Biography of a political scientist Evgeniy Satanovsky that's how it is. Evgeny Yanovich Satanovsky (born June 15, 1959, Moscow, USSR) is a Russian orientalist and economist, president of the independent scientific center “Institute of the Middle East” (formerly the Institute for the Study of Israel and the Middle East).
In 2003-2004 Evgeniy Satanovsky served as president of the Russian Jewish Congress (REC). One of the leading Russian experts in the field of politics of Israel, the countries of the Near and Middle East. Born in Moscow on June 15, 1959. Evgeny Satanovsky graduated from the Moscow Institute of Steel and Alloys in 1980. After graduating from university, he worked as an engineer at the State Institute for the Design of Metallurgical Plants and as a worker at the Hammer and Sickle plant.
Late 1980s Evgeniy Satanovsky went into business and became president of the Ariel group of companies.
Since 1993, Evgeny Satanovsky has been president of the Institute for Israel Studies (now the Institute of the Middle East).
In 1999, Evgeny Satanovsky defended his dissertation at the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences for the degree of Candidate of Economic Sciences on the topic “Specifics of the economic development of Israeli society in the 90s” (Specialty - 08.00.14 World economy and international economic relations).
Evgeniy Satanovsky teaches geopolitics and economics of the Middle East region at the Department of Jewish Studies at the Institute of Asian and African Studies at Lomonosov Moscow State University. He also taught at the S. Dubnov Higher School of Humanities and at MGIMO.
Member of the Presidential Council of the Russian Society for Friendship with Arab Countries. Member of the editorial boards of the magazines "Diaspora", "Bulletin of the Jewish University" and "Oriental Collection", the academic council of the "Library of Judaic Studies". He was the third president of the Russian Jewish Congress.
Takes part as an expert and speaker in specialized scientific conferences.
Evgeniy Yanovich has repeatedly argued that Saudi Prince Turki ibn Faisal Al Saud was behind the September 11 terrorist attacks in the United States and Nord-Ost.
- Do you consider yourself Russian?
- From a cultural and civilizational point of view, of course. Ethnically speaking, I am a Russian Jew. Not just a Jew, but a Russian Jew
Satanovsky E.A. My life among the Jews. Notes of a former underground worker
Human life is like a tree, and this tree has many roots. Something I inherited from my parents. Something from friends or enemies. Or taken from books that leave their mark - and what else! Those who banned them throughout the centuries, put them in special storage facilities or burned them, understood this very well. This book is a kaleidoscope of portraits, events, situations, historical facts and historical anecdotes, resurrected under the pen Evgeniy Satanovsky. Not the TV and radio hero familiar to the reader, but one of the leaders of the Soviet Jewish underground of the late 80s, who stood at the origins of the revival of the country's Jewish national institutions in the 90s and all subsequent years. Few of those who know the author as a scientist and journalist, entrepreneur and philanthropist imagine the Jewish pages of his biography. Will they help the reader understand who Russian Jews are and what they want from life? It's possible. How did the life of Jews develop in the Russian Empire and other countries mentioned by the author over centuries and millennia, and what results did this lead to? Maybe. Well, what more could you want from the author?
Evgeniy Satanovsky
Director of the Middle East Institute Evgeniy Satanovsky - latest videos on VestiFM and other political programs. From two to five with Sergei Korneevsky, full contact with Vladimir Solovyov and the Sunday evening political show.
Evgeny Satanovsky in the program “From 2 to 5” today 05/08/2019
Evgeniy Yanovich began today's episode of the program by announcing a new program release schedule from Monday to Friday. How Nikita Khrushchev gave Crimea to Ukraine and what caused it.
Evgeny Satanovsky in Vladimir Solovyov’s program “Evening” 02/28/2019 Conflict between India and Pakistan
Elections are planned in India in the near future. Therefore, the conflict with Pakistan will continue in a sluggish mode until May. Who else benefits from a war between two countries and how this will affect the international situation.
Evgeny Satanovsky in the program from 2 to 5 09/18/2018
The latest program by Evgeniy Satanovsky discusses the provocation of Israeli pilots, which led to the death of a Russian plane with 15 military personnel on board. Who is to blame and how Russia will respond.
Soloviev: - Evgeniy Satanovsky has been sick since 09/05/2018
On today’s broadcast of the “Full Contact” program, Vladimir Solovyov reported on the illness of Evgeniy Yanovich Satanovsky. The political scientist and host of the “From 2 to 5” program is undergoing treatment and comments on his illness with humor.
Evgeny Satanovsky - From two to five 07/26/2018
- Oil - OPEC and I are on the same side
- BRICS summit begins in South Africa
- Mikhail Khodarenok - the hour of the militarist
Satanovsky - From two to five 07/10/2018
In the next episode of the From Two to Five program, Evgeny Yanovich Sataeovsky and Sergey Korneevsky discussed the main events in Russia and world politics. The World Cup forced Satanovsky to watch the Russian team play.
Evgeny Satanovsky - from 2 to 5 04/25/2018
In the latest episode of the “From Two to Five” program on Vesti-FM radio, Evgeniy Yanovich and Sergei Korneevsky discussed: the situation in the Middle East; how Rospotrebnadzor cares about the well-being of Russians; US role in Syria; Crimean food.
Evgeny Yanovich Satanovsky in the Full Contact program 04/12/2018
Evgeny Satanovsky and Vladimir Solovyov discussed the main events of recent days in the Full Contact program on Vesti-FM. Is a Trump strike on Syria possible? what to do with the Russian economy; international review.
Evgeny Satanovsky - from two to five 04/11/2018. Trump is preparing a strike
The main topic of today's 2 to 5 program was Donald Trump's threat to strike Syria. The extent to which the US Army is capable of entering into open confrontation with Russia is discussed by Evgeny Satanovsky and Sergey Korneevsky.
Evgeniy Satanovsky and Vladimir Solovyov - Full contact 04/05/2018
In the latest broadcast on Vesti-FM, Evgeny Satanovsky and Vladimir Solovyov discussed the VII Moscow Conference on International Security. Russia gathered on one site the highest military personnel from 95 countries of the world.
Satanovsky - from two to five 02/27/2018
In today’s episode of Evgeniy Yanovich Satanovsky’s program “From Two to Five” on Vesti-FM radio: the situation in Syria and throughout the Middle East; economic situation in Russia; pre-election race for the presidency.
Part 1 The US lost in Syria, but continues to crap
Part 2 Russia and the USA
Part 3 Blockchain
Satanovsky - from two to five 02/22/2018
Today's episode of Satanovsky's program "From Two to Five" discusses:
- bomb "Drill" - cheap and very cheerful;
- not everything is so bad in our oil industry;
- imitation of vigorous US activity
From two to five 02/15/2018
Today's episode of the program by Evgeny Satanovsky and Sergei Korneevsky from 2 to 5 discusses the main political news in Russia and the world. The program is broadcast on VestiFM radio on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday.
Part 1 Irresponsibility is ours, dear!
Part 2 Problems and achievements of modern China
Part 3 The Hour of the Militarist - Mikhail Khodarenok
Satanovsky - from two to five 02/14/2018
Evgeny Yanovich Satanovsky devoted today’s episode of the “From 2 to 5” program to a review of the current situation in Europe, the military-political situation in Syria and the Russian economy. How different is France today from the good old France we all know? Watch Satanovsky's program at YouTube.
- France today and yesterday
- The situation in Syria
- Economic transformations and business problems in Russia
The “From Two to Five” program is updated regularly, come back
Evgeny Satanovsky and Vladimir Solovyov about Navalny
Director of the Institute of the Middle East Evgeny Satanovsky in Vladimir Solovyov’s “Full Contact” program spoke about the latest events in Yemen, Saudi Arabia and discussed with the host Alisher Usmanov’s answer to Alexei Navalny, in which the businessman gave an answer about his activities and the reasons why Navalny decided to slander him .
The program uses an audio recording of Alisher Usmanov's speech. The businessman filed a lawsuit for slander against Alexei Navalny, and a court hearing will soon take place that will give a legal assessment of the actions of the “opposition” politician Navalny.
Updated regularly, come back
SATANOVSKY: About Lieberman’s resignation. This means that this was programmed in the morning, it was clear that if the Minister of Defense promised to deal with terrorists, when he and his party fought their way into the ruling coalition and made their way... And he is a fairly tough person, Russian-speaking, which is good news, at least with our Minister of Defense Sergei Kuzhugetovich Shoigu, they spoke Russian quite well both during visits to the Middle East by representatives of the leadership of the Russian Ministry of Defense, and during Lieberman’s participation in the international conference of the Ministry of Defense in our country. It was quite funny to see them in the front row with the Iranian Minister of Defense: an Iranian sits on the right, then there was still Dekhkan, Lieberman sits on the left - well, my soul just rejoiced, because, of course, except for Russia, no one would be able to gather in one hall and in the same row as the Persian minister and the Israeli one - given the “wonderful” relations between their countries.
And yet, the resignation took place, and without any Iran - or almost without Iran. As you know, a few days ago, rocket attacks by the Hamas group from the Gaza Strip intensified into Israel. The entire south is in bomb shelters. Let me remind you that in the state of Israel there are more than a million people, approximately 1,200,000, Russian-speaking, of which approximately (for those who do not like Jews - they have every right, we don’t have the right to anti-Semites in the country?) a third of a million - these are generally Russians, Russian-Russians, that is, they have nothing to do with Jews. Plus Ukrainians, Belarusians, Tatars and in general all those whom they married in the Soviet Union. And about 100,000 people retained Russian citizenship. Russian means that the passport is Russian. These numbers fluctuate, because those who left during Soviet times can return Russian citizenship, but these are the very citizens of Russia - not Belarus, not Ukraine, not Uzbekistan. That is, to understand that our compatriots are from this side. Polling stations open when we have elections, embassies are active, and embassies work very well. Well, as it is! There is a certain difference in the voting preferences of the population with Russian voting. But what’s funny is that Putin received approximately the same amount in the last presidential elections in Israel. And everyone received approximately the same amount, including the “Growth Party” of Mr. Stankevich and Nadezhdin, well, they sympathize with “Yabloko” a little more. Yes, of course, that’s also quite understandable - such a completely intellectual topic. But! It seems that when your compatriots are shelled and they are sitting in bomb shelters, and there is also a damn cloud of Great Patriotic War veterans, and the parade there is on May 9, on the corresponding date, not at all the 8 that is celebrated in the West. And Soviet veterans of the Great Patriotic War go to this same parade. They said a lot about this, and the Prime Minister of Israel came to our Victory Parade and walked with Vladimir Vladimirovich in the “Immortal Regiment”, carrying a portrait of the Israeli hero!
Evgeniy Satanovsky: from two to five 11/14/2018
popular internet
A famous orientalist about Russia after Putin, Middle Eastern solitaire and the “adventurous but smart” Trump
Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Turkey are competing with each other in their influence on Russian Muslims and are gaining ground here, says Evgeniy Satanovsky, director of the Middle East Institute, noting that such influence should be treated very carefully. In an interview with BUSINESS Online, Satanovsky explained why the idea of sitting on Russia’s neck is widespread in the Arab world, whether Erdogan can be considered a “Turkish Stalin”, and Iran our ally, and what disasters the 2030s could turn into for the Russian Federation.
Evgeniy Satanovsky: “Iran is our temporary travel companion and partner, a country with which we maintain economic relations - not the most extensive, compared to Turkey or China” Photo: BUSINESS Online
“THERE ARE VIRTUALLY NO AMERICANS IN THE IRAQI OIL INDUSTRY”
— Evgeniy Yanovich, it recently became known that Rosneft has agreed with Iraqi Kurdistan to develop five oil blocks on its territory. Where do our oil workers have such courage? Is it because, as they say, Iraqi Kurdistan is more dependent on Turkey than on Baghdad?
— Iraqi Kurdistan depends on everyone. It depends on Baghdad because without its consent it will not be able to export oil. When oil smuggling channels through Turkey were stopped, through which the same Daesh oil flowed ( Arabic name for the terrorist group ISIS banned in Russia— approx. ed.), the Kurds have almost no alternatives. When ours took up this issue in Syria, the Americans were forced to take up the suppression of smuggling in Iraq. Moreover, Turkey is at war with the Kurds today, and relations between Kurdistan President Masoud Barzani and Recep Erdogan are very difficult.
Iraqi Kurdistan depends on Iran because there are no alternative ways to export oil other than through Basra and then through the Shatt al-Arab (a river flowing through the territories of Iraq and Iran) by sea. There are ideas for cross-border oil exports and transporting them to the world market through Iranian territory, but it is not clear what to do with all this. Not a single neighbor supported Kurdistan during the independence referendum ( although on September 25, 2017, 92.73% of local Kurds voted in favor of the independence of Kurdistan – approx. ed.). In addition, Barzani lost Kirkuk due to this ( transferred to Iraqi federal forces last October — approx. ed.). Fighting for power in an inter-clan fight as the local opposition, the Gorran (Movement for Change) party, continues to grow stronger, Barzani effectively surrendered Kirkuk to Shiite units. Peshmerga ( armed Kurdish forces — approx. ed.) retreated, snarling sluggishly, and the Shiites occupied the territory.
The Shiite militia is now a constitutional part of the Iraqi army. In addition, a party was created on this basis, which collected a lot of votes in the last elections. And the Kurds will not be able to get rid of this threat. So I would not say that it was safe for Rosneft to become involved with the Kurdistan government. Moreover, there is no need to expect any gratitude here - in pursuit of money, these people are ready to shift their problems onto anyone.
— Sechin is a risky person, as we know from his biography.
— Igor Ivanovich Sechin is a unique person. He can, knowing the size of Rosneft, which is developing and is quite quickly striving for the role of Gazprom in the oil industry, use support from the very top to resolve problems with the governments of Erbil ( capital of Iraqi Kurdistan — approx. ed.) and Baghdad. The management will certainly look into this, and with the highest degree of probability the situation will return to normal. It’s not even a matter of risk, but the fact that Vladimir Vladimirovich [Putin], as the President of the Russian Federation, who is directly involved in foreign policy and energy policy on major issues, has an amazing ability to negotiate with all local players. He, of course, fails to come to an agreement with the “Westerners,” but the problem here is simple: they don’t want to come to an agreement with anyone while Vladimir Putin is in charge of Russia’s leadership. And there's nothing you can do about it. Leaving office just to please the “Westerners” is sheer stupidity. And in all other cases, Putin manages to come to an agreement. In this context, we have a unique situation in Iraq, and some local conflicts can be corrected in the most miraculous way, given that the Baghdad government has chosen British Petroleum as the main oil operator. And there are practically no Americans in the Iraqi oil industry.
— Doesn’t the absence of the Americans open up the opportunity for us to establish ourselves in the Iraqi oil market, at least through Kurdistan?
“This doesn’t tell us anything, because there are Chinese oil campaigns and Malaysian campaigns. Yes, Lukoil works there, as well as Gazpromneft. And Rosneft. But I never tire of repeating: if there are no competitors in some place, this does not mean at all that everything has opened up for you there. Nothing like this. Just because Marilyn Monroe divorced Joe DiMaggio didn't automatically mean that everyone who wanted her got her. Even John Kennedy - and he was killed. Who knows what has opened? We still need to be able to use these opportunities ( According to Rosneft’s stated intentions, the total reserves it extracts in Kurdistan could be about 670 million barrels, and the amount of payments to the government could be up to $400 million. However, the Baghdad government called the deal illegal — approx. ed.).
Photo: kremlin.ru
“IF YOU ARE INTO A COUP IN IRAQ, YOU WILL BE DEFINITELY KILLED IN THE MOST CRUEL AND BLOODTHIRST WAY”
— We talk and write a lot about Syria, but you rarely hear about Iraq, where the militants of the banned group Daesh seem to be almost finished. What is the real state of affairs there, in your opinion?
— Islamist militants were largely driven out of Iraq. This was partly due to the fact that local sheikhs received subsidies and, having agreed with the field commanders, accepted those militants who originated from the Republic of Iraq back to their places of original residence. That is, physical destruction there affected a small number of terrorists, but it is also impossible to calculate. Because, if you believe the government troops, it turns out that more terrorists were killed there than the population of the entire country. And in Syria the statistics are the same. This is a very difficult situation, which for the Americans in Iraq was made easier by the fact that the Shiite militia and some Kurds fought on the side of the government (a little, because the Kurds did not fight much at all, but mostly seized territory for a referendum on independence, which they successfully failed in September last year). Plus the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps - IRGC with General Qassem Soleimani ( Major General and Commander of the Quds Forces Special Forces within the Corps — approx. ed.). Soleimani miraculously commanded his units near Mosul, operating next to American target designators. And somehow they, the Americans and the Iranians, did not notice each other, despite all Trump’s cries against Iran and the sanctions against Qassem Soleimani, that one marvels at the consistency of the US policy. But in fact, Americans are very pragmatic, and the CIA and the Pentagon act completely on their own and separately from the US State Department and from everything that is said in the White House.
— Can a new radical and even more terrible movement in its content emerge from the fragments of the defeated Islamic State, just as Daesh arose from Al-Qaeda in its time ( , —approx. ed.)?
— The banned Daesh was only initially called the “Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant”, and then simply the “Islamic State”. In essence, these are just local Sunnis who did not receive a share in the governance of Iraq and did not receive oil money ( one of the groups that took part in the creation of Daesh was called the “Army of the Followers of the Sunnah and the Community” — approx. ed.). Where will they go now - don’t destroy them all? But since they are not destroyed and are not integrated into the new reality, anything will arise on this basis. Especially if you throw in the money of the “zalivniks” ( Gulf countries — approx. ed.). In this case, supporting the Islamic State is a Qatari project, and supporting al-Qaeda is a classic Saudi project. In what form might a new group emerge? Yes, in any way! But whether it will be more radical or less radical is all nonsense and imagination of our colleagues from the press. Iraq is the most brutal country in the region since ancient times, and it probably remains so today in relation to its own population. If you took part in the coup in Syria, then you could be exiled as an ambassador somewhere or put in prison - there were dozens of such examples in the post-war period. But if you get caught up in a coup in Iraq, then you will certainly be killed in the most cruel and bloodthirsty way. We remember from history what Assyria was like, which honestly recorded its cruelty on bas-reliefs ( It is believed that impalement was invented in ancient Assyria, located on the territory of modern Iraq. — approx. ed.).
— You once mentioned that Iraq has been a quasi-state since the death of Saddam Hussein. Has it remained so to this day?
— Of course, like most of the Middle East and other local regions. Well, is Sudan a state? Or Somalia? Or Yemen and Afghanistan? In addition, a huge number of countries were destabilized after the “Arab Spring” and at the moment are not states as such. Although, at first glance, they have everything: state flags, anthems, ambassadors and all the formal structures of power. But the Middle East and Africa are primarily systems of tribes and ethno-religious groups. Accordingly, what the Iraqi government controls is not very clear, even in the Shiite zone. The government may formally include representatives of the Kurds and some Sunnis, but these people do not control Iraqi Kurdistan or the Sunni areas. Separatism is flourishing inside the Shiite zones of Iraq. Who said that the Iraqi prime minister can control areas where the majority is, for example, the population supporting Muqtada al-Sadr ( leader of the Mahdi Army, known for leading an uprising against international occupying forces in the holy Shiite city of Najaf in April 2004 – approx. ed.)?
We need to understand this, but no one wants to understand it. Therefore, it is difficult to say how Rosneft will act with its oil projects in Iraqi Kurdistan. This causes great invective from Baghdad. Iraqi Kurdistan has not become an independent state and, it seems, will not become in the coming decades. It is not very clear who advised Rosneft in terms of prospects in Iraqi Kurdistan.
"Islamist militants have been largely driven out of Iraq" Photo: Mikhail Alaeddin, RIA Novosti
“WHY SHOULD RUSSIAN MUSLIMS RECOVER SYRIA? DO THEY NOT HAVE ANY OTHER BUSINESS TO DO?”
— Not long ago, Russia signed an agreement with Bashar al-Assad that our military group will be present in Syria (at the Khmeimim base) for the next 40 years. Does this mean that the Assad regime, which everyone recently thought was finished, is so confident in its longevity?
— Hong Kong was once leased by Great Britain for 99 years, but those who gave it to the British were unlikely to live to see the end of this period. The Americans have a Guantanamo base, but neither the United States is ruled by the president who signed this treaty, nor is there the previous government in Cuba. Even the days of Fidel Castro are over. Nevertheless, the agreement is valid. It does not correlate with the physical lifespan of a particular ruler. So it is here.
“I mean the longevity of the Assad regime, not the Assad regime itself. If the Americans finally push him through and appoint their successor, won’t this jeopardize the recently concluded agreements with the Russian Federation?
— The mode can be anything. But when there is a Russian military base in the country, this is a very serious factor. Let us remember that a logistics support center for the Navy has remained in Syria since Soviet times. The only thing that can force the contingent to leave this base is a decision by the government of its own, and not a foreign country. Who decided to close the bases in Cam Ranh (Vietnam) and Lourdes (Cuba)? Our management, who decided that we no longer need to be there ( in 2001 — approx. ed.). Now the same management has changed its mind ( in November 2013 Vladimir Putin and President of Vietnam Truong Tan Shang signed an agreement to establish a joint base for the maintenance and repair of submarines in Cam Ranh — approx. ed.). Because an understanding has been reached that we still need to be present somewhere outside the Motherland. Accordingly, we will see what kind of regime there will be in Syria in 40 years. But this does not negate the importance of the Russian military presence in the Syrian Arab Republic - in the eastern Mediterranean, that is, on the road from the Black Sea through the straits to the Suez Canal. It is not very clear who, how and in what way will be able to knock Russia out of this bridgehead. Especially considering that in Crimea, despite numerous attempts, there is no NATO, but there is a Russian fleet. I am leaving out other Black Sea fleets, including even the Turkish one at the moment. By preserving the Khmeimim base, we are guaranteed that there will be no problems for Russian shipping in this region. And then we'll see. For us, both 5 and 10 years are a long historical period, and even 40... This is a prerequisite for restoring much of what we destroyed in the civil and military fleet. If, of course, they take restoration seriously and do not treat the implementation of the “May” presidential decrees in the same way.
—Who will restore war-ravaged Syria? Can Russian Muslims, for example, take part in this?
— To chip in 10 thousand rubles and use this money to restore Syria - that doesn’t happen. They are restoring either with government subsidies or as part of some loans and investments. In general, I prefer not to make predictions in such cases. Moreover, not a single forecast on the planet has yet come true, except for one - that we will all die someday. In economics, and especially in specific things, forecasts are an absolutely thankless task. Money loves silence. But, knowing the Syrians, I can say that they have always been a trading people and at the same time one of the most intelligent in terms of establishing production in the Middle East. In addition, they are very patriotic. Therefore, the Syrians are the ones who will primarily restore Syria. Let’s not forget about Syrian emigration—especially the old emigration. There are many waves of Syrian emigration all over the planet, and among these guys I saw more than one billionaire. Having received the appropriate guarantees and preferences, the Syrian foreign diaspora may well take up the restoration of their homeland.
Who restored the Soviet Union after the war? Did they write out a separate Marshall Plan for us and give us money? No, we had nothing but our pocket and our hands. And the destruction in the USSR was much worse than in Syria. However, we did everything ourselves.
— It is believed that Syria is spoiling relations with the Muslim world largely because of the Alawite group that is in power there.
— Syrians are secular people. Under Assad Sr., the secular component was dominant in the SAR. Unfortunately, Bashar al-Assad turned out to be very democratic and soft compared to his father Hafez al-Assad. At the same time, he wanted to liberalize the country: he released all Islamists from prison, and they immediately led detachments that almost destroyed Syria during the civil war. If we are talking about fanatics, radical Islamists, then the Assad regime really has big problems with them. In Russia they are being shot down, but in Syria there are still a lot of them, and a huge number of fanatics are now being pushed into the province of Idlib. These people from Idlib don’t need to restore Syria at all - they need to kill everyone who is not like them. At the same time, they are engaged in the extermination of each other, and they are not at all hampered by the fact that they are all Sunnis. It is much more important whether these groups are pro-Saudi or pro-Turkish. Splits also occur between different wings of political movements, as was the case between Jabhat al-Nusra ( terrorist group banned in Russia, — approx. ed.) and “Ahrar al-Sham” in the same Idlib. In this situation, I don’t quite understand why Russian Muslims should be involved in Syria? Don't they have anything else to do? Even if there are, it will not be the entire ummah, but some specific people and corporations. Perhaps they will cooperate city to city on a twinning model. Although it is difficult to call purely economic relations twinning. Or some specialized republic of the Russian Federation or autonomy will suddenly establish special relations with the Syrian region. But you can't force anyone. A business can only pretend that it is ready to carry out orders from above, but in fact it will not do anything that is contrary to its interests, reasonable logic and profit. Will the state then compensate him for his losses? Since birth it has not compensated and will not compensate. Don’t go to the porch after that.
Therefore, let's agree: Syria must be restored by the Syrian people and the Syrian government. If serious obstacles are put in front of them in this, then the Russian government and our military diplomats will certainly try to help. But no more than that. The idea that Russia can sit on its neck and hang its legs (they say, let the Russians - regardless of the nationality of the military contingent - fight and let the Russians rebuild) is, of course, a healthy idea, and it has existed throughout the Arab world. But we have already lost the Soviet Union once. Therefore, there is no need to overexert yourself and provide brotherly help while having your own problems.
Photo: Mikhail Ozersky, RIA Novosti
“THE HOLY PATRIARCH’S ATTEMPT TO PROVE THAT ALL OUR TROUBLES ARE BECAUSE THE PEOPLE HAVE LEFT THE CHURCH IS AN EXTREMELY DESTRUCTIVE IDEA”
— In this regard, I want to ask: does Russia now have some kind of ideological mission in the Middle East, similar to what it had during the times of the Russian Empire and the USSR?
- The ideological mission is cretinism, which was invented by slackers and idiots who did not know how and do not know how to do anything other than plow others for themselves. This was the case under the Soviet Union, but in the Russian Federation this category of people did not die out, to my great regret. Even now they continue to sell to the leadership the idea of the absolute necessity of an ideological mission, and therefore of themselves, armless and brainless idiots, as a nourishing force. For those who are not very good at doing something themselves, this is generally a very pleasant thing. But I don’t really understand why the hell should we all return to this path? Are we really sheep? Explain to me what ideological mission Peter I and Catherine the Great had, who ruled the country they led so well? When they forged the empire, did they have an ideological mission? I understand that in the 19th century, German professors came up with all this bullshit for Nicholas I. And under the Soviet Union this became even stronger and remains in the minds of some to this day.
— The mission was simple: the Russian emperors were building a “true Orthodox kingdom” that would provide assistance to the Slavic and other peoples falling within the orbit of our interests.
— You know, that’s why Nicholas I lost the Crimean War. Because in a situation where he controlled everything in the world (and he really controlled a lot, including most of Europe after the Napoleonic wars), I wanted to justify why we needed all this. Moreover, in the 1830s we also had straits ( Bosphorus and Dardanelles — approx. ed.) were generally under control. Well, we came up with it. As a result, the Crimean War was blown away, and after two kings we got a revolution.
The role of the Orthodox Church in the history of Russia and in its movement along the path along which it reached the Arctic and Pacific Oceans is much more insignificant than it was invented by people inventing ideological and other missions. Exactly the same as today. It may be offensive to believers. But let's separate the struggle for power and resources from the real state of affairs. The irrepressible struggle for power and resources, quite material, and at the same time for an attempt to control, referring to things that did not exist, do not exist and will not happen, leads to the emergence of militant atheism and to very serious tragedies - thereby resulting in the church after the revolution not only lost its position, but practically disappeared and did not influence anything before the Great Patriotic War. And in today's conditions, we can once again run into the same rake. I don’t really believe in the various myths about what role someone had or what it will be. You can, of course, as in Syria, come up with another mission that well-meaning and sincere, but not very smart people tried to push through at the beginning of events. I remember one of our guys who is famous, good-looking, talks a lot and has something to do with weapons in the Middle East: he said that Syria is the original Christian land, which he was right about. On this basis, he called for the restoration of everything that had happened since the times when shields were nailed to the gates of Constantinople. In order to slaughter all the Russians in Syria, this was very useful, but for nothing else. Al-Qaeda could only applaud him. In my opinion, the same applies to the attempt of His Holiness the Patriarch to prove that all our troubles are because the people left the church. This is an extremely destructive idea. Although it also sounded among the Jews: they say, all your troubles and the Holocaust are because you are atheists, and even marry someone other than your own. Much of this happened among Muslims too. The idea is absolutely explosive. Therefore, I am very far from ideology and am extremely hostile towards it. I really don’t want the country to collapse for the third time in a hundred years. Those who come up with this stupidity don’t want it either, but they provoke him.
— Nevertheless, it was in vain that you mentioned Catherine the Great as an example of de-ideologized rule. It was not for nothing that, for example, she named one of her grandchildren Konstantin. Historians testify that she intended to someday place Constantine on the Byzantine throne liberated from the Turkish Sultan.
- How do you know this about her?
— From historiography dedicated to Catherine’s era.
- Let's not attribute the inventions and tales of various idiots to the great empress. Catherine, as an ethnic German who converted to Orthodoxy solely for inclusion in the leadership of the country where this faith dominated, was an extremely pragmatic person. And it is no coincidence that she categorically banned missionary work on the territory of the empire, causing a very complex reaction from the then hierarchs of the Orthodox Church. Catherine’s predecessor, Peter I, turned this hierarchy, generally speaking, into a ram’s horn (Peter generally did not like anyone who would object to him). His heirs, judging by the results, turned out to be not so worthy. However, under Nicholas I, the German professors explained everything to us and came up with a mission: a) we are going into battle for our Slavic brothers, b) we are going straight to the Byzantine throne. And why pester his late grandmother Ekaterina about what she called her children and ordered her grandchildren to name? Not only did I not see Constantine as the Byzantine Emperor, I also did not see him at the head of the Russian Empire.
- He ruled the Kingdom of Poland, and from the throne, knowing about the riots in the capital after Alexander’s departureI simply refused, losing it to Nikolai.
- Yes. But the rest is fiction, a chest called “Alternative History and Fantasy.” Put it on your bookshelf and forget it. Otherwise, you and I will turn into something like the Ren-TV channel, which, if not a global conspiracy, is reptilians. Catherine was engaged in a specific war with the enemy along the borders - primarily with the Turks. She chewed off a huge number of territories, including Sochi and Anapa. And even Ukraine was part of the Turkish Porte - which was not part of Poland. From the time of Catherine to the defeat of the Ottoman Empire it was still a long way off. And we blew the Crimean War brilliantly and tragically - tragically for Nicholas I, who was much better as a person and a commander, and as a leader of the country, than they wrote about him throughout the Soviet era. And he died of a cold, giving rise to legends that he shot himself out of grief after defeat.
But, in the end, both the country's leadership and the leadership of the Russian Orthodox Church are free to do whatever they want. I don’t know what mythologies will feed them, but if this happens, they will destroy everything again. As they say, God loves a trinity. Did the then leadership headed by the Tsar destroy the Russian Empire? They banged. Has the leadership led by the Politburo collapsed in the Soviet Union? It crashed. Who is stopping us from repeating the same mistakes a third time in our times? Nobody.
- I hope that “love for the trinity” will misfire this time.
“But we’ll see in the 30s, if I live long enough.” In order for something not to happen, you must either act in the right direction, or at least not act in the wrong direction. But for now I see that in our pursuit of power and resources, everyone pulls the blanket on themselves, including where it all can explode.
Photo: kremlin.ru
“ANY LEADERSHIP OF TURKEY AFTER ERDOGAN WILL BE ANTI-RUSSIAN”
— But, let’s say, the relationship between Putin and the “Turkish Sultan” Erdogan is quite pragmatic. It is difficult to read any ideological codes in them.
— They are pragmatic on the part of Vladimir Vladimirovich. And often very unpragmatic on the part of Erdogan. Because Recep Erdogan is a man who firmly believes in his mission to revive the Ottoman Porte and in the influence of Turkey as an agabeylik, “big brother” in the entire space where the Turk once set foot, from Yakutia to Gagauzia. The Turkish president is a very imperial and very illogical person. He, of course, managed to reformat Ataturk’s Turkey, and today it is Erdogan’s Turkey, that is, a completely different country. But here's the question. Because the influence of the Turks on Russian territory is very important for Recep Erdogan, and this influence is far from only economic. It is very noticeable in a number of regions of the Russian Federation, and it is impossible to get rid of it by teams from the center. Attempts after the downing of the Russian Su-24 aircraft ( in November 2015 — approx. ed.) were and caused mute but stubborn resistance from the local elites. For which, if their main investor is a Turkish investor, nothing can be done about it. You won’t be able to replace them, because too many relatives of these elites live in Turkey, have businesses there, or simply took money there.
But what will happen after Erdogan is interesting. Because it is already clear today that any post-Erdogan leadership of Turkey will be anti-Russian. Erdogan is simply fighting against everyone in the world - with his pro-American military elite, with his pro-American and pro-European businessmen, with Islamists like Fethullah Gulen, who lives in the USA. And in this capacity, he is forced to listen to his main support - the businessmen of Anatolia, who are conservative and for whom the price of gas is important and that Turkish construction companies work in the Russian Federation. But no more than that. Erdogan himself is a rather dangerous and unpredictable neighbor. I don't think he can be described as a pragmatist. Putin is an unconditional pragmatist, so he tolerates all these “quirks” and gently reduces communication to what is useful for Russia. But thanks to Vladimir Vladimirovich for this, not Recep Erdogan.
Turkey's influence in Russia may have become less noticeable, but it remains. I would not say that the corresponding jamaats have disappeared in our country. Moreover, we continue to have competition between Qatar, the Saudis and Turkey over influence on Russian Muslims. In a number of regions of the Russian Federation, using each other’s mistakes, they are strengthening. I observe with sadness the situation with Qatar’s influence in Ingushetia ( just at the beginning of this year Yunus-Bek Evkurov visited Qatar — approx. ed.). And in Dagestan, I would not say that Saudi influence has decreased. Although the Saudis are no longer dealing with us, as was the case in the first and second Chechen wars, but more with Syria and Iraq and, fortunately, are stuck in Yemen. And most of their money no longer goes to our territory, but to the Middle East. In this sense, we are lucky. But I am always careful about contacts between Russian Muslims and foreign ones, in order to avoid the influence of visiting emissaries in the Russian Federation, including through their local cadres. We do not yet have our own local personnel, and all attempts to form them lead to the fact that radicals from the countries of the Middle East are trying to saddle them. And the Egyptian Al-Azhar University is definitely not helping us with this. In my time, I observed quite a lot of people from Syrian and Egyptian universities. For example, at one time al-Qaeda educational institutions in Yemen recruited guys from Bashkortostan - they seemed to leave to study, and then suddenly it turned out that they were already participating in battles with the Houthis. The TV channel “Ren-TV”, which I already mentioned, reported practically from the battlefield, proving what heroic young people they were. Apparently, the journalists who did this did not understand anything at all.
The Muslim Brotherhood, fortunately, remains on the prohibited list of the prosecutor’s office, but their lobby, when Mohamed Morsi was president of Egypt, almost succeeded in having them removed from this list. Absolutely amazing things were happening in Russian political circles. The Muslim Brotherhood lobby operated in the State Duma, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and academic structures.
— It is not surprising that the Islamic agenda in Russia is very relevant. According to official estimates, we have about 20 million Muslims...
- No, this is an obvious mistake: 20 million are people who belong to ethnic groups that traditionally profess Islam. Agree, this is a huge difference compared to the phrase “we have 20 million Muslims.” We do not have 20 million Muslims, we do not have, relatively speaking, 100 million Orthodox Christians, but we do have people belonging to ethnic groups whose basic religion was or is Islam or Orthodoxy. Of course, the percentage of de facto practicing religious rites and actual believers in Islam is higher than in all other ethno-confessional groups in our country. Let's say 15–20 percent. This is quite a lot, but no more than that.
— You spoke about the absence of “your” management personnel in the Russian Muslim environment. But are muftis Talgat Tajuddin, Ravil Gainutdin and others not influential enough to control the situation in the ummah? Or is it just a front façade?
— The religious background is the background. The same as in Orthodoxy. Otherwise there would not have been Bishop Diomede in Chukotka ( sharply criticized the leadership of the Russian Orthodox Church in 2007 — approx. ed.), there would not be so many Protestant groups that are very skeptical of their neighbors in the faith of Christ. The Islamic Ummah is certainly split into as many parts as it can be split. Both in our own Middle East region and beyond. It’s unlikely that anyone here controls anything at all. This is simply impossible, and even more so in Islam. There is no rigid vertical of power here, except, perhaps, the institution of ayatollahs in Iran. But their system is fundamentally different.
It should be understood that the religious factor in his relations with the state is much more exaggerated than in reality. The flow of people going to the Islamic world to fight does so mainly for money. Very few people join terrorist and radical organizations on different fronts based on their convictions. Most are mercenaries. Or those who left the local authorities, having quarreled with them over the redistribution of property or during the struggle of the elites. They go into the forest or into the mountains simply because the local elites are deeply corrupt and completely unable to cope with the situation. We see this today in Dagestan, with which Vladimir Vasiliev has to work quite harshly, mowing down the clearing where the previous leadership was outrageous. I remember how a dear man, a senator from Dagestan, at one time harshly objected to my arguments in the Federation Council that they had such a large Salafist ummah (and, I think, half of their religious points are pro-Saudi Salafists). And then what happened happened. This is objective reality. Expecting people to do what they cannot do is in vain.
In any case, has the war in Chechnya been extinguished? Extinguished. The remnants of some radical Islamist groups in Chechnya sometimes try to carry out terrorist attacks. Sometimes these terrorist attacks are aimed at local Christians, as was the case recently, sometimes at local authorities. But they cannot seize power in the republic. Another alarming situation: often in the corridors of power you can see guys with Russian passports, with the Russian language, who have received a good Islamic education by our standards - they come to the administration, entering local power structures. They are usually welcomed with open arms because they declare: “After all, we speak the same Russian language! Let us solve all problems with Islam in favor of the state, because we are patriots. Yes, we will also bring money, and we will do everything at our own expense.” Very often the authorities fall for this. The result is the emergence in the Russian Federation of cells that are not inclined to build a Russian state, much less subordinate to the central government in Moscow, which for them is pure jahiliyya ( paganism, primitive ignorance before the adoption of Islam — approx. ed.). But they won’t say anything about jahiliyya to the local governor.
Photo: shaimiev.tatarstan.ru
“WE STILL REMAIN A TERRITORY THAT COULD BE USEFUL TO THE GLOBAL ESTABLISHMENT IN CASE OF ANYTHING”
— Isn’t Tatarstan a problem area in this sense? After the contract with the republic was not renewed and the “law on native languages” was pushed through the State Duma, there is noticeable unrest among Tatarstan nationalists and intellectuals.
— It is clear that under Mintimer Sharipovich Shaimiev, a flexible and wise man who realized at one time that the country was falling apart, certain processes took place in Tatarstan. Those who want to remember that a couple of decades ago, before Putin came to the presidency, the question was not whether the Russian Federation would crumble or not - this was not even discussed - but into how many specific pieces, 8 or 10, and How will they then live with each other? How many different Russias will we have? And everything was already formalized territorially: there was already the Ural Republic of Eduard Rossel (no matter how much they later assured that the Ural franc was issued “just like that, for themselves”). Tatarstan, with its oil and industry, was certainly one of these parts.
— Could an entire Volga caliphate have arisen?
— Caliphate or not, Mikhail Sergeevich Gorbachev laid a huge mine under the RSFSR, making an attempt to equate the autonomous republics with the union ones, knowing full well that the majority of Russia was made up of national and autonomous republics, from Mordovia to Yakutia. But Gorbachev wanted to leave Yeltsin a terribly holey “plaid” - and then sew it back from the scraps. “Thank you,” of course, for this to Mikhail Sergeevich, as for everything else - big and very sincere. Nevertheless, the country did not collapse. Then Boris Nikolayevich experimented with his reforms - “take as much sovereignty as you can” - as part of maintaining himself in power. And the theme was simple: when Yeltsin leaves the presidency, everyone shakes hands and goes in different directions. And then the topic changed, but it changed quite accidentally. It was such a historical turn that no one could have predicted. But the memory of the very opportunity to “go in different directions” remained. What if Putin ceases to be president, because no one is eternal. Why can't the situation repeat itself? A strong ruler never leaves a strong person “in the kingdom” for himself.
Vladimir Putin, as you know, became the head of the country by accident. He was just very quiet and didn’t express any ambitions. Nobody could have predicted that he would be a very strong leader of the country, and today a political patriarch on a planetary scale (and this is indeed the case: remember how many European and American bosses were replaced while he was gaining experience). But it was predictable that the country would follow the same disastrous path as the Union. What if everything returns to normal in the 2030s? Even if Putin chooses to play the role of Deng Xiaoping and installs a successor in 2024. But will he leave in the 30s? Most likely he will leave. Because there are no eternal ones. Even the toughest ruler - think of Lee Kuan Yew in Singapore - could not control the country at the age of 80-90 years. We see this in dozens of examples.
And this is where different things can happen. It’s good for regionals when there is no boss over you in Moscow. No one bothers you, you can print your own money, you can divide everything that is on your territory in a huge number of different ways, and become very rich and influential. But locally everything is there: some have diamonds, some have timber, some have oil and gas, some have profitable transit or large ports. This is real, and everyone takes this reality into account - in Washington, in Brussels - to the extent that Brussels is generally able to take anything into account. The EU itself is now falling apart into a patchwork quilt. But why not? Taking a bite from a neighbor is generally sacred. We saw this in the 1975 Helsinki Agreement on the Inviolability of Borders in Europe. It died less than a decade and a half after it was adopted. Where is Yugoslavia, where is the GDR and West Germany, where is the Soviet Union? Nowhere.
But we still continue to be a territory that, if anything happens, can be useful to the world establishment. So Tatarstan simply exists here in objective reality. It is impossible to say that there are no other constituent entities of the Russian Federation that would like to follow the same path.
As for the language, everything is clear here. Where local leadership is focused on developing their language to the detriment of Russian... What can you say to them? Economic processes, career growth of children, forcing them to learn Russian and English - where can we get away from this? Or will the children of the nationals spend their entire lives in their region? But the objective interests of the local elite force it to object: “And is our language going to die out?” This is a separate topic, maybe experts would have figured it out, but no one ever asked them. The Russian language has dominated and will always dominate throughout the former territory of the Soviet Union. Even in special zones like Ukraine, where there is a real war against him. You can, of course, try to strangle it, as in the Baltic states - in the same Latvia, where the Latvian language is being imposed even in places where the Russian population has lived from time immemorial. But even there, the Russian language holds its position, because the Latvian language, excuse me, is not a language of international communication.
“No one could have predicted that Putin would be a very strong leader of the country, and today a political patriarch on a planetary scale.” Photo: kremlin.ru
— Let’s return, if you will, to Turkey. Has it already become a de facto theocratic Islamic state?
— Turkey became Erdogan’s dictatorship, of course, with strong Islamic content, but also with a very strong secular component. Just like our country, Turkey existed for many decades in the form of a secular regime. She's used to it. There are many more believers there than we have, simply because it is a country of Islam. And in Islam, as we remember, there are much more active believers than in Christianity. And the religion itself is quite young. Of course, for almost one and a half thousand years this statement sounds quite funny, but it is in a state of seething, boiling and revolutionary protuberations - like those that were in Europe during the religious wars of the 16th century. Maybe you want everything to happen faster, but the speed of processes in the religious world is approximately the same for all faiths.
Erdogan is certainly a believer, and for him Turkish Islam is one of the components of his neo-Ottoman future. Because, firstly, the empire needs to be restored, and secondly, let there be Islam in the correct Turkish form all over the world. In this regard, Turkey's Islamists have greatly increased their influence - especially through the Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Religious Affairs. At the same time, note: as soon as competition arose with the same Gulen, the scheme of the late General Alexander Lebed instantly worked: “Two birds cannot live in the same den” ( words spoken to the general Anatoly Kulikova in 1996, — approx. ed.). Well, yes, Fethullah Gülen and his jaamat helped Erdogan defeat the army, trample the judicial system, change the constitution, displace this and that, take power... And then, in fact, why such an ally? He's too strong. And now Gülen is the main enemy of Recep Erdogan.
Let's not forget that Erdogan only recently, on June 24 of this year, once again won the Turkish presidential election - in the first round, gaining 52.5 percent. And what we see now are his first steps after the elections. They said that Erdogan, with his oncology, was about to go into another world, but they talked about this topic for quite a long time. I'm more worried not about how he will behave in the near future, but about what will happen after him. Erdogan is clearing the political field, including within his Justice and Development Party (AKP). Many of those who could act as competitors to Erdogan have already left the field, including his longtime favorite Ahmet Davutoglu ( served as Prime Minister of Turkey until May 2016 — approx. ed.) is the author of the book “Strategic Depth” and the very idea of a new Turkey. Which of the old ones are still left? Perhaps Hakan Fidan, who heads the intelligence services - the National Intelligence Organization. But here everything is clear: as long as Stalin is alive, Beria is also alive. Those who know too much cannot be sent into retirement; they just need to be killed. But for now it is necessary.
It is possible that after Erdogan there will be a serious rollback from the current policy, including in religious terms. In particular, the hunt for Gülen Jamaat members contributes to this.
— Do you think that there will be a rollback back to Ataturk, to secular Turkey?
- You cannot enter the same water twice. The pullback will be towards some other sentiment. But to what extent this will happen is difficult to predict now. Who under Stalin could predict what would happen after Stalin? Could someone really name Khrushchev's name? It wasn't even funny. Erdogan’s repressions, of course, are milder than those of our “leader of the peoples,” but these are colossal repressions for Turkey. So Erdogan may well be considered the Turkish Stalin. And guessing about his future and the future of Turkey is not my job. I’m not a palmist or the thief of Baghdad - I don’t know how to tell fortunes using coffee grounds and lamb shoulder blades.
- It’s a pity, the Thief of Baghdad was a wonderful friend for Khoja Nasreddin.
- Well, this is in the works of Leonid Solovyov. But in life - who knows.
“Iran is just such a factor on the planet, sometimes useful for us, and sometimes competing with us” Photo: kremlin.ru
“WHY THE HELL IS IRAN OUR ALLY? I STILL REMEMBER THE STORY ABOUT THE MURDER OF GRIBOEDOV"
— Leonid Solovyov, by the way, is your colleague, considering that he was not only a writer, but also a good Leningrad orientalist. Now - about Iran. At the very beginning of the year, we witnessed unrest and a “price revolution” within this always stable state. Is there a risk that a color revolution will come to Tehran under some green banners?
— Iranian society is not at all similar to how it is usually portrayed. What was rather ridiculously called the “price revolution” was in fact a riot inspired by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), which was supposed to demonstrate to the supreme leadership that the government in the person of Hassan Rouhani was not coping with its responsibilities. That's why people were allowed to rage without suppressing them long enough. This is an intra-elite competition between Rouhani’s people and the IRGC people in the struggle for financial flows and control over the economy. That's all! The hopes of the Americans, who inflated these events in the press to unimaginable proportions, remained hopes. They have been cherishing them since Jimmy Carter said the “brilliant” phrase about Ayatollah Khomeini: “We agreed with this guy” and forbade the Shah to eliminate him. In general, all American forecasts regarding Iran have always been the greatest stupidity and have not come true in any of the cases. The unrest of December - January is a common internal struggle. The regime itself is quite stable and controls the situation.
If we take into account Donald Trump with his program to “zero Iran’s oil exports,” then now there is a flood of information in the press that Tehran is about to collapse, literally tomorrow. Because all countries, one after another, will refuse to buy Iranian oil. Of course, this affects Iran, and the information noise raised by the Americans reaches our press.
“But our same press increasingly views Iran as our ally.
“He has never been our ally and never will be.” Why the hell is he an ally? And no one has allies. I actually still remember the story about the murder of Griboyedov ( died in 1829 during the pogrom of the Russian embassy in Tehran — approx. ed.). Of course, you don’t need to hide other people’s wives in your embassy ( It is believed that Alexander Griboyedov hid two Armenian women from the harem of a relative of the Shah in the embassyAllahyar Khan Qajar — approx. ed.), but nevertheless the Persians finished off the Russian ambassador without regret.
Iran is our temporary travel companion and partner; The country with which we maintain economic relations is not the largest in comparison with Turkey or China. What is our alliance? Well, when you need to close some hole on the Syrian fronts, you can use the pro-Iranian Shiite militia, of which only Hezbollah fights decently. Yes, this is better than dragging our military personnel there, as they once did to Afghanistan. But this is a temporary cooperation.
It is also true that America's aggressive trade policy makes our interests aligned with Iran on many issues. But, if Iran needs to forget about Russia in its own interests and communicate only with Americans and Europeans, it will do so. With whom did Iran sign contracts for the supply of hundreds of aircraft? With Airbus and Boeing, and not with Russia at all. Calculations that we will now sell huge quantities of our Superjet to the Iranians are not worth a penny.
Iran is just such a factor on the planet, sometimes useful for us, and sometimes competing with us. The Iranians did not fight with us in the 90s; their sphere of influence was the Shiite world. They tried to establish their influence with us, including in Sunni territories. In the same Bashkortostan, in the example of local villages, one could see the influence of the Iranians, but it was a mild influence. The Iranians have never tried to create a springboard in the Russian Federation for some Hezbollah, as in Iraq or Syria. And for this, special thanks to them. But everyone in Iran remembers that this country was going to be divided, that at the beginning of the twentieth century, a good half of Iran - the Caspian Sea, Shiraz, and much more - was supposed to become part of the Russian Empire. That in 1943, it was on the basis of these treaties that we occupied half of the country, and the Americans - the second half. Therefore, they don’t feel any particularly warm feelings towards us there, just like in Turkey. With the difference that in all Turkish dictionaries Russian is “Moscow gyaur” (not the most complimentary term), but the Iranians do not have this. But they also remember whose princess Stenka Razin drowned.
History turned out like this: everyone tried to conquer everyone. Therefore, our entire south is either former Iran or former Persia. At the same time, under Peter, Mazandaran and Gilan were part of the Russian Empire (returned a little more than 10 years later). But there was also a “greater Iran”, which extended into Central Asia - the Iranian-speaking zone. Now there is nothing left of it except Tajikistan. Who was attacking there? Also the Russian Empire, and behind it the Soviet Union. In some places there were quite a lot of Persians in the border areas. And in Persia they also remember this well.
So I would not bet on Turkey, China, or Iran as an ally. Even our bets on the “brotherly”, just yesterday Soviet, socialist Ukraine went up in smoke and collapsed into tartarar, although this seemed completely impossible.
Photo: Sergey Subbotin, RIA Novosti
“AROUND US IS THE CRAPPING POST-SOVIET SPACE. YOU LOOK AT THIS AND YOU FEEL SAD”
— How are our relations with Israel? Can our Russian lobby in the Promised Land somehow compete with Jared Kushner and the Americans in general?
— In fact, Jared Kushner has no influence on Israel. There is the USA with its influence on Israel, military and economic. It is clear that the amount of military equipment that he receives from Washington is important to him. And it is clear that Jerusalem returns everything with high interest, because the Americans never help anyone if it does not bring them good dividends.
As for Russia, we do not have a lobby in Israel, but simply a significant part of the population that is Russian-speaking. We even have part of the elite there that is Russian-speaking - I mean the Minister of Defense Avigdor Lieberman (a native of Chisinau), the Minister of Environmental Protection Zeev Elkin (a native of Kharkov), who is Benjamin Netanyahu’s right hand and, possibly, the future mayor of Jerusalem, and now the Minister of Affairs Jerusalem. We can mention Yuri Edelstein, Speaker of the Knesset (a native of Ukraine, graduated from high school in Kostroma, lived in Moscow) and many others. These are the people with whom our superiors speak Russian. Just look on television at Yakov Kedmi, who is now, of course, retired, but in the past he led Nativ.
Today, the Russian leadership is doing nothing that could be directed against Israel. Emigration there is free, as in all other countries; there is no oppression of Jews on religious grounds. It is clear that the status of Russian rabbis in our country is determined primarily by proximity to their superiors or distance from them, and not by Israel. But there is dialogue here, and there are no particular problems.
Trying to work to increase Russian influence in Israel by reducing American influence is pointless. As, indeed, in any other country in the world - Kazakhstan or China, Iran or Turkey. Israel will never take one side against the other. To date, he has built a balanced and almost ideal relationship with Russia. That is why over the past 9 years, the Israeli Prime Minister has met with Putin 13 times, and each time more and more positive. But with the American president, everything was difficult for them, and before Trump it was really bad. Not only did our relationship with Barack Obama not work well, but Israel also felt this.
As for military affairs, there is an almost perfect coincidence. It is no coincidence that with completely different approaches to Iran, both we and the Israelis have an understanding that Israel does not oppose Russia in the Middle East, and Russia does not oppose Israel in ensuring its security. Israeli Defense Minister Lieberman visits us, meets with Sergei Shoigu, and the Iranian Defense Minister, who also often participates in our international military conferences, has to endure this. At the same time, Israel is considered a country of the Western bloc (although it is not a member of NATO and never will be). But we do not have such relations with anyone from the Western bloc as we do with the Israelis. Just recently, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Chief of the General Staff Valery Gerasimov traveled to Israel. For almost the first time in history, Moscow’s military campaign in the Middle East does not contradict Israeli interests, since Jerusalem does not need a fragmented Syria, scattered into small parts, where one al-Qaeda is chasing another. In this sense, Assad suits them better.
The approach itself - whether we have more influence than Kushner, or less influence - reminds me of asking a child who he loves more - dad or mom. And the importance of Trump’s son-in-law has been greatly exaggerated. Israel has separate relations with Russia and separate relations with America. Of course, the volumes of trade with the United States are incomparable with the volumes of trade with us, but for objective reasons. The United States is now the main power in the world. No one stopped the Soviet Union from collapsing the country, but from evolving. But the choice in favor of evolution was not made. They disbanded themselves, and also did everything possible to shut down the country for decades. Moreover, in many areas this inertia in the Russian Federation is far from being stopped.
— Are you still inclined to believe that in the 2030s we will still see an interesting movie called “Armageddon”?
“There’s nothing more interesting than an adventure movie.” But it’s better to watch it in theaters than in real life. And so, we have already experienced interesting things. The collapse of the Soviet Union was so interesting! If this had not happened, many would probably have been bored: there was a big country, it was developing... So what about interest... I'm always afraid of interesting things. But there are historical patterns, and they do not depend on us. Even nine women cannot give birth to a child in one month.
Nevertheless, there is progressive positive movement. The situation with Crimea is encouraging. The situation with Syria is so phantasmagorical... Who could have predicted recently that we would successfully go through this campaign with minimal losses? In addition, we gained enormous practical experience in how to conduct modern combat operations in such a complex environment.
How everything turns out depends on us. All around is the crumbling post-Soviet space. Look at perhaps the only stable territory called Kazakhstan. But what will happen there after Nursultan Abishevich Nazarbayev? Let's look at Turkmenistan with its colossal food and currency crisis. It is completely unclear what the fate of this “bag of gas” will be. Let’s look at Kyrgyzstan and drug-producing Tajikistan and scratch our heads: “Oh, how unstable this is all!” We look at the Caucasus - well, even more so... It seems that we could rely on Armenia, but unfortunately - the government has changed in Yerevan. And further it is unclear. And the famous Slavic brotherhood collapsed in such a way that my ears are still ringing. Ukraine showed us that we should not have invested money in the country - all these hundreds of billions of dollars in gas discounts - but should have distributed five billion to its authorities.
Everything around us has collapsed and is going to hell. We could have been next, and should have already been. Many worked for this, and Madeleine Albright, the then US Secretary of State, spoke openly about it. I am sure that half of our leadership in the 90s was geared towards this and prepared for this. And some are still preparing - these people have not gone anywhere. Someone ran around Poland and other Europe, and now they are already here - big bosses in small parties. You look at this and feel sad.
Photo: kremlin.ru
“The USA is a SUPERPOWER, AND WE ARE A SUPERPOWER ONLY BY ONE INDICATOR: WE CAN DESTROY THEM”
— I can’t help but ask a question about Donald Trump, who is forbidden by strict American uncles and aunts as a “boy from a good family” to meet with the “bad boy Vova,” but he still wants to and does. Is this his sincere desire or are there certain industrial circles behind Trump who are pushing him towards this?
— Nobody is pushing Trump - he is a person with an absolutely adventurous plan, but a very experienced and intelligent president who won the presidential election simply because he is much smarter than everyone thought about him and plays with fresh cards. He meets with Putin because he wants to. I believe that it is much easier for him to find a common language with Putin than with half of his Democrats and Republicans. Because they are both pragmatists. The difference is that Trump does not stop fighting for his own power, because most of the American establishment and a significant part of the US population would like to see him at least eliminated from the presidency and not win the next election. And the best thing in their fantasies is for him to be shot. This still distinguishes him from Vladimir Vladimirovich, whom you can “gnaw” as you like, but he wins the elections with a result of 76 percent of the vote. This is a fact: he is the president of a country where the majority of the population is for him, including those who grumble a lot about him and those who do not like the government (and who may like it, with the exception of the Minister of Defense, Foreign Affairs and a couple of others person from this list?). So Putin’s position is incomparably stronger than Trump’s. Despite the fact that there are no special elites behind Trump - these are all fairy tales that back in the 70s were invented by people who did not really know how America works. This is one of the “conspiracy theories” that were previously invented in different corners of the Politburo. As his employees once told me: “The system is one-party, but multi-entry.” And this happened in the Central Committee. And at the Higher School of State Security there were also theorists... Some of whom still come to the Academy of the General Staff to do stupid things and tell how everything works in the world. Although they have never worked anywhere abroad and don’t know anything there.
It’s probably possible to call Trump a “boy from a good family,” but Putin behaved much more decently throughout his life and is much more decent as a person. I like our president much better in this regard. But the main thing is that Putin and Trump find a common language, and then it’s up to karma. In general, the President of America can do much less than the President of Russia. Objective reality forces Trump to talk all sorts of nonsense about what a terrible enemy he is of Russia and Putin, so that he is not completely torn to shreds. And so half of America knows that he is our “agent”. Therefore, the very fact of meeting with Vladimir Vladimirovich for Trump is a rather risky thing, it is such a spit in the face of his enemies. Can he lift sanctions on Russia? Can not. Can he stop barking at us? Can not. Can he say that all the stories about Russian interference in the American elections are nonsense? He can't even do that. Although, on the other hand, he knows for sure that no one in Russia elected him - not even Vladimir Zhirinovsky, who drank to his victory. We simply did not like—and rightly so, we did not like—Hillary Clinton, suspecting that this Gingema would certainly not make us any better.
We have strict limits on what we can achieve in dialogue with the Americans. In those areas in which they need it - titanium for aircraft, space - they, of course, will cooperate with us. But Americans are not sentimental, and it is up to us what role we will have in the world. Excited shouts about Trump meeting with Putin - “hurray!” - usually emitted by people who have never had their own money, nor their own power, nor their own risks associated with money and power. Therefore, they react to some terribly strange factors like “they met or didn’t meet”, they spoke well or badly... The American press, which had absolutely nothing to write about the meeting in Helsinki, because they weren’t told anything, came up with the idea that Melania Trump's face changed as she shook Putin's hand. I watched the corresponding video for a long time and tried to understand where she changed in her face... As far as I know, a woman can change in her face, realizing that her shoes are too tight, or her makeup has come off, or something else extraordinary has happened, and so she Now I would really like to fix an undone button or an untied strap, but I can’t, because there are cameras all around. That's when the woman's face changes. But the American press sneered at how Putin stunned Melania by shaking her hand, and our media began to sing along. Well, they are such idiots.
What will be the consequences of the Helsinki meeting between Trump and Putin, whether they will meet again, etc., I won’t guess. Nobody ever knows how it will be. Very often it turns out, as in that joke about a sparrow, a cow cake and a fox (In winter, a sparrow was flying, froze and fell. A cow walked past. The cake - splash! - and covered the sparrow. The sparrow warmed up and chirped. A fox ran past, heard it, pulled out the sparrow and ate it. Hence the three morals: not the enemy who put you in shit; not the friend who pulled you out of shit; if you’re sitting in shit, sit and don’t tweet!). It's the same here. This is like Mao Zedong's poisonous proposal to Nikita Khrushchev to swim in the pool together ( during the visit Nikita Khrushchev to Beijing in the fall of 1959 — approx. ed.). Mao was a famous swimmer, he could easily swim across the Yangtze, but Nikita Sergeevich was somehow not very good in his family shorts. What was the fierce enmity between the Soviet Union and China after that and how did it all end on Damansky Island ( in the spring of 1969, the largest military Soviet-Chinese conflict took place here — approx. ed.), we know.
It's not bad when you have a meeting of two world class leaders. They say that America is fading, but it will be fading for a long time, it is a superpower, and we are a superpower only by one indicator: we can destroy them. And they won’t be able to do anything against it. In economics, we are, of course, not a superpower. However, the meeting between the American and Russian presidents, which took place positively, even against the backdrop of today’s Cold War, sanctions and other nasty things, is already good. But personally, I stopped going to America completely.
- Why? You weren't included in the sanctions lists, were you?
- I don't like meaningless things. On my last visit, I was questioned for a long time by a strange man standing in the place of a customs officer about what my Middle East Institute was doing. And before that, they kept me for half an hour in a local “monkey house” with potential illegal immigrants, taking away my passport so that this “customs officer” had time to get there. And I got the understanding that it’s probably bad for my health to visit the United States now. Skype works, which means I can talk to my mother-in-law anyway. As for sanctions, I am absolutely invulnerable for them. To do this, you just need to not hold a foreign passport, not educate your children abroad, not buy real estate there and not open accounts there. Just everything.
Evgeny Yanovich Satanovsky born June 15, 1959 in Moscow. Russian orientalist and economist, one of the leading experts in the field of politics and economics of Israel, as well as other countries of the Middle East. Founder and president of the Middle East Institute think tank (formerly the Institute for Israel and Middle East Studies). Candidate of Economic Sciences, Professor. Third President of the Russian Jewish Congress (2001–2004). Married, two children and three grandchildren.
He graduated from the Moscow Institute of Steel and Alloys in 1980 and worked as an engineer in the pipe rolling department of the State Institute for the Design of Metallurgical Plants. In 1984, due to the death of his father, in order to support his family, he got a job as a hot shop worker at the Hammer and Sickle plant.
By his own admission in a speech at the Federation Council, since 1982 he has been working on the topic of religious extremism in the USSR State Security Committee. In 1982, under the influence Sergei Lugovsky, whose father worked at MISiS together with Satanovsky’s father, joined his Hebrew study circle. In the mid-1980s, he participated in Jewish public life and became a member of the historical and ethnographic commission. In 1988, he left the factory and went into business, becoming in 1989 president of the Ariel financial and industrial group of companies.
Since 1993 - President of the Institute of the Middle East (until 1995 - Institute for Israel Studies, until 2005 - Institute for the Study of Israel and the Middle East.
In 1999, at the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, under the scientific guidance of Doctor of Economic Sciences, Professor Vladimir Isaev defended his dissertation for the degree of Candidate of Economic Sciences on the topic “Specifics of the economic development of Israeli society in the 90s” (specialty - 08.00.14 “world economy and international economic relations”).
Since 1995 at the suggestion Vladimir Gusinsky began to create a Russian Jewish Congress. In 2001–2004, he was the third president of the Russian Jewish Congress. Replaced in this post Leonida Nevzlin. Previously, he was vice president, responsible for issues of charity, higher secular education, culture, science and sports. Member of the Board of Directors of the World Jewish Congress.
Teaches geopolitics and economics of the Middle East region at the Department of Jewish Studies, head of the Department of Israeli Studies at the Center for Judaic Studies and Jewish Civilization of the Institute of Asian and African Countries at Moscow State University. Since 1998, he lectured at the Higher School of Humanities named after. Dubnova (Jewish University of Moscow). He also taught at MGIMO.
Vice President of the International Board of Regents of the International Center for University Teaching of Jewish Civilization at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Member of the Presidential Council of the Russian Society for Friendship with Arab Countries. Member of the editorial boards of the magazines "Diaspora", "Bulletin of the Jewish University" and "Oriental Collection", the academic council of the "Library of Judaic Studies". Until 2012, he was a member of the supervisory and coordinating council of the quarterly scientific journal “State, Religion, Church in Russia and Abroad.”
Takes part as an expert and speaker in specialized scientific conferences. Participates in his friend's programs Vladimir Solovyov on the Vesti FM radio station, where also from Tuesday to Thursday, together with Sergei Korneevsky hosts the program “From Two to Five.” Participant in Russian socio-political talk shows on state TV channels, including “Evening with Vladimir Solovyov” (since 2015).
Russian President Vladimir Putin called US missile attacks on Syria an aggression against a sovereign state in violation of international law.
The Russian leader also said that this step by Washington could cause serious harm to Russian-American relations, which are already in a deplorable state.
The president of the independent research center “Middle East Institute”, Evgeniy SATANOVSKY, reflects on the latest US aggression and some related issues:
“...or maybe it won’t”
An American strike on Syria could lead to anything, for example, to a war between Russia and the United States. Or maybe it won’t. It could also lead to a new Vietnam. In the end, no one is interested in the bombing of a chemical weapons warehouse and the place where the militants produced this same sarin. It’s just that the United States will try to overthrow Assad in any case...
But the incident in the Gulf of Tonkin, after which the Vietnam War began, also had nothing to do with reality, and the then US President and CIA director simply lied to Congress. But there was a Vietnam War!
“For some reason, our media fell in love with the American president”
Yes, now the wave of praise for Trump in our media has stopped. But I don't really know if it was good or bad, and it's none of my business.
If at first our media for some reason fell wildly in love with the American president, this probably shows how fed up we are with his rival Hillary Clinton!
But the point is not that we “love Trump very much,” although he is really great! The man won the presidential election when everyone was against him - both the American press and the American political establishment, including his party. And this, of course, inspires respect.
“Trump was not created by Putin”
On the other hand, yes, he became the President of the United States, but there are still all those people who simply cannot stand us! And in this regard, he is, of course, not the Russian president. It was not put in place by Putin or Russian hackers, and we were not the ones who smashed his opponents.
Therefore, very funny situations are emerging there now... That is, Trump will act as an American president, strictly constrained by American politics, should act. Yes, to the best of his ability, he will change it, but we will continue to react to any president and to any actions of any country, including America, reasonably and without hysterics.
You never know what the press writes, well, they write and write...
“Putin and Shoigu even treated Obama calmly”
And in general, I haven’t heard our President or Secretary of Defense come out and burst into laudatory speeches about Donald Trump. No, we don’t have such stupidity.
They have a calm and neutral positive attitude towards any US president. Putin and Shoigu even treated Obama calmly and neutrally positively - and this, of course, is a great thing! And what will happen next, we'll have to wait and see...
. “The USA is not nearly as omnipotent!”
In fact, US policy primarily consists of America’s attitude within itself... That is, from its goals and objectives, from its failures or victories, from the state of the economy, from the state of lobbying for the interests of certain countries, certain concerns, from losses and defeats, from real opportunities, of which America actually has much less than is usually talked about excitedly, considering the United States to be absolutely omnipotent.
No, the USA is not nearly as omnipotent! But again, we'll wait and see. I honestly admit to you that I am very cautious regarding any forecasts...
“For this there is a military-political leadership of the country...”
As for the possible change in the global configuration, it changes every day, and not after the US strike on Syria on April 7, 2017. Was this strike prepared in advance? You know, I'm not an American and I don't work in the Pentagon or the White House.
I don’t know what Russia’s future actions in Syria will be. For this purpose, there is a military-political leadership of the country, and it should be noted that it makes decisions, not based on the fact that it is necessary to crow in time and say - hurray, we won!..
“Then the Stalingrad cauldron - again, hurray, we won?”
Imagine that the Second World War is going on, we drove the Germans away from Moscow and said - hurray, we won. Well, we won - so what? Then the Stalingrad cauldron - again, hurray, we won?
But these are military actions, and Russia today carries them out, I would say, with micro-costs! All this has long ago not only paid off, but, based on military-economic logic, brought profit, and with very, very small forces and with extreme success! This is a fact.
“Russia’s activities inspire respect, envy and hatred”
There are so many hysterics and political speculations about the “humanitarian catastrophe” in Syria! But for some reason no one talks about what is happening in Iraq, and apparently everything is very good there with Mosul...
But humanitarian aid in Syria is distributed almost exclusively by our military and the Syrian government... You may not notice this at the official level and in the media, but there is very much information about this on the Internet.
In this regard, yes, Russia’s activities inspire respect. It also causes envy and, of course, hatred.
“Erdogan was offended by us, the Americans...”
But the question that it’s finally all over, of course, is not worth asking. Sorry, there is a very capricious and very controversial figure of the Turkish president... For example, the armed opposition consisting of pro-Turkish groups did not come to the last round of negotiations in Astana...
Of course, they did not come based on Erdogan’s direct leadership of this process. After all, he was offended by us, by the Americans, by the Europeans and in general by the whole world because his plans were not coming true, although they could not come true from the very beginning.
Actually, you still have to somehow reconcile your desires with the real situation, but he wanted to clear out all the Kurds in the north and take Raqqa. But then the Americans became agitated, they don’t need all this at all...
“Saudi Arabia is investing gigantic amounts of money in continuing the civil war in Syria”
And then there is the unpredictable situation with Saudi Arabia, which is investing enormous amounts of money in continuing the civil war in Syria. Prince Mohammed bin Salman is doing everything he can to continue fueling his al-Qaeda, as well as re-establishing Saudi Arabia's image as a major US ally in the Middle East.
Well, this is a serious factor. And there are many more such factors...
“Start nudging Marshal Zhukov”
Until all our long, complex, thorough, painstaking diplomatic and military-diplomatic efforts, in addition to military victories, lead to stabilization of the situation, we will have to do all this.
And all this despite the fact that Russia now has a fantastic strategy in the Middle East! That is, today we are doing in Syria what neither the Americans in Iraq, nor anyone else with the gigantic coalitions assembled there can even come close to doing and simply do not know how!
And this, of course, gives enormous experience to military designers, diplomats, military personnel, and anyone else who is involved in this! Well, ask about what’s next... Then start nudging Marshal Zhukov by the elbow and asking, what’s next? Well, what will he answer you?..
“Erdogan, as far as I know, is not a mother...”
Well, Erdogan recently called Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin his dear friend... Should we believe him? I don’t even know who in this world I can trust! You don’t need to trust anyone, and especially don’t trust anyone in the Middle East!
You can trust your mother, but Erdogan, as far as I know, is not the mother, father or any other close relative of anyone who lives in our country. Therefore, I don’t really understand why it is necessary to accept the words spoken at the eastern trade as some argument for discussion. Of course, any negotiations with Erdogan are a bit of an oriental bazaar: a lot of smiles, compliments, wonderful words, a certain amount of unsaid... And the results are different every time.
“As for Russia’s strategic loneliness...”
As for a certain strategic loneliness of Russia, every large country is lonely. Well, thank God, because carrying not only your own problems, but also the problems of the entire “civilized world” is very expensive and, as it turns out, completely pointless.
