The future is dubious, but the closest scenario of conflict resolution is with Russia occupying the two break away regions of eastern Ukrain: Donetsk and Luhansk and the declaration of the rest of Ukrain as neutral. In the event that Russia fails in reaching these goals, the war will turn into a protracted conflict subject to dramatic escalations not just for Europe but for the rest of the world.For Ukrain, it has two choices, either dance to the Russian tune or accept to pay the piper.

Share

Significant issues are humanitarian and socioeconomic crises and geopolitical shifts. The neighbouring countries are mostly affected by the refugee crisis. Four million people have been displaced to neighbouring countries, namely, Hungary, Moldova and Poland. Currently, it's estimated that almost 10 million people are pushed to seek shelter and safety. The war has severely affected food, energy and financial markets, sending commodity prices to soar record high. The global economy is forecast to contract by 1 percent in 2022. In the medium to long-term there may be a divergence in response between Europe and the US.   The increasing delta between the cost of gas and the cost of renewables making investment in the latter more attractive, even though supply chain disruption risks pushing up the cost of renewables.  In the US, higher gas prices make increased oil and gas prospecting attractive not only as a means of insulating the US economy from the need to import hydrocarbons from overseas, but as a profit-returning venture in its own right. The Russia’s unprovoked invasion of Ukraine has changed the paradigm in ways that we are only just beginning to discern.  The impacts will be long-term and potentially transformational.

There is danger of setting a sample for other states, especially regional powers to settle disputed borders through war, the signs have already started in other areas. If that happens, hard times are ahead.

@Ibrahim konack

I believe that the problem is bigger than a dispute over border area. It is mainly related to NATO expansion eastwards and the fear that this expansion instilled inside the Russian policy circles.

We are possibly heading towards a war that lasts for a minimum of two years with already visible dramatic consequences. This conflict will undoubtedly redefine the border contours of Eastern Europe and the defense strategy at NATO level. This has so far shown the image of unity, but in the long run the cracks could begin due to national agendas. For the rest of the world, the visit of the Chairman-in-Office of the African Union, Macky Sall, to Moscow alone demonstrates the capacity for economic and social destruction of which this war is capable, regardless where we are in the world.

The war has caused some civilians to question how safe they are in relatively

“peaceful” countries. It’s gone beyond Russia, Ukraine and even Europe to question the strength in national alliances in times of such intrusions.

While factors of the Russian-Ukrainian war is interconnected, a common highlight is the uncertainty that lies in absolute security of relatively developed countries and by extension the global peace of all nations.

The biggest potential consequence OUTSIDE of the immediate conflict area is what the relevant major power players take from Ukraine and consider applicable lessons to other areas. The most obvious application being talked about is Taiwan. What many miss, however, is that that lesson can be applied in TWO ways, not just one. Most in the West are looking at Taiwan and wondering if the West will support Taiwan against China. But there is definitely a scenario in which China looks at Ukraine and sees opportunities in which it can establish new explicit dominance over Taiwan. Ukraine is not necessarily a perfect example of the West standing up to authoritarianism and supporting the underdog (which is the mythology America wants people to believe currently). It is an example of major powers "sorta kinda somewhat" supporting the underdog, resulting in something of a quagmire. China could certainly exploit that approach to its own advantage and to Taiwan's detriment.

G. Kissinger offers his vision of the future geopolitics. "The international system of the twenty-first century, he notes, will consist of at least six major powers - the United States, Europe, China, Japan, Russia, and possibly India, as well as many medium and small states." In the book Does America Need a Foreign Policy? he emphasizes the complexity of the modern geopolitical picture of the world and identifies four main interstate systems based on different principles. The first system is the system of relations “between the United States and Western Europe, as well as between the countries of the Western Hemisphere ...”, in which “the idealistic vision of a world based on the principles of democratic and economic progress convincingly demonstrates itself ...; wars are excluded, they can flare up only on the periphery, where ethnic conflicts can become a source. The second system covers the relations between the great Asian countries (India, China, Japan, Russia), which treat each other as strategic rivals. “Wars between these countries are not inevitable, but hardly impossible,” and therefore the principle of the balance of power retains a decisive role here. The third system is the Middle East, a zone of permanent and serious conflicts, the roots of which "are not in the economic sphere, as in the countries of the Atlantic Basin and the Western Hemisphere, and not in the strategic one, as in Asia, but in the sphere of ideology and religion" Compromise is difficult to achieve . The fourth system is Africa, a continent to whose history it is impossible to find European examples. The policy of the 46 African states that have declared themselves democratic is not based on unifying ideological principles. Africa's colonial past has left explosive potential, ethnic strife, artificial borders, economic underdevelopment and colossal health problems. "As a result, Africa was overwhelmed by wild civil wars, developing into international conflicts, as well as epidemics, the enormity of which is difficult even to realize." With such a wide variety of international systems that have emerged in the post-Cold War world, Kissinger argued that America, "always looking for a single formula for all occasions," should wisely use its superiority, namely, to develop a long-term strategy that meets this new situation. , while focusing on differentiated approaches to emerging problems, based on the specifics of these systems.

EM. Slaughter characterizes the "new world order" as "disaggregated" and "networked" as a result of the transformation of states into structures that continue to operate on the world stage as unitary, sovereign entities, although in reality they are no longer such, or, more precisely, are such to an incomplete extent. In fact, states are becoming more and more “disassembled” into their constituent institutions, which acquire relative independence and interact with similar parts of other states, with supranational organizations. This is how structural and functional "management networks" (government networks) are formed, "entwining" the whole world. Networks as "forms of regular and purposeful relationships" between actors operating on the world stage can range from informal bilateral and multilateral ties, sometimes spontaneous, to regional and global organizations. Networks can function in parallel not only with states, but also with traditional international institutions, be built into them or even built on top of them.

K.S. Hajiyev notes that “the rise of a multipolar world order with its state and non-state actors has significantly narrowed, if not excluded, the possibility of maintaining or promoting any one state as a superpower capable of solely controlling the situation in the world” . Next to the North American and European economic and political centers, new centers have appeared, such as Japan, China, India, the Middle East, South Africa, and in the future Russia and the CIS countries will constitute an independent center of power capable of competing and cooperating on an equal footing with other centers. CM. Rogov states: “In a few years, the contours of the new world will be determined, America will be stronger than any other power, but it will join the ranks of such countries as China, India, Japan, Brazil, Russia, and also the countries of the European Union.” K.E. Sorokin names the following objective reasons that are pushing the world towards multipolarity: this is the finiteness of natural resources, and the limited habitable territory with the continued growth of the world's population, and the inconsistency of many key economic interests of individual countries and their groupings, with the unity or similarity of other interests, and the deepest cultural and civilizational differences existing in the world. E.Ya. Batalov notes that the presence of many concepts of the future world order leads to an important conclusion about the futility of claims to theoretical and methodological absolutism. “The modern system of international relations is too complex and dynamic to fit into any one identification scheme - “polar”, civilizational or some other. The multidimensional structure of the post-Cold War world order can only be adequately interpreted with the help of different, complementary analytical models: in some sense, it can be represented as a system of centers of power (and the centers of military power will not necessarily coincide with the centers of economic or financial or some other force), in some - as a set or even a system of civilizations, in some - as a pole system (when we have two centers that act in relation to each other as precisely the poles of a particular measurements), etc.”

What is actually built depends largely on the US ambitions

History reference

Modern Ukraine was created by Soviet Russia after the revolution of 1917 due to the separation from Russia of part of its own historical territories. Then, on the eve and after the Great Patriotic War, Stalin annexed to the USSR and transferred to Ukraine the territories that belonged to Poland, Romania and Hungary. In 1954, Khrushchev “gifted” Crimea to Ukraine. As a result, the territory of Soviet Ukraine was formed. And these are not the merits of the radicals and nationalists of Ukraine.

After the collapse of the USSR, the Ukrainian authorities began to build their statehood on the denial of a common history for Russia and Ukraine, sought to change the historical memory of millions of people, entire generations living in Ukraine. Not surprisingly, Ukrainian society faced the rise of extreme nationalism, which quickly took the form of aggressive Russophobia and neo-Nazism. Hence the participation of Ukrainian nationalists and neo-Nazis in terrorist gangs in the North Caucasus, and the increasingly louder territorial claims against Russia.

In 2014, before the coup d'état, Maidan radicals, with direct assistance from foreign states, organized a real terror against those who opposed their anti-constitutional actions.

In accordance with the laws on education and the functioning of the Ukrainian language as the state language (2014 - the abolition of the law "On the Fundamentals of the State Language Policy", 2017 - the law "On Education" was adopted), the Russian language is completely excluded from schools, from all public spheres right down to regular stores. The law on the so-called lustration, the "cleansing" of power, made it possible to deal with objectionable state and public figures. Also, the current leadership of the country does not respond to the requests of Ukrainian citizens to repeal laws that infringe on the rights of believers.

In March 2021, Ukraine adopted a new Military Strategy. This document is almost entirely devoted to the confrontation with Russia, aims to draw foreign states into a conflict with the Russian Federation. The strategy proposes the organization in the Russian Crimea and on the territory of Donbass, in fact, of a terrorist underground.

The military pumping of the Kyiv regime is persistently carried out. The United States alone, since 2014, has allocated billions of dollars for these purposes, including the supply of weapons, equipment, and training of specialists. The choice of ways to ensure security should not create a threat to other states, and Ukraine's entry into NATO is a direct threat to Russia's national security.

Today, one glance at the map is enough to see how Western countries have “kept” their promise to prevent NATO from moving eastward. In 1999, Poland, the Czech Republic, Hungary were admitted to NATO, in 2004 - Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia, in 2009 - Albania and Croatia, in 2017 - Montenegro, in 2020 - Republic of North Macedonia.

As a result of NATO, its military infrastructure went directly to the borders of the Russian Federation. This became one of the key causes of the European security crisis, had the most negative impact on the entire system of international relations, and led to the loss of mutual trust.

Ukraine has declared that it will create nuclear weapons, and this is not empty bravado. With the appearance of weapons of mass destruction in Ukraine, the situation in the world, in Europe, especially for Russia, will change in the most radical way. The choice of ways to ensure security should not create a threat to other states, and Ukraine's entry into NATO is a direct threat to Russia's national security.

Base on my research findings, It is observed that the West’s goals of seeking to keep Russia satisfied and Ukraine independent are

mutually incompatible. NATO is not Russia’s only problem; a democratising Ukraine integrating into Europe within the EU’s Eastern Partnership is also unacceptable to Russia. Putin does not distinguish between ntegration on offer in the Eastern Partnership and membership, which is not. Integration into Europe means that Putin cannot fulfil his destiny of ‘gathering Russian lands’ because Ukraine would not be part of the Russian World. Russian leaders believe that ‘Russian lands, was wrongly included in Ukraine, and are being prevented from joining the Russian World by Galician Ukrainian nationalists. Russian leaders have continued to believe this fallacy after Zelenskyy’s election. With Russian nationalism (imperialism) driving Putin’s policies towards Ukraine, it is difficult to see how peace in the Donbas can be achieved. With Putin in power for more years, the policies he has pursued, however counterproductive they have been to Russian goals, will continue towards

Ukraine. It is also observed that, major reason Russia going into war with Ukraine is to protect its border and to

maintain its regional influence in the east of Europe. Meanwhile, Ukrainians and Russians do not generally view

the ‘other’ in a hostile manner and both believe that there should be friendly relations between their countries; they do have very different views on where relations between their two countries actually stand. Russians and Ukrainians equally distrust the other’s political leadership and view the other’s country in an unfavourable light. It is found that the war has a global economic consequence, especially global supply chain disruption. This has manifested through energy supply shocks, and trade supply shocks. It led to rising energy prices, rising commodity prices, and a rise in food prices, thereby leading to a rise in global inflation in many countries. In

terms of humanitarian, the numbers of casualties are inestimable with inflows of refugees and displaced people within and outside of Russia and Ukraine territory. The implication is that geopolitical conflicts tend to have spillover economic effects to other countries and that such conflict do not have isolated effects on the sanctioned country. Therefore, political leaders should put in effort to discourage war like the Ukraine-Russia war, and should learn how to use diplomatic tools such as negotiation to resolve conflict. Most importantly, engaged NGOs, civil society organisation and international community on peace education and discussions on the negative effects of war and the hard realities of what war can cause to either countries’ now or future. This will help to promote international peace and security rather than hard economic policies on either side. It has shown that sanctions against a warring country is not an optimal solution because it has spillover effects into other

countries who are not part of the war, especially when the warring countries are trade partners of other countries

who are not involved in the war.

Literally Russian invasion of Ukraine has simply reenergized NATO and worldwide countries have begun revealuation of their military defences

Recently two Nordic countries that have pursued military non-alignment have applied for NATO membership

The confrontation of power between Plural (Liberal) sphere of influence (US-NATO) and Monolitic sphere of influence (Russia-China, and all monolitic based countries), will continue, but due to a lack of a credible international offer from monolitic sphere of influence, Plural sphere of influence will prevail.

War in Ukraine today is due to the fact that Russia can not put on the table a Diplomatic, economic and securitary offer that can balance US-NATO offer.

All the Monilitic based countries have nothing to offer to straingthen the international system, it’s why, all are speaking more about national interest

The geo-political implications from the Russia-Ukraine war are multiple to the region including the spill over effect to the global security. I always wonder where should I start. Implications to Ukraine, Russia, to the Eurasia region, to Europe and to the USA at one angle and to other parts of the world at other angle, are complex where many forces are working together. Different perceptions over national interest and national security made the conflict unavoidable. The old concept of power factor still very dominant in the conflict, dragged the region and the world into serious security repercussions. The old baggage of the Cold War tension still enveloping the background of the conflict. NATO creates fear to Russia since the Cold War and Russia perceive expansion of NATO as a threat factor in the region. Once again military security dominated the conflict, added with border security, territorial security, nuclear security and other security issues.

The most pessimistic scenario is that Russia, using its numerical, military, financial potential and the ability to hit targets throughout Ukraine, including settlements, will exhaust the population of Ukraine and thereby inflict a terrible defeat on Ukraine, while taking control of most of this country, cutting off from the maritime borders, which will undermine the economic component of the country for many decades, and moreover, will generally call into question the restoration or existence of the country as a whole.

The optimistic scenario is that Ukraine, having mobilized its maximum human, technological and financial resources, will be able to defeat the Russian army, while freeing all its territories, including Lugansk, Donetsk and Crimea, which was annexed to Russia. However, even if, under all circumstances, Ukraine manages to achieve this, it will be completely exhausted both in terms of human resources and political and economic, since this scenario will last for many years, even if the Western world assists Ukraine in providing the necessary military resources.

In my opinion, there is also a realistic option, which is that the entire modern world, not only economically but also politically, would express its complete disagreement with this aggression and, in fact, to the detriment of its geopolitical and economic interests, would let Russia feel this pressure significantly. Since, I do not think that it will be possible to convince Russia by limiting itself to political statements and economic sanctions. This in no way means that it is necessary to start a Third World War, it is necessary to create an international mechanism under the patronage of a reformed UN, whose decisions and resolutions will not be so easily rejected, and which will have the power to implement its decisions.

As present conflict is much wider than just territorial conflict between two countries.

The current crisis of the Western economy is not a recession because it is not cyclical and is not limited to 12-16 months. What is happening in the US and Europe today is a structural crisis, a process that began in the fourth quarter of 2021 and will continue for at least five years without interruption. However, the West does not understand the causes and essence of the crisis, because they do not have theories describing it. That is why, according to the economist, the American and European authorities are doing stupid things instead of effective measures to resolve problems.

It was impossible to avoid this crisis, because they went too far. They have expanded private consumption so much that they can no longer keep it. You need to name the main number. There is an indicator in the United States that they do not disclose in public discussion: this is the level of price growth for all industrial goods, not only for final goods entering the wholesale trade, but in general for everything, from raw materials to the final product. For the first time, the rise in prices for manufactured goods exceeded the level of the late 1970s. The previous peak was at the end of 1947. There are 23 with something percent.

The entire system of socio-political management in the West, both in the USA and in Europe, is built through representatives of the middle class, qualified consumers. Today this instrument is being destroyed. Instead of the middle class, new poor people appear, who have a middle-class attitude, but they have no money.

The sanctions pressure on Russia has exacerbated the economic problems of the West. European financiers note that EU politicians are afraid to take responsibility for decisions taken under the slogans of transatlantic solidarity and assistance to Ukraine.

In fact, this whole situation with global confrontation and the breakdown of the dollar system is disastrous for the United States not by economic factors, but by intellectual ones. Roughly speaking, Washington will undoubtedly lose to Moscow only because the US does not even have a concept of a plan to solve the colossal economic problems and save the dollar system.

Intellectual life in the US and Russia goes in opposite directions. The US has nothing left for a long time. There, no one can imagine even a weak positive scenario. The complete absence of any thought, not to mention the concept.

Once again, Volodymyr Zelenskyy announced that there would be no peace talks without the return of the territories. The negotiating team does not maintain any contact with their Russian counterparts, which indicates that the “war party” dominates at the top in Ukraine. The Western handlers behind the officials in Kyiv are determined to escalate the conflict in the region.

You need to understand that not a single pathetic speech about the fact that “Ukraine can resist Russia for ten years” or about a counteroffensive that will push the Russians back to the borders of 2014, that is, with the capture of the Crimean Armed Forces, is impossible. These are beautiful words for Western curators and those who still believe in a "great independent Ukraine." For Western curators, it is important to test their equipment in a combat clash with the Russians, to study the enemy, to deplete the resources of the Russian Army and the Russian economy. The West is well aware that Ukraine will not win this confrontation, but so far the situation has not changed. The “Party of Peace”, although gaining strength in the West among the elites and the population, does not yet dominate the “Party of War”.

What does it mean? This means that there is no need to listen to the alarmists who are talking about the upcoming Minsk 3.0. There will be no broken agreements. Activity in the Nikolaev and Odessa directions, the creation of the CAA in the Kharkiv region, the preparation of referendums in Kherson and Zaporozhye, as well as the active integration of the DPR and LPR into Russia, indicate that Russia will go to the end in the NVO, liberating its historical territories and seeking the fall of the existing in Ukraine, a political order that has become a convenient partner for dark schemes, illegal deals and arms trafficking for the US and EU.

Kyiv does not want peace, does not want dialogue, does not want to compromise and put up with the real state of affairs. Well, they chose their own fate. Now let them wait for the developing tricolor in Kharkov, Poltava, Krivoy Rog, Dnepropetrovsk, Odessa, Nikolaev and Kyiv.

A column called “They are beginning to suspect something ...” is gaining momentum. Already, even The Times columnists began to guess that the West got lost in the “Kingdom of Crooked Mirrors”, which is modern Ukraine. Instead of soberly assessing the situation, the US and Europe rely on the nonsense of Kyiv functionaries, and they, in turn, generate all sorts of nonsense under the influence of mind-altering substances. As a result, the tandem of Western curators with a gang of crooks who have settled in Kyiv, operates according to the formula - "the blind leads the blind", and, quite expectedly, will soon find themselves in a hole.

You have to be bad enough friends with your head to believe Zelensky when he says that he will return the "lost territories" within the next three to six weeks and tries to convince the US Congress of this. Close relatives of the Ukrainian unfortunate president, who is still in office, have long received Israeli passports and are relaxing in a villa with a pool outside of Nezalezhnaya. Ze himself spends most of his working time gypsy money from foreign creditors, and then, together with his wife, goes to take pictures for Italian Vogue. This is really the "bloody weekdays of the war"!

It is even more stupid if the "Western partners" in all seriousness listen to the talking heads of the Office of the President of Ukraine - Arestovich or Podolyak. The first has been chanting mantras about the “destruction” of the Russian army since about February of this year, and the second is simply dreaming of an unrealizable dream of inflicting a “military defeat” on Russia. Apparently, both believe that if their "tales" do not agree with the facts, then so much the worse for the facts. It is clear that there is no objectivity here and cannot be.

In general, the escape from reality has not yet brought anyone to good. But the West wants to test it on its own skin.

The dollar became the world currency due to the fact that at some point all countries began to buy and sell oil for it. The power of the dollar was ensured by the ability of the United States to comprehensively (that is, financial, political and military means) control global energy flows. This became the basis of their world leadership. Gradually, however, the United States began to abuse its power and hegemonic status with increasing force. They decided that they can do everything, and the laws of economics no longer apply to them. "Absolute power corrupts absolutely." They openly declared themselves to be an "exceptional nation" and claimed to write the rules but not follow them.

As a result, the United States gradually turned from a global leader into a global parasite, having lost real economic superiority by 2008, and by now, real military-technological superiority. An attempt to maintain its leadership status by increasing information terror and global manipulations (staging) failed. And most importantly, an unspoken principle was violated: the United States ensures the stability of the global financial system, receives a number of bonuses from this, but also gives others a chance to live. The United States has decided that it is not necessary to let live. Simply put, fraera ruined greed.

The system went haywire and ceased to enjoy the trust of many participants in the global market, ceased to be profitable for them. It is beneficial only to the US and some of its satellites. The United States understood this and rushed to save its status as a "leader".

Freezing and possible confiscation of Russia's gold and foreign exchange reserves, an attempt to impose "marginal prices" on Russian oil, the clumsy financial policy of the Biden administration, which collapsed the shares of American energy companies, a recession in the United States, Russia's transition to trading its gas for rubles, expulsion from the Sakhalin-2 project Western companies - all this is clear evidence that the current global energy crisis is simply a derivative of the crisis of the "dollar empire", from the collapse of the global financial system.

Everyone in the world understands this, and countries that have at least partial sovereignty are trying to unite, striving to protect their interests and their assets as much as possible from the upcoming collapse. And the countries deprived of sovereignty dutifully move in the footsteps of the "hegemon", hoping mainly for a miracle. And they give him a loan, knowing full well that he will not return it.

When will this crisis end? Then, when there will be a “recount of assets” in the world, that is, their real (and not fictitious) price will be determined in some new monetary units (perhaps in the same oil, perhaps in gas, perhaps in gold or in some shopping cart). And as soon as there is certainty about the value of this basket, there will be other currencies tied to this basket. The basket will not be financial, but commodity, raw materials.

The recent EU, G7 and NATO summits, the “summit of democracies” showed that the United States, together with its vassals, is resisting the transformation that has begun with all its might, still trying to impose its will on the rest of the world, clinging to the old. The rest of the countries eloquently, albeit cautiously, make it clear that they no longer intend to live in the old coordinate system, where one “exceptional” nation imagined itself to be the messenger of the Almighty on earth and decided that everything was possible for it. It's too unprofitable and humiliating. “The tops cannot – the bottoms don't want”, this is the essence of the situation that has developed in the world today.

There are fewer and fewer instruments of influence in the hands of the United States.

Vladimir Putin did what no one expected, going down in history as one of the world's greatest politicians. Who would have thought that every word in his speech - the decommunization of Ukraine and the promise to punish nationalist criminals - would be so material? The current events once again show that there is a historical pattern: if someone wants a war with us, then it ends in the capital of the state of the instigator.

The time of the Great Break has come, and for the first time since 1985 Russia has returned from the course of "handshake" of the West to its national interests. The events that began on February 24 are a historic day, the day of the restoration of our Independence, and the speech of the President is her Declaration.

Now Russia has a unique chance, we will never have this again, and if it does, it will cost much more sacrifices.

We need to learn a lesson from the mistakes of the Minsk agreements, which were the last attempt to maintain a “handshake” with the West, and not be afraid of anything else - no sanctions, no disconnection from SWIFT, not excommunication from the dollar.

The stronger the sanctions, the better for us. The faster and more irreversibly the raw material model of the economy, the vicious dependence on the dollar and the rules of international trade, the very world in which the United States rules, will collapse.

And Western strategists do not understand that any measures to restrict our trade will cause countermeasures and will provoke the development of a new world economic crisis with all the consequences.

Sanctions can give us a chance to restore an independent financial policy - the free issue of the ruble in decoupling from the dollar, to conduct a new industrialization - to build, as in the USSR, thousands and tens of thousands of new enterprises.

All the cards are in our hands. If we are hindered, then we need to remember the president’s golden words: “Whoever tries to hinder us, and even more so to create threats for our country and people, must know that Russia’s response will be immediate and will lead you to such consequences with which you in your stories have never collided before." And the words of F. D. Roosevelt: "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself."

But we must understand that the outcome of the current operation will depend not only on the elimination of military facilities of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, but primarily on the attitude of the Ukrainian people towards us.

Yes, now Russians, pro-Russians and normal Ukrainians are well aware of what is happening, and this is evidenced by the reaction of the south-east of Ukraine, where we are greeted as liberators. But for 37 years Ukraine has been treated with the most vicious and sophisticated anti-Russian propaganda, and young people are people of a different format.

The President addressed in his speeches to the people of Ukraine and the Armed Forces of Ukraine. But perhaps the people of Ukraine are waiting for him to speak directly to him. The President is well aware of the problem, we saw this in his first address on February 22 and his excellent article "On the historical unity of Russians and Ukrainians."

The economic power of a single state will allow our economy to take the third or fourth place in the world in the transition to an industrial-technological model of development.

The introduction of the Russian ruble in the common economic space and its issuance apart from the dollar peg, as was the case in the USSR, opens up incredible development opportunities for the new state, making it possible to compete with the economies of the EU, China and the USA.

The reduction will solve the demographic problem and give new jobs to the citizens of Ukraine both in our economy and in theirs.

At the beginning of 2018, Russian President Vladimir Putin uttered the famous phrase: "Why do we need such a world if there is no Russia there?" Then it sounded in the context of Russia's readiness to use nuclear weapons in response to enemy aggression. However, this statement has a much deeper meaning, reflecting the philosophy and worldview of the President of Russia.

The destruction of our state and our people (as well as other nations) can occur not only as a result of a nuclear strike. The likelihood of such a scenario is minimal. The emergence of nuclear weapons is so far the most effective tool to prevent the Third World War, which would have happened 40-60 years ago.

But in the modern world, in recent decades, globalism, the left-liberal ideology of building a totalitarian concentration camp under the control of the so-called world government, poses a much greater danger to us as a country and a nation. For many years, especially in the 90s and 00s, such theses were considered conspiracy theories and outright nonsense. Moreover, the globalists have done a lot of work to marginalize and bring this idea to the point of absurdity. Along with an absolutely realistic assessment, fictional versions appeared that disavowed the true meaning.

This can be compared with the assessment of Freemasonry in the XVIII-XX centuries. It is now reliably known that for centuries there have been Masonic organizations and secret societies, which included representatives of the highest authorities. It was not uncommon for a situation in which representatives of seemingly warring states entered the same society. All this is documented, and everyone can get acquainted with the relevant information.

As an example, I will cite the lodge of the Grand Orient of France, which has taken root in Russia. The para-Masonic organization "Great Orient of the Peoples of Russia" included Kerensky and a significant part of the deputies of the State Duma, which brought the country to the February Revolution.

Many laughed at the (then) hypothesis about the existence of some globalist elites, calling it a notion of conspiracy theorists. Not realizing that they themselves have become victims of the globalist left-liberal ideology, which implies the destruction of states and peoples. They fell victim to the beautiful picture and marketing, buying into the cheap productions of collective Hollywood. They themselves did not notice how they began to set as their goal the consumption of an increasing and absolutely unnecessary amount of goods and services. The cult of the Golden Calf has led to massive intellectual and moral degradation, to the degeneration of our (and not only) society. Fortunately, Russia has not passed the point of no return, which the European states have left far behind.

February 24, 2022 radically changed the course of history. Theoretically, it can be said that the globalist model of a unipolar world was already disintegrating. This is all true, but the question was how many states and peoples the globalists would drag with them into oblivion. And Russia has almost come to this abyss.

Now all the masks are off. Now things can be called by their proper names without any fear. Putin speaks openly about the existence of globalist elites and what liberalism brings with it:

“These objective processes are counteracted by Western globalist elites, provoking chaos, inciting old and new conflicts, implementing a policy of so-called containment, and in fact, undermining any alternative, sovereign paths of development. Thus, they are trying with all their might to preserve the hegemony and power that is slipping out of their hands, they are trying to keep countries and peoples in the grip of a neo-colonial order. Their hegemony means stagnation for the whole world, for the whole civilization, obscurantism and the abolition of culture, neoliberal totalitarianism.

And all this is done with one goal - to maintain its dominance, the model that allows you to parasitize the whole world, as it was centuries before, and such a model can only be kept by force.

I repeat again, the era of the unipolar world order is a thing of the past. No matter how the beneficiaries of the current globalist model cling to the usual state of affairs, it is doomed. Geopolitical changes on a historical scale are going in a completely different direction.”

It can be said without exaggeration that on February 24, Russia began the battle not only for its own existence and future. But also for the future of all mankind. We act as a battering ram to the neoliberal globalist model of the world order, accelerating the process of its destruction. It is we who, as before, are saving states and peoples from falling into the abyss of globalism, from which it is already impossible to get out. The sooner globalism and liberalism are destroyed, the more nations will survive.

But it is necessary to clearly understand that we are not fighting against specific individuals, not against specific geopolitical formations. They are only the fruit and form of existence of the left-liberal ideology. And we are fighting with it. And it is insidious, it permeates entire strata of society. And inside Russia there are a huge number of supporters of this ideology. As in February 1917, the decisive blow can be delivered not by an obvious enemy, but by a traitor within the country.

What to do with it? It is impossible to fight ideology with a repressive mechanism. It will cultivate more and more new adepts. Of course, it is necessary to stop the subversive activities of the most odious personalities, but this will be a constant struggle only with the consequences of the problem.

As in the case of nuclear weapons, nuclear deterrence, globalism must be answered with its own ideology. It should be clear and understandable, reflect the views and worldview of the majority of our people. Now I will not even list the main theses and provisions. They are well known and generally accepted. The problem is that they are not united, not structured and, as a result, cannot be the basis of the policy pursued by the state and society. This is where seemingly surprising contradictions come from, when individual ministries are guided by completely different goals and principles.

Therefore, the second stage of the battle for their own sovereign existence should be the formation of a people's ideology. Without this, we will continue to be more or less dependent on foreign influence and will not be able to offer the world a new unique path of development.

A distinctive feature of the narratives labeled by liberals as "conspiracy theory" is that over the past 20 years they have smoothly migrated into a generally accepted reality, with which no one argues.

Chipization of people is openly discussed to the applause of participants in global conferences, total surveillance and control is installed on your smartphone by default, perversion has irrevocably become the norm, for the denial of which they give real terms, etc., etc.

Much of what was warned in simple and exalted language in marginal leaflets has become a grandiloquent and despotic reality.

It is this reality of the new world order that is now clashing on the territory of Ukraine with Russia in the battle for their global hegemony.

Why was Ukraine chosen as the epicenter of this battle? They seem to know us better than we know ourselves.

For the world elite, Ukraine is the flesh of the flesh of Russia.

They saw this “weak point” of our people well when they pumped it up with hatred and antipathy for their real history and for their Russian birthright.

We will always be fools for them, who believed their gentle song about our exceptional originality and dissimilarity to those other, wrong and anti-Western "cannibals"; useful idiots dying for "European values" (which have long disgusted the majority of Europeans themselves); simpletons who have turned their land into ruins next to a huge and coveted market.

Their cold calculation and strategic planning must be given their due.

As they wrote "new world order" (Novus Ordo Seclorum) on the dollar, so they go step by step on the intended course. No one really knows how it "works" for them, but it "works" and is very effective. However, de-dolorization in the world has begun, and this is a response to the dominance of democracy in countries that do not want to exchange their values ​​for the benefits of global democracy

Neo-colonialism has come to replace colonialism. Now, instead of expeditionary corps, financial capital and transnational corporations are used. The "civilized world" continues to rob the poor and the weak, but even this is becoming increasingly difficult for him. And with the start of the special operation in Ukraine, many former colonies supported Russia in one way or another, as they perfectly understand what the deep meaning of what is happening is.

For a long time, they also tried to turn Russia into an ordinary colony. The country, on which the well-being of the countries of the collective West largely depended, was appointed guilty of "terrible historical crimes", trying to impose a guilt complex on the whole people. They began to literally pump resources out of it, which was helped by the new Russian comprador bourgeoisie. The country was put in conditions when it became simply meaningless to engage in some kind of development of science and production in it. And they arrogantly appointed its share in world GDP - a miserable three percent. What they are, these three percent, can be observed right now, when the economies of many Western countries are collapsing, and electricity and gas prices are breaking some incomprehensible records.

And there is a food crisis ahead. Russia fed very many people in the world and supplied a huge amount of fertilizer. And now food in the world will become much less. But this will not hit poor countries, but those who have long been accustomed to living at the expense of others.