeled themselves on Byzantium (a state that, although derived from the Roman Empire, used not Latin but Greek). Medieval Russians referred to Byzantium (and rightly so! and correctly so!) as to the Greek state; medieval Russians took Christianity from Byzantium; from the Greeks – Rus’ took (and slightly modified) the alphabet and modeled its own political system on Constantinople, which it called Tsargrad (Царьград) or Carigrad – the city of the emperor or the city of emperors. And yet, Russians adopted the names of the months from Western languages. And not only the names of the months. Those who know the language know how many German and French and now English words have found their way into Russian. These foreign inclusions are foreign to the point that they are not even declined by grammatical cases, although all native words are. Why are we talking about this? Is it because we are interested in proper names or etymology or languages in general?

We talk about it because language reflects the soul of a nation. It’s not the Germans, French or Americans who have Russian words in their own languages, but, conversely, the Russians have plenty of French, German and English words in their language. This, in turn, attests to who has an overwhelming cultural, philosophical, mental, spiritual and psychological influence on whom. It shows who really rules over whom. This is a better litmus test for demonstrating who is subject to whom than finances, the economy or military conquests. Why? Because financial or economic advantage can be coerced, because military advantage is demonstrated through the use of brute force. In the case of language, it is quite different. No one outside Russia told Russians to adopt foreign words! They did it on their own, willingly, and they did it because they recognized the superiority of Western civilization. Patriotic Russians may deny it, but it is the language that is hard evidence that Russians have always considered themselves inferior.

To get an Oscar (or a similar award given in the West) is the dream of every Russian film director; to get a Nobel Prize for literature (or a similar award given in the West) is the dream of every Russian writer. Does any Western film director or Western writer dream of getting an award in Moscow or St. Petersburg?

It is the above-described sense of the inferiority complex on the part of Russians that makes rich Russians buy properties in the West and keep their money in Western banks. In other words, rich Russians are at the mercy and disfavor of the West, which can take these estates and accounts from them at any time it sees fit. Such Russians with estates and bank accounts abroad constitute a fifth column within the Russian Federation. Russians who have accounts in Western banks, who have properties in the West – what’s more – whose children study at Western universities do not think in Russian, whether they want to admit it or not. These Russians are a powerful force, scattered about the country, that works to the advantage of the West and to the detriment of their own homeland whether they want to admit it or not. Continue reading

Soft power that has been dissipated by fools

If you ask the average Westerner which places in the world he would like to see, he will answer that he would like to see Paris, Rome, Venice, Barcelona, Los Angeles, Florida, the Riviera, the Alps. If you ask the same question to a man from other parts of the world, he will answer that he would like to see… Paris, Rome, Venice, Barcelona, Los Angeles, Florida, the Riviera, the Alps. Similarly, if you ask a man from the West which university he would like to study at, he will answer that Oxford, Cambridge, Sorbonne, Harvard… If you ask the same question to a man from other parts of the world, you will get the same answer. If you ask a man from the West in which banks he would like to keep his money, he will mention one of the Western banks. If you ask a non-Western man, you will get the same answer. Let’s go further. If you ask a Westerner what his favorite movies or books or music are, you will hear titles, authors and performers that belong to the Anglo-Saxon world. If you ask the same question to a non-Western man, you will get the same answer. Questions with similar content can be multiplied. The result will always be the same. And it has always been the same. Representatives of previous generations would have answered the same way, people living in the nineteenth and eighteenth centuries would have answered the same way. One could say that the world is arranged in such a way that Westerners love the West and non-Westerners also love the West. Statistically speaking, no one in France, Great Britain, Germany or the United States dreams of their child studying in Poland, Hungary, Romania or even Russia. Conversely, parents from Poland, Hungary, Romania and Russia would give a lot for their children to study in France, Great Britain, Germany or the United States.

Western political scientists and politicians should be aware of this. They should know that they wield enormous soft power. They should realize that they have enormous power over non-Westerners. They can control them almost at will. All they have to do is wave a carrot or a sausage, and a non-Westerner is ready to do almost anything, including actions that will be detrimental to his own country, to his own people. The only thing the West should not do is to use a stick, to show exaggerated contempt for non-Westerners or to be too insulting to their feelings. If Westerners can’t help but show superiority or contempt, they should show this superiority or contempt in a measured way, intensifying these demonstrations gradually so that non-Westerners don’t notice it too much. If, on top of this, the West accepts at least some of the elites of non-Western nations into its club, the West’s power over the rest of the world is guaranteed.

Unfortunately, stupidity, hubris, greed, overconfidence – you name it – cause Western elites, Western leaders, Western think tanks to continually make the same mistake: they begin to ostentatiously escalate their display of contempt, they begin to ostentatiously and excessively pillage non-Western nations, they begin to hurt these nations’ sense of dignity too quickly and too violently (such as by imposing marches of sexual deviants in morally traditional societies), all of which leads to conflict. The West has made this mistake over and over again and continues to do so, and is unable to learn from the past.

Consider Russia. The elites of this country capitulated before the West at the end of the 1980s, declared the bankruptcy of their own system, behaved with allegiance to the West, began to take over and imitate everything as far as culture is concerned, and their only dream was if not to settle or at least live for a long time in the West – because, as is known, there is paradise for humanity – then at least to recreate this West at home. The elites not only of Russia, but also of Ukraine, Poland, Czechia, Hungary, Romania and so on, as well as the elites of India and China would do anything to shed their own culture and to embrace the West. How many Indians and Chinese go to Great Britain or the United States to be able to study there or at least to see with their own eyes those countries they have dreamed of since the cradle! If smart people ruled in the West, they would use this soft power to rule over the rest of the world until… the end of the world. But no. Continue reading