“Divide and rule” – says the old Roman rule. And Rome acted on it as it conquered and held its power over peoples. The current, Anglo-Saxon technology of domination is based on the same rule. Our “partners” borrowed from the Romans not only their legal system and cultural values, but also the principles of geopolitical struggle.
These principles are being applied to this day, therefore understanding of the methods of our opponents can helps analyze the current situation.
The Romans liked short, precise expressions. “I came, I saw, I conquered” – that aphorism of the great Caesar is an essence of his political thought. Short and elegant. However, for greater clarity, the rule requires one more element.
“Divide, play off and rule”
Now the idea has taken its final form.
We find many examples of its application in history. Little is known about the conquest of India by the British, where they constantly incited one Raja on another, as a result of crushing both of them afterwards.
Better known is the history of the conquest of North America and the destruction of Indians by the Anglo-Saxons. They used to enter alliances with one tribe against another. The winner tribe could receive a gift of blankets deliberately infected with smallpox.
But these examples are distant from our country. Therefore, let us recall some facts from our own history.
Russian Empire was huge and strong, and therefore considered very dangerous by its geopolitical competitors.
Finland became part of Russia in several stages. The first was Nystadt Peace with Sweden in 1721, when Estonia, part of Finland and Latvia were actually bought from Sweden for a few million golden thaler. Later, another part of Finland joined Russia under Elizabeth I, and the remaining part was incorporated into the Russian Empire under Alexander I. Characteristically, these were no land grabs or occupation. The lands were obtained as a result of agreements with Sweden, the legitimacy of which no one denies.
Thus, Finland became part of the Russian Empire according to the international law.
It had its own parliament even before the remaining Russia had it, its own currency, and its own separate police and customs. When traveling from St. Petersburg to Finland, you had to undergo a pass and customs control on the Finnish border, while still remaining within the Russian Empire. This special status of Finland was used by Russian revolutionaries who could quickly hide in Finland following their terrorist attacks, and even the imperial power could not do anything about.
There has never been any rebellion against the “bloody tsarist regime” in Finland because the Finns were quite happy with their situation. They had never had a state and they did not seem particularly interested in having one.
But as a result of the activities of traitors in February 1917, who had support from the Entente, Russia began to fall apart. In the next stage, in October, Lenin recognized the secession of Finland.
What happened? There had never been a Finnish-Russian conflict. Just as there was no Russian-Russian or Finnish-Finnish problem for several centuries. As soon as the state collapsed and was divided, civil war began immediately. In Russia, Russians killed Russians, and next door, in the “independent” Finland, Finns started killing Finns.
The first phase – the division – was thus accomplished.
Next came the second stage, the playing off. In Russia the Civil War was won by the Reds, in Finland – by the Whites: A good starting point for a conflict which, I repeat, never existed before. The Entente started arming Finland, which had never had any army before, simply because there had been no independent Finland. Its territory was used by the British during the Civil War in Russia to attack Kronstadt and the Russian Navy. The first bomb attacks on St. Petersburg are on the conscience of the British, and not the German pilots.
The result: mistrust and hatred. Split. Where there never before had been pretensions or claims, now they abounded.
In 1939, the Russian-Finnish War started, and then it was repeated in World War II. During the time of the Russian Empire, Russian and the Finns could not fight each other as they had no reasons for conflict.
Before us is the Anglo-Saxon method:
1. First, divide one country apart.
2. Then create a conflict between the parts by supporting one of them (the smaller and weaker) against the other.
3. Play off two parts of the same country in a civil war, weakening both, and the whole country will submit to their will.
Now, with the understanding of this technique, let’s have a look at the situation in Ukraine.
1. In 1991, and even before, the West supported all those who wanted the breakdown of the Soviet Union.
2. By propaganda, falsification of history, and bringing their puppet politicians to power, they provoked the creation of a conflict between Russia and Ukraine. A conflict which had not existed in history, as on both sides of it is a single nation and a single country. Sure, there had been clashes in medieval times, just as between all European countries, and the latter “somehow” do not interfere with the creation of the European Union. In Ukraine, long forgotten, ancient pretentions were recalled and promoted in the media, creating an illusion of “eternal” enmity with Russia.
3. At a moment appropriate for the West, an armed conflict in the Donbass began, in order to play off Russia against Ukraine in the war.
The method of division and playing off is universal, and its application does not stop for a minute. That the Ukraine-Russian war did not happen exactly according to the plan? No problem. We will try to break up Russia otherwise:
1. Stop feeding the Caucasus!
2. No transfer of taxes and excise duties from Siberia to Moscow! Siberia is a property of the whole world!
3. Freedom of Ingria and Karelia!
4. Ural could live like France. Especially if they print their own money – franks.
5. St. Petersburg should become a free city.
(Contemporary slogans of pro-Western Liberal opposition and separatists in Russia – transl.)
And so on. It does not matter at all what to separate from what – the Caucasus from Moscow or Moscow from the Caucasus. The main thing is to start implementing the “Roman rule”.
Here’s what I want to note here:
1. The place of those who advocate the division of Russia is in jail. Why they are on the loose, is a great mystery.
2. Those who want to separate Siberia and Karelia from Russia are very few – no more than 10-15 people. One show trial and imprisonment of two or three most violent would make others either cease their activities (the sincerely misguided) or go to London and continue from there (the paid scum).
3. All these “regionalists” should be treated very seriously as they are the first part of the Anglo-Saxon method. The final stage of it is always war, in places where it is impossible to even imagine today. Who could imagine a war in Donbass a couple of years ago?
But that is not all.
You don’t win a war by just defending yourself. Attack is necessary.
Therefore, apart from jailing those who want to separate Siberia, the Caucasus, or St. Petersburg from Russia, we must advocate for the right of nations to self-determination:
We are for a free Quebec (following Charles de Gaulle); we are for a free California.
That Northern Ireland should be reunited with Ireland is so obvious, that there is no real cause for discussion in this respect.
* * *
Originally published on June 23, 2015 at Nikolai Starikov’s Blog