Evgeny Prigozhin’s interview with the nationalist blogger Konstantin Dolgov is still echoing in Russia. If an ordinary citizen of the Russian Federation had publicly said half of what the owner of the Private Military Company “Wagner”, he would probably have been sentenced to life in a penal colony on the basis of at least ten paragraphs.
However, Prigozhin, like another “hawk” Igor Girkin ps. Strelkov enjoys an informal immunity that allows him to speak more than others. Both use this privilege of inviolability, demanding, on the one hand, more decisive military actions in Ukraine, and on the other, criticizing the inefficiency of Putin and his entourage. For commentators, it remains a mystery why they can afford it and go unpunished.
Not a cook, but a butcher
However, there is a fundamental difference between the two war criminals, who are in sharp conflict with each other. While Girkin can be witty and sophisticated in his criticism of the Kremlin, and even shows a certain literary talent, Prigozhin could be shown in Sevres as a model of rudeness, rudeness and crudeness. In a blasphemous interview with Dolgov, he gives a sample of his specific black humor when he says that he is not “Putin’s cook” at all (he is a restaurateur who can’t even cook), but can be safely called “Putin’s butcher.” In this way, he alludes to his own role in the carnage in Ukraine.
In general, Prigozhin does not spare bitter words to the Russian authorities because of the policy towards Kiev, but he does it from a different perspective than the Ukrainians or Poles themselves. First of all, he blames “degenerate Yanukovych”, who thought only about money, for the outbreak of the Maidan revolution. Then he accuses Moscow that instead of making the annexed Donbass a paradise on earth to attract other countries to Russia, such as Georgia or Armenia, everything that could be stolen was stolen, as a result of which “ordinary Russians found themselves in d…”
Blame Shoigu and Gerasimov
Prigozhin repeats the thesis of Kremlin propaganda that the “special military operation” preceded the Ukrainian attack on Russia, but later in his argument he criticizes the manner in which this invasion was carried out. As he says:
The “special operation” is Ukraine’s return to our pro-Russian bosom. And to tell the truth, many in Ukraine wanted to get into this bosom. If we are creating a pro-Russian womb, then we need to change the leadership of the government, kiss people’s asses and invite everyone over. And what have we done? We came rudely, marched our boots across the country looking for Nazis. And looking for the Nazis, we turned everyone we could into sausages. We went to Kyiv. Then, speaking Russian, we shit on everything and left. Then we went to Kherson, took a shit and left.
In this situation, it is not surprising, as Prigozhin states sadly, that Russians are not loved in Ukraine today. Moreover, it failed to achieve the goals assumed in advance, i.e. the denazification and demilitarization of Ukraine. Instead, the goals opposite to those intended were achieved: the authorities in Kiev were given strong legitimacy around the world and the Ukrainian state was militarized to an unprecedented extent. According to the head of the “Wagnerians”, Joseph Stalin, in the place of Vladimir Putin, would have drawn conclusions from such a lesson and would have shot at least two hundred responsible for this defeat.
Prigozhin lists Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu and the chief of the general staff, General Valery Gerasimov, as those responsible for the defeat. He admits that he would love to see them hanged on Red Square in Moscow. “Putin’s Butcher” also criticizes the elites of the Russian “deep state”, accusing them of sending their sons to exotic countries instead of to the front, while the children of simple people die en masse due to the incompetence of commanders. There is a risk that the situation from 1917 may repeat itself, when war-weary soldiers turned their weapons against the then elites.
Competition with God
Against the backdrop of the Kremlin’s propaganda, Prigozhin appears as a pessimist, forecasting a dark scenario of events. In his opinion, there are two possibilities for the further development of the situation. In the optimistic version, the US and Europe will start to feel tired with the prolonged war, China will invite both sides to the negotiating table, and then “what we took is ours, and what we don’t – it’s not ours.” . However, a pessimistic scenario seems more likely to him, in which Ukraine receives weapons, launches a counter-offensive, succeeds, returns to the 2014 borders and tries to regain Crimea. In his opinion, it is therefore necessary to prepare for a long and hard war, because – as he warns – “we may lose Russia.”
At the end of the interview, Prigozhin states his political credo:
I love my homeland. I listen to Putin. Shoygu for soap. I will keep fighting.
Perhaps the head of Putin’s “Wagnerians” listens, but he criticizes him more and more often, though not directly, but with clear suggestions. For example, in a conversation with Dolgov, he says that competition in Russia would be useful in every area of life, but “with us there is only competition with Peter I or with God.”
“Two Russias”
The impunity of public and open criticism of the authorities began to embolden other representatives of the mainstream to make equally unorthodox statements. During a recent meeting of the State Duma, for example, MP Nikolai Kolomeitsev spoke, who stated that there are “two Russias” today: one dies in the trenches, and the other hangs around pubs and goes shopping abroad, including the wives of deputy ministers from the security structures. Later, Boris Nadezhdin, a political scientist, appeared on the regime’s television station NTW, saying that in the current situation, it is necessary to elect other authorities in the country, replace Putin with someone else, and thanks to this, it will be possible to establish normal relations with Europe.
Two weeks ago, such statements would have been unthinkable in the public space. So the mood among the establishment is changing. Even if its representatives are not against the war, they are increasingly against the part of the authorities responsible for the course of the war. They are not satisfied with saying that everything is going according to plan and the goals of the operation have been achieved, because no one really knows what the goals are, which in the official narrative are constantly changing. The opinion that “the king is naked” has so far been voiced by such figures as Prigozhin or Girkin or other representatives of the “party of war” in the style of Dugin and Alksnis. Now others are coming. We’ll see what happens next – will Putin order them to be silenced, will he feed them Shoigu, or will he do nothing, allowing more and more open criticism. One thing is certain: no one has ever won the competition with God.
Gregory Gorny
Source
About Post Author
