EDITORIAL: Russia is Exporting Dictatorship


Russia is Exporting Dictatorship

The democracy defenders at Freedom House have released a devastating new report on Russia, entitled Undermining Democracy and lumping it together with rogue nations like Iran and Venezuela, its allies, as states which are aggressively, ideologically, seeking to destroy the institution of democracy both at home and abroad.  FH had already released a report detailing how the Putin regime has continued to wipe out democracy within Russia’s borders, and now it shows, beginning with the example of Russian aggression in Georgia, that the KGB Kremlin is not satisfied with exterminating freedom within Russia’s own borders.

Brutally subtitled “Selective Capitalism and Kleptocracy,” the FH report lays bare the barabaric conduct of the Putin regime in seeking to replicate itself like a virus thoughout post-Soviet space.

Just as the Soviet Union used to do, Russia is not content with destroying civilized society within its borders but feels threatened by the existence of democracy anywhere on the planet and is lashing out against it.  This is the predictable final act in the transformation of Yeltsin’s Russia into neo-Soviet Russia, led by a “president” for life named Vladimir Putin.

Russia cannot win such battles with reasoned argument, just as the USSR never could, so Russia turns to brute force. It murders dissenters within Russia and it rolls tanks into countries that border Russia.  It behaves in the manner of a savage just as the USSR did, and the consequences for Russia can be no happer.

FH points out that while the global economic crisis has devastated the Russian economy, it still gives Russia the opportunity to exploit the weakness of the much smaller nations in post-Soviet space who lack Russia’s raw material wealth.  What’s more, since the possibility of “systemic failure” in Russia is “quite real” as FH puts it, Russia is dangerousl desperate and capable of actions that are self-destructive and irrational.  Fundamentally corrupt, the Putin “kleptocracy” recognizes no moral constraints and does not necessarily act in the best long-term interests of the nation as a whole. The same, of course, was true of the USSR.  Page 58 of the report provides an invaluable chart laying out the connections between all the major Kremlin power players and the core aspects of the national economy.

FH states that Russia’s threats to its neighbors are “numerous, ranging from the encouragement of dictatorial regimes and the export of high-level corruption to political meddling and even military intervention.” 

FH reminds us that, for instance, Russia had no hesitation in becoming directly involved in the 2004 presidential campaign in Ukraine, acting on behalf of the pro-Kremlin candidate Victor Yanukovich.  Russia, of course, bristles with outrage whenever any Western forces attempt to support Russian opposition figures like Garry Kasparov, and this hypocrisy was another signal hallmark of the US.  In the case of Kyrgyzstan, by contrast, Russia was even more direct, attempting to directly subvert the regime with cash ($2 billion) in order to buy its loyalty.  In Georgia, tanks rolled in.

Russia is aggressively seeking to monopolize the flow of natural gas throughout post-Soviet space, and it is just as aggressively seeking to dominate local media, capitalizing on both local economic vulnerability and the legacy of Soviet domination that imposed Russian-language media throughout the region.  This effort even includes the English-language propaganda network “Russia Today” and the New York think tank “Institute for Democracy and Cooperation.”

And Russia’s neo-Soviet aggression, of course, is not limited to post-Soviet space. It actively seeks coalition with anti-democratic forces in Iran, Venezuela and Syria, trying to build coalitions of such rogue states in the United Nations and seeking to form its own alliance groups to foment anti-democratic politics and undermine such organizations as the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe.

FH’s conclusion is stark:  “Today’s Russia is an authoritarian state where a corrupt and illiberal ruling elite maintains its power through media manipulation and the subversion of the democratic process.  An appeal to common interests is unlikely to prove a solid basis for improved relations. Russian authorities have embarked on a campaign to undercut the integrity of standards-based institutions that focus on democracy and human rights.”

It’s clear that the naive Obama regime is walking into a neo-Soviet trap.

65 responses to “EDITORIAL: Russia is Exporting Dictatorship

  1. True, true.

    There were times, when I would never expect to hear something like this from an important Western organization.

    I remember that quite recently all the small ex-USSR nations, including, and possibly mainly so, Baltic states were frowned upon as a “trouble seekers” who a being hysterical in their attitude to Russia and are stirring up emotions just because they “can’t let the past go”.

    Meantime they warned that Russia is changing to its worst again (after the democratic “thaw” of 1990-ies) but nobody wanted to listen to them.

    I am happy that world’s eyes have finally are opening. Better late than never.

  2. I recently checked out a sparkling , shiny copy
    of that propaganda effort , ” Russia Today ” .
    Quality of paper excellent ( probably Italian ) .
    Contents shabby as usual , no doubt russian .

  3. “It’s clear that the naive Obama regime is walking into a neo-Soviet trap”.
    Yes, I too fear so. But today, fresh from the internet, comes some more insights into the Obama mind:
    Question: What is the similarity between God and Obama?
    Answer: Neither have birth certificates.
    Question: How do they differ?
    Answer: God does not think, He is Obama.
    So folks, we have zilch to fear, the Obamanator will save us from the new-red peril. (?)
    R.D……with doubts………

    • Sadly, Obama is continuing down Bush’s path of ineptness with Russia.

      Hillary threw human rights as a matter of principle and as leverage under the bus when she visited the Chinese and said it wouldn’t be an issue with them. And, it isn’t going to be an issue as long as we need China to buy our debt and that’s going to be for years. You can’t credibly hold Russia to a different standard. They know it.

      If it wasn’t for the EU Court of Human Rights and EU media focused on the Khodorkovsky show trial Putin would be acting with more impunity towards the opposition. Russia is getting much more bad press in Europe than here.

  4. I think Russia’s brute force options with their near neighbors past their occasional bluster are far and few. They do care what the West thinks of them if only for the practical reason that they need capital and markets. A serious military adventure would cost them oil and commodity pricing with the Chinese who would exploit their then sanctioned and reviled renegade status with a vengeance.

    Disrupting ME oil in collusion with Iran would net the Russians more.

    • Iranians don’t want to deal with Rooshan kind, if they are not forced to. Israel knows that Iran will eventually get nuclear weapons, one way or the other. Even if the US and Russia don’t like it. Israel and London got them from the US. There are other more reasonable ways to solve these problems now, because we have to. Nuclear weapons are a last resort measure and there are a billion Muslims that would unite in a holy war of attrition. Some already have nukes or are close to it. We may even see an attack in New York. Obama may be able back off the situation in the middle East if Hillary Clinton keeps her stupid mouth shut, and does not make declarations of war and pass out stupid “buttons”. This may be a chance, and could be his single most achievement in office. If nuclear war breaks out this is where it will happen first.

      Iran Has had troubled relations with Russia for far longer than with America, and there is deep distrust for Russia even among Iranians who distrust the United States. Iranians who see themselves as successfully defying the world’s greatest power — America — see no reason why they should make concessions to Russia, which they view as a much lesser power.

      Besides, Tehran strongly suspects that if it ever really came under serious threat of attack from the United States, (which Hilary threatened). Russia would do nothing to help Iran. This, of course, only further reduces the incentives for Iran to make any sort of concession to Moscow. Indeed, many in Tehran see Russia as needing to make concessions to Iran for fear of risking the loss of Iranian business to China, India, Europe, or even America (which many in Iran — perhaps over optimistically — see as dependent on Tehran if it hopes to pacify Iraq and Afghanistan).

      What this suggests is that while neither Russia nor Iran is willing to cooperate with America and the West, they are not willing to cooperate with each other either. This actually presents an opportunity for America to take advantage of — if only Washington recognized it as such.

      • Very much like Nixon & Mao getting chummy in the 70’s.
        That was when the Russians really started feeling the squeeze.

    • To Penny, If I understand you correctly, in this comment of your’s, you seem to be saying that Putler’s RF will NOT invade neighboring countries, such as Georgia, etc….because it will be bad for them, economically & politically, etc. I certainly hope you are correct, Penny. But, since we witness so much irrational and eratic, and dare I say, typical Russian-machismo at play these days, I greatly fear that that otherwise-logical supposition may be too imaginary. But, sure, I hope you are right! I just don’t trust the Kremlin to do anything which makes common sense, by normal standards. They seem to be on a self-destruct mode for Russia and for themselves. If those desperate gangsters in charge over there, did what is best for Russia and it’s people, it would act entirely different than it is.
      I truly expect them to soon invade Georgia. Afterall, with that large anti-Sakashveli ‘grass-roots’ (ha! ha!) Georgian internal ‘popular’ movement, seeming to gain support, the RF already has it’s ‘invitation’ to …’liberate’ the poor enslaved Georgians. Of course, we know who is financing this farce inside of Georgia.
      And, my thanks to you, Penny, for all your astute and informative comments, as I read them all, avidly.

      • psalomschik, your scenario regarding Georgia could well come to pass this summer, but, I think Putin is a lot more preoccupied with domestic problems now. He’d be risking a lot in any adventure there.

        There a good editorial in the WSJ yesterday arguing that a diplomacy of silence with NK would be a good thing, let them rot. That’s effectively what Bush did with Chavez. It would work well for a time with Hamas too. It could well apply to Russia.

        Notice that all three thug states are attention seeking. Their bad behavior plays well with the home crowd that buys their external enemies ploy, but, in hard economic times the masses lose attention and tolerance of those antics.

        The Europeans need to find a way off the Russian gas plantation. This administration is not going to play the human right’s card. So I don’t see what stick they could use on Putin that the cratering of oil prices isn’t doing. We have little control over that.

      • To La Russophobe, Is there anything I can do,
        so that my comments are not cut off, before the end
        of my sentences??? This seems to be a problem,
        on and off. Can I…correct this?
        R.D. It also seems to affect others, alsop.

  5. Gazprom, which controls the world’s largest reserves of natural gas, has issued a stark warning to the European Union saying it must decide if it wants to continue receiving supplies of Russian gas.


  6. Hi George,

    White Stream was proposed years ago and would break the gas monopoly that moscow wants to create.

    White Stream Gas Pipeline. The Georgia-Ukraine-European Union (GUEU) White Stream gas pipeline project would carry natural gas from Caspian sources (Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan) to Ukraine, or directly to EU-member Romania via an underwater gas pipeline across the Black Sea. Ukraine is supporting the project as it would greatly reduce the country’s reliance on gas supplies from Turkmenistan through Russia’s gas pipeline network. There are two proposed routes for White Stream. Both call for a 115km pipeline to diverge from the SCP gas pipeline in central Georgia and extend to the Georgian Black Sea coast. From there a 630km underwater pipeline would connect with Ukraine’s Crimean Peninsula. A 215km onshore section would cross the Crimea and then a 395km underwater pipeline would carry on to Romania. The second option calls for an underwater pipeline running the entire breadth of the Black Sea between Georgia and Romania. Phase 1 ($4bn) would carry an initial 8 bcm/year of Shah Deniz gas, Phase 2 would expand capacity to 16 bcm/year and Phase 3 raise it to 32 bcm/year.


    Nord Stream will not improve Europe’s energy security and make Europe energy independent, but will increase the level of dependence on Gazprom and make Europe more under the control of the kremlin. When roosha divides into smaller parts in a few years, then Europe will have a serious problem.

    Georgia joins White Stream gas pipeline project


    White stream may be another reason why the kremlin attacked Georgia.



  7. Is dictatorship the art of tasting dicks? If so, Putin is the man for the, er, job.

    On a serious note, this has been the situation for eons within this part of the world, at least since Ivan IV (the Terrible (“Grozny”)). It’s as though someone must save the Russians from their own government, paradoxically. Only, that disease is, and has always been, malignant. Moscow needs radiation treatment, or chemotherapy.

    • “It’s as though someone must save the Russians from their own government, paradoxically.”

      Are they worthy of being saved is the real question? Do most of them even want to be saved?

      There is no outside liberation force that is coming to Moscow.

      Russians had the goodwill of the West emerging from the Soviet era, but, all that has followed is their problem and responsibility. After alloting one measly decade to the pursuit of a civil society and capitalism they threw that under the bus when they weren’t immediately gratified and it has been back to the Czar as Savior paradigm ever since. Democracy requires unrelenting vigilance.

      Putin’s ratings are still good. It’s a miracle if more that 100 opposition party sympathizers go to the street with them.

      What’s there to liberate?

  8. Yes, Dermovinov, His name in Russian, as you must know, is
    literally, Ivan (the) Awesome. Yet, because
    he was, also, in fact, terrible, why not just call him that, in English? Some in Russia, today, consider
    him as a ‘saint’, and why? Because he was often praying hard and
    repenting of his sins, in church. That is true.
    But what did he have to repent of, so often?
    All the people he had murdered, (over and over again) no doubt, as he apparently did have a guilty conscience. Does Putler?

  9. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/simonheffer/5462029/Russia-wheels-out-the-evil-weapon-of-history.html

    Russia wheels out the evil weapon of history
    Distorting the facts about the Second World War may well be a prelude to a battle over a land corridor through Poland, writes Simon Heffer.

    By Simon Heffer
    Published: 4:24PM BST 06 Jun 2009

    There are few things more dangerous or terrifying than when a nation, or the state apparatus that controls it, falls into the grip of a collective delusion. Such was the case in Nazi Germany, when a straightforward decision was taken to scapegoat Jews, Communists and, in the end, anyone else who didn’t agree with the prevailing madness, and persecute them to the point of mass murder. Stalin, in his own pursuit of totalitarianism, behaved similarly.

    Some of us hoped that, in Europe at any rate, such absurdities were over; but a dispatch from The Daily Telegraph’s Moscow correspondent last week showed that the madness is back, in Russia at least, and with it the determination to abuse and manipulate history.

    A research official in the Russian defence ministry has published an essay saying that Poland effectively started the Second World War by refusing to accede to Germany’s “modest” demands. We may take it that this man’s view reflects that of the Russian state; it is certainly widely interpreted as such.

    Russia has been struggling with its idea of itself since the international humiliation of losing its empire nearly 20 years ago. For a time its sudden wealth – thanks to a high oil price and the value of other of its minerals – restored its amour propre. Although its rulers locked up people who sought to push democracy to its natural conclusions, such as the former oil magnate Mikhail Khodorkovsky, poisoned troublemakers and threw the odd journalist out of windows, the money enabled it to offer the pretence of being a dynamic and powerful economy. Rolexed men in expensive suits climbed in and out of BMWs all over Moscow, and an idea was perpetuated that Russia could feel good about itself.

    Then the oil price collapsed, soon after the militarily successful but diplomatically disastrous war with Georgia last year. Once more Russia was poor – with many of its greatest businessmen broke – and an international pariah. So now history, that much-abused weapon, is brought out of the armoury.

    To the rest of the world, the Stalin era is one of shame for Russia. The country is seeking to change this. The cynical pact with the Nazis, concluded between Molotov and Ribbentrop a little more than a week before the outbreak of war, is now defended as an essential prelude to the defence against the “inevitable” attack by Hitler. It enabled Russia to occupy half of Poland and the Baltic States.

    As the genocide or occupation museums in Vilnius, Riga and Tallinn all show (and I have visited them all), the miseries inflicted by the Communist occupier on Lithuanians, Latvians and Estonians were vicious, bloody, murderous and had nothing to do with protection against Hitler. They were about the Sovietisation of Eastern Europe, a process interrupted by the Nazi invasion of 1941 but pursued with ruthless savagery after 1944-45. Oh, and by the way, Stalin was so reconciled to the “inevitable” Nazi invasion for which this occupation was a “preparation” that he ignored all warnings that it was coming.

    The Russian view now is that if only Poland had let Germany have a land corridor to Danzig – then a “free city” but effectively German, with a strong Nazi organisation and surrounded on three sides by Poland in its new, post-Versailles boundaries – there wouldn’t have been a Second World War. That is such idiotic nonsense that only a regime founded on lies, as Putin’s and Medvedev’s is, could seriously attempt to peddle it. Whatever Poland had done, Hitler would have annexed it. It had been his plan since Mein Kampf. It was where Germany’s Lebensraum was to be. The Czechoslovaks had made concessions to him (forced by us, not least), and they were not deemed enough: occupation followed.

    There is no point trying to reason with the Russians about how they ought to know this. They don’t want to know it. Reason doesn’t come into it.

    Further proof of the madness comes in the suggestion by the Russian government that it is planning to pass a law to make it an offence for Russians (and, more sinisterly, for foreigners – though how that would work remains to be seen) to describe what happened in Poland and the Baltic States between 1939 and 1941 as an “occupation”. If you still cannot grasp how evil this proposal is, imagine if the German government were to do the same – saying that it would criminalise the statement that Nazis had occupied Poland (or France, or the Low Countries, or anywhere else) during the last war. Germany would become a pariah state overnight.

    So why are we not exercised by Russia’s wicked distortion of the past? And what else is to come? Are we to expect a further revision of the view about the Katyn massacre of 1940, when, on Stalin’s specific order, 6,000 Polish soldiers were murdered by Soviet executioners? It is only in the last few years that the Russians have owned up to doing this, having hitherto blamed the Germans. Perhaps now they will blame the Poles for this too, possibly even speculating that it was a collective suicide.

    In history there is a distinction between revisionism and distortion. The former makes a sensible reinterpretation of known facts, often with the support of additional and uncontestable evidence, such as newly unearthed contemporary documents. Distortion requires no new evidence, but can require the disregarding of facts we already know. It is clear what the Russians are doing: and I fear it is not merely to make themselves look good, or to rehabilitate Stalin and his ideas, or to use history to seek to humiliate a troublesome and fiercely independent neighbour.

    When the Baltic States threw out the Russian occupier in 1991, a part of the former East Prussia annexed by Stalin – Kaliningrad, the former city of Königsberg – remained Russian. However, like that other Baltic city, Danzig, it now finds itself landlocked away from its motherland. Poland is to its south and west, Lithuania to its east. Are the Russians trying to tell us something? Is Russia about to make a demand for a land corridor through Poland to Kaliningrad, for the same reasons that Hitler sought one to Danzig 70 years ago? If so, is Russia intending to argue that the denial by Poland of land access to Königsberg could provoke a big international fight, and possibly terrible destruction, and that it would be Poland’s fault for not giving into a “modest” demand?

    I simply don’t know. But when people start twisting history and wielding it as a blunt instrument without any provocation, we are wise to start asking ourselves why.

    • “The cynical pact with the Nazis, concluded between Molotov and Ribbentrop”
      So what is evil in this pact about only non-agression?

  10. Andrew: This one-sided view Pole. For example: 6000 Poles were killed in Katyn. Before that 20,000 Russians were killed in their concentration camps. I do not reject the crimes of Soviet power in Katyn. This is realistic, but an independent inquiry in our time does not take place.
    The last formal investigation has been made the Nazis during the Second World War.

    • Get your facts straight and stop your repugnant lying. For starters, the number of Polish officers/intellectuals murdered at Katyn and various other locations during that period on Stalin’s orders ” is estimated at about 22,000, the most commonly cited number being 21,768″ as per wikipedia.


      There were no Polish administered concentration camps killing 20,000 Russians in 1940 or prior or after.

      Auschwitz was opened in 1940 by the Nazis which had nothing to do with the Poles. All of the concentration camps in Poland were administered by the Nazis, but, you know that.

      Your duplicity and stupidity are breathtaking. Whoever you are, you are an immoral person that will always offend decent people. You really aren’t much better than the Nazis whose “last formal investigation” fiction you made up.

  11. My favorite blonde Penny! If you kept books on the history, the fear section which refers to the period before the Second World War (1919-1921), where you will learn the history of relations between Russia and Poland. Then write to me personally enevsky@mail.ru.

    • You mean when the hordes of Russian Bolshevik scum invaded Poland to try and restore it to the status of a Russian vassal.

      Many Russian, Ukrainian, and Georgian exiles (particularly the latter two) helped to DEFEND Poland against Russian agression, and were honoured by Poland for doing so.

      Russia was resoundingly defeated in it war of communist/imperialist agression.

      As usual

  12. P.S. “Nazis whose “last formal investigation” – On this basis, Yeltsin brought his condolences to the Poles.

  13. OPINION EUROPE JUNE 11, 2009 Kremlin’s Crimes
    Is Russia determined to repeat its history?

    By JANUSZ BUGAJSKI From today’s Wall Street Journal Europe.
    As European democracies celebrate the 20th anniversary of their liberation from communism and the Soviets, Moscow seeks to restore its dominance over former satellites. Rewriting Russian history is part of this plan. The Putinist notion of a progressive Soviet system in the past is designed to provide justification for Russia’s current assertiveness in the region.

    Take Moscow’s annual May 9 parade, which celebrates the “victory over fascism” on the anniversary of Nazi Germany’s surrender to the Allies. The entire exercise is based on a monumental national delusion fostered by the Kremlin. Although Russia was one of the victorious powers at the end of World War II, Moscow continues to disguise the historic record that the Soviet Union itself helped launch the war in close alliance with Nazi Germany. Through the Ribbentrop-Molotov pact, Stalin schemed with Hitler to carve up Eastern Europe.

    Russia has recently intensified its revisionist campaign, claiming that it voluntarily gave up communism and the Soviet Bloc and that the Cold War ended in a draw with the West. Russia’s state propagandists maintain that the USSR never occupied its neighboring states after World War II, but rather liberated them from tyranny. And they minimize the Kremlin’s imposition of a totalitarian system over the region that stifled its political and economic progress for almost half a century. Unlike post-war Germany, Moscow has never paid reparations for Soviet crimes and expropriations in Central and Eastern Europe.

    Moscow also disguises the fact that Stalin murdered more Russians and other Soviet citizens than Nazi Germany. Its official figure of 27 million war dead includes several millions of Stalin’s victims during Soviet civilian deportations and military purges.



    • Only one question: where does Russia rewrite history?

      • Instead of admitting that it was a perpetrator and an opportunist in the destruction of Europe, Russia, as the successor state to the Soviet Union, depicts itself as a victim and a victor.

        • “perpetrator and an opportunist in the destruction of Europe”)))
          In all times?
          Can you prove this claim? And we see who really rewrite history.

          • Through the Ribbentrop-Molotov pact, Stalin schemed with Hitler to carve up Eastern Europe.

            • You realy need to educate yourself, aglyamoff. This is not uncommon knowledge in Russia, well, not unless you are a cement brained Sovok.


              The Ribbentrop-Molotov pact via wikipedia:


              It was only after the Baltic Way demonstrations of August 23, 1989, where two million people created a human chain set on the 50th anniversary of the signing of the Pact, that a special Soviet commission under Alexander Nikolaevich Yakovlev examining the Pact admitted its existence.[183] In December 1989, the commission concluded that the protocol had existed and revealed its findings to the Soviet Congress of People’s Deputies.[183] As a result, the first democratically elected Congress passed a declaration in December 1989 admitting the existence of the secret protocols, condemning and denouncing them.[185]

              In 1992, the document itself was declassified only after the dissolution of the Soviet Union.

            • Ribbentrop-Molotov pact was not treaty about military or any other alliance, it was only non-agressive pact. What’s criminal? And no one saw so called secret protocol. It isn’t in both Russian and German archives. I can make photocopy of it in my home. I think this protocols weren’t. Pact was result of unwillingness of England and France to conclude a treaty with USSR. (Becouse they wanted to stir up A. Hitler to Soviet Union) First country which signed non-agressive pact with Hitler was … Poland. May be you’ll call Poland as culprit of WW2?

              • You get your info from the soviet encyclopedia, which is only good for toilet paper. In 1939-40, Hitler and the kremlin invaded and occupied several countries, and started killing non-rooshans!

                In August 1939, Stalin had secret negotiations with Germany and, separately, with Britain and France. On one hand, Hitler told Stalin he was going to attack Poland and needed to know whether Russia will allow it (or even participate) or will it fight against it. On the other hand, Britain and France assured Stalin that if Hitler will invade their ally Poland they will declare war against Hitler. Knowing that, and knowing that Hitler did not believe in Britain’s and France’s resolution to defend Poland, Stalin gladly promised his support to Hitler. It is true that due to the ‘weakness’ of the French and British proposals, Russia had strong reasons to choose to make the deal with Hitler as it did, but historians now have the proof that Russia made the deal with Hitler with explicit intention and knowledge that this will start a European war that will first exhaust Germany France and Britain and then the fully prepared Russia will attack Germany and will occupy all of Europe. Stalin clearly explained all that to his government in a meeting on Aug. 19, 1939, in which he told them exactly why Russia is going to sign (four days later) the deal with Hitler’s Germany, the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, which cleared the way for Hitler to start World War 2.

              • I just wonder how much longer planet Earth will have to bear creatures like you.

                For a moment I really believed that all those Stalinist/Imperialist dinosaurs will die out after collapse of USSR. How wrong I was. Obsessive stupidity is eternal.

                “May be you’ll call Poland as culprit of WW2?”
                Your very own Ministry of Defense did it like a week ago.

  14. aglyamoff –
    I’ve read a hundred books about WWII, but I’ve never seen any thing written that even comes close to what you are talking about.

    It is a fact that Russia concluded a pact with Germany which detailed the attack and division of Poland. Yes, England and France (suspecting that Poland was in danger) offered to declare war against any country that would attack her. This was a courageous act on the part of these countries. Now, you, neo-Soviet, wish to blame these same countries for WWII.

    You, sir, are completely uninformed and could really use an education. These brave countries should be praised and revered for standing with Poland, not out of self-interest, but out of morality.

    It is a pity that the two largest fascist states went to war with one another.

    Now, lie in your bed.

    • What books did you read?

      “On the proposal of the Soviet military alliance, made April 16, Downing Street has responded only on 8 May. The proposals were in fact
      rejected. This has strengthened suspicions in Moscow that Chamberlain did not want
      to conclude a military pact with Russia to prevent the capture of Hitler Poland. Not surprisingly, the Russian in connection with the attempted rapprochement with Germany.”

      “If Chamberlain had honestly and honorably, to appease Hitler and gave him in 1938, Czechoslovakia, then why did Stalin behaved dishonestly and base, a year to appease Hitler by Poland, which still refused to Soviet assistance?”

      ” The most important is increased confidence in the Kremlin, that if Germany and attack Russia, then by that time, Western democracy will be at war with the Soviet Union and not have to face it alone, which Stalin feared the summer of 1939.”

      W.Shirer “Rise and Fall of the Third Reich”

  15. aglyamoff, you really are obtuse, stupid and a liar. What part of “declassified” and made public by the Russians do you not in your peabrain understand?

    From the Britsh Telegraph in 1995:

    For the first time since Hitler and Stalin carved up Eastern Europe in 1939, a map bearing the Soviet dictator’s signature, and other long-classified documents, have gone on display in Moscow, the final act in Russia’s tortuous struggle to come clean about the infamous “secret protocols” that underpinned its lost empire.

    As part of an exhibition at Moscow’s Tretyakov Gallery marking the 50th anniversary of Hitler’s defeat, the material provides concrete evidence of Moscow’s darkest and almost suicidal exercise in diplomatic realpolitik: the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact of 23 August 1939.


    If you work for the FSB you are wasting their money. If you are just a defensive Russian or a western useful idiot you are adjusting the perception of Russian IQ’s downward. Whichever you’d don’t deserve anymore attention.

    I doublt you’ve never read a book in your life let alone hundreds.

    Give it up.

  16. Read comments and think – this is a battle of titans stories. Professional historians can not come to an unequivocal conclusion, probably because they have not read your messages.

  17. No one saw this protocol. It’s fishily. But it isn’t important.

    England and France gave to Adolf Austria, Czechoslovakia, Poland. It’s much more shameful than non-agressive pact. Western countries have no moral right to discuss about it.

    Let’s consider delegation of England and France to USSR in summer 1939. Head of England’s delegation was retired admiral R. Draks, from France – general J. Dumenk. Not chief of general staff, not minister of defense, only admiral and general with no credentials. They came on slow trade passenger steamer «City of Exeter». Thus, the instructions for going to Moscow with the British delegation directly prescribed «to negotiate very slowly» , trying to avoid specific commitments: «The British government is unwilling to be drawn into any sort of an obligation, which would tie our hands in any circumstances . Therefore, with regard to military agreements should seek to limit what is possible to more general language”(Документы и материалы кануна второй мировой войны. 1937—1939. Сб. материалов в 2-х т. Т. 2. Январь—август 1939 г. М., 1981. С. 168.)
    Such delegations don’t come to come to agreement. It’s became clear that England and France don’t want to conclude military treaty with USSR, may be they want to stir up A. Hitler against Soviet Union. In this situation Stalin was forced to conclude non-agressive pact with Hitler.

  18. The plan to invade Germany and conquer all of Europe in the name of Communism’s expansionist ideology, is likely the greatest secret of World War 2 that remains officially Top Secret. The Communist Empire kept that secret for five decades, preferring to appear peaceful and militarily incapable, even dumb, rather than to appear as the aggressive expansionist “Evil Empire” that it always was. And modern roosha, nationalist but no longer Communist, understandably might never officially admit that either, although key evidence slipped out of their control. ……………..

  19. If England and France concluded military treaty with USSR, A. Hitler couldn’t attack Poland. But England and France didn’t it. And if we remember that Americans supplied Hitler by resources and equipment until 1944(!) it become clear who really wanted this war and who really rewrite history.

    • algy,

      you still did not reply to my comment. Why do you approve of killing rooshan children??

      The kremlin was humongously more repugnant then Germany. Hitler did not kill Germans, but the kremlin killed Soviet citizens, for decades! In essence, the kremlin has been killing the children [and adults] of their “nation”. And, we all know that the childern are the future of any nation.

  20. Really Algymuff, the US did not supply Russia until 1944.
    Some individual citizens my have, but as previously noted they were taken to court by the US government.
    Russian stupidity is alive and well.

  21. On November 3, 1941 the famous architectural monument, the Dormition Cathedral in the Pecherska Lavra built 1073 in Kiev, was destroyed. Moscow tried to blame the Germans for destroying this superb example of medieval Ukrainian architecture but it was proven to be the work of a Soviet bomb squad which had mined it before their retreat and later set it off killing Germans.

    • If England and France concluded military treaty with USSR, A. Hitler couldn’t attack Poland. But England and France didn’t it. And if we remember that Americans supplied Hitler by resources and equipment until 1944(!) it become clear who really wanted this war and who really rewrite history.

  22. agly,

    kremlin’s guilt for HOLODOMOR:

    “Famine in Ukraine was brought on to decrease the number of Ukrainians, replace the dead with people from other parts of the USSR, and thereby to kill the slightest thought of any Ukrainian independence.”
    – V. Danilov et al., Sovetskaia derevnia glazami OGPU_NKVD. T. 3, kn.2. Moscow 2004. P.572

    Yet one of stalin’s lieutenants in Ukraine stated in 1933 that the famine was a great success. It showed the peasants “who is the master here”.

    After the murders, Ivan Potupchik, who had formerly been an informer for the local OGPU, was officially employed in the mass executions of kulaks. Later, he was found guilty of the rape of a teenage girl and spent a short time in prison. After he was released, he was again employed by the OGPU, but received an assignment far from Gerasimovka.

    Kartashev, an OGPU investigator, willingly spoke of his part in persecuting kulaks: “By my personal count, I shot thirty-seven people and sent many more to the camps. I know how to kill quietly. Here’s the secret: I tell them to open their mouth, and I shoot them close up. It sprays me with warm blood, like eau de cologne, and there’s no sound. I know how to do this job — to kill.”

  23. Does it mean that you confirm that Russia is not guilty in WW2 and England and France more than Hitler are guilty in this war?

    “Famine in Ukraine was brought on to decrease the number of Ukrainians, replace the dead with people from other parts of the USSR, and thereby to kill the slightest thought of any Ukrainian independence.” It’s just particularly opinion of one man.

    As we see on example of Potupchik, Ukranians also served in NKVD.

    I don’t discharge murderers of NKVD. But in 1925-1934 there was so called gold blockade of USSR. England, France and US didn’t buy anything expected grain from USSR. Stalin was forced to change grain to lathes and technologies to provide industrialization. And in 1933 the catastropha occured. It’s not clear who more guilty in hunger Stalin or western countries.

  24. In 1932, the Soviets increased the grain procurement quota for Ukraine by 44%. They were aware that this extraordinarly high quota would result in a grain shortage, therefore resulting in the inability of the Ukrainian peasant to feed themselves. Soviet law was quite clear in that no grain could be given to feed the peasants until the quota was met. Communist party officials with the aid of military troops, OGPU, NKVD secret police units were used to move against peasants who may be hiding grain from the Soviet government. Even worse, an internal passport system was implemented to restrict movements of Ukrainian peasants so that they could not travel in search of food. Ukrainian grain was collected and stored in grain elevators that were guarded by military units & NKVD secret police units while Ukrainians were starving in the immediate area. The actions of this Moscow instigated action was a deliberate act of genocide against the Ukrainian peasant.

  25. Pingback: Boycotting Chinese and Russian goods - Page 4 - Why We Protest - IRAN

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s