…. everything I have said today is not a bluff – it is not a bluff, believe me – and … those who live in the past … unable to look into the future … [should] stop rocking the boat we are all in which is called the Earth.”
Vladimir Putin, 1 March 2018
Nearly two years ago The Washington Post published a piece on “Putin’s dangerous campaign to rehabilitate Stalin.” It pointed out that Stalin and Putin both murdered political opponents. Of course, Putin’s political killings have not been as numerous as Stalin’s; but why would Putin rehabilitate a communist mass murderer like Stalin? Perhaps because Stalin was Russia’s “great” leader during World War II. Perhaps Putin aspires to be such a leader himself. Essayist Simona Pipko, who met Stalin many years ago, once observed that Putin imitates Stalin’s mannerisms. And now, having studied Putin’s State of the Nation Address (which was delivered three years ago last month), it seems that Putin has Stalin’s flare for instilling fear (and perhaps his taste for killing on a grander scale; please see “How Many People Did Joseph Stalin Kill?”)
In his State of the Nation Address, Vladimir Putin said, “Russia ranks among the world’s leading nations with a powerful … defense potential,” Putin added, “The next few years will prove decisive.” Then the Russian leader adopted the tone of that kinder guy whose soul George W. Bush claimed to have glimpsed. Putin admonished his countrymen that Russia must not fall behind technologically. Cities must be expanded and other “large-scale” projects must be embraced. Putin spoke of “family farms” and shrinking the state’s share of the economy by state sponsorship of “start-up entrepreneurs.” With these and other deceptive flourishes, the Russian President plodded toward a stunning presentation. The speech turned from boring promises of a shiny socialist future (without using the “s” word), to Stalin’s trick of making his victims soil themselves.
“The operation in Syria has proved the increased capabilities of the Russian armed forces,” Putin stated. Then he spoke of improvements to various weapon systems: “The strategic missile troops received 80 new intercontinental ballistic missiles, 102 submarine-launched ballistic missiles and three Borei nuclear ballistic missile submarines. Twelve missile regiments have received the new Yars intercontinental ballistic missile. The number of long-range high-precision weapons carriers has increased by 12 times, while the number of guided cruise missiles increased by over 30 times.”
This opening was not much of an attention-grabber, especially for your average Westerner (who is asleep at the switch). However, when you consider the terrible state of America’s strategic deterrent, a feeling of uneasiness might begin – however slight. After all, America is still sporting ancient Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs). Even the thirty-year-old Trident II (D-5) is nothing to write home about. In fact, there has been no real augmentation of America’s nuclear deterrent – despite growing nuclear arsenals in North Korea and China. Even more dangerous, America’s nuclear warheads are approaching the end of their shelf-life in 2023, with no relief in sight until 2029. On Tuesday Senator Elizabeth Warren called for a reduction in America’s nuclear arsenal. In response, Admiral Charles Richard, who heads the U.S. Strategic Command, told the Senate Armed Services Committee that America was “at risk of losing credibility in the eyes of our adversaries.” Admiral Richard then explained that the country was woefully behind Russia, which is “aggressively engaged” in modernizing its nuclear forces.
Returning to Putin’s speech, the world could not have guessed what was coming next. With mocking irony Putin pointed to America’s “withdrawal from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty.” He said, almost with a wink, “We did our best to dissuade the Americans from withdrawing from the treaty. All in vain. The U.S. pulled out of the treaty in 2002.”
The Russian President was relishing the moment, underscoring the blind stupidity of American policy, and mocking America’s growing helplessness. Putin then spoke of the fall of the Soviet Union. Moscow had lost 23.8 percent of her national territory, he said, and 48.5 percent of her population, 41 percent of her GDP, 39.4 percent of her industrial potential, and 44.6 percent of her military capability. Putin then explained: “A civil war was raging in the Caucasus, and U.S. inspectors oversaw the operation of our leading uranium enrichment plants.” (But then, he forgot to say that America paid for those plants, as Russia claimed to be flat broke at the time.)
Like a stage magician, Putin was preparing a trick – or a series of tricks – for his audience: “Apparently,” he said, “our [Western] partners got the impression that it was impossible … for our country to revive its economy, industry, defense industry and Armed Forces to levels supporting the necessary strategic potential.”
Putin then unveiled his first trick: “During all these years … we have been working intensively on advanced equipment and arms, which allowed us to make a breakthrough in developing new models of strategic weapons.” And oh, what models! “In addition,” continued Putin, “we have embarked on the development of the next generation of missiles.” He called it the “Sarmat missile,” which “weighs over 200 tons.” (It will replace the old SS-18 “Satan” missiles next year.)
Putin then explained that Russia has been developing strategic arms “that do not use ballistic trajectories at all when moving toward a target.” Defensive systems, he said, “are useless against them, absolutely pointless.” Russian scientists, Putin said with pride, are “on the cutting edge.” He then outlined three new missiles: (1) a small-scale but heavy-duty “nuclear energy unit that can be installed in a missile,” giving it unlimited range; (2) a low-flying stealth missile that can carry nuclear warheads, with an “unpredictable trajectory”; (3) a nuclear-powered missile with unlimited range and unprecedented maneuverability. Putin calmly noted, “No other country has developed anything like this.”
The magician vaguely smiled and turned to his next trick: – Russia’s new submersible vehicles that can move at unprecedented depths [3,000 plus feet] – and, said Putin, “at a speed multiple times higher than the speed of submarines….” [That is, up to 185 kilometers per hour.] “It is really fantastic,” Putin remarked. “They are quiet, highly maneuverable and have hardly any vulnerabilities for the enemy to exploit. There is simply nothing in the world capable of withstanding them.”
It was magic, indeed. Putin began to talk about the speed of sound. Mach 1 is very fast, he said. It is 1,062 kilometers per hour. Imagine the trick of going Mach 5! “Military experts,” said Putin, “believe that it would be extremely powerful, and that its speed makes it invulnerable to current missile and air defense systems….” Yet, Putin’s trick was much bigger than this. “Friends,” Putin warmed to his audience, “Russia already has such a weapon.” Russia, in fact, has a “high-precision hypersonic aircraft missile system … the only one of its kind in the world. Its tests have been successfully completed, and, moreover, on December 1 of last year, these systems began their trial service at the airfields of the Southern Military District.” This new weapon is not merely five times faster than the speed of sound. It can travel at Mach 10! Russia has named this new missile system “the Dagger.” American aircraft carriers are defenseless against it.
Developing his theme further, Putin described Russia’s next strategic missile system with a gliding wing unit – also successfully tested. Then he addressed Russia’s “American and European partners who are NATO members.” With this new weapon, the Russian military will “neutralize” any threats posed by the deployment of U.S. global missile defense systems. The United States will not be able to defend itself or its allies. Furthermore, said Putin, “I am pleased to inform you that successfully completed experiments … enable us to confirm that in the near future … the Strategic Missile Forces will receive new hypersonic-speed, high-precision new weapons systems that can hit targets at intercontinental distance and can adjust their altitude and course as they travel.” Again, “no country in the world has such arms in their military arsenal.”
Putin presented one peerless weapon system after another. How can we account for it? Russia has almost no GNP. It is nothing but an overgrown Bulgaria. Surely, America cannot be so outclassed. Or did we miss something along the way? Did we delude ourselves?
“Nobody really wanted to talk to us about the core of the problem,” said Putin, “and nobody wanted to listen to us. So listen now.” If you thought a missile that goes Mach 10 was unprecedented, Russia has a missile that can go “in excess of Mach 20.” An animation of the new superweapon was then presented, with Putin apologizing that, “for obvious reasons we cannot show the outer appearance of this system here. This is still very important. I hope everyone understands this.” As if to summon the Devil himself, Putin spoke of something called Avangard. If other countries are developing new superweapons, he explained mysteriously, “We have every reason to believe that we are one step ahead there as well….”
For sheer effect, Putin nonchalantly announced, “We have achieved significant progress in laser weapons. It is not just a concept or a plan any more. It is not even in the early production stages.” A pregnant pause, as it were: “Since last year, our troops have been armed with laser weapons.”
Alas, our magician refused to offer more details. “It is not time yet,” he explained. Then, concluding this unprecedented display of military prowess, Putin said there are far more weapons “in development than I have mentioned today. But this is enough for now.” (In fact, Putin did not touch on Russia’s new anti-ballistic missile system, the S-500 Promethius. But then, this might have spoiled his pretense of innocence while accusing America of attempting to deploy its own rather ineffective anti-ballistic missiles.)
“Thousands,” said Putin, “literally thousands of our experts, outstanding scientists, designers, engineers, passionate and talented workers have been laboring for years, quietly, humbly, selflessly, with total dedication. There are many young professionals among them. They are our true heroes, along with our military.” He then thanked these heroes on behalf of the Russian people.
Then, engaging in ironic understatement, Putin said, “I hope that everything … said today would make any potential aggressor think twice….” With equal irony he said it was his duty to inform “our partners” of these new weapons. Russia has not violated any arms control agreements, he lied. Russia has no intention of using these weapons for “aggressive goals,” he promised. In fact, he continued, “We are not threatening anyone.”
Does Putin’s speech have a non-threatening feel?
Continuing in this ironic vein, Putin accused the United States – though not by name – of “seeking unilateral advantage against Russia.” And he said this with a straight face! Then, he turned from being a magician and a comedian to a lawyer. He warned that “restrictions and sanctions” introduced against Russia are “illegal from the standpoint of international law….” And then, with obvious satisfaction, Putin said: “Everything you have tried to prevent through such a policy has already happened. No one has managed to restrain Russia.”
His domestic audience was pleased. Occasional smiles and knowing looks were exchanged here and there. The old apparatchiks – the ones who knew all this was coming years ago – looked very bored. But then Putin turned his full attention on America. “We are greatly concerned by certain provisions of the revised [American] Nuclear Posture Review [of February 2018],” said Putin, menacingly. “Behind closed doors, one may say anything to calm down anyone, but we read what is written. And what is written is that this strategy can be put into action in response to conventional arms attacks and even to a cyber-threat. I should note that our military doctrine says Russia reserves the right to use nuclear weapons solely in response to a nuclear attack, or an attack with other weapons of mass destruction against [our] country or its allies, or an act of aggression against us with the use of conventional weapons that threaten the very existence of the state. This is all very clear and specific. As such, I see it as my duty to announce the following. Any use of nuclear weapons against Russia or its allies … will be considered as a nuclear attack on this country. Retaliation will be immediate, with all the attendant consequences. There should be no doubt about this whatsoever.”
Committing himself to “sustainable development for human civilization,” Putin then launched into an attack on the United States. “Our policies will never be based on claims to exceptionalism. We protect our interests…. We observe international law and believe in the inviolable central role of the UN.”
How internationalist. How noble. How disingenuous. Our effeminate and loose principled politicians say he stole the 2016 election for Trump when he only stole the strategic high-ground.
Then Putin pointed to Russia’s “comprehensive strategic partnership with the People’s Republic of China.” Of course, he opined, Russia’s relations with “many other countries in the world are entering a new dynamic stage.” He then spoke of Russia’s international reach. “Colleagues,” he said, looking to his elite Russian audience. “this is a turning point for the entire world and those who are willing and able to change….” Oh yes, “change is necessary,” he said. The next decade and the entire twenty-first century will “undoubtedly be an age of outstanding triumphs for Russia…. I believe it will be so. Thank you.”
And so, Putin himself has provided us with an answer to the question posed in last week’s essay, “Are Russia and China Igniting a Third World War?” To prepare such an astonishing array of weapons – which are clearly aimed at America – cannot be explained as a mere attempt at self-defense. Putin’s entire performance was a perfectly choreographed threat.
A few days ago, the U.S. Strategic Command sent an unprecedented tweet in the form of a “Posture Statement Preview” from their website:
The spectrum of conflict today is neither linear nor predictable. We must account for the possibility of conflict leading to considerations which could very rapidly drive an adversary to consider nuclear use as their least bad option.
The U.S. Strategic Command is admitting, without offering details, what was outlined in our essay of last week. Indeed, a nuclear war could begin at any time. What events would “drive an adversary to consider nuclear use as their least bad option”? The answer may be found in the “classics” of Soviet military literature, which support in every respect the choices made by Putin’s new weapon scientists.
To put Russia’s new weapons in perspective, a brief commentary on America’s new weapon systems is also in order. Let us start with the U.S. Navy’s Littoral Combat Ship (LCS), or, as one report put it, “How to Put Lipstick on a Pig.” It is a $34 billion dollar warship program that does not work as intended. It costs almost as much to operate as a guided missile destroyer, but without any real combat value. Or how about the “Too Expensive to Use” F-35 single-seat, single-engine, all-weather stealth multirole boondoggle? Over its lifespan, this piece of junk will cost taxpayers $1.7 trillion. It was supposed to replace the F-16, but it “is slow, maneuvers sluggishly and cannot fire its new lightweight gatling gun without destroying the housing and the airplane.” In fact, this fighter has 12 “class one” life-threatening defects and 871 “flaws” which must be fixed before this jet-powered nightmare can be deployed as intended (if ever). Even more depressing, check out the new Ford class CVN (nuclear powered aircraft carrier). The ship’s “innovative” Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) does not work. There are also problems with the ship’s nuclear propulsion system, the elevator design, and much, much more. When will the Ford CVN be fixed? Well, it has been almost four years and the ship still has not successfully completed its post-delivery test and trial period. For those curious to read about more failed or outrageously expensive weapons systems, please read, “The Sobering Truth About the Pentagon’s Acquisition Failures.”
As a final comment, the United States is rapidly losing its strategic capability. In fact, the Russians and Chinese may be so superior that we cannot credibly deter them from using nuclear weapons on us. Russian military strategists have long held that strategic rocket (missile) weapons are the decisive weapons of the next war. Why? Because they are the fastest weapons on Earth and they hit the hardest. Senator Elizabeth Warren, of course, does not really think we need them. She wants us to rely on something else. Perhaps she has an Indian tomahawk in mind. But can the Pentagon procure one that works?
This is Part II of THE CRISIS
Special thanks to Barrett Moore for his assistance in the writing of this article.
Quarterly Subscription (Voluntary)
JRNyquist.blog
$15.00
159 responses to “Checkmate: For Twenty-Two Years You Were Warned”
Mr. Nyquist, What is your take on Alexei Navalny? My gut says he is a CIA deepstate plant considering the attention given him by the OBiden admin and Mockingbird MSM. What is is his role in all of this?
Given what Navalny has suffered, and the courage he has shown, the suggestion that he is a CIA plant is insulting — not only to him.
i apologize if you felt insulted, not my intention. Given the levels of lying and manipulation in this world, its an honest question to ask.
I did not feel insulted. Your remark was insulting to Mr. Navalny, a dissident who was poisoned by the Russian government with a military-grade nerve agent. Navalny was treated for this poisoning in Germany and then returned to Russia, where he was promptly arrested on trumped-up charges — and then embarked on a hunger strike (which he, being near death, has ended). To malign such a person as an agent of the CIA is offensive. Whatever we think of Navalny’s political ideas, his courage is not that of a stooge. Russian dissidents who are poisoned, like Anna Politkovskaya and Alexander Litvinenko, in 2006, do not generally survive long. Anyone who has the courage to stand up against this regime — in the face of assassination and torture — deserves better.
Madonna showed great courage in supporting the musical group, Pussy Riot, when they were imprisoned for political artistic expression. After establishing a chain of fitness centers, ‘Hard Candy,’ in Russia, she risked all that capital, to stand up for Free Speech.
Madonna is joined on stage by Pussy Riot at Amnesty International Concerthttps://youtu.be/3Vm9k5sWxWA
https://www.madonna.com/news/title/hard-candy-fitness-opens-in-moscow
After nearly two years in prison for singing a song about Vladimir Putin in Moscow’s main cathedral, the women of Pussy Riot are no less defiant. Maria Alyokhina and Nadezhda Tolokonnikova have walked free from prison , and pledged to devote their energies to changing the political system in Russia and improving conditions inside its prisons.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/23/freed-pussy-riot-amnesty-prison-putin-humiliation
Make America Great Again
You are mocking Navalny, too, by writing this post.
Punk public prayer “Mother of Jesus, Putin banish” – “Pussy Riot” in the Temple
(Song about Vladimir Putin in Moscow’s main cathedral, the women of Pussy Riot)
https://youtu.be/wlgPdcUXIHs
Who needs “courage” when you have the resources of the US State Department?
Navalny is just another agent of the Obama Admin’s policy of regime change.
Trump is CIA and so is O’bama. The Covid Live Exercise, began on Trump’s watch, and butter wouldn’t melt in his mouth. He criticized Hilarity for her connections with, Goldman-Sachs, then the first thing he did once elected was to stuff his cabinet full of those crooks.
You are intentionally attempting to confuse my readers. Don’t post here again.
The World is confused because we all have been hoodwinked by a phony two party system, which is controlled by the one same totalitarian globalist entity. Trump talks the talk that Conservatives want to hear, but he let states’ governors all shut down the US economy. Instead of standing up for The Bill Of Rights, all Trump could do is cry about the election fraud. John Kerry complained back in 2004, that Republicans defeated him with rigged, Smartmatic voting machines, but neither Democrats nor Republicans dare to discuss that today. Nobody will lock up Hilarity, because if she talks, she takes everyone down with her.
“The center of the Yale “World Fellows” Program is a 15-week global affairs seminar for wannabe “foreign future leaders” , Navalny is a graduate of this program that educates future “colour revolutionaries”.
No wonder CIA’s Brennan dreamt about Navalny becoming Russian president”
https://twitter.com/elenaevdokimov7/status/1316002618188025856/photo/1
https://worldfellows.yale.edu/person/alexey-navalny/
“Imagine prospects for world peace, prosperity, & security if Joe Biden were President of the United States & Alexei Navalny the President of Russia. We’ll soon be halfway there.” — John Brennan
https://thespectator.info/2020/10/09/holy-cringe-ex-cia-director-john-brennan-uses-birthday-of-late-john-lennon-to-imagine-new-presidents-for-u-s-and-russia-twitchy-com/
All an American KGB agent serving in the CIA has to do to cast suspicion on a Russian dissident, is praise him. Why, then, does Brennan praise Navalny. One may betray with a kiss, or crush with an embrace.
[…] This essay by JR Nyquist may be one of his most concerning yet. It is a follow-up to his previous article, which I reposted here. Please read the entire post, then see the summary points below. […]
Nyquist, it’s crazy how much hate you are getting on twitter and your blog posts! It’s because you are hitting the nail right on the head and you are now being trolled by lefties and probably Russians lol. It just makes the articles you write more appealing to read. I hope you do the interview regarding the prophecies. That stuff is fascinating.
Yes. I have actually interviewed the author last week. I just have to edit and post it.
great news Jeff, I was the reader who ask about the prophecies.
This is exactly right. When you start taking flak, you are over the target. Open the bomb bay doors. Reposted your essay and added some commentary here… https://www.professorpreponomics.com/state-sponsors-of-terror/russian-military-danger/
It’s very important to get this information out there, and get prepared for a rough ride.
👍
Communism is the belief (slight pause) that your government officials are wise, intelligent, and good.
See footnote “h”.
For use as a stand alone political comment when you’re about to turn and walk away – or end a podcast?
“When former Defense Secretary Ashton Carter ordered all combat roles open to women in December 2015, the Marine Corps was alone among the services in requesting exceptions in areas such as infantry, machine gunner, fire support and reconnaissance, according to a Congressional Research Service report. The exceptions were denied.”
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/breaking-barrier-women-become-us-marines-after-surviving-crucible-2021-04-26/
“It is probably no accident that Russia leads all other nations in the production of vacuum tubes, Svetlana Tubes in St. Petersburg being the largest manufacturer of vacuum tubes in the world. Vacuum tube electronics are over ten million times less vulnerable to HEMP than the advanced semiconductors and microchips that are the sinews of economic and military power in the United States.”
https://www.americanpartisan.org/2021/04/wwv-the-russian-federations-military-doctrine-plans-and-capabilities-for-electromagnetic-pulse-emp-attack/
Bingo.
Even in the late 80’s the Soviets planned a multi-altitude level & multiple stage EMP “lay-down” attack on North America but didn’t give it the odds of complete success one might have expected.
We would be fools to not consider the improvements they would have made over the intervening 30+ years not just in delivery systems (hypersonic, fractional orbital, subsurface ocean) but nuclear technology (pumped x-ray, neutron, exotic materials) and non-nuclear (NNEMP, CHAMP).
In regard to the Russian Poseidon Status 6 “Multipurpose” System, such a system or one a heck of a lot smaller and more stealthy one (or one deployed by the other) could be an anti-boomer “Super-EMP” weapon system, laying quietly on the floor of the ocean for the fateful day/night. The affordability and potential rapid deployment of such a weapon system could all by itself be a game changer.
Strangely, I have never even heard of speculation of such a anti-submarine “EMP system” although the old VA-111 Shkval supercavitating torpedo would be the ideal weapon for delivery of such a device near the intended target.
Never underestimate your enemy.
To glance at Walmart’s array of items for sale, was to understand America’s future.
How hidden from fools is the cause of events.
Navalny, is a brave, dedicated, agent provocateur. There is no genuine, populist Russian contender to leadership. Yale, Skull & Bones, has yet to repatriate, Geronimo’s skull, too.
Attending a seminar at Yale is proof of your thesis? Do you have any idea how to analyze evidence? And now you have made him a member of Skull & Bones! — Simply because he visited Yale.
Fair enough. I didn’t even know about that until reading the above post.
I had a professor at Portland State University, who has a doctorate from Yale. He is the best professor that I ever had. PSU has many professors from Yale. One Friday night in the Campus student center, I overheard a group of them huddled together, discussing plans for something akin to a New World Order.
I proved two professors there, of fraud, which resulted in my being academically dismissed, assaulted by Campus police, and ending up homeless. One of the teachers who I proved a fraud, got fired. I feel vindicated since the PSU Death Squad, wandered several blocks off Campus to a drinking establishment, and emptied their clips in a good Samaritan who had just broken up a fight.
Russia and China are not the problem. The two party system, controlled by Yaleies is the problem.
I’ll reserve judgement on Navalny, but don’t expect me to trust him.
Are you one of those Antifa activists?
Jeff, here’s one part of the problem I have with your thesis regarding Russia (there are others but this one stands out for me particularly); can it ever be proven false, or can bias always find ”proof”?
You see, most of the people who have ever stuck to these ideas, are people primed to them to begin with; a number of partisans of Russophobia, often either Islamist fanatics, evangelical protestants who hate and fear Russia because they think Russia is fated to invade Israel during the End Times with a coalition of Muslim allies, Uniates of various sorts who hate Russia for ethno-tribal and religious reasons, and (connected somewhat to the previous) traditional roman catholics who hate and fear Russia because they believe in the Fatima apparition and think Russia’s refusal to convert to the Papal church will bring on judgement upon the nations at Russia’s hands, Russia in their eyes holding back a period of spiritual and temporal glory for the world/and the Roman church. In other words, believers in theological theories they’re personally emotionally invested in. Believers who latch on to the ”Golitsyn Thesis” and related ideas who automatically fit these ideas into already established worldviews antithetical to the very existence of a Russian state and people. And I haven’t even mentioned much the fascists and other followers of the Hitlerite religion….
Therefore, is it possible to examine the information you have provided, and interpret it in a framework that a Great Russian Nationalist, A patriotic Russian nationalist who is Anti-Communist (but maybe even Socialist in a Non-Marxian Leninist manner!) an Orthodox Christian perhaps who desires a revival of the Tsarist Regime and Empire, or some such other type that exists today, would accept it? Or have the people who regularly endorse these ideas of yours and others made that impossible even if they were true?
And I make these comments and ask these questions out of the deepest respect, for you are one of the few who understand quite well at least the sickness of the Western world. I am not critical for criticism’s sake, or out of a lack of understanding of history, particularly Russian history.
Vladimir: Thank you for writing such a thoughtful set of paragraphs. My thesis is not really about Russia. It is about Russia’s peculiar government — that halfway house of the post-Soviet machine, with its communist throwbacks animated by the psychopathology of the modern state (which we see in Europe and America — destroying everything). And yes! If bias always finds proof then bias is father to the lie. One should not seek to prove a theory, in science. One should seek, rather, to disprove a theory. That is the only correct way to proceed. As for demonizing Russia, I have never consciously done that. Russia is the prisoner of its state, as America is becoming the prisoner of its state. The right-minded see the good and bad in everything, and seek to advance the good. Certainly, Russia is special because it passed through the fires of communist nihilism first. This passage, as grim hangover, may continue for some time to come, or it may be nearing its end. Perhaps Russia is our only real hope; for if Russia finds a way out of the trap, then the world may also find a way out. Like other great countries, Russia has a toxic modernizing element and a deeply spiritual redeeming element. Russia probably must follow a monarchist path, and an Orthodox path, which is strictly necessary to the challenges of its geographical position and profound historical experiences. I have never believed that democracy is the right form of government for Eurasia, or Russia, nor is it necessary for the freedom of the Russian people. Monarchies have checks and balances just as Republics can have them. All that being said, Russia requires a more autocratic form of government because of its vulnerability — its proximity to Islam, the Turks, the Mongols, etc. To be a Republic it helps to have oceans around you, or the English Channel. Democracy is not a panacea. As the history of Athens shows, it is the worst form of government imaginable. I am not Russophobic. I admire Dostoyevski and Solzhenitsyn. I have read Father Georges Florovsky with profit. It will anger some of my readers, but I have never pronounced an opinion regarding Bible prophecy, except to excuse myself from having an opinion. People who are interested in such things have always been interested in my work, to plunder what I have written in support their own views. I listen to such views patiently. Sometimes I listen with impatience. As for Fatima, it was a real event. I know what my Catholic friends say about it. I know what my Orthodox friends say about it. I cannot intelligently unravel the theological arguments of each side. My training was in political science and theory, not theology. Naturally, I do not wish to stray too far from my subject area. I do not know how to square political theory with supernatural visitations — except to say, with Machiavelli, that supernatural events do occur in history, and provide men with warning messages. Noting your further comments: Of course, there is the religion of the Hitlerites and the anti-Semites, who represent a political religion, akin to communism — permeated with a negative spirituality. Hitler was a mystery in the sense of his many intrigues; yet he was monstrously selfish — a maniac who wanted to exterminate Russia and who murdered millions of Jewish hostages he collected from Europe. This is insane, and the insanity destroyed Germany. Hitler was not a nationalist. Hitler’s country was himself. Authentic nationalism is not evil, though nationalism can be perverted to evil ends. Genuine nationalism takes on the spirit of a people. It is not about chauvinism. It is not about hating other people. In the case of Russia, her people suffered martyrdom at the hands of Bolshevism, at the hands of Nazism. And the world looked coldly on. It was a world exhausted by the folly of the First World War, yet I have always believed there is some kind of obligation, as Edmund Burke said during the French Revolution, for peoples to rescue other peoples when the situation is truly dire; when an evil contagion threatens humanity as a whole. I cannot understand why the French and British did not more actively support the White Army. And as you mention the Golitsyn thesis, we must always remember that all such theses, however successful their predictions have been, are always problematic on the next go-round. Great care must be taken to observe the real situation. In fact, there are signs of underlying hope in Russia, with the decline in Putin’s popularity and the protests in support of Navalny. The rotten regime cannot last forever. At least we hope it cannot. Those who think Russian nationalism is inherently evil do not realize that Russia saved Europe in 1813-1814. The Russian Army entered Paris and put an end to Bonaparte. The authentic Russia, the good Russia (as one should hope to see a good America), left a century of peace in her wake (minus those relatively small affairs, like the Crimean War and the Franco-Prussian War, etc.). One should not simplify, of course. Forgive me for doing so. As for people who “regularly endorse” my ideas: Are there really such people? Doesn’t everyone have their own ideas? But I see what you mean. Writing can be frustrating; for the ideas you set forth often come back to you in distorted form; and you blush with shame, and ask yourself, “Am I really so inept that this is what they got from my work?”