Alexander Dugin interprets Trump’s outburst as the reflex of a man trapped between globalist hawks and his own instincts, glimpsing – yet resisting – Russia’s sacred imperative to liberate....
The EU wants to carve up Russia for its resources as they cannot longer exploit their former colonies. The axis China - Russia - Iran signals their decline.
I dont think trump has the "security clearance " to discuss the three civilization states defining and dividing the spheres of influence in the new multipolar world.
The rejuvenation of the Nazi movement must be confronted. That the Western powers have come to support this travesty is mind blowing.
What with the West having created numerous enemies, Al Qaeda, Hamas, ISIS I suppose it is not unprecedented, but the implications of Nazis playing a significant role in the future of the world is probably playing on Trump's conscious.
Seems to me the more informed Trump gets, the less likely he is to want to play this through as others planned. Trump may be hoping Putin gets rid of all the Nazis for him.
Kinda like the Covid fiasco, did anyone not go along with this debacle? Are there any sane or decent people left in positions of power? How can a Zionist Oligarch own a Neo-Nazi militia unit? Small wonder it has taken so long to stop these gong shows? The good guys get bought or shot.
Your point made at the outset of your article “Trump sincerely wants to stop the war, and in my view, there is no deceit or falsehood in this. But he does not understand what kind of war this is“ …. to a degree I concede is correct.
However I disagree with your argument and especially, that once again it seems that there exists a completely misguided faith that Russia is hanging onto by endeavouring to meet Trump and or his poisonous rhetoric and or demands, either Russia is involved in a unique and complex chess game with the most dangerous moves being this passive acceptance of every insult levelled at either the State or its Leadership, or once again Putin and leadership have because of wishful thinking misread the room, I admit, obviously I am not privy to every nuance determining or contributing to such a reaction, however my rationale for this thinking is as follows..
First and foremost Russia must keep uppermost in all of its thinking and deliberations just who are the actual prognosticators and belligerents, we know unequivocally the U.S has been primarily so and continues to be, undertaking such a position we know has been their want and agenda eversince the fall of the USSR, actually when one thinks about it, it is truly similar to the position adopted immediately post WW2, when we know the U.S together the U.K worked through their OSS, forerunner the CIA to destabilise via asymmetric means the USSR including especially upon the territory of Ukraine, many lives were lost and taken as a consequence, fast forward the present and the U.S are doing the exact same again, except this time more surreptitiously contrasted the overt basis they did so post WW2.
The U.S leading and calling the shots have had a presence in that Nazi infested shithole Ukraine, culminating the CIA Paramilitaries, the numerous CIA Bases 14 at last count established on the Border, since the breakup of the USSR, as we know via USAID, the State Department, Victoria Nuland, Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt they orchestrated the overthrow of a legitimately elected government, provided hardware, intelligence, co ordinated and trained a proxy armed force Russia now fights, installed the new government, making top appointments to key roles, oversaw the shelling and illicit tactics deployed against Russian speaking Ukrainians in the Donbas, Odessa, Zaparozhiya, and other Oblasts, had senators, political figures visiting both during and post the coup, publicly campaigning and calling for the overthrow of an elected leader and government, political interference writ large crikey, I say on steroids, they have supplied Weapons, and to top it off, from the beginning through the recent Raw Minerals agreement plundered and pillaged ex favourable terms Ukraines resources, bought the most productive lands, undertaken privatisation of Key Government Assets, stripping Ukraine just as occasioned the former USSR the 1990’s, they now call for peace all whilst arming and funding Ukraine, providing ongoing intelligence together their Western co Belligerents comprising the group of 50.
In short they, the U.S and West just cannot be trusted, they speak with a forked tongue, their intentions far from gracious, noble nor friendly, this whilst present CIC Trump, throws poisonous barbs by way of his Soc Media Posts and verbals.. he is aided and abetted his administration using as he is the imbecilic Kellogg as is his want to whom it seems he pays great heed, whilst the true anti war members of his administration are sidelined, well, certainly upon the face of it one could so construe.
In short I just would not trust the Americans, Russia does so as its peril, Russia is superior by way of Military Industrial Complex, militarily and mil technologically, in short it has become and rightfully reclaimed its position as a true Super power, its diplomats far better, its armed forces and defence industries light years ahead of the entire combined West, Russia is winning decisively against NATO, whilst the need to balance and be seen by Russia’s allies especially heavyweights China, India, Brazil, Indonesia etc.. together the Middle Eastern monarchic states is of great import, I feel the time for Russia to dictate has come, thus there can be no more placating, acquiescence nor subtle acceptance of Western belligerence, of its bellicose rhetoric of the rubbish espoused, nope, no longer.
It’s time or seems damn close to the time that Russia needs to just say and respond with what needs to be said in response to the many barbs thrown, backing such responses up by being firm and prepared to back up its words as required, just as recently has been done the Baltics against those big mouthed pirates, thieves and wannabes.
Russia has come through this baptism and crucible of fire with flying colours, time to stand tall, no longer pushed or to be pushed around, time the world treated you with the respect the nation has earned and as a result of recent successes on the battlefield in the diplomatic arena, so richly deserves, no longer to be timid, shy, instead, time for confidence, strength, and why not, what is there to stop Russia… five eights of f..k all I say.
Escalation and atomic war--nuclear war, whatever--is clearly a fools game. Mark my words, however, that's exactly what the Bad Guys want. You, good reader, may not believe me, but back around 1995 or so I came across a UN planning document, and it said right there that war between "east and west" would be the best way to bring about "equality" between "north and south." These people were and remain nuts. And reckless.
Fully agree that the rulers in Kiev need to go. They are clear bad guys, and war criminals, to my eyes. Denazification is absolutely necessary, not because Russia wants it, but because what we are looking at in Ukraine aren't the LARPERS, common criminals, and mentally ill we are used to in "the west" when it comes to Nazis. Hell no. We are talking the real deal, right out of 1938, with smartphones. Not funny, not a good time, not acceptable.
We're talking about the ilk that slaughtered thousands of Polish people just because. And yea, "Jews" too, although these days as Israel commits an open genocide this fact comes across as ironic. I guess "Never Again" is like Orwell's notion of equality--some animals are more equal than others. Terms and conditions evidently apply.
Whatever the case may be, yea, the Nazi's need to go, and of course, no NATO expansion. Now, this said, occupation of western Ukraine? That's just going to be a drain on the treasury and a never-ending problem. It's pretty clear that the fruits and nuts in the west who are so fond of mutilating children in the name of a pop ideology are going to take a few generations to win over. Meanwhile, their societies will implode. No need to occupy, no need to attack, no need for any war whatsoever.
Now, I personally want to see Odessa and Kharkov go Russian, for sure, but I'm not in charge, so we'll just leave it at that.
The patterns have been established; the Russian Federation has nothing to fear, and zero reason to attack. Foolishness and idiocy will consume itself.
However no harm in building ramparts. No harm in that at all.
You are correct (imho) and my belief is that your President (and his very competent team) thinks along the same lines.
That I have a note prepared for yourself and still need to make time to arrange it grieves me a little because, it seems, there is a proverbial elephant in the room, the one called "Russophobia" and other wicked names, but this demonic creature is never discussed. Name the Devil and Free his Influence, to paraphrase.
Russia should have been able to identify this creature but many people, knowledgeable and wise advisers and commentators, still carry on discussing fishing without understanding the polluted nature of the river.
I hope that the above is a little clearer and also that you and your circle maintain health, spirit, and happiness.
From Siberia 2.0
NOTE ; your "Russia, the U.S., and China – three civilization states – must define and divide spheres of influence in the new multipolar world. " is a remark whose time, I offer, is not right now: and I submit, in turn, that "spheres of influence" is a phrase that may weigh too heavily on the brother nations of the Global South.
Expressed maybe more humbly as "spheres free of influence", it enables our Africans, Pasifika, and "Latin" Americans to create their own individual spheres. Then they may at last begin to contemplate their deserved destiny,
I find Dugin always interesting and worth listening to. This analysis is one of the most enlightened, far seeing and welcome yet. Thank you Professor Dugin. God blessed you!
The bottom line is who cares what the EU and the UK think ! They are irrelevant today having become so through their own doing. It is comical to witness King Charles, Starmer or Macron attempting some grandiose political statement. Empty, cheap, irrelevant words that make no difference in the big boys club.
Ah yes, the great “civilization-state” where millions still lack access to basic infrastructure like flushing toilets. Truly the shining beacon of modernity and higher purpose.
Maybe before preaching about imperial destiny and metaphysical missions, Russia could make sure its own citizens don’t have to dig holes in the backyard to take a dump. Or is this part of the grand Eurasian tradition you keep talking about?
Funny how so many of these grand imperial visions are just a cover for old-fashioned land grabs and nostalgia for lost empires. But hey, who needs working plumbing when you’ve got “historical destiny,” right?
I think President Putin’s interview with Tucker Carlson opened a lot of eyes in the U.S. In addition to discovering that he did not have red horns and a tail, contrary to what U.S. politicians have been implying for decades, we were impressed with his superior knowledge of history and sober view of the current world situation and its solution. I despair that America will never have a leader like him in my lifetime, if ever.
The text in question is a paradigmatic specimen of ideological rhetoric, interweaving political assertion, affective manipulation, revisionist historiography, and discursive coercion under the guise of analytical commentary. What follows is a minute critical dissection of the text’s argumentative logic, rhetorical structure, ideological subtext, and semiotic mechanisms.
The tone is marked by a calculated calm that masks a more aggressive thrust. The speaker assumes the stance of a rational, wise, and patriotic observer aligned with Russian political leadership and opposed to Western “globalist” agendas. This persona is one of sovereign wisdom and long-range strategic insight, posed against an impulsive, ideologically disoriented, and morally compromised West. “Let’s not escalate things over Trump’s crude phrasing. We are a great power that knows its worth…” encapsulates the speaker’s affectation of philosophical detachment, which in fact shields an ultra-nationalist and expansionist core. Dignified restraint is the surface gesture; coercive authority is the submerged intention.
Trump is portrayed with a paradoxical ambivalence that reveals the strategic desire to both critique and co-opt him. He is framed as naïve but sincere someone who “does not understand what kind of war this is.” He is presented as a victim of hidden powers, “pushed” by neoconservative and globalist forces. Yet he is also treated as a potentially useful figure who may “ripen” in time, once properly exposed to “the real” nature of the conflict. This framing is a clear case of ideological instrumentalization. Trump is not evaluated based on political consistency or ethical coherence, but according to his potential to disrupt Western unity and serve Russian interests. He becomes a cipher misguided, but capable of becoming strategically productive through education or soft coercion.
The core of the text’s ideological operation lies in its rewriting of the Ukraine conflict as a simple battle of liberation from Nazism. “Putin wants to liberate all of Ukraine from the Nazi regime.” The rhetorical structure here is both mythic and Manichean. The historical complexity of Ukraine is dissolved into a binary opposition of good versus evil, framed through a war-era imaginary that recalls the Soviet narrative of heroic antifascism. The use of the term “Nazi regime” functions metonymically, not descriptively. It operates as a placeholder for political illegitimacy and moral decay. “Liberation,” in this context, is euphemism for annexation, occupation, and control. The narrative is not concerned with persuasion but with foreclosure obliterating any possibility of dialogue or ambiguity by totalizing the moral frame.
By asserting “this is our internal matter,” the speaker enacts a radical refusal of international law and sovereign pluralism. The Ukrainian state is rhetorically erased, its existence reimagined as a temporary aberration within a historical-cultural continuum that naturally belongs to Russia. This is classic imperial discourse dressed in contemporary pseudo-legalist garb. The dialectic of internal/external is weaponized to deny not only territorial autonomy but also narrative agency. What appears to be a domestic affair is in fact a structure of geopolitical aggression shielded behind the veil of historical inevitability.
The depiction of the West is driven by conspiratorial totalization. “Macron, Starmer, Carney… all the globalists, the Deep State…” collapses the political heterogeneity of the West into a single malevolent entity. This is not critique—it is myth. The West is imagined as omnipresent, ideologically coordinated, and structurally nefarious. This serves two functions. First, it immunizes the speaker against critique by framing all opposition as part of a transnational plot. Second, it offers a psychologically satisfying scapegoat onto which all contradictions, failures, and anxieties can be projected. The narrative is not interested in facts but in constructing a moral binary between purity (Russia) and corruption (the West).
The call for a “striking, successful, powerful, large-scale” military campaign reveals the text’s true core. All preceding analysis, moral framing, and strategic speculation lead to this climax. The speaker articulates a vision of war not as a tragedy or political necessity, but as a redemptive event. Victory is not just tactical; it is metaphysical. Through it, truth is reestablished, dignity restored, and geopolitical order reset. This is not Clausewitzian realism but militarist eschatology. The war becomes a ritual of purification, a spectacle of sovereignty, a mythic reassertion of imperial destiny. This move renders diplomacy irrelevant and positions military action as the only vehicle for meaningful transformation.
The reference to nuclear exchange is introduced with disturbing casualness. “Russia could receive a nuclear strike from America. But America could also receive a nuclear strike from Russia.” What is rhetorically disavowed as “not a serious discussion” is simultaneously normalized. This is strategic ambiguity at its most dangerous. By appearing to reject the logic of nuclear threat while inserting it into the discourse, the speaker performs a double move: deterrence by suggestion, disavowal by tone. This results in the normalization of apocalyptic possibility. The listener is left with the sense that such escalation is not desired but is eminently thinkable, even rational.
The repeated posture of stoic restraint “So I would simply not pay attention to such sharp remarks…”functions as a performance of sovereign indifference. But this is not true equanimity. It is a posture of supremacist contempt. It infantilizes Trump, while elevating Russian leadership as the true adult in the geopolitical arena. This rhetorical asymmetry mirrors the imperial fantasy at the heart of the text: one of mastery, inevitability, and unilateral legitimacy. The text enacts domination while pretending to be above the fray.
Despite the apparent calm, this is not an exercise in realism but in myth-making. What presents itself as commentary is in fact discursive strategy: a mask of diplomacy draped over a deeply coercive ideological program. The central operations of this text include colonial narrative revival, conspiratorial projection, militarist redemption, paternalist superiority, and nuclear brinksmanship cloaked in rhetorical ambiguity. It should not be read as political analysis but as an artifact of ideological warfare. Beneath its smooth rhetoric lies a structure of thought dedicated not to peace or understanding, but to domination and historical revision.
The EU wants to carve up Russia for its resources as they cannot longer exploit their former colonies. The axis China - Russia - Iran signals their decline.
Take Odessa and Kiev and this war is over.
I dont think trump has the "security clearance " to discuss the three civilization states defining and dividing the spheres of influence in the new multipolar world.
The rejuvenation of the Nazi movement must be confronted. That the Western powers have come to support this travesty is mind blowing.
What with the West having created numerous enemies, Al Qaeda, Hamas, ISIS I suppose it is not unprecedented, but the implications of Nazis playing a significant role in the future of the world is probably playing on Trump's conscious.
Seems to me the more informed Trump gets, the less likely he is to want to play this through as others planned. Trump may be hoping Putin gets rid of all the Nazis for him.
Kinda like the Covid fiasco, did anyone not go along with this debacle? Are there any sane or decent people left in positions of power? How can a Zionist Oligarch own a Neo-Nazi militia unit? Small wonder it has taken so long to stop these gong shows? The good guys get bought or shot.
A bit like how former presidents have been told they don't have the clearance level or 'need to know' about whatever the 'UFO File' is.
Dark Journalist is deep into that one incidentally if anyone cares to look into it.
Hi Alexander, Prof Dugin,
Your point made at the outset of your article “Trump sincerely wants to stop the war, and in my view, there is no deceit or falsehood in this. But he does not understand what kind of war this is“ …. to a degree I concede is correct.
However I disagree with your argument and especially, that once again it seems that there exists a completely misguided faith that Russia is hanging onto by endeavouring to meet Trump and or his poisonous rhetoric and or demands, either Russia is involved in a unique and complex chess game with the most dangerous moves being this passive acceptance of every insult levelled at either the State or its Leadership, or once again Putin and leadership have because of wishful thinking misread the room, I admit, obviously I am not privy to every nuance determining or contributing to such a reaction, however my rationale for this thinking is as follows..
First and foremost Russia must keep uppermost in all of its thinking and deliberations just who are the actual prognosticators and belligerents, we know unequivocally the U.S has been primarily so and continues to be, undertaking such a position we know has been their want and agenda eversince the fall of the USSR, actually when one thinks about it, it is truly similar to the position adopted immediately post WW2, when we know the U.S together the U.K worked through their OSS, forerunner the CIA to destabilise via asymmetric means the USSR including especially upon the territory of Ukraine, many lives were lost and taken as a consequence, fast forward the present and the U.S are doing the exact same again, except this time more surreptitiously contrasted the overt basis they did so post WW2.
The U.S leading and calling the shots have had a presence in that Nazi infested shithole Ukraine, culminating the CIA Paramilitaries, the numerous CIA Bases 14 at last count established on the Border, since the breakup of the USSR, as we know via USAID, the State Department, Victoria Nuland, Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt they orchestrated the overthrow of a legitimately elected government, provided hardware, intelligence, co ordinated and trained a proxy armed force Russia now fights, installed the new government, making top appointments to key roles, oversaw the shelling and illicit tactics deployed against Russian speaking Ukrainians in the Donbas, Odessa, Zaparozhiya, and other Oblasts, had senators, political figures visiting both during and post the coup, publicly campaigning and calling for the overthrow of an elected leader and government, political interference writ large crikey, I say on steroids, they have supplied Weapons, and to top it off, from the beginning through the recent Raw Minerals agreement plundered and pillaged ex favourable terms Ukraines resources, bought the most productive lands, undertaken privatisation of Key Government Assets, stripping Ukraine just as occasioned the former USSR the 1990’s, they now call for peace all whilst arming and funding Ukraine, providing ongoing intelligence together their Western co Belligerents comprising the group of 50.
In short they, the U.S and West just cannot be trusted, they speak with a forked tongue, their intentions far from gracious, noble nor friendly, this whilst present CIC Trump, throws poisonous barbs by way of his Soc Media Posts and verbals.. he is aided and abetted his administration using as he is the imbecilic Kellogg as is his want to whom it seems he pays great heed, whilst the true anti war members of his administration are sidelined, well, certainly upon the face of it one could so construe.
In short I just would not trust the Americans, Russia does so as its peril, Russia is superior by way of Military Industrial Complex, militarily and mil technologically, in short it has become and rightfully reclaimed its position as a true Super power, its diplomats far better, its armed forces and defence industries light years ahead of the entire combined West, Russia is winning decisively against NATO, whilst the need to balance and be seen by Russia’s allies especially heavyweights China, India, Brazil, Indonesia etc.. together the Middle Eastern monarchic states is of great import, I feel the time for Russia to dictate has come, thus there can be no more placating, acquiescence nor subtle acceptance of Western belligerence, of its bellicose rhetoric of the rubbish espoused, nope, no longer.
It’s time or seems damn close to the time that Russia needs to just say and respond with what needs to be said in response to the many barbs thrown, backing such responses up by being firm and prepared to back up its words as required, just as recently has been done the Baltics against those big mouthed pirates, thieves and wannabes.
Russia has come through this baptism and crucible of fire with flying colours, time to stand tall, no longer pushed or to be pushed around, time the world treated you with the respect the nation has earned and as a result of recent successes on the battlefield in the diplomatic arena, so richly deserves, no longer to be timid, shy, instead, time for confidence, strength, and why not, what is there to stop Russia… five eights of f..k all I say.
Kia Kaha (Stay strong) from New Zealand
Escalation and atomic war--nuclear war, whatever--is clearly a fools game. Mark my words, however, that's exactly what the Bad Guys want. You, good reader, may not believe me, but back around 1995 or so I came across a UN planning document, and it said right there that war between "east and west" would be the best way to bring about "equality" between "north and south." These people were and remain nuts. And reckless.
Fully agree that the rulers in Kiev need to go. They are clear bad guys, and war criminals, to my eyes. Denazification is absolutely necessary, not because Russia wants it, but because what we are looking at in Ukraine aren't the LARPERS, common criminals, and mentally ill we are used to in "the west" when it comes to Nazis. Hell no. We are talking the real deal, right out of 1938, with smartphones. Not funny, not a good time, not acceptable.
We're talking about the ilk that slaughtered thousands of Polish people just because. And yea, "Jews" too, although these days as Israel commits an open genocide this fact comes across as ironic. I guess "Never Again" is like Orwell's notion of equality--some animals are more equal than others. Terms and conditions evidently apply.
Whatever the case may be, yea, the Nazi's need to go, and of course, no NATO expansion. Now, this said, occupation of western Ukraine? That's just going to be a drain on the treasury and a never-ending problem. It's pretty clear that the fruits and nuts in the west who are so fond of mutilating children in the name of a pop ideology are going to take a few generations to win over. Meanwhile, their societies will implode. No need to occupy, no need to attack, no need for any war whatsoever.
Now, I personally want to see Odessa and Kharkov go Russian, for sure, but I'm not in charge, so we'll just leave it at that.
The patterns have been established; the Russian Federation has nothing to fear, and zero reason to attack. Foolishness and idiocy will consume itself.
However no harm in building ramparts. No harm in that at all.
God bless and protect you, Mr. Dugan.
Thank you for this thoughtful note, Professor.
You are correct (imho) and my belief is that your President (and his very competent team) thinks along the same lines.
That I have a note prepared for yourself and still need to make time to arrange it grieves me a little because, it seems, there is a proverbial elephant in the room, the one called "Russophobia" and other wicked names, but this demonic creature is never discussed. Name the Devil and Free his Influence, to paraphrase.
Russia should have been able to identify this creature but many people, knowledgeable and wise advisers and commentators, still carry on discussing fishing without understanding the polluted nature of the river.
I hope that the above is a little clearer and also that you and your circle maintain health, spirit, and happiness.
From Siberia 2.0
NOTE ; your "Russia, the U.S., and China – three civilization states – must define and divide spheres of influence in the new multipolar world. " is a remark whose time, I offer, is not right now: and I submit, in turn, that "spheres of influence" is a phrase that may weigh too heavily on the brother nations of the Global South.
Expressed maybe more humbly as "spheres free of influence", it enables our Africans, Pasifika, and "Latin" Americans to create their own individual spheres. Then they may at last begin to contemplate their deserved destiny,
Thank You.
He needs to take all but the very eastern portion while he can in order to control western subversion.
Putin? Don't you mean the very *Western* part of Ukraine?
The EU is delusional if they EVER envision the U.S. to going to war in Eastern Europe or the Middle East.
I find Dugin always interesting and worth listening to. This analysis is one of the most enlightened, far seeing and welcome yet. Thank you Professor Dugin. God blessed you!
A truly logical interpretation of the situation Alexander.
https://www.reuters.com/article/world/trump-administration-reinstates-military-aid-for-ukraine-idUSKCN1VX2P5/
The bottom line is who cares what the EU and the UK think ! They are irrelevant today having become so through their own doing. It is comical to witness King Charles, Starmer or Macron attempting some grandiose political statement. Empty, cheap, irrelevant words that make no difference in the big boys club.
Ah yes, the great “civilization-state” where millions still lack access to basic infrastructure like flushing toilets. Truly the shining beacon of modernity and higher purpose.
Maybe before preaching about imperial destiny and metaphysical missions, Russia could make sure its own citizens don’t have to dig holes in the backyard to take a dump. Or is this part of the grand Eurasian tradition you keep talking about?
Funny how so many of these grand imperial visions are just a cover for old-fashioned land grabs and nostalgia for lost empires. But hey, who needs working plumbing when you’ve got “historical destiny,” right?
It is good to hear the Russian perspective because we never hear it in the US except in independent media.
I think President Putin’s interview with Tucker Carlson opened a lot of eyes in the U.S. In addition to discovering that he did not have red horns and a tail, contrary to what U.S. politicians have been implying for decades, we were impressed with his superior knowledge of history and sober view of the current world situation and its solution. I despair that America will never have a leader like him in my lifetime, if ever.
Brilliant assessment 👏!
The text in question is a paradigmatic specimen of ideological rhetoric, interweaving political assertion, affective manipulation, revisionist historiography, and discursive coercion under the guise of analytical commentary. What follows is a minute critical dissection of the text’s argumentative logic, rhetorical structure, ideological subtext, and semiotic mechanisms.
The tone is marked by a calculated calm that masks a more aggressive thrust. The speaker assumes the stance of a rational, wise, and patriotic observer aligned with Russian political leadership and opposed to Western “globalist” agendas. This persona is one of sovereign wisdom and long-range strategic insight, posed against an impulsive, ideologically disoriented, and morally compromised West. “Let’s not escalate things over Trump’s crude phrasing. We are a great power that knows its worth…” encapsulates the speaker’s affectation of philosophical detachment, which in fact shields an ultra-nationalist and expansionist core. Dignified restraint is the surface gesture; coercive authority is the submerged intention.
Trump is portrayed with a paradoxical ambivalence that reveals the strategic desire to both critique and co-opt him. He is framed as naïve but sincere someone who “does not understand what kind of war this is.” He is presented as a victim of hidden powers, “pushed” by neoconservative and globalist forces. Yet he is also treated as a potentially useful figure who may “ripen” in time, once properly exposed to “the real” nature of the conflict. This framing is a clear case of ideological instrumentalization. Trump is not evaluated based on political consistency or ethical coherence, but according to his potential to disrupt Western unity and serve Russian interests. He becomes a cipher misguided, but capable of becoming strategically productive through education or soft coercion.
The core of the text’s ideological operation lies in its rewriting of the Ukraine conflict as a simple battle of liberation from Nazism. “Putin wants to liberate all of Ukraine from the Nazi regime.” The rhetorical structure here is both mythic and Manichean. The historical complexity of Ukraine is dissolved into a binary opposition of good versus evil, framed through a war-era imaginary that recalls the Soviet narrative of heroic antifascism. The use of the term “Nazi regime” functions metonymically, not descriptively. It operates as a placeholder for political illegitimacy and moral decay. “Liberation,” in this context, is euphemism for annexation, occupation, and control. The narrative is not concerned with persuasion but with foreclosure obliterating any possibility of dialogue or ambiguity by totalizing the moral frame.
By asserting “this is our internal matter,” the speaker enacts a radical refusal of international law and sovereign pluralism. The Ukrainian state is rhetorically erased, its existence reimagined as a temporary aberration within a historical-cultural continuum that naturally belongs to Russia. This is classic imperial discourse dressed in contemporary pseudo-legalist garb. The dialectic of internal/external is weaponized to deny not only territorial autonomy but also narrative agency. What appears to be a domestic affair is in fact a structure of geopolitical aggression shielded behind the veil of historical inevitability.
The depiction of the West is driven by conspiratorial totalization. “Macron, Starmer, Carney… all the globalists, the Deep State…” collapses the political heterogeneity of the West into a single malevolent entity. This is not critique—it is myth. The West is imagined as omnipresent, ideologically coordinated, and structurally nefarious. This serves two functions. First, it immunizes the speaker against critique by framing all opposition as part of a transnational plot. Second, it offers a psychologically satisfying scapegoat onto which all contradictions, failures, and anxieties can be projected. The narrative is not interested in facts but in constructing a moral binary between purity (Russia) and corruption (the West).
The call for a “striking, successful, powerful, large-scale” military campaign reveals the text’s true core. All preceding analysis, moral framing, and strategic speculation lead to this climax. The speaker articulates a vision of war not as a tragedy or political necessity, but as a redemptive event. Victory is not just tactical; it is metaphysical. Through it, truth is reestablished, dignity restored, and geopolitical order reset. This is not Clausewitzian realism but militarist eschatology. The war becomes a ritual of purification, a spectacle of sovereignty, a mythic reassertion of imperial destiny. This move renders diplomacy irrelevant and positions military action as the only vehicle for meaningful transformation.
The reference to nuclear exchange is introduced with disturbing casualness. “Russia could receive a nuclear strike from America. But America could also receive a nuclear strike from Russia.” What is rhetorically disavowed as “not a serious discussion” is simultaneously normalized. This is strategic ambiguity at its most dangerous. By appearing to reject the logic of nuclear threat while inserting it into the discourse, the speaker performs a double move: deterrence by suggestion, disavowal by tone. This results in the normalization of apocalyptic possibility. The listener is left with the sense that such escalation is not desired but is eminently thinkable, even rational.
The repeated posture of stoic restraint “So I would simply not pay attention to such sharp remarks…”functions as a performance of sovereign indifference. But this is not true equanimity. It is a posture of supremacist contempt. It infantilizes Trump, while elevating Russian leadership as the true adult in the geopolitical arena. This rhetorical asymmetry mirrors the imperial fantasy at the heart of the text: one of mastery, inevitability, and unilateral legitimacy. The text enacts domination while pretending to be above the fray.
Despite the apparent calm, this is not an exercise in realism but in myth-making. What presents itself as commentary is in fact discursive strategy: a mask of diplomacy draped over a deeply coercive ideological program. The central operations of this text include colonial narrative revival, conspiratorial projection, militarist redemption, paternalist superiority, and nuclear brinksmanship cloaked in rhetorical ambiguity. It should not be read as political analysis but as an artifact of ideological warfare. Beneath its smooth rhetoric lies a structure of thought dedicated not to peace or understanding, but to domination and historical revision.