Belarus is the vanguard of our future common world


- Let’s go back to Russia’s borders. Baltic countries openly hate Russia and try to “impair” us in everything, in Ukraine there is a special military operation, Azerbaijan looks towards Turkey, Armenian authorities are oriented towards their Western “senior comrades”, Georgia cannot fully decide with whom it is, Central Asian countries look towards China… And only one Belarus acts as an unconditional ally of Russia. What is its phenomenon? Is it the role of a personality in history?

- Yes, it is the role of a personality in history. This is a country with a population of 9 million, with a good strategic location and a human resource of the highest quality — both in terms of education and mentality. A long time ago, during the Soviet years, my cousin, with whom we grew up together, was sent on a business trip to Belarus. He said then that Belarusians are Russians, to whom nothing needs to be explained twice.

But first of all, there is the factor of personality (of the country’s leader — Ed).

Let me come back to Iran again: no resource, the country was almost backward, and now it is among the top ten technologically developed countries. The same is true for Belarus, which has retained, as far as possible, everything that was Soviet and at the same time has not stood still and has developed politically. That is why I see Belarus as the vanguard of our future common world, which will come to some form of confederation. There are different forms of confederation. Iran may join it, if the world doesn’t go to hell. I hope so, although we live in an eschaton. We will inevitably come to it. We only need to believe in ourselves. Belarusians, like Iranians, have no frustrations. The only thing that Belarusians lack is access to the sea.

And here one can hear the cries of Poles, authorities of the Baltic states that Russia is so scary (we are talking about the Suwalki Corridor). I will not be surprised if Belarus says: why don’t we go to the Baltic Sea?

Now we need linguists, political scientists, economists, intellectuals. All these specialists can be found or trained in Belarus.

Here, for example, is the Western despotism and its reverse side — the right to authority.

In Afghanistan, for example, the Pashtuns have a prince, and he feeds all his tribe, but he must have authority. He must earn the right to be a prince by his behavior. He can be approached as a guarantor of justice. He can transfer power to his son, and no one will object. He is interested in the life of the tribe, in taking care of it. That is his pedestal. But if his son, who has studied in America, is quite educated, yet is a drug addict, a lecher and a slacker, he will not sit on the throne after the death of his father. So Western despotism has a downside — respect for that despot. To think that a flighty idiot can do anything, any perversion, is nonsense, he will be removed, and there are plenty of people who want to take his place.

In Russia, there is a reverence, partly even a sacralization of power. The supreme power is metaphysical.

The desacralization of personified power in the West has led to solid frontmen, to irresponsible creatures. Just look at Ursula von der Leyen, Scholz, Biden. Do they care about their nations? No, of course they don’t. This has led to personal irresponsibility.

And here you need a very high level of personal responsibility. I’m a person who feels inner freedom, but who also needs outer freedom. And I can only limit it by common sense. It is important to me that if a country is conducting military operation, I should be restrained in my statements on a certain topic, proceeding from the principle of «do no harm». And not to beat my chest, show what a great patriot I am and say something and do harm. Yes, it is a restriction of my freedom, I as any woman want to talk unlimitedly. This is a conscious action of mine. A Russian man is very free internally, and that explains why the French surrendered after two months.

What about the Great Patriotic War? Moscow was already surrounded, panickers were burning party cards. But we said: «As long as we’re alive, we’ll fight». And we won, chased the Germans, and took Berlin. For which we are now being avenged with special cynicism. But it’s ok, I think we’ll come back to it. This matrix is unkillable, we are a very free people.

- Do we have any potential allies in the post-Soviet space?

- No.

- After World War II Europe and America put Stalin in front of a choice: Poland or Armenia. Stalin chose Poland on the assumption that he would take it by diplomacy, and the Armenian territories, which were part of Turkey, by force, because at that time the former Ottoman Empire was weak. Based on today’s situation in both directions, was Stalin right in his actions?

- Maybe he was wrong, but it is not for me to judge him. I’m speaking without judgment. In history there were few politicians, such personalities who every second, scrupulously engaged in operational activities, having a phenomenal memory and efficiency, remembered the names of their colonels. Stalin was a man who had impeccable command of argumentation and logic. He possessed a rare quality for a politician — preventive thinking. But he could not do everything. There is no such thing as omnipotence.

The ending follows.