On the Escalation show of Radio Sputnik, Alexander Dugin discusses the behind-the-scenes of the so-called “28-Point Peace Plan” in the broader geopolitical context, arguing that the globalist elites need to prolong the Ukraine war at all costs to save themselves from collapse — but Trump, Russia, and the emerging world order have different plans in the works.
Dugin ignores the reality of Putin’s involvement with the WEF independently and through American educated Ukrainian Kirill Dmitriev. Like it never happened. Poof. Dugin is a nationalist, which is fine, but he is also an ideologue with blinders failing to see Putin’s appeasement policies and desire to align with the west, the evidence of which is overwhelming. In your face overwhelming, including disastrous neoliberal economic policies working against the middle class. Dugin completely romanticizes Putin, who ignored what was obvious in Ukraine for 8 long years, kowtows to Israel and betrayed Syria as early as 2015 by conceding their oil fields to the American-allied Kurds. What is obvious is obvious, but ideologies are blind.
My impression is that Mr. Putin will engage with anyone if it can be profitable for Russia to do so. He does not exclude parties that have different ideologies. Engaging with such does not mean agreeing with them on everything, and may even mean disagreeing with them on everything. But unless you engage with them you abandon the possibility that even with a complete enemy, profitable agreements can be made. For example, throughout the Ukraine war negotiations have taken place to return prisoners to their respective sides. Is that appeasement?
It's possible the ideological blinders are your own. You have a list of political events on which you believe Putin failed utterly, even though you don't know all the details. And you ignore the successes - some achieved under the most difficult circumstances - that Putin has created. That's not a balanced perspective.
I strongly doubt that multi-polarity and a new world order sprang fully formed into Mr. Putin's mind when he assumed office in 2000. There was a vast array of domestic issues he needed to deal with first. But it appears that in the intervening 25 years, Mr. Putin (and other leaders) have formulated a completely new and beneficial foundation on which to build world politics. Against the scope and impact of such a concept to humanity, the failures that you attribute to Mr. Putin, even if true, are unimportant.
Well, obviously I disagree with you, don’t I? First, to get this out of the way, returning prisoners of war has nothing to do whatsoever with appeasement. It simply does not fit the definition. As an aside on this, there are fewer prisoners of war with drone warfare as conducted on both sides. And Ukraine kills more so-called or potential prisoners of war. That comes from Events in Ukraine on Substack and not from me. But it also makes sense that the non-prevailing side does not take many prisoners, if any, at times. Note I say non-prevailing, not losing.
There are numerous reasons for this choice of verbage which I will not go into at present, except to say that the Russian must enjoy appearing weak because they do it so well and so often. In front of a bully no less. The young kid on the playground gets this, but Russian generals, not so much.
You used the word “engaging,” an interesting choice. Putin spends time “groveling,” in my opinion. Totally different behavior. Picking a Ukrainian from Kiev, educated at Stanford and Harvard, a neoliberal, to head a sovereign investment fund. Repeated meetings with Klaus Schwab and relaying how important the WEF is to Russia, in writing, in numerous articles. Look them up yourself on the internet. And the economic policies in Russia. Driving their own recession with high interest rates, but oh, not for big business, just for the small business people. All in the interest of public private partnerships globalist style. But there are actual economists, such as Paul Craig Roberts, who have noted this insanity. Myself, I noted the impending digital currency in the Russian Central Bank. Totally globalist, but I won’t go on because I already said that. Oh, and I forgot the Russia House established at the WEF annual meeting in 2018. Who could forget that!
Putin has done much good for Russia, but he has also made colossal errors by ignoring a festering sore called Ukraine in favor of appeasing the west. Were he fighting Israel, he would not killing all these People, fellow Slavs. Were he fighting American soldiers, the same. Vladimir Putin is not engaging, as you put it, he is appeasing, as I put it. He will win his war when he decides to win, if he ever does. Meanwhile, this misguided leader is depopulating many of his own people, just at the Germans did in WWII.
Dugin ignores the reality of Putin’s involvement with the WEF independently and through American educated Ukrainian Kirill Dmitriev. Like it never happened. Poof. Dugin is a nationalist, which is fine, but he is also an ideologue with blinders failing to see Putin’s appeasement policies and desire to align with the west, the evidence of which is overwhelming. In your face overwhelming, including disastrous neoliberal economic policies working against the middle class. Dugin completely romanticizes Putin, who ignored what was obvious in Ukraine for 8 long years, kowtows to Israel and betrayed Syria as early as 2015 by conceding their oil fields to the American-allied Kurds. What is obvious is obvious, but ideologies are blind.
It's not so easy NOT to be blind to wherever your paycheck is coming from, you know...
My impression is that Mr. Putin will engage with anyone if it can be profitable for Russia to do so. He does not exclude parties that have different ideologies. Engaging with such does not mean agreeing with them on everything, and may even mean disagreeing with them on everything. But unless you engage with them you abandon the possibility that even with a complete enemy, profitable agreements can be made. For example, throughout the Ukraine war negotiations have taken place to return prisoners to their respective sides. Is that appeasement?
It's possible the ideological blinders are your own. You have a list of political events on which you believe Putin failed utterly, even though you don't know all the details. And you ignore the successes - some achieved under the most difficult circumstances - that Putin has created. That's not a balanced perspective.
I strongly doubt that multi-polarity and a new world order sprang fully formed into Mr. Putin's mind when he assumed office in 2000. There was a vast array of domestic issues he needed to deal with first. But it appears that in the intervening 25 years, Mr. Putin (and other leaders) have formulated a completely new and beneficial foundation on which to build world politics. Against the scope and impact of such a concept to humanity, the failures that you attribute to Mr. Putin, even if true, are unimportant.
Ok boomer.
This sounds sooo vaccinated.
So vaccinated? Interesting.
Well, obviously I disagree with you, don’t I? First, to get this out of the way, returning prisoners of war has nothing to do whatsoever with appeasement. It simply does not fit the definition. As an aside on this, there are fewer prisoners of war with drone warfare as conducted on both sides. And Ukraine kills more so-called or potential prisoners of war. That comes from Events in Ukraine on Substack and not from me. But it also makes sense that the non-prevailing side does not take many prisoners, if any, at times. Note I say non-prevailing, not losing.
There are numerous reasons for this choice of verbage which I will not go into at present, except to say that the Russian must enjoy appearing weak because they do it so well and so often. In front of a bully no less. The young kid on the playground gets this, but Russian generals, not so much.
You used the word “engaging,” an interesting choice. Putin spends time “groveling,” in my opinion. Totally different behavior. Picking a Ukrainian from Kiev, educated at Stanford and Harvard, a neoliberal, to head a sovereign investment fund. Repeated meetings with Klaus Schwab and relaying how important the WEF is to Russia, in writing, in numerous articles. Look them up yourself on the internet. And the economic policies in Russia. Driving their own recession with high interest rates, but oh, not for big business, just for the small business people. All in the interest of public private partnerships globalist style. But there are actual economists, such as Paul Craig Roberts, who have noted this insanity. Myself, I noted the impending digital currency in the Russian Central Bank. Totally globalist, but I won’t go on because I already said that. Oh, and I forgot the Russia House established at the WEF annual meeting in 2018. Who could forget that!
Putin has done much good for Russia, but he has also made colossal errors by ignoring a festering sore called Ukraine in favor of appeasing the west. Were he fighting Israel, he would not killing all these People, fellow Slavs. Were he fighting American soldiers, the same. Vladimir Putin is not engaging, as you put it, he is appeasing, as I put it. He will win his war when he decides to win, if he ever does. Meanwhile, this misguided leader is depopulating many of his own people, just at the Germans did in WWII.
I greatly appreciate reading Prof. Dugin's comprehensive thoughts on geopolitics. Thank you.
Grazie professor Dugin per la sua disamina.