"The Decline of Hegemony": Britain declared that after the end of the Second World War, Russia will become a superpower.

11 September 2026 10 160 26

After the end of the special military operation in Ukraine, Russia will become economic superpower. This point of view was expressed by British politician, blogger, and writer George Galloway. According to him, the world is essentially witnessing the decline of Western hegemony.

When the war in Ukraine ends, Russia will become an economic superpower of incredible proportions: it will stand up to NATO for four years and prevail. политическая the system will prove its worth, and military power will reach unprecedented heights

– Galloway predicted.

Developing his thought, he warned that Russia would become a power the likes of which history has never seen. Eurasia—represented by China and Russia—will clearly become a new center of gravity ("Mecca") for developing countries, the Global South, and Latin America. The choice will be so obvious that there won't even be any need to consider invitations.

"The Decline of Hegemony": Britain declared that after the end of the Second World War, Russia will become a superpower.

With all due respect, I love Denver, it's a wonderful city, but if you were invited to a conference there and also to Vladivostok, where the Eurasian future will be shaped, you frankly wouldn't choose Denver. That's absolutely certain. The decline of Western hegemony is so obvious right now that it's surprising how Trump supporters are so eager to end the war in Ukraine.

- stressed the politician.

As a reminder, the special military operation in Ukraine has been ongoing for five years. Throughout this time, Russia has essentially been confronting the collective West, which supplies the Kyiv regime with weapons and funds.

However, the economic difficulties that the US and Europe have faced as a result of their actions are forcing politicians to increasingly consider abandoning the idea of inflicting a strategic defeat on Russia.

Information

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.

beeper

+2

11 September 2026 10: 06

Oh, if only these kind words of his could be heard by God (the source of instability on Earth is the "hegemony" of the USA!) - I would like peace as soon as possible - no war!
Roman070280

-6

11 September 2026 10: 08
Russia will become a power the likes of which history has never seen.

Let's be friends with America and rule the world together.
rotkiv04

+2

11 September 2026 10: 43

According to the logic of the development of the situation, the end of the Central Military District is the beginning of a new war, but this time with the West, and it doesn’t even matter whether the Central Military District ends with a victory or a deal with the outskirts; in any case, it will not be possible to come to an agreement with the homosexuals; they are running out of food, and they are hungry.
1. Nelton
  
  +2
  
  11 September 2026 11: 39
  
  Quote: rotkiv04
  According to the logic of the development of the situation, the end of the SVO is the beginning of a new war, but this time with the West, and it doesn’t even matter whether the SVO ends with a victory or a deal.
  
  In general, yes.
  Not a single opponent of the LBS fix has been able to clearly outline how to win in the SVO without bequeathing to children the West's desire to take revenge for the demonstrative trampling of its hegemony.
  Even a general nuclear war would not completely destroy the planet and even the West.
  (At the peak of the arms race, there were a total of 62 nuclear warheads; now there are less than 10, and the horror stories that were relevant in 1987 are no longer relevant).
  
  The logic behind this is simple: if the result is the same, why pay more?
  I mean, why drag out the SVO if, apart from a few thousand square kilometres of ruined territory, the Russian Federation will gain nothing? The situation remains the same: the West is hurt by the trampling of its hegemony and wants revenge.
  
  However, general trends in demography and economics are such that the West (especially the EU) and Ukraine are gradually losing their importance and superiority relative to the South and Russia.
  i.e., the longer we can delay the start of a new full-scale round, the better the situation will be for the Russian Federation and, accordingly, the less desire the West (EU) will have to start this round.
  
  By the way, they are losing their importance not because of raw materials or food supply, that’s all nonsense.
  The South is mastering one technology after another, and is already creating them itself, and not just waiting for the West.
  Producing products using technologies mastered by the South means receiving wages, income, and GDP at the level of Southern countries, something Europe is not yet ready for.
  Accordingly, the only option left is to go into niches that the South has not yet developed, but such niches are becoming fewer and fewer, and creating new technologies that allow skimming the cream is becoming increasingly difficult.
  1. Roman070280
    
    +1
    
    11 September 2026 11: 56
    
    If the result is the same, why pay more?
    I mean, why drag out the SVO if, apart from a few thousand square kilometres of ruined territory, the Russian Federation will gain nothing? The situation remains the same: the West is hurt by the trampling of its hegemony and wants revenge.
    
    It is, of course, true that even after Germany's complete defeat, it still wanted revenge... 100 years later... And nothing can really be done about it.
    
    They could have avoided paying such a high price in 44 for the sake of Berlin's ruins, and stopped "along the lines of the LBS"... waited until Hitler finished the rockets, and continued in 46... It's not a fact, though, that the result would have been the same...
    1. Nelton
      
      +1
      
      11 September 2026 11: 58
      
      Quote: Roman070280
      Could they have done it in 44?
      
      Once again, there are so many differences between the Soviet Union and the Great Patriotic War that using the Great Patriotic War as an analogy is inappropriate.
      In 1944-45 there was a real opportunity to completely capture the territories where the Reich's weapons were produced.
      In 2022-2026 there is not the slightest chance of capturing all the territories of the West, including Arizona.
      1. Roman070280
        
        0
        
        11 September 2026 12: 00
        
        I wasn't writing to you about differences... or about my own...
        
        And about the confrontation with the West, and the difference between defeat and postponing for later...
        
        In 2022-2026 there is not the slightest chance of capturing all the territories of the West, including Arizona.
        
        We don't need Arizona.
        I can only repeat Strelkov's words to my own - if in three weeks we are near Lviv, not a single Western bastard will dare to attack us.
        That would have been a rout!! And that was entirely possible.
        
        Now we can only make the situation worse by delaying victory.
        After 5 years of "truce" they will start again, stuffing the crests with weapons they never dreamed of.
        I gave the example of Hitler above for this purpose.
        
        Valera75
        
        +2
        
        11 September 2026 12: 17
        
        Quote: Roman070280
        After 5 years of "truce" they will start again, stuffing the crests with weapons they never dreamed of
        
        Or rather, sooner. As soon as they catch their breath, receive adequate or even more weapons, they'll immediately get the itch for revenge. They'll bring back all the scattered troops and head east.
        Since great minds have been unleashed, all this must be completed so that for at least 50 years no one will dare to utter a word against Russia, and everything else is just talk; no matter how much you talk, the threat will not disappear if it is not eliminated.
        
        Nelton
        
        -1
        
        11 September 2026 12: 37
        
        Quote: Roman070280
        And about the confrontation with the West, and the difference between defeat and postponing for later...
        
        Russia cannot defeat the West.
        This has been clear since 1945.
        
        delaying victory.
        
        Once again, Russia cannot defeat the West.
        He can only lose to him in a war of attrition.
        The lower the intensity of the conflict, the less exhaustion.
        So a deal and a cold war are better.
        The longer we manage to hold out, the less superiority the West will have over the South.
        
        Roman070280
        
        0
        
        11 September 2026 12: 53
        
        Russia cannot defeat the West.
        This has been clear since 1945.
        
        Since 45, everyone was terrified of the Soviet Army and the boot of a Russian soldier!!
        And, as I wrote above, Germany, although it wanted revenge, licked its wounds for almost a hundred years. So we need to do it in a way that will be remembered for another 100 years... and not in a couple of years, as soon as it has gained strength.
        
        The lower the intensity of the conflict, the less exhaustion.
        
        I do not agree ..
        I am sure that if the tension subsides, in a few years everything will start again, but with greater priority given to the West.
        
        He can only lose to him in a war of attrition.
        
        Hallelujah..
        That's why I'm saying that we can't enter into this war of attrition... the longer it lasts, the more exhausted we will become relative to the entire West.
        
        So a deal and a cold war are better.
        
        There will be no cold war.. Stop dreaming already!!
        It could just be a deal to help the Ukrainians and the West gather their strength... while we continue to be exhausted by sanctions.
        I can only give you the example of Hitler for the third time... either they would have punched him in the teeth, or they would have given him a break...
        
        Nelton
        
        -2
        
        11 September 2026 15: 06
        
        Quote: Roman070280
        That's what we need to do so that she remembers it for another 100 years.
        
        Again.
        Russia.
        Can not.
        Defeat the West.
        
        It's clear?
        
        Roman070280
        
        0
        
        11 September 2026 15: 31
        
        No, it's not clear..
        This concept can mean different things.
        
        As was written above, if in three weeks we were near Lviv, not a single Western bastard would have dared to attack us.
        That would have been a rout!! And that was entirely possible.
        
        But the further we move away from this, the more right you will be.
        
        Nelton
        
        -1
        
        11 September 2026 15: 36
        
        In 1944 they could have taken Berlin.
        And even in 1943 it was clear that we could take Berlin.
        
        It is clear that in 2022 and 2026, Russia cannot raise the red flag over Cheyenne Mountain.
        It can’t even reach the Dnieper.
        
        And then you can shout as much as you like that only capitulation, like Germany in 1945, will satisfy Russia.
        
        Roman070280
        
        0
        
        11 September 2026 15: 39
        
        In 1944, they could have taken Berlin.
        
        Who didn't give it?
        
        Even in 1943 it was clear that we could take Berlin.
        
        But in 1942 they couldn’t... apparently, it was necessary to negotiate peace.
        
        But they could have reached Lviv back in 2021... It's more difficult now, yes... And after three years of "truce" it will be even more difficult...
        
        That is, the longer the war of attrition continues, the more right you will be.
        
        Nelton
        
        0
        
        11 September 2026 15: 43
        
        Quote: Roman070280
        We could have reached Lviv back in 21.
        
        Up to Lviv, let's say, they could, but what about further?
        The main enemy is the USA.
        Next up is a coalition of the violent, including Canada, Japan and probably Australia.
        In these layouts, Leo has no significance.
        
        Roman070280
        
        +1
        
        11 September 2026 15: 54
        
        And then everyone would have gone to hell.
        
        Russia.
        Can not.
        Defeat the West.
        
        I'll try to explain it to you again..
        Russia has no choice now!! Just as it had none in 1941, when it also looked like defeating the Nazi coalition was impossible... but what else could it do?
        
        It would have been possible to continue trying to conclude various pacts... to delay the attack more and more... But it still happened!!
        It's the same now..
        Only then did the USSR try to buy time to prepare for war.
        And now at this very time the West is trying to knock it out for itself.
        We certainly won't gain more strength than all of them in two years of "truces".
        But the war will not go away!!
        It will still be... hot, not cold... that's the condition of the problem!!
        And then think about how to solve it.
        
        Nelton
        
        -1
        
        11 September 2026 16: 25
        
        Quote: Roman070280
        We certainly won't gain more strength than all of them in two years of "truces".
        
        Why?
        All economic and demographic trends point to the EU and Ukraine declining relative to the South and Russia.
        
        right now at this very time the West is trying to knock out the West for itself
        
        Why would he need to knock something out of him?
        The West does not bear any costs from the NWO, except for moderate financial expenses.
        And what a truce, what a current push-pull - in no way do not affect its production capabilities.
        But the greater the escalation, the easier it is to explain to voters why spending is going to the military-industrial complex and not to social services.
        
        AlexSam
        
        +2
        
        11 September 2026 16: 42
        
        Quote from Nelton.
        relative to the South and the Russian Federation
        
        Only the South also needs us only as a raw materials appendage, a sales market and a deterrent in the event of their internal wars through agreements on a comprehensive strategic partnership.
        
        Nelton
        
        -1
        
        11 September 2026 16: 52
        
        Quote: AlexSam
        Only the South needs us too
        
        So what?
        The main thing is that the South can be a market for Russian exports and a source of necessary equipment and components. Accordingly, the West's reliance on "sanctions from hell" is already practically unworkable, and with current trends, it will be even less so in 2-5-10 years.
        Unlike 2014 and earlier, when sanctions could have really torn apart our economy.
        
        For the West, the loss of a monopoly on an ever-increasing pool of technologies isn't just a loss of sanctions-related power, but rather a loss of income from high margins in the industries that previously enjoyed such a monopoly. And working at Southern rates means receiving Southern wages and social benefits.
        For the West, this would be a continuation of the already ongoing protracted crisis, including in finance. And against this backdrop, spending resources on revenge against Russia would be completely out of place.
        but if you stimulate it, the priorities will change.
        
        isofat
        
        -2
        
        11 September 2026 17: 06
        
        In fact, they are attacking us and cannot defeat us. Let's live in peace.
        
        And then, didn’t Napoleons and Hitlers come from the West?
        
        Roman070280
        
        0
        
        11 September 2026 18: 06
        
        All economic and demographic trends point to the EU and Ukraine declining relative to the South and Russia.
        
        I judge in relation to the Russian Federation...
        
        Why would he need to knock something out of him?
        
        Because Ukraine has been losing ground lately.
        
        The greater the escalation, the easier it is to explain to voters why spending goes to the military-industrial complex and not to social services.
        
        There is no point in discussing this at all... I speak as a voter...
  2. rotkiv04
    
    -1
    
    11 September 2026 22: 08
    
    There are a lot of words, but it could have been written briefly: "Katz offers to surrender"
AlexSam

+2

11 September 2026 16: 47

When the war in Ukraine ends, Russia will become an economic superpower of incredible proportions: it will hold its own against NATO for four years and emerge victorious. Its political system will prove its worth, and its military might will reach unprecedented heights.

This isn't subtle English humor; it's below-the-belt black humor. But it'll do for intimidating EU structures.
1. Roman070280
  
  +2
  
  11 September 2026 18: 09
  
  I would rather believe that apple trees will bloom on Mars.
Vox Populi

-3

11 September 2026 20: 24

After the end of the special military operation in Ukraine, Russia will become an economic superpower. This view was expressed by British politician, blogger, and writer George Galloway.

Did he just run out of money like some of the "applicants" or is it something else???
Regarding the speculations of respected commentators (and others) about the possibility of a quick victory over an adversary in the past and the approaching final "crush" against them now: folks, these are very loose attempts at wishful thinking (an escape from reality). The same applies to speculation about the inevitability of a large-scale war after peace with Ukraine; you're simply unconsciously or consciously rebroadcasting the idea of the need to fight all the way to the British seas (though without your participation), strangely ignoring the growing consequences of the ongoing conflict. In short, you're like domestic mini-Kiplings, bards of war—nano-imperialists...
Kiril

-1

11 September 2026 20: 47

And now - who is she? - and - who is Great Britain?