A New World War: The Road to Victory

The present cascade of overlapping and contradictory events is bewildering and makes it hard to understand what is really going on. In this essay, I dare give my interpretation of recent history, relying on my own experience and knowledge, which over the past 35 years have allowed me to avoid serious errors in estimates and forecasts. These sometimes came a bit late, but more often were years or even decades ahead of the expert community’s.

I dare say a new world war is in full swing. Its origins lie back in 1917, when Soviet Russia broke out of the capitalist system. It was attacked first by interventionists, then by fascist Germany and almost all of Europe—to no avail. The second round began in the 1950s, when the Soviet people, notwithstanding enormous hardships, created an atomic bomb to ensure their sovereignty and security, and achieved nuclear parity. Without realizing it at the time, we thereby dismantled European/Western military superiority, the foundation of its colonialism and ideological domination, which for five centuries had allowed it to rob the rest of the world and suppress what had once been the world’s most advanced civilizations.

From the mid‑1950s onwards, the West suffered one military defeat after another. Humanity embarked on a path of national liberation and began nationalizing the resources that had been seized by Western countries and corporations. The global balance of power began to shift towards the non-West.

At the same time, the world order’s contradictions began to deepen. Inequality started to grow rapidly. The new generations of Westerners realized that they would live worse than their predecessors, including because of reduced ability to exploit and plunder the rest of the world.

The present cascade of overlapping and contradictory events is bewildering and makes it hard to understand what is really going on. In this essay, I dare give my interpretation of recent history, relying on my own experience and knowledge, which over the past 35 years have allowed me to avoid serious errors in estimates and forecasts. These sometimes came a bit late, but more often were years or even decades ahead of the expert community’s. 

I dare say a new world war is in full swing. Its origins lie back in 1917, when Soviet Russia broke out of the capitalist system. It was attacked first by interventionists, then by fascist Germany and almost all of Europe—to no avail. The second round began in the 1950s, when the Soviet people, notwithstanding enormous hardships, created an atomic bomb to ensure their sovereignty and security, and achieved nuclear parity. Without realizing it at the time, we thereby dismantled European/Western military superiority, the foundation of its colonialism and ideological domination, which for five centuries had allowed it to rob the rest of the world and suppress what had once been the world’s most advanced civilizations.

From the mid‑1950s onwards, the West suffered one military defeat after another. Humanity embarked on a path of national liberation and began nationalizing the resources that had been seized by Western countries and corporations. The global balance of power began to shift towards the non-West.

At the same time, the world order’s contradictions began to deepen. Inequality started to grow rapidly. The new generations of Westerners realized that they would live worse than their predecessors, including because of reduced ability to exploit and plunder the rest of the world.

In the 1970s and 1980s, the prevailing mood in the West was despondency. It tried to unite in order to survive. In the mid-1970s, the U.S.-Europe-Japan Trilateral Commission was set up. In an effort to restore supremacy, the Reagan administration increased military spending and launched the “Star Wars” myth. Trying to show that they can still win, the Americans invaded the tiny and defenseless island state of Grenada, but did not convince anyone.

And then the West got lucky. The USSR collapsed under the pressure of ideological erosion, inefficient socialist agriculture, constant shortages of food and other necessities, monstrous defense expenditures, a huge but inefficient army, subsidies to allied countries, and the foolishness and indecision of Gorbachev.

The global capitalist system, which had been in crisis, was flooded with adrenaline and glucose: legions of hungry consumers and cheap workers. History seemed to have turned back, but the euphoria did not last. Giddy with victory, the West made several gross geostrategic mistakes, and then Russia began to revive, primarily by restoring its military might.

Confrontation also intensified. Obama proclaimed an ‘America First’ policy to revive U.S. power. His administration increased military spending and anti-Russian propaganda. Russia tried to stop this new attempt at revanche by reincorporating Crimea, at which point the real hysteria began. But Moscow did not follow up on this success, as it still hoped to come to agreement. It danced around the Minsk Process, failing to see how the Ukrainian army and people were being prepared for war with Russia. New waves of sanctions followed, and an economic war was unleashed during Trump’s first term in office. Russia, a familiar enemy, became the primary target of the attempted revanche. The Trumpists, however, pretended that they were ready to negotiate if we gave up China. Then they were distracted by COVID, likely a weapon for the new war that turned against the West itself.

We hesitated to respond to the West’s offensive. When we finally did, in 2022, we made several mistakes. We underestimated the West’s desire to crush Russia (the source of the West’s impending historic failure), so as to then deal with China and again suppress the World Majority that had been liberated by the USSR/Russia. We underestimated the Ukrainian regime’s readiness for war and the degree of Ukrainians’ brainwashing. We still hoped that they were “our people,” although such people were few—and with time ever fewer—west of the Dnieper. A bigger mistake was to start fighting the Kiev regime while ignoring the fact that Russia’s main opponent and threat was the collective West—especially the European elites, who sought to distract from their failures and to take revenge for their 20th-century defeats, especially the one suffered by Hitler, under whose banners the overwhelming majority of Europeans had marched. However, our key mistake was to only partially utilize our most important weapon: nuclear deterrence, for which we paid with malnutrition and even famine in the 1940s and 1950s.

The Americans long worked to incite this war, especially since the early 2000s, honing Ukraine as the tip of their spear.

We have ended up in a war, called the ‘Special Military Operation,’ whose rules we have essentially accepted as imposed upon us: a war of attrition with an economically and demographically superior enemy. It has become trench warfare with 21st-century technology.

Nevertheless, in 2023 and 2024, we did strengthen nuclear deterrence, making clear that we had reinforced structure and deployment, and updating our nuclear doctrine. The U.S. had no intention of fighting for Europe, especially if there was a risk of nuclear escalation and a thus a threat to U.S. territory. It therefore began to withdraw, even under Biden, to avoid a direct clash, while continuing to profit from the war at the Europeans’ expense. Trump, despite his plaintive cries for peace, has actually done the same, cashing in on the war while avoiding direct confrontation with Russia.

This war has so far been waged openly on two fronts. The Americans provoked a war in Europe and then, predictably, set the Middle East on fire—this time under the pretext of destroying Iran’s nuclear potential. There is no longer any talk of expanding the “zone of democracy.” The rationale is quite obvious—to spread the Middle Eastern conflict to South and Southeast Asia, and to North Africa. The predictable (and planned) interruption of fuel and fertilizer supplies will inevitably lead to a decline in food production. Other regions will also be destabilized. Meanwhile, the U.S. is purging its “near abroad”—the coup in Venezuela, the blockade of Cuba.

While we may sympathize with Trump’s human decency, he is contemptuous of international norms. Some still (understandably) hope to “negotiate,” but with whom? Him? Those who will replace him? (Though dialogue with a great nuclear power truly is necessary.)

Besides the desire for revanche, there are even deeper reasons for the unfolding world war. One is the exhaustion of modern (now digitalized) global capitalism, which has lost its ethical foundations.

It depends on ever-growing consumption, which undermines the foundation of human life, causing environmental pollution and climate change. Unbridled consumption, amplified by a focus on liberalism/inpidualism, is becoming an increasingly obvious threat to humans as thinking beings who consider themselves to have been created in the image of God and who strive to serve others. No clear answers to these two threats have been found so far. Or no one wants to find them. The absence of these answers is the deepest cause of the modern world system’s crisis.

Washington remains committed to its long-standing strategic goal: preventing the rebirth of Greater Eurasia, especially now that it would be under the leadership of Russia and China (not only Tsarist/Soviet Russia, as the Anglo-Saxons had feared).

The goal is to destabilize Europe and the Middle East, then other regions of Eurasia and Africa, and finally—with luck, or our stupidity/weakness—to crush Russia, so as to then deal with China and again suppress the World Majority.

The U.S. has dropped all pretensions to civility, legality, order, and law. It captures and kills the leaders of countries that resist it, and abets aggression and even genocide committed by its vassals. Look at what has been done to the Palestinians in Gaza.

Having met no strong resistance, the U.S. has ignited a world war without restraint—though left the escape routes open. While speaking of the “spirit of Anchorage,” Washington wants to prolong the confrontation in Europe, continue draining Russia, and cut China’s supply routes.

U.S. strategy and policy provoke disgust and may trigger a global conflagration. The U.S. is now rushing to regain military superiority by boosting its already gigantic military budget by half—an increase unprecedented since the Second World War.

Trump’s policy is, in fact, even rational in its own way, despite all the twists and turns that disguise it. It will remain very dangerous until the Americans meet strong resistance. Russia has so far refrained from providing that, even pretending that it wants to negotiate. Or did it actually want to? Any hopes for an agreement are comedic or worse, given the U.S.’s general course and internal situation. Who should we negotiate with, and about what? How can a country waging an economic war against us help Russia’s economic development?

The Special Military Operation has driven many traitors out of the country, and undermined the positions of domestic compradors[1]* and their servants. But we have not yet understood the essence of the struggle. It is not about taking towns in Ukraine, but about who will win the historical battle: the West, or we and the World Majority? Or will modern—yet imperfect and even (especially in the West) degrading—human civilization perish in the flames of an all-out thermonuclear war?

With (most) Europeans, things are simpler and even worse. Their elites have degenerated morally and intellectually, abandoning almost everything good about Europe. Failing everywhere, they have opted for war hysteria, created an artificial enemy for themselves, and are even preparing for war. One can scoff at their attempts to create a militarized European Reich, as the German General Staff planned at the beginning of the 20th century, and then the Nazis in the 1930s and 1940s. They will not succeed. Yet they do have a lot of money and a large population, including immigrants, poor Eastern Europeans, and Ukrainian refugees. So, the European hyena pack is dangerous and becoming even more so. Europe’s current elite is returning the subcontinent to its nasty but habitual role as the main source of all the worst in human history: endless wars (including two world wars unleashed in one generation), colonialism, racism, serial genocides, and anti-human ideologies.

This “elite” must be toppled, if possible without harming the innocent. But these “innocents” once chose Hitler, Mussolini, and the like, and now they obey the scum in Brussels and Berlin that is pressing the continent towards a great war and suicide. But this race into the abyss is also dragging in others, and will drag us in if we do not change our approach to the war that the West has forced upon us and is imposing on the whole world. The West’s decline should not lead to the demise of human civilization, let alone of our country.

Europe’s conventional and nuclear buildup must be stopped. Macron and his ilk should be disarmed. When he declares a readiness to extend “expanded deterrence”—nuclear guarantees—to other countries, the French people should know that he is lying through his teeth. Since the mid-1950s, even the U.S. never really intended to launch nuclear retaliation for Europe’s sake. And if Macron is not lying, then the French people should recall their revolutionary tradition and guillotine him as a traitor ready to sacrifice Paris or Lyon for Berlin or Poznan.

But in any case, we should keep our powder dry: if the European elite’s degradation persists, Macron may be followed by people even more mindless than him.

Russia should quickly build up its operational and strategic nuclear capabilities so that France and Britain know that if they try to use nuclear weapons against Russia, or transfer them to someone else, they will simply be wiped off the face of the Earth. God forbid, of course.

I will repeat what I have said in other articles: given the European elite’s rapid degradation, its nuclear weapons should be taken away sooner or later. When Britain and France acquired nuclear weapons, they were still headed by responsible and reasonable people. There are no such people there anymore. For everyone’s sake, monkeys should not have grenades.

What Is to Be Done?

We must understand and accept the immutable fact that we have been forced into a global historical struggle that directly threatens to destroy our country—and, in the medium term, all of humanity.

The answer is obvious: the militarization, and concentration on defense, of our political and economic thinking. Not a mindless rush into an unlimited arms race like that pursued by the USSR. But our entire ideological, economic, and domestic policy should be geared towards not only our survival, but also towards winning the world war imposed on all humankind.

The life and development of each person, and of humanity as a whole, are determined by state of mind (ideology), strength (military capabilities), and (to a lesser extent) welfare (the economy, which is necessary, but whose rightful place is to serve and bolster the spirit and strength of the country and people).

In the near future, Russia should be governed not so much by civilians as by the military, which is already happening, considering the senior roles held by people from the security services. This process needs to be sped up.

Our Chinese friends, despite their caution and desire to delay the clash—something that has occasionally caused annoyance and even suspicion in our country—have already begun preparing for a major war, if only to prevent it. They are building up strategic reserves, adopting mobilization plans, and replacing people in the[2] leadership.¹ We hardly see such work in our country, except for several national programs that are useful but not aimed directly at preparing for war or winning it. For example, what is being done to strengthen civil defense? Again, we are the primary target in the unleashed world war; China is the second. The West will deal with China after it has weakened or subverted us. And for that, the West is setting the world around Russia and China on fire.

We must finally part ways, albeit a century and a half late, with Europhilia and Westernizing thought. In the current and future circumstances, such thought and behavior are terribly outdated, signifying mental inferiority and moral impurity. The ‘Epstein elite’ is not for us. The West will be a source not only of military threats and hostility, but also of moral infection and anti-humanity.

This does not mean denying all the good and lofty things brought by Peter the Great’s injection of European culture. Nor should we completely shut ourselves off from people in the West—not all are moral degenerates and liars.

There are still decent people there, though ever fewer due to propaganda that surpasses even that of Goebbels in its totality. We should not dismiss all Western countries. The sprouts of normality have not yet been fully stamped out in the U.S., as inhuman, ugly, and disgusting as its current policy may be. Such sprouts can still be found in Southern and Central Europe, which eventually may join Greater Eurasia as a healthy part of humanity. We should not be like the Western elites, who are whipping up total Russophobia, preparing their societies for war, and driving them into an intellectual and moral impasse. When (the sooner the better) we have to destroy old—especially northwestern, Calvinist—Europe, we must not throw the baby out with the bathwater. We should keep the best European practices and even cultivate them. But we must finally understand that we are not originally a European, but a great Eurasian civilization-state.

The external origins of our historical spiritual culture came from the south—from resplendent Byzantium, Palestine, and the Muslim and Buddhist worlds. And our main external political origins lie in the Great Mongol Empire. It is high time we understood ourselves and lived our own way, as destined by history and geography—to see the world from the center and north of Eurasia, not from its western offshoot.

A difficult but pressing issue is restoring our best traits: faith and striving for the supreme spirit and for love. European civilization expelled God. We were particularly affected by this when the European communist ideology, godless and atheistic, was imposed upon us. But most importantly, without faith and hope for the best in oneself, without realizing oneself as part of history and of one’s country and its culture, a person is not a human being, but an inferior animal, as modern Western civilization is pushing him to become.

Sick and tired of communist uniformity, society and part of the ruling elite shun the word ‘ideology.’ It also seems that some of the elite does not want an ideology because it certainly will not be liberal or Western. But great countries cannot be created without a single spiritual core and ideological platform, and perish if they lose them. History is a graveyard of powers that lost their cores. Twice, we almost perished, having lost faith in God, the Tsar, and the Fatherland by the beginning of the 20th century, and having lost faith in communism by the end of it.

There is no need for an ideology to be termed as such, or for it to be binding. A Russian citizen should have the freedom of opinion and choice—as long as he does not harm others. Russia’s Idea-Dream[3]² should be mandatory only for those who seek public recognition or the right to govern. But it should be instilled from childhood, as the idea of service to the family, society, the country, and God. (Faith in Him cannot be imposed, but should be encouraged. Faith in God, whatever He may be called, is the best human trait in man.)

We must finally get rid of the delusion of economism, whether Marxist or liberal. Terming the person an ‘economic animal,’ and claiming the absolute priority of his economic interest, indeed reduce him to the level of an animal.

We should develop and implement a new economic model—a post-capitalist one, based on initiative and personal interest, but developing the best in man, preserving nature, and uniting the two in what outstanding Russian thinkers called the “noosphere.” The economy, including business, should serve man and the Earth, not suppress them, as under modern capitalism, which has lost its ethical roots.

China has come closest to this model. But we should not copy its experience, though it may be useful. There are many elements in our own Imperial and especially Soviet experience that should be modified and revived. In a world of intensifying geopolitical and geoeconomic struggle, in a world that has been forced into a world war, it is impossible to survive, let alone win, without long-term planning and strict administration.

We need not only a forward-looking ideological platform—a Idea-Dream—but also a series of comprehensive macro-projects designed to ignite the country with creative energy.

The first among them is the ‘Siberization of Russia’—the transfer of the center of ideological, economic, and political development to Russian Asia, i.e., Siberia. The future is there. We should wind up our Western voyage as soon as possible, as the only things still awaiting us there are threats and the miasma of decay.

Since Europe is returning to its authentic self, as the source of wars and other troubles, the military advancement and an eastward shift are also necessary for military and strategic reasons.

The movement towards Siberia is a movement “towards ourselves,” towards what is real and best in our national character, towards the non-Western future. We need to immediately start searching for where to establish a third capital in Siberia, and to transfer some capital functions to Siberia’s cities.

Foreign and Defense Policy Need Serious Modernization

First. We need to understand that the deep contradictions in the current global economic system, which is undermining the very essence of man, endanger the entire human civilization. Continuing our half-measures in Ukraine threatens to exhaust our country and undermine the incipient revival of its power and spirit.

Second. In the “spirit of Alaska,” we may discuss a truce. But we must understand that, fundamentally, long-term peace and development—for our country and for all humankind—are impossible without suppressing the West’s Europe-led pursuit of revanche. To this end, we should destroy the Kiev regime, and liberate the southern and eastern regions of the quasi-state of Ukraine, which Russia needs for security reasons. Our brave soldiers and field commanders can and should keep advancing. But we must understand that a world war cannot be won through modernized trench warfare. That is a path to defeat, or at least to the loss of hundreds of thousands more of our best men, whom we need to fight and win in the approaching historical era, which will be extremely dangerous and difficult even without the clash in Ukraine.

Third. It is impossible to victoriously end the current struggle in Ukraine, let alone prevent its escalation to a global thermonuclear war, without qualitatively increasing reliance on nuclear deterrence. To do this, we must stop blabbering about “arms limitation,” although agreements on joint management of nuclear deterrence and strategic stability are useful and even necessary. We must accelerate the production of missiles and other medium-range and strategic delivery systems to deter the West from trying to regain superiority. Our opponents must know that superiority and impunity are unattainable.

Nuclear weapons, in optimal numbers and with the right doctrine of use, while saving conventional military spending, make non-nuclear superiority unachievable. Our Burevestniks, Oreshniks, and other hypersonic delivery vehicles should convince them that their hopes for victory are futile and even suicidal. A new generation of weapons must be prepared to disabuse the Americans of their fantasies about regaining superiority and imposing their will by force.

Increasing our nuclear arsenal’s flexibility should remind everyone that it is impossible to defeat a nuclear-armed great power through a non-nuclear arms race or conventional or even drone war. But we must avoid the senselessly expensive and dangerous idiocy of the American and Soviet nuclear buildups of the 1960s. Potential adversaries need to know that an arms race is pointless and even suicidal. Dialogue, at least with the Americans, should be conducted on this matter.

Drone, biological, and even cognitive-digital wars need to be prevented by increasing reliance on weapons that can destroy any instigators of such wars. For the time being, only nuclear weapons can do that, provided we are ready to use them and have restored the fear of them.

Yet, to curb Washington, which has lost all sense of boundaries, we should amend our military doctrine to state our real readiness to strike U.S. and European overseas assets if the West continues its present course towards unleashing a world war.

The West is much more dependent on foreign assets, bases, and vulnerable logistics and communications than we are. The enemy should recognize his vulnerability and understand that we know about it.

We should make use of Iran’s experience defending itself from the current U.S.-Israel aggression. Tehran hit the enemies’ weak points; they felt the pain and retreated. Changes in military doctrine and structure, increasing asymmetric strike capability will enhance deterrence and have a civilizing effect on the opponent, who has lost his mind and is jumping or is about to jump into insane gambles.

We should revise the priority targets for preemptive strikes (first with conventional weapons and then, if absolutely necessary, with nuclear ones). These should include communication, control, and logistics centers, military bases, and—crucially—the places (especially in Europe) where the elite is concentrated. The elite should be deprived of its sense of impunity, and know that, if war is continued against Russia—let alone escalated, horizontally or vertically—fatal blows will be launched against it and those close to it. To strengthen this deterrent, we should accelerate the creation and testing of conventional and nuclear weapons that are capable of penetrating great depths. Unhinged leaders, especially in Europe, should know that they cannot sit things out in bunkers or on some islands. Our Defense Ministry recently published a list of European enterprises producing weapons for the Kiev regime; this is just a small step but in the right direction.

Now the Western elite pretends that Russia is threatening it, but in reality it is not afraid, certain as it is that Russia will never punish them with nuclear weapons. We need to instill primal fear in them. Maybe then they will back off, or their Deep State masters will expel them. Maybe societies will rise up. Strengthening Russia’s nuclear credibility is also necessary to awaken European societies from their ‘strategic parasitism’—the belief that there will be no war and that everything will work out for the best. We must return a sense of self-preservation to those who have forgotten their past wars and crimes.

Clearly, such a policy is absolutely necessary towards Germany. A country that has started two world wars and is guilty of serial genocides has no right to the “strongest army in Europe,” much less weapons of mass destruction. If it tries to obtain them, it will be destroyed along with them, so that no threat to peace ever comes from German territory again. The German burghers should be made to understand this.

Fourth. To strengthen the threat, we should amend our nuclear doctrine and specify that in the event of aggression (or continued aggression) by one or multiple states whose economic, demographic, and technological potential exceeds ours, Russian command will have the right and obligation to use nuclear weapons. We should start, of course, with a series of nuclear tests. (I do not understand why we are waiting for the Americans to begin. Are we again trying to please them?) This should be followed by conventional attacks on logistics hubs, control centers, and symbolic targets. If the adversary continues its policy or fights back, we should respond with a series of grouped nuclear strikes, exceeding tactical weapons’ yield, on military bases and key industrial facilities. If the enemy does not capitulate, we must be prepared to go to the next level. This should be avoided if possible, but avoidance requires that the maddened ‘elite’ either flees before the threat of physical destruction, or is removed from power.

Reliance on nuclear deterrence is necessary to block the road to drone warfare. Our response must be crushing. If, for example, missiles or drones fly out of Ukraine or neighboring countries after a peace agreement or capitulation, those who stand behind the drone operators should know that retaliation—even nuclear—will reach them. Knowing this, they will themselves hunt for possible provocateurs.

Fifth. Besides changes in doctrine and force structure, it is worth advising the Supreme Commander-in-Chief to immediately appoint a Commander for the European Theater of Military Operations. This position should be given to a combat general with the right and duty to use nuclear weapons (following tests and conventional warning strikes) if necessary. This person (and his staff, which should consist mainly of combat veterans) should possess and demonstrate full readiness to take such action. Russia urgently needs new heroes like Kutuzov or Paskevich. The Supreme Commander-in-Chief should retain strategic control over military operations, if necessary.

Sixth. It is high time we abandoned the idiotic view, which benefits primarily the Americans, that there can be no winners in a nuclear war, and that the use of nuclear weapons will inevitably escalate to the global level. This view is at odds with elementary logic and specific military plans. God forbid that nuclear weapons be used: innocents will die, and the myth of their use inevitably leading to global Armageddon (a myth that has saved humanity) will collapse. Nevertheless, a nuclear war—God forbid—can be (easily) won, especially against a crowded and morally weak Europe.

The use of nuclear weapons is a great sin. But the de facto refusal to use them is an unforgivable, deadly, and criminal sin, because it paves the way for the expansion and escalation of the world war unleashed by the West. If it is not stopped, it will most definitely lead to the destruction of humanity, including our own country. Vladimir Putin’s question “And what is the point of a world without Russia?” remains relevant.

Seventh. Alongside the long overdue upgrading of our nuclear forces, and particularly the nuclear doctrine, several parallel steps are urgently needed. Together with China, we should help Iran endure and win. We should invite Middle Eastern countries, including even Israel (which has undermined its legitimacy), to create a regional security system with guarantees from Russia, China, and possibly India and Pakistan. These powers, unlike the U.S. and its satraps, are wholeheartedly interested in Eurasian stability.

Eighth. Finally, given the generally great danger posed by the next couple of decades, which will see many wars and Western attempts at revanche, a temporary (e.g., ten years with possible extension) defensive alliance with China should be considered. This would be useful for stopping the revanchists, and also for letting brotherly China know that it does not need to catch up with the U.S. and Russia in strategic nuclear capabilities. China has advantages in other areas, and if its nuclear capabilities match Russia’s, this may generate fears and suspicions among future Russian leaders, which neither the Russian nor Chinese people need.

Naturally, there are many other steps that I have not mentioned but that must be thoroughly considered and taken to prevent the spread of the new world war and its escalation to the global thermonuclear level. But the greatly- and immediately-needed steps proposed here would probably be enough to win the war that is bleeding our country dry, push back the revanchists, and (most importantly) halt the slide towards global catastrophe. This is an urgent world-historical task. If we do not complete it, our descendants (if any survive) and God Almighty will never forgive us for our cowardice and mental laziness.

Russia was given twenty years without a war, but now is entering decades of historically-imposed conflicts. We need to win them, saving ourselves and humanity.

Again, while blocking the West’s revanchism and the world war’s escalation to a global catastrophe, we must not forget about the root causes of this crisis of the world system, the greatest in human history. These causes include modern capitalism’s exhaustion, and its threat to the existence of Homo Sapiens, a threat intensified by ‘omni-informationalization’ and other features of modern civilization. But more on that in other articles.

Other articles will touch on the contours of the international system to be pursued through victory and avoidance of escalation to global thermonuclear catastrophe.

But the main point now is to understand the magnitude of the unprecedented challenges, collect ourselves, focus, and play decisively to win. If we succeed, we will prosper as a great country and once again save humanity.

References

[1] Since the 16th century, the Portuguese used the term ‘comprador’ for merchants and their servants.

[2] As borne out by numerous reports in the last year or two. See an excellent analysis by experts from the Centre for Comprehensive European and International Studies of the Higher School of Economics: Kashin, V.B., Smirnova, V.A., and Yankova, A.D., 2026. The New Great Wall: On the Logic of Chinese Foreign Policy Behavior. Russia in Global Affairs, 24(2), pp. 79-95. https://eng.globalaffairs.ru/articles/china-kashin-smirnova-yankova/

[3] Our version: Karaganov, S.A., 2025. Russia’s Living Idea-Dream. The Code of the Russian in the 21st Century. Ed. by F.A. Lukyanov and P.N. Malyutin. Moscow: CFDP, HSE. chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://iwmes.hse.ru/mirror/pubs/share/1084733025.pdf