Russian Economy Department
K: I do not like to gainsay with bloggers or columnists but sometimes I can’t help to stop to do it.
Mr. Roberts always praised Mr. Putin, backing his opines on “facts”, it is on Putin’s official statements. It’s hard to refute such claims as facts are facts. But it starts to knock in my head in such situations why Mr. Roberts tries to be so “infallible” touching only irrefutable “facts”?
Mr. Putin leads foreign policy on tactical and strategic levels. It’s obvious. His domestic policy is run based on powerful vertical political structure. But here Mr. Putin stops shining, up to such level that many Russian commenters write openly about Putin betrayals. Both in foreign and domestic issues. Those critics are expressed in non-parliamentary languages frequently, but always very sharp, direct, sound and justified (truthful).
Meanwhile Mr. Roberts puts his critics mildly only, usually never looking into domestic matters. If coerced to point to the Russian economy, he’d always(?) put it in the context of world economy or the US hegemony.
Meantime there is a huge area of Russian domestic economy dictated by the US advisers loitering through corridors of Russian ministries. It is the US written constitution which is mandatory in RF nowadays. Fifth and sixth columns thrive in Russia around Mr. Putin at will. All issues, problems or sabotages stemming from the fact, which are obviously detrimental to the state of Russia, are left untouched.
I assume Mr. Paul Craig Roberts must know that. But the dark side of Mr. Putin – comprising among others from his inactivities in those spheres like health, economy, finance, education, transportation, etc., what’s more, not reacting to Mr. Medvedev and his supporters in evident subversive doings against Mr. Putin – seems to be not being seen by Mr. Roberts. On purpose?
Of course, it’s wrong to suppose such extreme and unpleasant inference – He knows better than me and knows more than me – but Mr. Putin is somehow being spared from critical views from those sides. Why?
The good news is that Mr. Roberts pointed Russia and China for the n-th time, gently of course, how such liberal policy, not only unstoppable, but supported, especially by Mr. Putin (one should read dozens of blogs), is deeply unjustified, detrimental and leading to nuclear war. He also used weak language, so less adequate, which does not fully mirror the scope and destructiveness of thievery and robbery of Russian authorities which apply to Russia and Russians in Russia (China is terra incognita for me).
But I agree with Mr. Roberts. Nevertheless few questions were left unanswered by Mr. Roberts.
If the US is afraid of nuke war and I think she is (assuming not all in the USA are nuts today), why Mr. Putin will not regain Russian influence in Ukraine and get rid of NATO and the US thugs from the country? Why he dodged Novorossia issue jumping into quagmire of Syria instead? Reclaiming Russian World would finish with sanctions or political isolation, as the trade blockade would be out of question, but Russia would gain impetus to change the issues pointed at by Mr. Roberts in his column.
Well, there’s yet the most important question – why Mr. Putin does not make those changes in Russia already NOW.
One can find satisfying explanations in Mr. Alexander Dugin’s columns defining “the 5-th and 6-th columns” or “The Land and The Sea Empires”. You may use my blog, or 4th Revolutionary War blog, or Katehon.
Mr. Roberts has written (quote below) about “liberal economic policies” versus “gov destabilization”. I wonder why he pushed to readers the smelly waft instead of the rancid stench of Kremlin’s wet rot? Not implementing his listed corrections will not lead to destabilization of government but to the destruction of whole Russia. Am I wrong?
World War III Has Begun
From: Paul Craig Roberts, April 25, 2016
– “The Third World War is currently being fought. How long before it moves into its hot stage?
By implementing neoliberal economic policies urged on them by their economists trained in the Western neoliberal tradition, the Russian and Chinese governments are setting themselves up for Washington. By swallowing the “globalism” line, using the US dollar, participating in the Western payments system, opening themselves to destabilization by foreign capital inflows and outflows, hosting American banks, and permitting foreign ownership, the Russian and Chinese governments have made themselves ripe for destabilization.
If Russia and China do not disengage from the Western system and exile their neoliberal economists, they will have to go to war in order to defend their sovereignty.“