Why Russia needs to quickly abandon the "post-Soviet space"

The alarming events of recent times, for the most part unfolding in the very immediate vicinity of the borders of our Motherland and directly affecting its vital interests, have not only revealed a huge number of problems and acute moments that have accumulated in our relations with our own neighbors. By and large, they finally proved the complete inconsistency of such a familiar and firmly rooted in political science concept as "post-Soviet space".

Why is such a formulation, which has been criticized for a long time in the West, is in fact unprofitable and harmful just for Russia? What are the reasons that induce us to abandon it and what can and should be offered in return? Let's try to sort out these difficult questions.

"They do not pour new wine into old wineskins ..."

This evangelical expression perfectly matches the situation that eventually developed on a colossal territory that remained in a completely incomprehensible geopolitical status after the collapse of a great country that covered one-sixth of the earth. Initially, all the independent states that arose on its ruins were only former "fraternal republics", but not much time has passed - and only a part of them remained for each other not only allies, but at least good neighbors. A much larger number of yesterday's "brothers in the USSR" have turned into opponents, if not even deadly, irreconcilable enemies. The war thundering today in Nagorno-Karabakh is the best confirmation of this. Could Russia have prevented all this? Let's be objective - in no way. And not only due to the fact that its first leader, Boris Yeltsin, was absolutely alien to any ideas of a unifying sense, on the contrary, he acted as one of the most active and active destroyers of the USSR.

There are much more weighty reasons - firstly, the West, which did not just "orchestrate" the destructive processes on the territory of the Soviet Union both during its collapse and after it, would not have allowed anything of the kind, going to all the military intervention, which would then hardly have met with a serious rebuff. Secondly, Russia, torn apart by numerous crises, robbed and destroyed in front of its people, was definitely not up to the restoration of its own dominant status in one form or another. Thank God, at least they managed to defend their own territorial integrity - and that at the cost of considerable blood. Subsequently, when attempts were made to “stitch together” the broken ties and disintegrated alliances, they, alas, were reduced to such a level that sometimes it seems that it would be better if they did not exist at all!

In fact, all the interstate structures of the “post-Soviet space” were, to a greater or lesser extent, bad copies of the USSR, created hastily and without much intelligence, adjusted for the new status of the former republics. The only problem was that, unlike Soviet times, Russia no longer had any influence on its old-new "allies" and "partners". From the word "absolutely" ... Let's be honest to the end. It is time, finally, to recognize - that the Commonwealth of Independent States, that the Collective Security Treaty Organization, that the Eurasian economic union are, if not initially stillborn, then, to put it mildly, extremely ineffective formations as they exist, not replenishing with new members, but crumbling literally before our eyes. This alone speaks volumes. Perhaps the reason is that their origins were, for the most part, truly "post-Soviet" leaders of nation states, who as a general strategy chose to satisfy their own urgent needs and far-reaching ambitions at the expense of Moscow.

They demanded trade preferences, cheap energy resources and weapons, protection and support from the "elder brother", while initially not intending to give up even a tiny bit of illusory "independence", but in reality - the right of newly-made "appanage princelings" to exploit the resources of their country and the remnants of what was inherited from the USSR industry and infrastructure at its sole discretion. And at the same time, it is also to play "multi-vector", that is, to participate in full swing in various projects of the West, each of which was essentially anti-Russian from the start. Subsequently, the same “multi-vector approach” was turned by “national leaders” into an excellent lever for blackmailing Russia in the style: “You are evil, evil ... We will leave you”. In the end, they left - often no longer of their own free will, like Viktor Yanukovych, who played into "European integration", and with his rushes brought the situation to a coup d'etat. And what is the result?

New space. But which one?

In reality, no such "post-Soviet space" has existed for a long time. There is the Baltic region, which is a member of the European Union and NATO, which is oozing with Russophobia and is turning before our very eyes into a military foothold for the West to attack our country. There are Georgia and Ukraine, extremely hostile to Russia, which are under the direct external control of the United States. Azerbaijan, which a little more - and can be considered a full-fledged Turkish province. There is Central Asia, where China's influence already far outweighs Russia's. What remains? Armenia, thanks to which we are about to be drawn into an armed conflict with Turkey? Belarus, whose leader is precisely his own, whether it is wrong, “multi-vector” and flirting with anti-Russian forces both in the country itself and abroad, brought the matter to the current attempt at a “color revolution”? True, he must be given her due, he resists quite courageously, coming to his senses and again rushing to Moscow with his arms. Who's next? Moldova with its eternal "rocking" between Moscow and Bucharest?

All this is no longer a "post-Soviet space", at least in something united and at least somehow connected, but a real seething cauldron, which must be put in order from completely different positions and with a completely different ideology, rather than referring to some A common past. No, Russia in no way should renounce its own succession to the Soviet Union. Should not cross out, and, moreover, let someone try to cross out the most important pages of the history of the USSR, such as the Great Patriotic War. However, it is time to admit that at the current stage, relations with the new countries that surround us should be built on completely new principles and principles.

It's time to bury the "post-Soviet space" with a bitter sigh, leaving this term only to historians. Alas, if it existed from the beginning, then we surrendered it to the West almost completely, allowing "Maidans" of varying degrees of Russophobia in almost all the former republics of the USSR. Even with regard to countries that are nominally today, if not friendly, then at least not hostile to us, any assumptions should be made with great caution. Will Belarusians, Kazakhs, and Tajiks stand shoulder to shoulder with Russian soldiers if in the Caucasus they still have to directly clash with the Turks? Will other CSTO members, besides Russia (I’m not talking about the Kyrgyz - they would have to deal with their endless “Maidans”), participate, if necessary, in restoring constitutional order in Minsk? The worst part is that the answer here is rather negative than even hypothetically positive. The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, in which two former Soviet republics clashed, one of which is openly supported by a NATO member state, in itself puts an end to all "post-Soviet" mirages. But it also makes us think about what exactly the space around Russia should become, proceeding from its, and not the West's, geopolitical interests.

It is very likely that all the structures created on it over the past decades with the participation of Moscow should be, if not scrapped, then at least seriously reformatted. It is necessary to “breathe” life into them, to fill them with real meaning - economic, military-strategic, geopolitical. If both Baku and Yerevan are, as Vladimir Putin says, “our equal close partners,” then hostilities between them should stop at Moscow’s word, and not at a shout from Washington, as it seems to be happening now. Otherwise, all our "alliances" and agreements are worthless.

The cornerstone should be not nostalgia for the common Soviet past, but reinforced concrete pragmatism dictated by current realities. But here you should start with the development of your own country - only after turning into a state, it will be much more profitable to be friends with which (first of all, in purely mercantile aspects) than to be at enmity, Russia will be able to build around itself not a post-Soviet, but its own geopolitical space. The Russian Empire, which collapsed in 1917, was practically fully recreated, no matter who tried to lie, not with bayonets, but due to the fact that the growing and rapidly developing Soviet Union was attractive to the bulk of the inhabitants of the republics that were part of it, full of those who have tasted the bitter and bloody fruits of "independence". This is a historical truth, and it is necessary to draw very specific lessons from it.

Another point is that Moscow must finally openly declare adjacent territories that were once part of the same state with it as the sphere of its own indisputable vital interests, and learn to act in this area without looking back to the West. In principle, this is exactly what is happening in Belarus now - and this gives rise to some hope that our country is starting a “turn” in the only right direction. The world today is not just on the verge of another "great redistribution" - it is in the process of doing so. If at this stage we are not able to create for ourselves at least a safe, more or less predictable, and, ideally, also contributing to the development and strengthening of our country, then in the very near future we will be completely "wedged" between the spheres of influence of China , The United States, the European Union, Turkey, and God knows who else. And this will be a very big step towards ensuring that Russia itself turns from a sovereign state into a territory controlled by someone.
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. gorenina91 Offline gorenina91
    gorenina91 (Irina) 26 October 2020 11: 26
    -Well, and ... -that's ... here ... here once again write about the obvious ...
    - Who needs this "early cry of Yaroslavna in Putivl, with abundant shedding of tears" ???
    -At all times, with all the kings and rulers, different lands gathered together ... and quite "brutally" ...
    -That Bismarck not so long ago (in the 19th century) brought together the whole of Germany ... -And before that, whoever was there ...: and Saxony, and Silesia, and Pomerania, and Prussia, and Bavaria, and Westphalia and so on and so on ... - And everyone rested ... - with horns and hooves ... - everyone so wanted to be "independent and independent" ...
    - And what today ... in Russia ... -Yes, everything is the same ...
    - And be in the place of our guarantor in Russia ... mmmm ... well, at least the same ... Erdogan ... then ... then ... then this one would quickly have all these "former" would unite ... - these are now considered "disunited" ... - It all depends on the head of the center ... - and the center itself, which this leader created ... - And even Russia will merge with Belarus in "love ecstasy" it does not work ... - what can we say about others ... - So how not to lose "that" that we have today ...
    1. yuratanja1950 Offline yuratanja1950
      yuratanja1950 (Yuri) 26 October 2020 12: 26
      Quote: gorenina91
      So, as if "that" not to lose what we have today ...

      As much as it is unpleasant to say it, but now the head should ache, first of all, so that, following the collapse of the USSR, Russia would not be destroyed in the appanage principalities ...
      And the first step towards this is the rejection of the "post-Soviet" space ...
      And the fact that Russia ... So it was with the feudal lords - they do not appease their vassals - they go under the wing of a stronger, richer and more generous ... hi
      1. Polente the Wanderer 26 October 2020 13: 51
        The feudal lords gave not only carrots to their vassals, but also used the stick to discipline ...
        1. ioan-e Offline ioan-e
          ioan-e (Boris) 26 October 2020 20: 59
          Quote: Wanderer Polente
          The feudal lords gave not only carrots to their vassals, but also used the stick to discipline ...

          Moreover, the whip was given many times more often!
    2. Toha from KZ Offline Toha from KZ
      Toha from KZ (Anton) 27 October 2020 06: 57
      A victim of the exam? Before the coming of Putin, there was a question about the division of Russia into several principalities. Saved, saved. But where I agree, it was his mistake to help this sultani to retain power. These were never our friends or partners
    3. Magistr Offline Magistr
      Magistr (Valery) 1 November 2020 16: 07
      Irina, socialist Belarus will never allow itself to be swallowed by Putin's oligarchs.
  2. tuchkovskij Offline tuchkovskij
    tuchkovskij (Vladimir) 26 October 2020 13: 25
    To protect its interests, Russia needs:
    1. to denounce the "Belovezhskaya agreement"
    2. to propose to all former republics to create a confederation with a single army and currency
    3.Republics wishing to join NATO or host NATO military bases, to begin with, cut off all logistics and pipes for them, close their markets, close borders for entry to state workers, declare Casus belli and deprive territories previously belonging to Russia or the USSR
    1. Kuramori Reika Offline Kuramori Reika
      Kuramori Reika (Kuramori Reika) 26 October 2020 16: 24
      2. to propose to all former republics to create a confederation with a single army and currency

      And feed them and rebuild them again? Yes, let it be better to finally turn into stinking swamps and steppe pastures. Our funds should be spent not on those who could not become sane countries in 30 years, but on ourselves. These former republics, with the exception of a couple, did not create anything new, but gobble up what was built under the control of Moscow, with subsidies from the RSFRS. Let them build with their own hands, but they clearly lacked the mind to live within their means and independently, as can be seen from history.
      1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
        Marzhecki (Sergei) 27 October 2020 08: 08
        Quote: Kuramori Reika
        These former republics, with the exception of a couple, did not create anything new, but gobble up what was built under the control of Moscow, with subsidies from the RSFRS.

        And what special things have we managed to build during this time?
    2. Vladimir Tuzakov (Vladimir Tuzakov) 30 October 2020 21: 18
      The first point, the step is strong. And legally, the Belovezhskaya Agreements are a worthless piece of paper, because the signatories did not have the authority to sign such agreements (this is possible only by the Supreme Soviet of the USSR and by referendums). But the point is different, in the lost Cold War and the defeat of the USSR. Here the winner (USA) acts on the defeated as he wishes, which is what happens to the comprador government of Boris Yeltsin, then his nominee (or rather the nominee of his family) V, V, Putin ... Nothing has changed for almost thirty years, the people and so on robbed and further robbed and disenfranchised by a handful of robbers in power ...
  3. GRF Offline GRF
    GRF 26 October 2020 13: 35
    Will Russia learn to value itself and exploit others?
    Hardly, because for this you need to learn, for a start, not to write off debts for beautiful eyes (well, or secret reasons that cannot be reported to your citizens) ...
  4. Jozhik_2 Offline Jozhik_2
    Jozhik_2 (Jozhik) 26 October 2020 15: 51
    That's all right. Spraying is stupid and costly. What the hell are "allies" and so on? Each threshing his own shovel and at the same time hypocritically calls on Russia to remember the common past and almost the ideals of equality and brotherhood, begging and parasitic at its expense. Pragmatism and reasonable isolationism will save money to improve the living standards of their own people. And if the appetites of their own cosmopolitan bourgeois were tempered, it would be quite good to live.
    Russia (for the first time in history, it seems) needs to finally focus on itself, otherwise the khan.
  5. Bulanov Offline Bulanov
    Bulanov (Vladimir) 26 October 2020 18: 23
    Russia needs more Russian state selfishness for the prosperity of its own people, as they do in the United States. Then all the neighbors will instantly line up to fraternize with Russia.
  6. rotkiv04 Offline rotkiv04
    rotkiv04 (Victor) 27 October 2020 13: 55
    to do all this, you need to get rid of the liberal lobby in power, but this is from the realm of fantasy
  7. genadij Offline genadij
    genadij (gene gene) 31 October 2020 13: 33
    I think that Russia should return to its composition only Belarus, Little Russia and Novorossia (excluding the western regions of Ukraine). Because these are Russian lands with a Russian population.
    And only trade with everyone else.
    1. Magistr Offline Magistr
      Magistr (Valery) 1 November 2020 16: 25
      Gennady, today even this is an unattainable dream. But one way or another - albeit as a result of colonization, revolution and wars - we created a Great Eurasian Power much earlier than the EU. With a single energy system, with a transport system, with strong economic ties, with a powerful army, with affordable higher education, etc. With which, of course, the West could not reconcile. And as a result of their provocations, we have only a fragment of the former power. It is quite possible to revive it now, only by developing the country to a decent level, so that the former republics themselves want to unite again. But the trouble is that the comprador authorities have no goal of developing the country. She has a different goal: to exploit the country along with Western predators. Therefore, the theme of the revival of the Eurasian state (even without the previous GULAGs) is not popular in our country.