Putinin pahin pelko

Putinistisivusto julkaisi parahiksi kuvallisen esityksen siitä, mitä Putin eniten pelkää ja uskoo estäneensä:

Oli siinä todellakin jotain takana

Kuten jo viime vuosikymmenellä arvelimmekin, puheissa Karjalan palautusmahdollisuudesta 90-luvulla todellakin oli jotain totuutta takana. Ei voi tietää, mitä olisi tapahtunut, jos Suomessa olisi ollut presidenttinä Koiviston sijasta Kekkonen, eikä varsinkaan sitä, miten asiat olisivat kehittyneet, jos Karjala todella olisi saatu takaisin. Mielenkiintoisin kohta jutussa on kuitenkin tämä:

Perussyy Venäjän Karjala-pohdintoihin vuonna 1991 oli Fjodorovin mukaan rahan sijaan poliittinen: pelättiin ”suomalaismielisen nationalismin” kasvua Karjalassa. Se olisi voinut johtaa esimerkiksi kansanäänestykseen alueen autonomiasta.

Moneen kertaan on nähty, että Putin pelkää kaikkein eniten juuri Venäjän hajoamista, ja on Kaukasuksella onnistunut pysäyttämään sen vai kyseenalaisin keinoin, jotka eivät voi toimia ikuisesti. Jos Venäjällä todella alkaa tapahtua jotain, meidän pitäisi olla valmiina.

Taas merkkejä hajaannuksesta Venäjällä

Yksi venäläismielinen sivusto julistaa Putinin suurinpiirtein petturiksi:

Russia and “Israel” are allies, so much so that one can even speak about them as a singular political entity nowadays using the neologism “Putinyahu’s Rusrael“. The hyperlinked source in the preceding sentence is chock full of proof supporting this assertion, but the smoking gun if one was even needed at this point came on Monday during the Herzliya Conference, a yearly security forum held in the self-professed “Jewish State”. Mossad chief Yossi Cohen made it clear just how important of an ally “Israel” regards Russia as being when he credited “channels of communication with the Kremlin” for contributing to what he described as the “one-time window of opportunity” to clinch an “Israeli”-Arab peace deal “for the first time in Middle East history”, with Reuters quoting him as saying the following:

“The Mossad today espies a rare opportunity, perhaps for the first time in Middle East history, to arrive at a regional understanding that would lead to a comprehensive peace accord. Common interests, the fight against rivals such as Iran and Jihadist terrorism, the close relations with the White House and channels of communication with the Kremlin all combine to create what might be a one-time window of opportunity.”

Toinen, joka yleensä julkaisee ihan samojen kirjoittajien samoja juttuja kiistää:

 This Spring saw a sudden increase in the volume of articles in the so-called “alternative media and blogosphere” about Putin “selling out” Syria or Iran to the Israelis and their US patrons, or both. What was particularly interesting about this campaign is that it was not triggered by any kind of event or statement by Putin or any other senior Russian decision-makers. True, Israeli politicians made numerous trips to Russia, but each time they walked away without anything tangible to show for their efforts. As for their Russian counterparts, they limited themselves to vague and well-intentioned statements. Nonetheless, the “Putin sold out to Netanyahu” campaign did not stop. Every meeting was systematically interpreted as The Clear Proof that the Zionists control the Kremlin and that Putin was doing Netanyahu’s bidding. The fact that this campaign began ex nihilo did not seem to bother most observers. Soon I started getting steady streams of emails asking me to react to these articles. My reply was always the same one: let’s do the opposite of what these supposed “specialists” are doing and wait for the facts to come out and only then form an opinion.