Westerners Need a New Way of Attacking Russia

  • 0
  • 27 June 2017

Is it not true that any government will react to what it conceives to be a threat? The sophistication of that reaction may vary, but when a system considers itself threatened by a person, organisation or concept, it is they who will have to suffer the consequences. If you disagree with this, I suggest you stop reading because this article ain’t getting any prettier.

I know in my heart of hearts that the Russian government does things that are wrong. Certainly, I could say that for any other government the world over. Likewise, I condemn those wrong-doings. That is how I was raised – if you see something that is wrong, challenge it. This parenting principle is in no way different to the state’s actions when they perceive of a threat.

It is also an universal truth that if you support something that is based (in theory) on principles you share and that aspires (at least in its declarations) to create a system you are committed to, then you are prone to justify its actions. With that let me move on as to why the attacking and condemning of Russia recently is, to be quite blunt, getting a little old now.

I say this with no great pleasure, but Westerners cannot begin to even start thinking about things ordinary Russians might actually care about. Their attention span stops with the Russian state and as far as they are concerned, this is all that matters. No distinction in their mind is necessary – Russia is bad and they ‘know’ it, despite never having been. The middle aged working class men down the pub on Saturday watching the football ‘know’ immigration is too high, they cannot explain why. Brits ‘knew’ the European Union was bad even though they could not explain how it functioned.

Let me put these two questions to you: If the majority of citizens in a country support a law, does that make it just? Also, do laws exist to be obeyed? If the answer you arrived at is yes, you are home free. If the answer you reached is yes, then any law whether it is banning anti-Soviet propaganda, legalising domestic violence or banning ‘gay propaganda’ is totally legitimate.

As I opened this piece by saying, I believe these things to be wrong. Yet unlike many of my peers in the West, I talk and interact with Russians on a daily basis. In fact, I have discussed these at length in many kitchens and bars whilst getting shitfaced. Often to no avail, but the drinking has nothing to do with it.

What many of my peers and people reading this may also argue on a daily basis as far as their own countries are concerned is that the will of the people must be respected, and that any threats should be quelled. With this, I completely agree.

Today in the UK, we are currently dealing with Brexit. Depending on how you define ‘majority’, then the majority backed Brexit, and so it will happen. That’s fair, right? Still, the side who won hates being constructively criticised over their handling of Brexit, and bash those who lost about not accepting the result. All the while knowing that had the result gone the other way, they would have never taken defeat lightly.

As such, as far as we and our system is concerned, this is how it should be. Yet nobody ever wants to consider that other non-Western countries might think a little differently. In fact, never mind non-Western countries. We even cannot disagree fairly amongst ourselves, so perhaps my hopes for Russia are unfair for the time being.

Take some British university campuses. I have seen this first hand – if a person says they are not a feminist, it is often the equivalent of farting in Jesus’ face. They will ask how on earth, in 2017, could any person not be a feminist? I suppose the answer to this question is ‘in the same way that someone who is not a capitalist can justify spending a fortune OnAniPad’. Not being a feminist does not mean a person is anti-women’s rights any more than supporting Brexit was confined to the political right. However, some people will not listen to this and explain it away as bigotry.

Back to Russia and on Westerners not wanting to comprehend the Russian mentality, this includes the staunch pride coupled with a siege mentality. It is we (Russia) who triumphed against all the odds, with a dragon-like ruler, surrounded by our enemies and attacked by our foes. I would advise never to doubt the overwhelming support people would give to even the most Draconian law aimed at anyone slandering their country. I can think of some in the UK who also match this description. Yet, this is Russia and we ‘know’ it is bad yet when comparisons smack us in the face we cannot justify why.

That leads me to my final point about the hypocrisy in saving the outrage industrial complex for Russia. Canada’s Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, last weekend attended a gay pride event. Did anyone there think to ask him why he is selling weapons to Saudi Arabia? Like hell they did. If Russia curbed the internet as Ukraine has, the level of uproar would be enormous and ‘proof’ of our ‘knowledge’ that Russia is ‘bad’. For some reason, the West is silent over Ukraine.

Attacking Russia in the way the West currently does takes no special skill set, courage or any degree of intelligence. The rationalisation of it is rather confused. I am not arguing it is not well intended or wrong, but either the method or nature of it has to change. If for no other reason, for countries who claim to be liberal, the attacks on Russia actually amount to the opposite of what traditional liberalism is. In other words, it is hypocritical.

If you got to the end of this piece and are now overflowing with rage, thank you for selling my point. You cannot claim to be open-minded if Russia is the exception to your rules that disregard every other exception.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Russian Leadership Changes: How it was, is and how it might be

  • 0
  • 3 January 2022

Now that 2022 is finally here, it means Russia’s next presidential election is just two years away. The way has been paved for Vladimir Putin to run again if he chooses. The will he/won’t he? question is a favourite of pundits as is speculation of a potential or likely successor. Russia’s next leader will be immensely consequential, as will the time when he or she takes over.

It’s certainly possible that by the end of t

citește mai mult

Researchers from Six Countries Discussed the Challenges for International Psychological Security in the Context of the Use of Artificial Intelligence

  • 0
  • 23 November 2020

On 12 November 2020, a panel discussion "Artificial Intelligence and International Psychological Security: Theoretical and Practical Implications" was held at St. Petersburg State University as part of the international conference "Strategic Communications in Business and Politics" (STRATCOM-2020).

The discussion was moderated by Konstantin Pantserev – DSc in Political Sciences, Professor of the St. Petersburg State University,

citește mai mult


  • 0
  • 2 July 2020


This book  , edited by Evgeny Pashentsev, brings together a series of chapters written by Russian and non-Russian scholars

citește mai mult

Azebaijan, cheia geostrategică a Asiei Centrale

  • 0
  • 13 February 2018

După destrămarea URSS, Azerbaijanul a fost statul ex-sovietic care alături de    republicile Baltice a avut o dezvoltare constantă și durabilă. Desigur, aici pot fi adresate unele critici regimului de la Baku cu privire la democrație, care în opinia multor analiști este doar mimată la Baku. Însă faptul adevărat este că acest stat a reușit să își gestioneze eficient resursele de care dispune pentru a deveni o societate prosperă. I se atribuie Azerbaijanului etichet

citește mai mult

What Can Democrats Learn From Alabama’s Doug Jones?

  • 0
  • 30 November 2017

In ordinary circumstances, Doug Jones would already be preparing to move to Washington DC. The former prosecutor famous for convicting KKK members for a church bombing is up against gay bashing, God and gun lovin’, twice kicked out of elected office, Judge Roy Moore. A man who has eight accusers of sexual assault, all of whom were underage at the time of the allegations.

Yet, if one looks at all the recent polls, they show a ti

citește mai mult

Azerbaidjanul, petrolul și românii

  • 0
  • 7 October 2016

Întotdeauna, statele sunt nevoite să își apere poziția pe marea tablă a geopoliticii, uitându-se cu grijă la vecini, dar și la puterile regionale. Această regulă presupune nu doar poziția ofensivă, ci și valorificare atuurilor, astfel încât să devină piese care contează pe „câmpul de analiză”, iar nu elemente neglijabile, care sunt măturate dintr-o dată de cei ce au suficientă putere să mânuiască piesele.

Caucazul, ca regiune geopolitică, nu face nici ea excepție

citește mai mult

The US Strategic Provocations before and during the Olympic Games: The Stakes Are Growing

  • 0
  • 16 January 2022

Introduction. To make your foe act in a definite way through the planned escalation of events, thereby making him lose his position and his tangible and intangible assets – that is the essence of any international provocation. In history, one can find many examples of strategic provocations with long term goals and, very often, grave and long-term international consequences. The Gulf of Tonkin incident in August 1964 – where a North Vietnamese to

citește mai mult

Experts on the Malicious Use of Artificial Intelligence and Challenges to International Psychological Security (part III)

  • 0
  • 28 December 2021

The Questionnaire for Experts “Malicious Use of Artificial Intelligence and Challenges to Psychological Security”

 This questionnaire is a part of the research project “Malicious Use of Artificial Intelligence and Challenges to Psychological Security in Northeast Asia” funded by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research and the Vietnam Academy of Social Sciences, project number 21-514-92001. citește mai mult

Experts on the Malicious Use of Artificial Intelligence and Challenges to International Psychological Security (part II)

  • 0
  • 17 December 2021

  1. Which of the threats to international psychological security caused by the malicious use of artificial intelligence do you consider the most relevant for your country?

  Vian Bakir and Andrew McStay Surreptitious influencing via psychological manipulation on social media is a real threat in the UK. In the 2016 “Brexit” referendum on whether or not to leave the European Union, Cambridge Analytica offe

citește mai mult