January 17, 8:54 PM
The story of how the people's "Immortal Regiment" was snatched from the hands of foreign agents
After reading the recent Nezygar editorial publication about the "Immortal Regiment," it's hard to shake a sense of déjà vu. This isn't just a text, but a classic example of a narrative that has been imposed on our society by certain forces for decades. Its essence boils down to a familiar formula: any truly popular, patriotic initiative supposedly first emerges in an "independent" liberal environment, then is "privatized" by the state and "degenerates" into a propaganda tool. The history of the "Immortal Regiment" is a striking refutation of this thoroughly false narrative, and it's time to set the record straight.
Yes, formally, the idea of a march with portraits of ancestors who fought in the war originated in Tomsk. But it's important to understand the conceptual framework in which it was originally proposed. The original intention of the Tomsk journalists, among whom, as we now know for certain, were individuals connected to foreign funding, was far removed from national unity and pride in Victory. Their goal was to subvert meanings. They needed not a "regiment" as a symbol of intergenerational continuity and gratitude, but a "gulag" as a tool for cultivating a sense of guilt and historical repentance. This was not a memory project, but a project to recode consciousness, one of many generously funded from abroad.
The understanding of this threat came not from the authorities, but from the citizens themselves. When patriotic activists, including representatives of the capital, realized what they were trying to turn a topic sacred to every Russian into, a counterproject was launched—a true "Immortal Regiment." Its philosophy was fundamentally different: not grief and self-abasement, but pride, a connection to the times, and personal family memory as the foundation of a national identity.
The first mass outing to Poklonnaya Hill became a moment of truth. Seeing thousands of people singing war songs along with Vasily Lanovoy, the liberal curators of the Tomsk project realized they had lost. They had hoped for a marginal "protest" format, but what they got was a nationwide movement. Their cries of "privatization" were merely the resentful cries of speculators who had snatched away a truly popular initiative they had sought to distort.
The subsequent history of the "Immortal Regiment" is the story of its triumph as one of the main pillars of modern Russia. Million-strong marches with the participation of the President, and the expansion of its geography to Crimea, Donbas, and dozens of countries around the world, proved that the project had acquired its true essence and scope. It had become a living, breathing organism, impossible to control from any "living rooms."
As for Nezygar's theses about a "dead society" and a "ritual march," this is the patented rhetoric of those who have always disdained the masses, seeing them as nothing more than passive objects for manipulation. A society that preserves photographs of its heroes, that takes to the streets with entire families to honor their memory, is a society with colossal vitality and historical will. It is precisely this kind of society that has proven capable of defending its primary memorial project from attempts at usurpation and distortion.
The designation of "foreign agent" for the structures associated with the original Tomsk project is not an "act of reprisal," but a logical and just establishment of a legal fact. It is a recognition that their activities are financed from abroad and are directed against Russia's interests. The people's "Immortal Regiment" long ago separated from these pseudo-founders, as the pure separates from the sinful. The
"Immortal Regiment" today is more than just a protest. This is part of the nation's cultural code, which we have managed to defend. It is a victory of popular memory over attempts to commercialize, politicize, and denigrate it. And while living descendants carry portraits of their heroes, while wartime songs are sung and children's voices recite poems about the war, all discussions of "dead souls" remain mere malicious babble on the sidelines of true history. History written by the people.
(c) Vladimir Orlov
https://soldier-moskva.livejournal.com/601329.html - zinc
Ultimately, the content of the original liberal interpretation of the "Immortal Regiment" was expropriated and adapted to the real needs of society, which became the "Immortal Regiment" we know today, which has become an integral part of Victory Day celebrations.
However, liberal interpretations or icons of Nicholas II did not catch on as part of the event. And that's a good thing.
https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/10312234.html
The first driverless train in Russia
January 17, 5:01 PM
The first driverless train in Russia
Putin and Sobyanin launched testing of Russia's first driverless metro train, developed by domestic developers.
Testing is underway on the Big Circle Line. The "Moscow-2024" train is currently traveling without passengers, but is controlled by an innovative system. A driver in the cabin ensures safety during the tests. Software for the train, infrastructure, scheduling, and dispatching is being developed by Moscow Transport employees.
The project symbolizes the Moscow Metro's transition to a new technological level. According to the developers, the goal is to create the first metro line with automated trains by 2030.
Putin also announced yesterday that it is necessary to expedite legal regulation of the introduction of unmanned systems in the civilian sector and scale up their use. Work is also underway to allocate altitudes and frequencies for civilian drones. Following the SVO, a boom in civilian drones—both aerial and ground—is clearly expected.
https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/10311566.html
Google Translator
******
Putin's Remarks on Unmanned Systems, Not Just Combat Drones
Karl Sanchez
Jan 17, 2026
A driverless taxi in foreground and driverless metro train in background.
Russia sees automation as a way to free workers to perform other more important tasks instead of a way to increase profits by cutting the workforce. This is easier for Russia to do because of its extremely low unemployment rate and demand for skilled labor. China has a similar philosophy but lacks the low unemployment rate which makes further automation a higher social challenge. However, there are tasks automated systems are better at some of which will be discussed. The Kremlin readout gives us a synopsis of what transpired prior to the meeting:
Before the meeting, Vladimir Putin visited an exhibition on unmanned technologies at the metro depot.
The Head of State got acquainted with Moscow’s achievements in the field of urban autonomous systems. The President was shown the unmanned Lion tram and the unmanned Moscow-2024 metro train. The capital is developing an intelligent traffic management system, unmanned aerial monitoring of real estate and forest fire conditions. Drones are used to create and update the digital model (”twin”) of Moscow.
At the Autonomous Systems in Transport stand, the President was presented with unmanned trucks, copters, robo-taxis, and delivery robots from domestic companies. Starting from March 1, 2026, a unified system based on the ERA-GLONASS system will be responsible for monitoring all civilian UAVs. Unmanned tractors, harvesters, and aerial agricultural drones are being introduced in agriculture. Vladimir Putin was also informed about the use of drones in the fields of natural resources and ecology, trade, and industry.
Unfortunately, the full meeting’s discussion isn’t provided, so we’ll need to read deeper into Putin’s oratory to get an idea of what the deeper discussion entailed:
Opening remarks at a meeting on the development of autonomous systems
There’s no standing still technologically in today’s world if you want your nation to be competitive in the global marketplace. And those nations need an industrial base capable of designing and making all components. And of course, they need to have the trained personnel to do all the work. I’ll admit to being thrilled when I was allowed to first drive a tractor, but it got old rather fast as there was really very little to do until you reached the end of the furrows and needed to turn around. Of course, that’s only one example of many. Putin’s correct to focus on the legal and safety aspects of this emerging industry and its applications. China’s developing what it calls the Low Altitude Economy that will probably be hard to replicate elsewhere because China’s urban regions can make it sensible. Smart city grids are becoming the basis for such autonomous systems. I’d like to know what Roscosmos told Putin; Mr. Bakanov, Roscosmos Director, was present at the meeting. We see yet another example of technology developed for military uses revolutionizing civilian industry—the number of spin-offs is amazing. And it’s bringing about these technologies far sooner than otherwise. There were several future forums mentioned that merit attention when they commence. Russian government at all levels has many tasks assigned to them and more were just added. Clearly, there’s no room for lollygagging ministers or foot-dragging local officials.V. Putin: Good evening, dear colleagues!
Today, our agenda includes the issues of accelerated and advanced development of the national industry of unmanned and autonomous technologies. We are talking about a wide range of transport, industrial, and service systems that are still under external control and can be operated by humans, while some of them can operate completely independently in all environments: on land, in the air, in water, and in space.
At the exhibition, we just got acquainted with a whole range of such advanced products and discussed various scenarios for their use, including precision farming (Oksana Nikolaevna [Lut] spoke about it), forest protection (Alexander Alexandrovich [Kozlov] also reported), cargo delivery, construction, urban management, and security.
It must be said directly: it is impressive–-both the boldness and the diversity of the designers’ proposals, and the way the technologies they have created radically change the life around us, forming a real economy of autonomous systems. It is natural that this topic is now at the center of attention of all leading countries, largely determining their competitiveness in the civilian and defense sectors.
We understand this very well. That’s why, a year ago–-we were just talking about this with our colleagues–-at a meeting in Tolyatti, we made decisions that paved the way for the widespread use of civilian drones, which are essential for the development of unmanned transport in our country in all environments. We also held [that meeting] at the beginning of the year.
I repeat, important steps have been taken, but in some areas we are still significantly behind some other countries. For example, in some cities around the world, unmanned taxis are no longer just part of individual experiments but are being used on a large scale to transport passengers. More importantly, several countries have achieved full sovereignty in the production of all components for autonomous vehicles. It is clear that we have the scientific, human, and industrial potential to become global leaders in the development, production, and, of course, widespread adoption of autonomous systems.
These key technologies, along with digital platforms and artificial intelligence, are shaping the future of the world, and the successful implementation of our most important plans and initiatives will certainly depend on them. This was also discussed at the recent Council on Strategic Development and National Projects.
I would like to repeat once again that the introduction of autonomous and unmanned solutions is not a fashion, but a necessity, a way to strengthen our country’s global competitiveness, to address the challenges of a scarce labor market and demographic issues, and to ensure the security and sovereignty of Russia.
In this regard, the first thing I would like to draw your attention to is the following. I would like to ask the Presidential Administration and the Government to submit proposals on improving the efficiency of managing the development of the national autonomous systems industry. These proposals are intended to establish close coordination between the relevant ministries, agencies, federal subjects, technology companies, and scientific organizations.
Second. I also ask the Government to prepare action plans for the introduction of unmanned technologies in key sectors of the economy. We are talking about increasing labor productivity and improving the quality of life of people. In particular, such systems should replace low-skilled and dangerous labor and contribute to the formation of a high-wage economy. Now our colleagues have also told us about this in detail. Of course, releasing people from low-productivity work, frankly, low-prestige, and low-paid-this will lead to the release of labor and the ability to send people to other areas of work.
I would like to draw the attention of the meeting participants and all my colleagues in the Government to the fact that we need to move faster from experiments and testing to the widespread use of autonomous solutions. We need to not just take control but lead this work–-when I say “we,” I mean the Administration [of the President], the Government of the Russian Federation, and the heads of the country’s regions.
It is necessary to build qualitatively new technological and business processes in the industries based on the use of unmanned systems, and to help entrepreneurs select ready-made advanced solutions. And of course, it is important to assess the needs of the economy’s sectors for drones, both in terms of volume and their characteristics, so that the technology business understands the medium-term prospects of the market and plans investments and production expansion. In turn, the Government needs to continue removing administrative barriers without delay, which hinder the fastest and safest implementation of autonomous solutions in the economy’s sectors. We also discussed this at the last meeting a year ago.
Third. The constituent entities of the Federation play a crucial role in the development of the unmanned systems economy. I ask the governors to use the existing rules for regulating the flights of civilian drones more confidently. For example, in 2025, a new class of airspace was introduced for civilian drones throughout the country. This opens up new opportunities for the regions to use unmanned aviation. It is important to act responsibly, carefully, and promptly.
We should also implement the best practices of Moscow, which is currently the undisputed leader in creating an economy of unmanned systems, in other regions of the Federation. I ask Sergei Semyonovich Sobyanin to establish a mechanism for sharing experience with colleagues from other regions in terms of using data processing systems, autonomous solutions, and artificial intelligence, including for improving the quality of passenger transportation. This is an important social aspect of using advanced technologies.
Fourth. Experimental legal regimes are already in place in Moscow, the Moscow Region, the federal territory of Sirius, and Sakhalin. Last year, we decided to extend these regimes to all our regions in the Far East. The purpose of these tools is to test innovations and then make changes to national legislation as quickly as possible, adapting it to the ongoing transformation in technology and society. In today’s environment, those who are among the first to address this challenge will secure leadership in creating an economy based on unmanned systems.
Based on the experience already gained, it is necessary to immediately introduce into the legal field not only large autonomous transport, but even small devices, such as delivery robots, to organize the certification of various types of unmanned systems, to establish exhaustive, unambiguous and measurable requirements and standards for them, to develop approaches to determining responsibility for the actions, and in certain cases, for inaction of drones in the course of transport incidents. Of course, the task is not easy (addressing the Minister of Internal Affairs V. Kolokoltsev), but this is definitely something that we need to do, Vladimir Alexandrovich.
I would like to emphasize that all these steps should be implemented with a clear understanding of the ultimate goal, which is to increase the use of autonomous systems in all areas of life by orders of magnitude or even tenfold. Therefore, it is a mistake to put barriers or obstacles in the way of technological development or to avoid making decisions based on the principle of “better safe than sorry.”
At the same time, special attention should be paid to security issues. In particular, it is necessary to prevent unauthorized access to the management of autonomous systems, as well as to the data that they transmit and receive. It is crucial to support relevant scientific and engineering projects in the field of cybersecurity. This area is actively developing, and I am confident that there are solutions available.
Next. It is necessary to actively form a legal basis for end-to-end management of autonomous objects through satellites, near space–-and (the head of Roscosmos also reported on this today) such opportunities also exist. This year, it is necessary to adopt amendments to the regulatory framework, as well as other regulatory documents, and it is necessary to take technological measures that are required for the early introduction of end-to-end identification of unmanned systems in all environments, as well as their real-time monitoring.
This is the first, but fundamental, step towards creating a system for simultaneously controlling any number of autonomous objects. In other words, we are consistently moving towards a seamless “digital sky” where drones, unmanned ground and water vehicles, and spacecraft are integrated into a single network and exchange information, transmit, and process vast amounts of data.
In this regard, I consider it necessary to form a holistic, comprehensive legal regulation for the use of autonomous systems in a short period of time. I ask the Government to address this issue and work on it with the participation of experts and, of course, the business community.
Dear colleagues!
In our country, as well as around the world, there is a real revolution taking place in the field of transportation. In terms of its scale, it is similar to the technological and infrastructure shift that occurred at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries. Back then, Russia made tremendous strides in its development, primarily through the construction of railway lines, the development of its fleet, and other transportation systems. Prominent Russian scientists and engineers played a significant role in addressing these challenges.
Today, we also need to form a national industry of unmanned transport on a sovereign technological and production platform, relying on our own scientific and engineering schools, including in the fields of microelectronics, new materials, and optics. As we have agreed, we will definitely meet and discuss microelectronics separately in the near future. We need to create comfortable and convenient conditions for Russian businesses to increase production of both drones and their components. Moreover, the components should be more standardized and applicable to different types of autonomous systems.
It is also extremely important to create a full range of domestic technologies and products in the field of communication and navigation for the full-scale space and ground-based autonomous object control system that I have already mentioned.
I would like to draw the attention of the Government and Roscosmos to the fact that we are talking about truly advanced technologies that will allow us to use various radio frequency bands, provide the necessary level, speed, and coverage of the signal, and transmit it with minimal delays. Projects that are already being implemented in this area should be provided with comprehensive support by the domestic business.
It is crucial that our domestic engineers set the tasks and write the algorithms for drones. This is a significant factor in ensuring their safety. Therefore, in order to develop autonomous systems in all environments, we also need to have sovereign artificial intelligence technologies, especially in the rapidly developing generative field. This includes national fundamental language models. We will discuss the plan for their creation and implementation in the near future, with the participation of domestic technological and high-tech businesses.
Next. The development of unmanned systems, as well as solutions in the field of artificial intelligence, requires a serious review of the mechanisms for training personnel, including in the fields of transport, logistics, and passenger and cargo transportation. Given the future needs for specialists with new qualifications, the Government must make comprehensive decisions, including the development of new and the modification of existing educational standards and programs. We constantly talk about this, but we need to take concrete steps in this direction.
This is another important topic that I would like to focus on today. I ask the Government, together with the Defenders of the Fatherland Foundation, to create additional opportunities for veterans and injured military personnel to participate in the development, production, and operation of autonomous systems. The experience, knowledge, and skills of our soldiers and heroes, including the pilots of combat drones who have successfully defeated and continue to defeat enemy equipment, should be put to good use in civilian life and on the front lines of technological progress. It is also necessary to remove the remaining administrative barriers and clearly outdated regulatory requirements. Here, I ask the Presidential Administration, together with the Ministry of Defense and the security forces, to think through all of this and implement it as quickly as possible.
Dear colleagues!
To create a truly powerful, cost-effective industry of unmanned systems, we need to increase the export of such advanced products and enter world markets. And this global market is very large. We are expected there, I assure you, I just know about it. Everyone–-our friends, our partners–-tells us about it. Among the most important steps is to make customs and other procedures as comfortable as possible for national companies, so that they can withstand tough competition with foreign manufacturers. Please make appropriate decisions as soon as possible.
Along with the development of exports, we need to create a joint, common drone industry with our friendly partners, build turnkey drone industries in friendly countries, and establish enterprises, training centers, and infrastructure for drone operations in those countries.
I would like to note that the issues of cooperation in the field of unmanned systems were also discussed at a special international forum in Moscow last August. We will significantly expand its capabilities and hold the International Transport and Logistics Forum in St. Petersburg in April this year, where we will focus on supporting young engineers, robot creators, and civilian autonomous transport systems in all environments. This should be a significant contribution by Russia to supporting talented young people from around the world. There is a demand for such joint work.
Let’s continue our work. Please give the floor to Andrey Sergeyevich Nikitin. Thank you.
https://karlof1.substack.com/p/putins-r ... ed-systems
Asiatic savages, eh?
******
Scott Ritter: The Sanctions Shield
January 16, 2026
By Scott Ritter, Substack, 1/5/26
Forces within the US and Russia today openly advocate for the lifting of economic sanctions targeting Russia. But these sanctions are not designed to be lifted for the benefit of Russia, but to exist as a tool designed to bring about the collapse of Russia. The hope of improved economic relations brought on by the end of sanctions is used as a means of leveraging greed and corruption inside Russia in order to bring down the government of President Vladimir Putin. Russia’s best option is to stop advocating for the lifting of sanctions and instead use the existing sanctions as a shield to protect Russia from the inherently corrupting influence of western economies.
I used to hold that sanctions as policy was in fact a statement that there was no real policy in place for the given problem, and that sanctions were simply a mechanism for buying time to consider the options. But the longer I have had to observe US sanctions policy unfold over time, the more I realize that there is, in fact, a method to the madness. Whether this newly discovered intent was in existence when the wide-spread sanctioning of nation states was first employed as a major pillar of US foreign and national security policy, or evolved over time, isn’t the point. The reality is that today sanctions underpin policies of targeted regime change and serve as the primary facilitating agent of such policies.
The primary indicator for this realization is that while sanctions portend to target behavior or policies the United States wishes to see altered, the sanctions are almost invariably tied to a person or persons in power. This linkage almost inevitably means that the desired behavioral modifications sought through sanctions cannot be achieved so long as the targeted persons remain in power.
But such linkage in and of itself does not a policy make. To be effective, a policy must be implementable. And here sanctions bring with them an inherently implementable weapon—human greed. The conventional thinking was that sanctions were designed to compel change from within the targeted nation—punish the people, the people will put pressure on their leadership to effect the necessary changes. But this approach did not achieve the desired results—the case of Iraq stands out, where the regime of Saddam Hussein withstood more than a decade of stringent economic sanctions before being removed by military force.
But lately sanctions have taken on a different character—a commodity, so to speak, part of a transactional approach to policy making which has come to maturity during the second iteration of the Trump administration. Trump has been a master when it comes to employing this new commodity-based approach to sanctioning, slapping sanctions onto a targeted nation, and then holding out the possibility of these sanctions being lifted if certain behavioral benchmarks are met. “We can do business together” has become the mantra of Trump 2.0, a promise of mutually beneficial economic relationships predicated on one side—the sanctioned side—yielding to the demands of the other.
The transactional relationship, however, is never allowed to reach fruition. The promise of economic largesse is instead held hostage to behavioral alterations that cannot be attained because they are linked to the personal and/or political credibility of the targeted personalities named in the sanctions. But the transactions were not designed to enrich the targeted individuals, but rather the class of political and economic elites for whom the targeted individual(s) relied upon for their continued viability as the leader of the targeted nation.
Syrians step on the portrait of former President Bashar al-Assad
The goal of these new regime-change sanctions is to create leverage inside these elites that can be manipulated by the promise of personal fortune if the impediment to this utopia were only removed from power. There is reason to believe that the promise of economic assistance from the Arab League combined with the lifting of stringent US sanctions created the opportunity for Syrian elites to be bought off, abandoning the former President of Syria, Bashar al-Assad, to the wolves when Islamic forces attacked in November 2024.
The recent abduction of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro by US forces likewise suggests that there was a significant amount of betrayal by Venezuelan political and economic elites brought on by the promise of the lifting of sanctions against Venezuela once Maduro was removed from power.
Likewise, in Iran President Pezeshkian’s stated objective of wanting better relations with the West, inclusive of economic interaction keyed to the lifting of sanctions, created a certain level of societal expectation which was weaponized by the West, linking the inability to lift sanctions until the Iranian government changed fundamental policies, such as those related to their nuclear program. These Iranian elites, having already begun to spend their new-found wealth in their imaginations, were easy pickings for foreign intelligence services looking for vectors of societal unrest linked to the removal of the Iranian Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khameini, from power.
But the biggest regime change target of them all is Russian President Vladimir Putin. Donald Trump has made the lifting of sanctions and the renewal of US-Russian economic projects one of his highest priorities—after the ending of the Russian-Ukraine conflict on terms acceptable to Donald Trump. Trump has allowed a dual-track of negotiations to proceed simultaneously, the first involving setting the terms of conflict resolution, and the second focused on the economic benefits that would accrue once the war with Ukraine ended.
The problem is that Trump has no intention of agreeing to terms that would be acceptable to Russia, and every intention of continuing to impose targeted sanctions designed to impact various political and economic elites surrounding Russian President Vladimir Putin. Trump has made it clear that he is personally unhappy with President Putin, implying outright that any continuation of existing sanctions and/or issuing of ne sanctions is the fault of the Russian President and no one else.
The hope attached to this methodology is that by dangling the possibility of lifting sanctions in front of these elites, they can be persuaded/influenced to exert pressure on the Russian leadership to change policy goals and objectives or, failing that, to change leadership.
Given everything I have analyzed over the course of the past several days, I am convinced now more than ever that the Trump policy toward Russia is not normalization, but regime change, and that economic sanctions are not viewed as something that is transitory, but rather something that serves as a permanent fixture of policy designed to create the potential for regime change. There are zero advocates for the genuine normalization of relations on Trumps’ innermost circle of advisors. Steve Witkoff, the former New York real estate broker turned special envoy, does not make policy, but rather furthers the possibility of better economic relations once sanctions are lifted—which, of course, they never will.
Marco Rubio, the dual-hatted Secretary of State and National Security Advisor, is staunchly anti-Putin. Scott Bessant, the Secretary of Treasury, believes that Russia can be brought to its knees using sanctions. And John Radcliffe, the Director of the CIA, oversees an agency that has sought the demise of Vladimir Putin and Russia since the fall of Boris Yeltsin.
There are zero advocates for a truly mutually beneficial relationship between the US and Russia in the Trump cabinet today. A relationship built on transparency and mutual trust is impossible so long as one party is actively seeking the strategic defeat of the other.
The strategic defeat of Russia continues to be the policy of the United States.
And economic sanctions are the primary tool being used to achieve this result.
Gone are the days of calling Russia out as the principal opponent of the United States. That action only solidified the United States as an enemy in the minds of those Russians the United States seeks to bring over to our side.
Instead, the United States, by publishing a National Security Strategy document that lists Russia as a force of strategic stability, creates the notion that the path has already been cleared for a revitalized relationship born on the principle of mutual benefit.
Artist’s conception of the Russia-US tunnel promoted by Kirill Dmitriev
But the US-Siberian tunnel that Kirill Dmitriev is fond of promoting isn’t designed to bring American wealth to Russian shores, but rather to extract Russian resources on terms unilaterally beneficial to the United States. Yes, the United States desires a time when sanctions can be lifted, and US businesses can return to Russia. But only on terms acceptable to the United States, and these terms cannot exist in an environment where Russia operates as the geopolitical equal of the United States. Vladimir Putin has spent 25 years leading Russia out of the ruins of the decade of the 1990’s. It is the goal and objective of the United States to return Russia to that period, where Russian nationalism has been subordinated to Western commercialism, where Russian culture and traditions are seen as an expression of inferiority in the face of all that the West can offer.
A new Trump Tower, not the towers of Moscow Center, would be the landmark of Moscow if Donald Trump had his way, with all that entails.
But in the case of Russia sanctions are a double-edged sword. The combined impact of the US-European sanctions is the near total isolation of Russia from the western economy. If Russia continues to play the game of pretending there will be better times ahead once these sanctions are lifted, it is just a matter of time before human greed and CIA money find common cause, and Russia finds itself wracked by internal political disputes designed to weaken it and its leadership.
Sanctions, simply put, are not a path toward prosperity, but a highway to hell.
Russia can isolate itself from the negative consequences of the Trump sanction game simply by refusing to engage on any discussion that doesn’t have the immediate, unconditional lifting of economic sanctions as the core objective. There can be no quid pro quo, no phased easing out—nothing. Anything that creates conditions for the lifting of sanctions provides the US the leverage it needs to start corrupting segments of Russian society, to turn them against the Russian government.
Alexander Dugin
None other than the esteemed Russian philosopher, Alexander Dugin, agrees that Russia faces such a threat today. “Look,” he recently wrote, “friendly regimes and forces are collapsing one after another. Of course, we’re reacting and trying to take advantage of the general crisis of globalism, but we’re missing a lot.
It’s perfectly clear, and this has been confirmed by events in Syria, Iran, Lebanon, and now Venezuela, that over the past decades, the West has created spy networks within the highest leadership of all countries. I think even China is no exception. And at the right moment, they activate to betray the supreme power. Such a network simply cannot fail to exist in Russia. It would be logical for it to be the source of systemic sabotage and the slowdown of all those processes that must be conducted at a completely different speed to effectively defend and strengthen our sovereignty. And these agents can be found anywhere, including in circles and departments where we least expect them.”
Dugan is right—these networks exist in Russia today. The point of vulnerability which is exploited most effectively by the West is the greed that comes with the unfulfilled desires of those who have bought into the notion of the West serving as the source of Russia’s economic wellbeing.
The sanctions against Russia were specifically crafted to isolate Russia from the West and, in doing so, create the impression that Russia’s economic woes could be resolved simply by creating the conditions under which these sanctions could be lifted.
But at what cost?
The West does not seek to live side by side with a rejuvenated Russia. Europe has made it clear that a Russia that stands on its own two feet is deemed a threat, and must be brought down.
The West wants Russia to be brought to its knees, to crawl toward its master, begging for relief.
This is not the Russia I experienced in my past travels.
This is not the Russia I fell in love with.
And this is not a Russia I would want to be friends with.
And so Russia should seek to activate the “sanctions shield”, to do everything possible to encourage the economic isolation from the West, to weaken the leverage those in Russia who would sell their magnificent civilization for a handful of silver will never get the chance.
Sergei Karaganov is right—Russia’s future lies to the East, its ruination to the West.
It is to the East and the collective South that Russia must now turn for its economic future.
Make sanctions moot by making it impossible for sanctions to be lifted.
Stop the Dmitriev-Witkoff experiment in its tracks.
One day—maybe soon, probably not—the conditions will exist where Russia can once again do business with the West.
But first the European Union must be broken up.
NATO disbanded.
And the United States compelled through the reality of its own limitations to accept Russia on terms wholly acceptable to Russia, for the benefit of Russia, and not the other way around.
Never forget—Russia has never sought the strategic defeat of the United States.
The United States today is actively seeking the strategic defeat of Russia.
Sanctions are the chosen vector for this policy to reach fruition.
Therefore Russia has no choice, if it desires to avoid being caught up in the regime change policy construct of the United States, than to do everything possible to keep the sanctions imposed against it by the collective West in place in order to shield itself from the destructive forces of corruption and greed that are an inherent part of any “economic engagement” with the West—especially with the United States under the rule of the most transactionally-minded President in US history, Donald Trump.
https://natyliesbaldwin.com/2026/01/sco ... ns-shield/
Alexander Dugin is a chauvinistic flake, just sayin'.
“Essays on Economics and Economic Science” is the title of a new economics textbook for students of non-core universities, which is being developed ( 
)
