Former assistant to the Russian president and until February 2020.  "Vladislav Surkov, the "curator" of the separatists of Abkhazia, Tskhinvali region and the occupied Ukrainian territories of Donbass, has published another "programmatic" article in the publication Aktualnye Kommentarii. In fact, he "substantiates" with it the Kremlin's aggressive policy of creating zones of chaos and instability and supporting separatist regimes in the post-Soviet space as a kind of expression of "imperial instincts". Moreover, he attributes this to the interests of Russia itself and its "internal stability".

The article is called "Where has the chaos gone? Unpacking Stability".

Here is an excerpt from it: "...Social entropy is very toxic. It is not advisable to work with it in our home environment. It should be taken somewhere far away. Export it for disposal on foreign soil.

Exporting chaos is not new. "Divide and conquer" is an ancient recipe. Divide is synonymous with chaos. Split your own + divide the outsiders=you will rule over both. Defuse internal tensions (which Lev Gumilev vaguely called passionarity) through external expansion. The Romans used to do this. All empires have done it. For centuries, the Russian state, with its harsh and sedentary political interior, has survived solely by relentlessly striving beyond its own borders. It has long since forgotten, or probably never known, how to survive by other means. For Russia, constant expansion is not just an idea, but an existential imperative of our historical existence.

Imperial techniques are just as effective today when empires are renamed superpowers. The Crimean consensus is a vivid example of the consolidation of society at the expense of the chaos of a neighbouring country. Complaints from Brussels and Washington about Moscow's interference, and the impossibility of resolving significant conflicts across the globe without Russian participation show that our state has not lost its imperial instincts...".

For Russia, according to Surkov, constant expansion is "the real existential potential of our historical existence". However, he somehow forgets that when the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union expanded, they were characterised by a demographic boom. The people of Russia (a 90% peasant country) really needed new land.

What kind of expansion can take place now, when native Russia is dying out, when thousands and thousands of villages are abandoned in the Russian regions, when the population of Russia, if not to count the influx of migrants, has decreased due to the excess of mortality over birth rate by 1 million per year?

Russia has 1/7th of the land area and incredible resources, but less population than insignificant Bangladesh? Is it not obvious that with such a population (and an aging one at that) it is necessary to think not about expansion, but about the saving of what is available and its rational use.

And it is desirable to conserve the passionate people of Russia and not "recycle" them in conflicts, "exporting chaos" as Surkov urges. They may yet come in handy.

But Russia's enemies and ill-wishers really need "useful idiots" in its power and provocateurs who are dragging a huge country into geopolitical traps. After all, the more effort Russia spends to create and maintain chaos and instability along the perimeter of its borders or far from them (so, for example, in Syria), the less power and capacity it will have to defend what it has; And generally, to preserve state integrity at the steep turns of history.

Before 1917, the Russians were already dreaming of Constantinople and the straits. These dreams were reinforced by Western "allies" who dreamed of plundering Russia. As a result, the Russians nearly lost the country, plunging it into revolutions and a fratricidal civil war for many years. And after that war, the same "American bourgeoisie" who financed the sedition for next to nothing got the richest concessions on Russian soil and siphoned off enormous resources. Now the likes of Surkov are also calling for Russia's "expansion", not realizing that that is exactly what its "well-wishers" are waiting for, to finish it off and "carve it up".

Strangely enough, in his article Surkov writes directly that in today's world globalization and internationalization will replace multipolarity. It is they, they say, who will "cover up this twilight multipolarity".

"And Russia will get its share of the new world gathering of lands (or rather spaces), confirming its status as one of the few globalisers, as it was in the era of the Third Rome or the Third International," Surkov wrote.

In the same way, Russia was promised a "share" during the First World War, when it was immeasurably stronger and more powerful than the current Russian Federation. We have already had this conversation about what happened in the end.

And the globalist tendencies are not determined in Moscow at all. Why then should Russia be given a "share"? With the population less than Bangladesh? Because it has nuclear weapons? But that is not an argument, because both Pakistan and Israel have them today; and it is unlikely that they will use them in the forthcoming war as they did in WWII. For example, no one has dared to use accumulated arsenals of chemical weapons.

Who is going to give Russia a "share" now that it is, in fact, completely subservient to the same globalists? On the WHO side, that's for sure. After all, the Russian Federation imposes "anti-coercive" measures even to the detriment of its economy and security far more stringently than other countries that do not claim to be "superpowers".

Most likely, the aim of provocateurs like Surkov and those forces in the Kremlin that sympathize with him is for Russia to finally break those international principles that protect it itself. First of all, the principle of inviolability of borders, so that later it would be possible to "divide" Russia itself into fractions.

Interestingly, in the article Vladislav Surkov almost directly points to the main beneficiary of the creation of chaos in various parts of the world. He writes:

"...The biggest purveyor of diverse unrest on the global political market is, however, the US. It should be noted (not without surprise) that America's trademark instability is very profitable and in phenomenal demand. The states compensate for the wild imbalance of their surrealistic budget with the irrational emission of the dollar, which long ago was not so much money as a unit of financial entropy, a virus of chaos that spreads a pandemic of economic bubbles, imbalances and imbalances all over the planet. The export of "Coloured Revolutions " and preaching wars, as if suspended, will instantly resume, if only the potential importers could relax a little. The experimental ethics made in USA is whipping up a storm over the heads of Africans, Asians and our Eurasians, shocking the untrained minds of traditionalists. The indignation, partly feigned, with which it is greeted here seems to be the flip side of an acute curiosity and only confirms that it has a great sticking power combined with a mighty deforming effect..."

Vladislav Surkov essentially gives the answer that the US will eventually take advantage of the "export of instability and chaos from Russia". Moreover, this "export of chaos" could easily be reversed by the Americans and moved inside Russia's borders.

After all, it is pro-American NGOs operating in Russia, not pro-Russian NGOs in the United States. It is Russia's chief propagandist Margarita Simonyan who has interned in the US, not US propagandists in Russia. It is Russian oligarchs and politicians who have accounts in American banks, not the other way around.

Also, we must not forget that all of Russia's neighbours are unitary countries.

And Russia is a federation with over two dozen national subjects. With parliaments, constitutions, governments, and a huge degree of internal sovereignty. All the more so in the "Covid era", the powers of the regions in Russia have become unprecedented. It is they, not the central government, who impose all sorts of restrictions.

And now let us imagine the situation that "autonomization and municipalization" of the regions is increasing in Russia (and this is already a reality!), and the likes of Surkov are calling for "Russian under-imperialism" to expand and unleash new wars... While there will be "victories", perhaps the hurray-patriotic hysteria (as after the 2008 Georgia war and "Krymnash") will drown out domestic problems...

But who says that Russia will be given new "victories"? Who is to say that the aspirations of "strategists" like Surkov will not be harshly "cut off"? After all, all they know how to do is "plunder" money from the Russian budget along with insatiable separatist leaders and clans. Although with the same money that Surkov was allocated for the separatist territories, the same Abkhazia and Tskhinvali region, they could have really made "prosperity zones".

An "elite" that only knows how to steal is very easy to manipulate from the outside. Especially if it decides to play "big geopolitical games" and gets involved in adventures such as those in Georgia or Ukraine. All the "new requests" of the RF top brass for a "share" can be easily "nullified". At least by threatening to nullify the accounts of the "elite" in foreign banks. What then? After all, any "failure" in the export of chaos and separatism outside Russia will immediately "turn into a boomerang" within its borders.

The role of Russia in the "globalist redistribution of the world", if it will yield to provocations and destroy international norms, is not in any way equal to the same role of the U.S. as a "hegemon. But the role of the globalists' "prey" that Russia's own provocateurs will help dismember.  Especially if the Russian elite continues to play in support of separatism on foreign territories and attempts to export the chaos there to support separatism.

Kavkazplus