Leer en Español
A new bill has been presented to the Russian State Duma to strengthen the Foreign Agents Law (enacted in 2012) that declares NGOs, social movements, media, and bloggers receiving funding from abroad to be “foreign agents.” In face of a potential Biden administration, and considering the colored revolutions articulated by Obama, Putin is preparing to neutralize potential interference.
The bill presented by senators and legislators prevents people who are classified as “foreign agents” from being elected officials at the national and municipal levels. The document also prevents these “agents” from having access to state secrets. The law also proposes to expand the qualification of “foreign agents” to citizens and foreigners who receive funding from abroad and “participate in political activities or gather information about Russia’s military activities.”
The law is part of a legislative package that a Commission headed by Vasily Piskarev (United Russia), who stated that the law is aimed at “those who, with the help of financial resources received from abroad, are trying to change the domestic and foreign policy of our country.”
Putin’s advance in Russia seeks to consolidate, on a bigger scale, a new position regarding his relationship with the United States, given that the outcome of the presidential election is still uncertain with several open legal battles.
Simple authoritarianism or prevention against colored revolutions?
Georgia, Ukraine, Kyrgyzstan: three post-Soviet countries where the United States has financed and advised “colored revolutions” in the past. Three countries where President Vladimir Putin has won thanks to his meticulous time management and his talent for delivering strategic blows that dent the strength of his enemy.
Colored revolutions are the consolidation of a diplomatic strategy used by today’s States to avoid warlike actions that can escalate into far-reaching, multiparty wars.
With them, actions to change policies or entire governments (if necessary) are more elastic: the use of soldiers is replaced by domestic political actors, official pronouncements by ideological narratives promoted through NGOs, international institutions, and social movements. In other words, with colored revolutions, states create a more private or civilized mask that is more cost-effective, more elusive, and more “epic” in influencing foreign power structures.
In 2014, the Euromaidan in Ukraine overthrew Viktor Yanukovych. But behind the epic of the shields, the Orthodox priests raising their crosses against the Titushki (mercenaries hired by Yanukovych), the politicians’ speeches in Independence Square, there was the meticulous advice of John McCain and the Obama-Biden administration, and the funding of the NED.
Now, just as there is a “tradition” of Forever-War Democrats and neocons of meddling in foreign affairs and trying to change the course of countries to weaken or dominate them, there is also a tradition in the hegemonic ways of Russia that dates back to the nineteenth-century pan-Slavism that the Czarist Empire assumed as one of its most important international policies.
What Putin may be evaluating today is an eventual clash of both political traditions: on the one hand, the globalist one that wants to put all the weight of international power on the anti-Russian faction by restoring the regime-change policy. On the other hand, there is the Eurasian one that Putin has executed since his arrival in power, where he embraces the Eurasian region and consolidates a military and political power that is reluctant, skeptical and independent of the events and outcomes of the West.
For that reason, with these bills, Putin proposes to neutralize the entry of resources (cutting off the direct entry of hard power influence) from other governments to these organizations so that they cannot have room for acts when it comes to provoking a revolution, following what Raimondo Montecuccoli said: “for War you need three things: 1. Money 2. Money 3. Money.”
For Democrats, Putin, not Xi, is “The Enemy”
Now, the globalist narrative is a distortion of the vision of Our Lady of Fatima: “Russia will convert and have peace; if not, it will spread its errors throughout the world, promoting wars and persecutions of the Church.” For the Democrats, Pandemic China, that of Christian concentration camps and corporate “depredationism,” is harmless and even benign. Russia, on the other hand, is the true embodiment of the worst evils that need to be stopped.
A potential Biden administration is already demonstrating complacency with China. According to an announcement by the prospective Democratic transition team, Joe Biden has named Steve Ricchetti as one of its advisors. Ricchetti was one of the key architects in the creation and enactment of the PNTR with China.
This agreement is a good deal for AmericaBill Clinton, 2000
Yale researchers Justin R. Pierce and Peter K. Schott revealed in 2012 that “employment in the U.S. manufacturing sector fluctuated around 18 million workers between 1965 and 2000, before falling by 18% between March 2001 and March 2007.
The dirty links between the Biden family and China, the opposition of the Democratic candidates to a strong position against Beijing, the Russiagate lie led by Biden and Harris’ party, the Democratic design and advice on the colored revolutions in the first half of the decade, and this latest appointment of Ricchetti, make it clear that China is not the enemy for them, but Russia —and Putin in particular.
If there is something that stands out in Putin, it is his capacity for strategic projection, and this package of laws that his party presented is proof of this. He knows that laws should ideally be put into effect before the judicial diatribe on the U.S. elections produces a final result. The aim is to avoid at all costs a colored revolution. Whether it be communist, liberal, or progressive, the ultimate goal of the revolution would be to remove him from power after more than two decades, eroding the pole of Eurasian power.