Reţeta

Cu mici variaţiuni, de la caz la caz.

Niqnaq:

murid ponders the “colour revolution” phenomena

“The fact that the President of Russia will not be able to reverse the situation that objectively leads him personally onto the block, can be explained by his consciousness being captured by disinformation in his surroundings which creates a false picture of what is happening and its consequences.” This is precisely the “good king, bad boyars” scenario again. Another good name for this scenario, if you will excuse me, is “If the Fuhrer only knew!” – RB

Two scenarios (1)
El Murid, Oct 5 2014 12:42

Igor Strelkov has named one of his tasks, with which I entirely agree, countering the “Russian Maidan”, in other words, an attempt at holding in Russia a scripted “colour revolution”. However, this immediately raises the question: how can we have this scenario and consequently, what exactly is it proposed to counteract? The question is not simple, as to mechanically transfer events known to us of the “colour revolutions” onto Russian soil is very unpromising. In order to understand what exactly we have to face in the coming years, and possibly months, this is a short, but extremely concentrated attempt to give a definition and to identify common signs of a threatened “colour script” which is likely to be used against us. “Colour revolution” is a generalized name for the system of scripted coup with external management carried out under conditions of artificially created political instability. The most important tool of the colour revolution is the artificially created protest movement, the most important method is political blackmail the government and society. The object of the colour revolution is always to overturn the political regime and replace it with one more favourable in terms of controllability from the point of view of the aggressor. Accordingly, the organization and conduct of colour revolution requires the existence of two key conditions: political instability and protest movements. Once these conditions occur, everything else becomes a matter of technological and largely formulaic techniques. Patterns and frequency of occurrence of the scenarios in different countries are give us the general characteristics of a colour revolution and in some sense its weak point, in that it allows us to be proactive in that case, to create resistance able to counter the patterns of these scenarios. Realizing the weakness of their position, the technologists of colour revolution, already in the events of the Arab spring, introduced into their scenarios certain feedback-based iterative methods. Feedback allows you to adjust the course of events and to adapt the scenarios to the peculiarities of different countries. However, the specific technology of the assembly and disassembly of new social subjects (the protest/insurrection networks – RB) is that they are quite tightly bound to a common scenario plan and phases of the development process of a coup. Their inability to leap through these stages (or phases) allows you to organize opposition to them in the early stages of the crisis. You can clearly distinguish several stages of development of a colour revolution:

The first stage. Preparation

At this stage the protest movement has a network form of organization. In many ways, this organization is reminiscent of the terrorist network, which, in fact, it is. Experience in creating terrorist groups allows Usaia to form such networks in the different strata of society and in relation to different societies. The protest network can be created in nationalist, religious, intellectual, managerial strata of society. For each group, will be created their own attractive images and are formed artificial threats. However, all these images ultimately personified on the specific shapes of the government. Given the range of figures, which is negative propaganda in all groups in terms and images that are understandable and accessible to a particular group. For example, a negative image of Vladimir Putin to the Islamic environment is based on its creation of the painting against Muslims, Islamic values and way of life. Among the urban intelligentsia and cosmopolitan intellectuals develops the theme of his curtailment of democratic values. The nationalists injected the idea of the oppression of the Russian people, supposedly conducted by Putin personally. Other shapes of the guide defamed on other grounds: Prime Minister Medvedev seems to be incompetent and worthless, infantile loser; Minister of foreign Affairs Lavrov is accused by the fact of his daughters living abroad (as, incidentally, also Putin); defense Minister Shoigu can be accused in mass propaganda of planning his own coup, or of being corrupt, a charge which can be extended across the whole Ministry. No matter which of these accusations are true, which are based on distortion, and which are false, it is important to create the image of them and fix it in the mind.

In preparation for the coup are created and periodically eliminated, new leaders of the protest movement, who are tasked with maintaining protest at a relatively high level and with creating a permanent threat to the existence of the government and society. As a rule, the government always makes the same mistake of trying to play contragravity with such “opposition”. For example, creating a dual pair “the Bolotnaya protestors are hostile to religion,” the Kremlin spin doctors played into the hands of a future coup, promoting an absolutely marginal opposition, gathered from force of several hundred people to their events, to the rank of a serious and influential political force. It is clear, these protests aspired to become political. Given the contrast between the threat of a coup and broad popular support for Putin personally, they constituted an attempt to create artificial conflict and to create the illusion of a threat to the credibility to the President, which was reflected in the results of the vote in 2012. However, the price of this illusion was the removal of the marginalized in the political field, which satisfies the West, which relies on the resentment of the “angry citizens” in major cities. No matter that support these movements is minimal even in Metropolitan areas, the West plays on the contrast of images of useless opposition and terrible regime. This creates a precondition for conflict on a personalized level. On the Ukrainian Maidan, it was expressed in slogans against Yanukovych personally, as opposed to “Бандера прийде — порядок наведе”. As a result, those marginalized in the political turnover continue to gain momentum. They are joined by representatives of the culture of that society, devoid of these authorities, took the vacant niche and turned into their ersatz substitute. Personal position Andrei Makarevich occupied by them on the conflict in Ukraine, has caused such a controversial and violent reactions in society precisely because of modern media, cultivating artificial images of idols of representatives from pop culture and outright kitsch, eventually making them politically important figures.

All this happens against the background of the actual sagging economic and social situation in the country. This is the result of a combination of factors: the liberal and largely semi-colonial economy rapidly stagnating, but the pace of stagnation for the West is no longer sufficient, and it imposes sanctions, transforms negative economic trends in the acute phase. No need to imagine that only the position of Russia in Ukraine has become a source of sanctions. The West and Russia fought a war of sanctions, the reason for which was the first negative attitude to the alleged discrimination of sexual minorities in Russia, and then in response the infamous “law of Dima Yakovlev.” It is obvious that the goal of sanctions is the worsening economic situation in the country and the construction of conflict in the most important social group, the managing elite, against the country’s leadership. As soon as, in the opinion of the technologists of the coup, the sanctions achieve their objectives, the time for the latent phase of preparation for the coup will end, and will be launched the next stage: open conflict.

The second phase. The conflict comes to the surface

The initiating moment, which starts the visible processes of a coup, is the conflict, either triggered or random, but which has become a cause for rioting to begin. In Tunisia, the ordinary case of self-immolation of a young man protesting against the intolerable conditions of life and the futility caused the protest, which had no chance to spread, but was used as an initiator to start the advance of technology. In Moscow the events on Manezhnaya Square wore an equally spontaneous, but the conditions for interception of protest were not created, and that helped with quite a high degree of confusion authorities still relatively quickly to resolve the problem. Subsequent protests have not had any serious continuation. In Libya, the same color revolution started after a failed attempted coup in Tripoli on Feb 17 2011, after which the losers-conspirators fled in Benghazi. Initially, the authorities had not even paid attention to it, believing the performances in Benghazi to have been inspired by the conspirators. However, it turned out that they were hardly aware of what was happening and put them before the fact. The speed with which the West reacted to the events in Libya, as well as a very short time between trigger events and conducting through UNSCRs 1970 and 1973, triggered the NATO aggression, merely says that a failure of the revolt was included in the plans of “colour revolution”, and at a level inaccessible to the nearest circle of Gaddafi, which formed the core of the conspiracy. Already at this initial stage of the “colour revolutions” run in one form or another feedback mechanisms that allow engineers and planners to keep abreast of constantly increasing the level of violence if the government resists blackmail by the “revolutionaries”. If the government succumbs to blackmail the streets, revolution is completed at the stage of “velvet”. In the case of resistance, begins the pressure and power of blackmail, followed by direct terrorism, and as the highest stage, the launch of a purely military scenario.

In the countries of the Arab spring, we could see all the variants of these methods: from the most mild in Tunisia to the bloody scenario of the four-year Syrian war, which now gets a second wind through the new invention of Usaia, allowing them to manipulate international law: the fight against terrorism. While the difference between the countries of the Arab spring and Ukraine, you can see all the same rigid structural line, which is performed by technologists of the “colour revolution”, from the secret stage, to bringing it to the surface with the escalation of violence as an instrument of pressure on the government. Meanwhile, the West is easy on the revival of fascism in its most aggressive forms. Wahhabism, which is essentially a Islamo-fascism has its mirroring in Ukraine in the face of nationalist groups, who in just over a year since the beginning of the square acquired its finished look as territorial and special punitive battalions. It should be noted that the West not only tracks current trends when carrying out coups, and adjusts their scripts on the fly. He makes major changes in the scheduling of events. Even if they almost immediately get out of the control of Usaia and the Arab monarchies, the Islamo-fascists hardly affect the general direction which nurtured them. In Ukraine the process was immediately put under very strict control, and the Nazi extermination of the sonderkommandos in the East of Ukraine has attained an industrial scale. Their task completed, having revealed their power and dismantled flimsy Ukrainian statehood, they were cynically and ruthlessly exterminated in the Donbass region, along the way solving the problem of destruction of the ideological opponents of fascism on the opposite side, in a way providing the service to their Russian fellow oligarchs. In this affair, class solidarity was stronger than clan contradictions.

The third stage. Feedback and betrayal elite

In connection with the use of feedback mechanisms is quite difficult to identify and assess technologies used in the third stage of the "colour revolution", after the initiation of protests launches visible events. In each country, the specifics of the "revolutions" of its own, being forced to look for non-trivial methods and tactics of holding protest actions, but the overall purpose and objective of the third stage is to paralyze the state power, by means of simultaneous action of the street, and of traitors among the ruling elite. Ukraine has demonstrated perhaps the most vividly, the concerted actions of the streets and government offices. Disappeared protests on Maidan were forcibly initiated by hard acceleration, after which the media most roughly mobilized new performances, working against the regime with unbridled propaganda. The complete helplessness of the security forces during the events of Jan-Feb 2014, and most importantly a direct order to stop the riot police from acting in the last night of the government's existence, when the square was almost bare, could not occur without a high-ranking traitor at the top.

By the way, about the same scenario brought about the "revolution" in Egypt. The calmed-down and almost broken-up Tahrir Square demonstrations erupted again after Mubarak, who was able to "sit out" the most poignant moment of confrontation, was nevertheless forced to resign, and after that the excitement received a new impetus. In other words, everywhere "colour revolutions" are based on a treacherous part of the power management layer, covering its activities for the seizure of power by street protests. Such coordination is impossible to organize in the course of development, so it is most logical to assume that a "colour revolution" is always the conspiracy of a part of the elite under the guise of popular unrest. These troubles are allowed to paralyze the working of the state machine, which would otherwise be capable even at the first stage to eliminate the weak and not yet running at full speed patterns of the "revolutionaries". Where advance was not created by a serious power group, ready to revolt, or where, one exists but at the last moment did not dare to maintain the "street", then the scenario of the "colour revolution" immediately sags, and the West is forced to resort to purely military mechanisms. An example is Syria, where there were virtually no substantial betrayals for all of four years, from the start of unrest to today, except for the flight of Prime Minister Riad Hijab and several high-ranking military and government officials, which were mainly caused by banal corruption and attempt to avoid responsibility. In this situation the West, after gradually pumping the scenario of street protests into a classic situation of "sniper fire" in a crowd, was forced to go to a purely military events, launching the creation of armed formations. The "Street" phase was completed in late 2011 after capturing several neighborhoods of Homs by a group of militants who came from Lebanon. From this moment on, "colour revolution" in Syria was reoriented to a full-scale irregular war, which continues to this day.

The complexity of this scenario and its bad practice has led to the fact that Usaia, Euia and the Arabian monarchies at this stage followed separate policies, often contradicting each other. The consequence of this was the growing hostility of the field commanders focused on different sources of supply and financing, and after that, by 2014, the fighting between the different factions of militants finally undermined all initial plans for the overthrow of the Assad regime, and the war went on his own script, in which all players have become objects rather than its subjects. To some extent such chaos can be observed in Ukraine. The revolution in Kiev which ended with the victory of pro-Western Maidan, predictably led to the collapse of the entire power structure, resulting in the whole South-East, finally realizing the danger of Nazi revenge on Ukraine, trying to make the only logical move, which was to seek the protection of Moscow. However, it's unclear why this protection was granted only to the Crimea. A trip by Kharkov leaders in Moscow immediately after the Congress of representatives of the deputies of the South-East in Donetsk at the end of Feb 2014 ended inconclusively, after which regional elites of the South-East launched their projects of salvation, wihtout much consistency, and ultimately only Kharkov managed to build new relations with Kiev, guaranteeing their loyalty in exchange for relative safety.

The exemplary annexation of Crimea to Russia was the only meaningful attempt of Russian policy in the Ukrainian direction, which almost destroyed all the plans of the West after the seizure of power in Kiev of the victorious junta. To some extent, Russia has demonstrated the ability to withstand the scenario of a "color revolution", and much more effectively than the Egyptian generals, whofirst of all succumbed to the demonstrators on independence square, then gradually reimposed all controls, until the problem was finally resolved in the summer of 2013 through a military coup. Russia after the Crimea proved, we can say empirically, that the victory of the "colour revolution" always gets to a critical point of anarchy, which can be used for a turn of events in the opposite direction. There was a chance not only for the return of the legitimate government in Kiev, but also the transition of all events in Ukraine under Russia's control. This could have been a brilliant foreign operation, which would have become a reference book for all opponents of the "colour revolutions" in the world. Russia, however, for some unclear reasons,did not bring the accession procedure to the end, leaving the question of international recognition of boundary changes. Then Moscow has refused to carry out any policy in relation to the outbreak of the uprising in the South-East, quickly bringing the matter to chaos and civil war. In this situation, the West could not refuse such a gift of fate and managed to finally recapture the initiative so stupidly missed by the clique of officials and oligarchs in Moscow, of steering Ukrainian politics. It is possible that this betrayal will play a role when attempting the "colour revolution" in Moscow.

The South-East was plunged into chaos, in which Kiev and Nazi groups controlled by Ukrainian oligarchs, first and foremost Kolomoisky, managed through the terror in Dnipropetrovsk and Odessa, and the arrests of AntiMaidan activists in other areas of the South-East, to crush the resistance. With the exception of Donetsk and Lugansk regions, in which the projects of local oligarchs Akhmetov and Ephraim (in DND and LNR respectively) started to trade with Kiev out of control, which led to the need for full-scale punitive operations, presaging the same sort of chaos which led in the Syrian scenario to the civil war. To date, Kiev and Moscow have managed (apparently by backroom arrangements) to come to a very shaky mutually acceptable variant of Minsk "truce", but everything suggests that it only drew a line under the first stage of the disintegration of Ukraine. Even the elimination of DND and LNR would achieve nothing (Даже ликвидация ДНР и ЛНР уже ничего не решает); events had acquired an internal logic in which the conduct of any meaningful policy became extremely difficult for all participants in the event. Summing up the preliminary results of this brief overview of the definition of “colour revolution” with equally brief examples, we can say that the first two stages, the hidden and the initiation phase of the protests, the West has got all worked out and look very high-tech. With system preparation at this stage, the combat scenarios of a conventional coup are practically eliminated. The latent phase is protected by current legislation allowing the creation of the structure of the future revolution to be concealed in legitimate activities. The phase of initiation is impossible to control, as the initiative always belongs to the offensive side, and absolutely any occasion can be used as a “fuse”. The third phase, out-front seizure of power, is a very difficult task even under the most favorable conditions, but the most difficult stage is the time between the seizure of power and the establishment of a new regime.

Two scenarios (2)
El Murid, Oct 5 2014 12:42

A critical vulnerability in the script “colour revolution”

If you try retrospectively to look at all the coups under the guise of popular protests that took place the last few years, you can see that the third phase, the development phase of the protests and the seizure of power in each country, is fraught with a variety of surprises that cannot be foreseen in the original plans. Even the victory of the coup d’etat is not final; there is always the possibility of a reversal of events, the loss of the power of goal-setting by the winners immediately after their victory, which is why they are not able to withstand sudden external factors. The initiative in this case can be captured by any force which has strong plans and is ready to go to the end. This is the weak point of all the “colour revolutions” which at the moment is absolutely not fulfilled their technologists. The vulnerability of the transition phase between the victory of the coup d’etat and intercepting the levers of power, gives a chance to the opponents of the “colour revolutions”. This is a chance that has to be used quickly and decisively, otherwise very soon the initiative goes back to the “revolutionaries”. As shown by the events in Ukraine, this operational pause is not more than two or three weeks, and the most favourable time for reversal of events lasts no more than a few days. If you look at the chronology of events after the victory of the Maidan, then first, immediately after it, all of Ukraine was flooded by a wave of executions and persecution of the old regime figures, law enforcement officials, regional and local administrations:
On Feb 23, the head of customs chief Sergei Kharchenko, who had confessed to involvement in corruption schemes, was tied to a pole with tape; in Odessa there were clashes between the activists of the “Right Sector” and “Anti-Maidan”, which continued until Odessa’s “Khatyn massacre” of the latter on May 2;
On Feb 24, there were attacks on the building of the Jewish center of Zaporozhye; there were attacks on the homes of relatives of Members of the Rada from the Party of Regions; the son of the mayor of Uzhgorod Victor Pogorelov said that his father had to spend half a million dollars for security; the Governor of Kherson region wrote out his resignation, according to his own later statement, under threat of being subjected to cold steel; in Rovno, the gang of Sashko Bilyi robbed duty of the tax militia of the state tax service of Rovno Oblast.
On Feb 25, by order #144, Verkhovna Rada Commissioner for the oversight of the Ministry of internal Affairs Arsen Avakov dissolved “Berkut”. On the same day in Lvov about a hundred members of “Berkut” were forced to their knees and asked forgiveness of the “community” for their “crimes”. On the same day took place the famous confrontation by Sashko Bilyi at the meeting of the Presidium of the Rovno Oblast regional administration with a Kalashnikov, with a requirement for full disclosure in the field. The orgy of anarchy grew almost to the end of March or beginning of April. The result was the collapse of all governmental institutions. Going on about the Nazis, on Feb 23, the Rada abolished the law “On state language policy”, which had allowed an official status to the Russian (and not only Russian) language in different regions of Ukraine. In fact, on Feb 23 was given the go-ahead of the war in the East that goes on to this day.

It makes no sense to enumerate all the events of these weeks, it is important to understand that the victory of a “colour revolution” power scenario inevitably leads to the necessity of total stripping of power from disloyal representatives of the old regime in all state structures, which automatically leads to paralysis of state control. When this sweep are the winners, who are in the vast minority in relation to “clear them”. There is no doubt that a hundred employees of “Berkut”, forced to their knees in Lvov, could easily be lead to order a bunch before they repented. At any normal time, bandit Sashko Bilyi would have been arrested for any of their “arts”, and the presence of the machine was given the full right to use a weapon. However, the paralyzed and demoralized state apparatus dutifully obeyed the winners, recognizing their right to violence and abandoning their own. It is the small number of winners and the scale of the task facing them, that does not allow the creation of a new administration without completing the stage of the previous defeat. So about mid-Apr 2014, the Kiev junta was almost impossible to conduct any meaningful policy, although it made incredible efforts to restore manageability. From a managerial point of view, the explanation is quite trivial. The seizure of power is a separate task, aimed at by the “revolutionaries”. On the seizure of power are focused all the patterns of the coup, in this work all of the logistics chain, links and resources. After the victory, you want to change the management paradigm, from struggle and destruction to the interception of the control levers, and at least some creative work. For this you need to eliminate your own old patterns aimed at destruction, and ideally to orient them to the new tasks. In practice, this is unlikely ever to be achieved, because to conduct a coup requires very specific human material: minimally educated, most manipulative, and capable of destruction, not construction. Therefore, the new challenges have to face the most severe shortage of performers, many of whom are obviously not loyal. Thus, it is necessary to wage a bitter struggle with yesterday’s companions, who are ready to continue the revolution further but organically incapable of creation.

Thus, there is a completely objective situation, which is hardly affected by the geography and national characteristics of the “colour revolution”. In Egypt, the collapse of control and could not be overcome until the coup of 2013, when the military deposed President Morsi. Probably just weak and unviable built post-revolutionary structures and revolutionary chaos largely contributed to the success of the coup of General Sisi, rather than thoroughly thought-out plans. Ukraine has been “lucky” in this sense, more so as a complete reformatting of power has not happened. In fact, one group of oligarchs was replaced by another, and therefore the collapse of the state apparatus to the base was not required. However, the problem of excess “revolutionaries” is not going away, and in Ukraine it was decided through the classical scheme for the creation of paramilitary units. This is partly in compensation for the fallen law enforcement system, and partly allowed the use of militants of the Maidan as ‘National Guards’, to bring the regions to obedience and strengthen the government junta. Naturally, this process is very laborious in character, creates a permanent element of chaos, and significantly limits the junta’s ability to manage the situation. What has been said emphasizes the nature of the transition stage: the junta which comes to power through a coup is especially weak, and the longer the critical phase of the weakness of the new regime lasts, the harder and longer it becomes for it to gain full power, and the more thoroughly it has to destroy the previous administration. The conclusion is quite obvious, but the examples of Ukraine and Egypt confirms its practice, suggesting that in any similar situation patterns of this phase will act strictly.

In fact, we come to the main issue. Possible developments in our country. In Russia. It is absurd to suppose that the technologists of “colour revolution” do not see such a vulnerable place in their planning. The existence of critical points for an offensive have been known to Western military thought for long enough, and the planning of such a military action (a “colour revolution” is the development of operational thought and is a classic military operation to capture an enemy state) is conducted by all the rules of military art. Technologists of “colour revolutions” cannot ignore the danger posed by the existence of the critical point, and inevitably will solve the problem for two obvious scenarios. The first vulnerability is minimized by reducing the time required for the transition between the taking of power and control. The second scenario, on the contrary, will need to use the existence of the critical point and to create a catastrophic situation. We have two scripts, fundamentally different from one another:

1. the script for seizure of power in Russia and the establishment of a pro-Western regime, in command of the whole territory of the country; and
2. the scenario for a complete collapse of the country, the collapse of it as a distinct state, where it does not matter what orientation those who come to power adhere to. Control over the entire territory of the former Russia in this case will be implemented through the creation of endless contradictions between such territories.

The first scenario. “I’m tired, I’m leaving”

The ultimate objective of the first scenario is the seizure of power by Moscow’s pro-Western clique. The key parameter of this grip is the rate of the operation is less costly and more quickly will the offset of the top leadership, the less time will remain on the resistance to the inevitable destruction of part or all of the management apparatus. In other words, the Kiev or Egypt scenario in this case is strictly contra-indicated. No Maidan, Tahrir or Manezhnaya, or even if you need any “riots” to cover up the coup, they will be extremely minimal and only for pictures on TV. The basic steps for this scenario should be conducted in the corridors of power. In other words, the first scenario is the scenario of an apical coup. It is quite typical for Russia. So for the last 300 years have been shifted three Czars, and at least two General Secretaries of the CPSU Central Committee. One leader at least every 60 years. Two coups, in 1917 and 1991, almost immediately turned into the scenario of the collapse of the country that seems to have been predesigned; others have a limited personnel reshuffle in the top echelons of management. If you add to these cases, even the death of Stalin and voluntary remission of Yeltsin, we can say that this method of changing the leader of the country is almost traditional for Russia. The tool for the first scenario is a conspiracy. The illusion that operatives in the country’s powerful intelligence services are able to “detect” the preparations for the coup and nip it in the bud, is refuted by the fact that the top leadership of the country is always untouchable for them. Moreover, representatives of the special forces or other law enforcement agencies are always included in such a conspiracy, just in case it is necessary counter any such eventuality. In the end, the arrest of Lavrenti Beria in 1953 is another example of an apical coup which occurred with the full connivance of the country’s security service, which was simply neutralized.

Such a scenario is almost impossible to control from the outside. To oppose it on the level of society is impossible, it is always put before the fact. How exactly the coup works, nobody knows, and society only learns from the media about the fact of displacement of the first person under any plausible pretext. Poor health is the most logical excuse that explains everything. Either the head will announce about his bad health himself, or it will be done for him, there is no fundamental difference. Importantly, under this scenario, the conspirators will act scrupulously, observing the formalities. Therefore, the presence among the conspirators, at least formally, of the second person of the state is a necessary condition. He must assume interim management retaining full control of the device and not allowing the slightest malfunction. The question of whether he will he end up as the first person is absolutely not important in this case. His role on the stage of the revolution is to minimise and reduce to zero the vulnerability of the transition period between the seizure of power and the interception of the control levers.

Such a scenario has two fundamental and unavoidable problems that ultimately can either complicate it or completely destroy it. Both problems are associated with the possible presence of a powerful force that could not be neutralized before the coup, and which will be able to organize resistance to the junta. This power can be based either on the resources of power, that is, to be part of the ruling elite, which as a result of the coup d’etat would have to “go under the knife”, or on the people’s authority, that is, to have a serious impact on a substantial part of the active population, capable in the face of inevitable power of confusion to create a hearth combating the clique that has come to power. However, you need to understand that just to eliminate this kind of confrontation, the conspirators are directly interested in the quickest possible interception of controls and the time period between the revolution and the creation of a situation in which opposition to it is impossible, will be very short: a few days, or at the maximum a few weeks. The most logical solution in this case is a junta, as long as you can gain control of public media and declare accomplished the transfer of power. In that case, if the conspirators are able to work out the script well, the only chance to counteract it may literally lie in the first or second day after the announcement of the transfer of power. Further, any attempts at resistance will be crushed by the state apparatus and security forces, which inevitably will fall under the control of the putschists. No less logical in this scenario is the carrying out of certain limited activities of “colour revolution”. To mobilize the power structures and their passage under the control of the junta, the conspirators will need to create a distracting source of tension, as is familiar and was used to counter earlier. Conventionally, a small arena or local Бирюлево, to eliminate which, the new leadership will require the unconditional loyalty of the security forces. Any attempted counter-coup in this case will be presented as anti-state activity and assistance to the rebels. The junta will require power structures stripping, as it has triggered the controlled riot, and possible structures of resistance to the coup.

This scenario of an apical coup, of course, looks extremely sketchy; immediately you can call different versions of its method which differ materially from those described. But the main thing you need to understand is that the purpose of this scenario is to preserve the integrity of the country and the establishment of a regime controlled by the sponsors of the coup, which, of course, will be performing forces in the West. It should be noted that the prerequisites for such a scenario plan exist and look quite convincing. Beneficiaries of such a scenario would be representatives of the part of the Russian governing elite which is focused exclusively on the West, as the most controlled by it. In the crisis they are interested in infringement of competing power groups and redistribution of the budget “pie” in their favor. Obviously, the redistribution will affect primarily the defense budget, which will be declared redundant. This fully meets the interests of the West, which is extremely concerned by the program of modernization of Russia.

By the way, we can say that the outwardly mediocre policy of Russia on the Ukrainian direction fits perfectly into the framework of this scenario. The principal undetermined problems of the DND and LNR, the protraction of the conflict, the constant creation of difficulties and problems for the rebels, all lead to the fact that more and more patriotic citizens of Russia are drawn to the bloody conflict in the East of Ukraine, and these are precisely the people who can become the force that will oppose the coup in Moscow. The Ukraine crisis allows the accounting and production control of all organizations that have the potential to become cells of resistance to the junta in Russia, to identify their communication, coordination, accounts and resources, committed leaders, both already proven, and potential. This will be the aim of the junta in the second stage of the revolution, to stage a sampling situation in the country under control. Finally, the West can create an incident, provoking the open use of armed forces of Russia in the conflict in Ukraine. This may be the reason for the extension of the ultimatum when the junta came to power, on the voluntary disarmament of Russia as the aggressor country. The existence of persistent conflict on our borders creates a wide field for all sorts of maneuvers in this direction. Anyway, in the context of preparation for a coup, the outwardly feeble and almost treacherous policy of Russia in the South-East of Ukraine is built in a logical and meaningful way.

The fact that the President of Russia will not be able to reverse the situation that objectively leads him personally onto the block, can be explained by his consciousness being captured by disinformation in his surroundings which creates a false picture of what is happening and its consequences. I have already given an example from Russian history, when a group consisting of minor officials and nobles of the court, known under the name “Besobrasov clique” by the name of its leader A M Besobrazov, had influence on the Czar sufficient, for example, to shift its opponent S Witte from the post of Minister of Finance, managed to subdue the far-Eastern policy of Russia, bring it to fiercely strained relations with Japan, and eventually bring the country to the Russo-Japanese war.

You shouldn’t imagine the first person of the state as infallible and all-seeing ruler. Even in terms of absolute monarchy, possible combinations in which a group of officials greedy for personal purposes may put the country on the brink of disaster. Especially if they are supported by the interests of the great powers of Russia’s enemies. We are not talking about primitive formula of “good king, bad boyars”. The situation looks quite bad enough without the use of this opposition, given all the good and mediocre prime ministers and unscrupulous courtiers. One way or another, the script for the apical coup seems to me quite workable and having the right to exist. However, it is limited near the above-described conditions, and most importantly, it works only if the Western technologists of “colour revolution” are interested merely in the change of the ruling regime to a more controlled and collaborative one. “Colour technology” in such a scenario will have a supporting role, and serve mainly to solve minor problems in the first place, to justify the actions of the junta immediately before the revolution and immediately after it. The scale of application of “colour technologies” in this scenario would be significantly limited and entirely under control at all stages of the process engineers. If the goal of the West is the disintegration of Russia and its decay, the coup d’état looks completely different.

(to be continued)