The aggressive policy of the West toward Russia is deeply rooted in its colonial past and is fully consistent with its contemporary neocolonial ambitions. Today, the collective West perceives itself as far stronger than Russia and believes that it can lead the country to humiliation and surrender through sustained military pressure or even outright military defeat. Its objectives have been openly stated on numerous occasions: the destruction, fragmentation, and plunder of Russia—a process euphemistically referred to as the “decolonization of Russia.”
The recently announced “Rearming Europe” program is already contributing to a significant military escalation of the war in Ukraine and, in all likelihood, paves the way for a full-scale NATO war against Russia, aimed—as Western elites openly hope—at the eventual collapse of the Russian state. The ongoing militarization and escalation in and around Ukraine constitute a clear indication of Western intentions. In particular, the strikes against Moscow, St. Petersburg, Crimea, and other Russian cities, as well as acts of piracy and drone attacks against vessels of Russian interest in international waters, can hardly be seen as Ukrainian decisions. These operations were decided, directed, and executed by the United States and its European allies.
The joint statement issued after the recent G7 summit in Evian made it clear that further escalation against Russia should be expected. This was not exclusively a European decision; the United States was the driving force behind it. Moreover, US interests are not fundamentally opposed to those of the core NATO members in Europe, nor do they pursue substantially different goals about Russia. The former European colonial powers remain firmly under US control and appear to accept this arrangement willingly. Any existing differences among them are unlikely to lead to a split in the foreseeable future.
It follows that the West would abandon its aggressive policy toward Russia only if it concluded that the balance of power had shifted decisively against it.
In this context, the question arises as to whether nuclear weapons could make a significant difference. Can nuclear deterrence serve, in the current conflict, as a credible barrier to full-scale aggression against Russia? In my view, the answer is no. The conflict has already escalated by the West to the level of a confrontation between NATO and Russia. In the event of nuclear use by either side, there is no indication that the other would refrain from immediate and similar retaliation.
The crucial question, then, is how Western aggression could be countered. I will attempt to outline several points, fully aware that they are far from exhaustive:
1. The recent experience of Iran offers important lessons: inflicting maximum cost on the adversary, tolerating significant losses—even among top officials—while ensuring the continuity of the state, mobilizing the population, and maintaining a robust focus on ideological, cultural, and communication strategies.
2. A new anti-imperialist narrative is urgently needed. This narrative should identify which countries constitute the imperialist bloc in our era, define their primary objectives, and clarify which states belong to the opposing camp and which form what we call the “Global South”.
3. An international front against the neocolonial expansion of the West is essential, and Russia could serve as the pivot of such a front.
4. The Western narrative presents Russia as a threat to Europe. From our perspective, Russia should be portrayed as one of the many victims of Western neocolonial expansion. This expansion should be declared the greatest threat to humanity’s survival in our time.
5. An international solidarity campaign for Russia is necessary in the Global South, under the slogan: “Defending Russia, we defend ourselves from neocolonialism.”
6. Finally, a word on the Balkans and certain Eastern European states. Although many of them are NATO members, they do not share the colonial past of Western European countries. On the contrary, their societies suffer from dependency on the West and its neoliberal-neocolonial policies. It is therefore essential to find proper ways to cultivate and reinforce the sentiments of friendship toward Russia that ordinary people—and segments of the political establishment—in these countries still maintain.