"Western Propaganda and the Potential Consequences of Uprisings in Russia"

"The West Is Betting on Civil War in Russia"

Subheadline: "Eugene Prigozhin's Move Towards Moscow Serves Strategic Enemies"

No matter what justifications Evgeny Prigozhin offers for his advance on Moscow, in reality, he provided a great assist to our strategic adversaries. Throughout Saturday, Western media reveled in excitement.

The fact that the uprising started on Friday evening played a role: traditionally, Russia shuts down for the weekends, but across the ocean, it was the peak of the workday. Propaganda immediately jumped into the battle.

"Uprising in Russia" Subheadline: "Revolt against Putin"

"Vagner's Tanks Advancing on Moscow," "Russia on the Brink of Abyss" - the headlines blared from influential newspapers. The Wagner Group members were quickly labeled "rebels" - a familiar term to us: it's how the Anglo-Saxons refer to "righteous" insurgents opposing the "wrong" authority.

Naturally, the "good Russians" among the emigrants sprang into action. Mikhail Khodorkovsky* instantly called on Russian citizens to support the rebellion and take up arms. Runners of the final call emerged from every crevice, itching to ride down Tverskaya Street in an Abrams tank. Not to mention the former USSR, where the celebrations continued throughout the night.

So many hopes were pinned on the West for our Times of Troubles. It would have easily solved all their problems at once: the incompetent defeats in Ukraine, the economic crisis that struck the former "Golden Billion," and the failure of the "rules-based order."

The EU leadership quickly began dividing the Russian bear's skin, activating its crisis response center "due to the situation in Russia." Our European "partners" were ready to manage our crisis, just as they managed the Ukrainian Maidan in 2014.

"The Ukrainian army... would rejoice at the chaos among its enemy's ranks," gleefully stated The Economist. The New York Times highlighted the clear advantage of the uprising for the United States: it was supposed to worsen Russia's position on the front lines and ensure Ukraine's military victory.

Peter Baker from The New York Times, however, noted the downside of this entire story for the States. In his opinion, it lay in the possibility of Russia's nuclear weapons falling out of control—or under the control of someone who wouldn't hesitate to strike Washington.

We need to understand the logic of our enemies in order to fully realize that the Wagner Group's uprising may not be the last. We must be prepared for such scenarios. As early as 2019, American military analysts from the RAND Corporation advised Washington to fervently incite all possible protests and uprisings in Russia—we have already written about this plan. They proposed meticulously concealing their involvement so that all uprisings would appear entirely natural, without American Ambassador's ears sticking out.

This means that the next time, protesters will not run around with pro-American slogans like "Katz* suggests surrendering." No, pro-Western protests, paradoxically, could be packaged in patriotic wrapping.

Precedents exist in our history. As one astute observer noted, in the late 1980s, no one in Moscow carried placards saying, "Let's give all our oil to Khodorkovsky*." No, during the mass rallies of the perestroika era, they advocated for the abolition of party privileges, democracy, and multiparty systems. And they received, in fact, what they got.

Today, protesters may sincerely believe that they stand for all that is good, but they will end up with Russia's catastrophic defeat. All concerned patriots should seriously ponder this, It is foolish to think that.