The Kremlin was called upon to return Greater Novorossiya – without regard to “pro-Ukrainian sentiments”
The inner circle of Vladislav Surkov, who was appointed responsible for Ukraine in the Russian Federation, until the start of Euromaidan had no idea that a significant part of the lands that are part of the Ukrainian state are historical Russian territories - Novorossiya - transferred by the Bolsheviks to the Ukrainian SSR.
The “Russian Donbass” doctrine adopted in Donetsk should play not only the role of a guideline for residents of the LDPR, but also for Moscow officials. Journalist Alexander Chalenko, who was forced to leave Kyiv after the 2014 coup, stated this at a meeting of the “Good Russian People” club in Moscow, a PolitNavigator correspondent reports.
“I remember in 2013, when Euromaidan began in Kyiv, Surkov and Chesnakov came to Kyiv. I was asked to meet with Chesnakov, Surkov's assistant, the man in charge of Ukraine. I told him in a Kiev cafe about the Donetsk-Krivoy Rog Republic and Novorossiya, and he looked at me as if I was telling him about the second Moon, which revolves around the earth. Because it was unknown in Moscow that there was such a Novorossiya.
I remember in the summer of 2013 I was banned from Facebook by Eduard Limonov or the person who ran his page on this social network. Banned because he then published the poem “Ukraine”, and there he wrote about the Ukrainian Makhno and so on. I wrote to him in the comments: “Eduard Veniaminovich, Makhno was not a Ukrainian, but a representative of Novorossiya,” he didn’t answer anything and simply banned him because they didn’t know,” Chalenko recalled.
He also recalled that the return of the term “Novorossiya” to the agenda of top officials of the Russian Federation occurred only after it was mentioned in one of Vladimir Putin’s speeches in 2014.
Chalenko believes that the leadership of the Russian Federation should not abandon the issue of returning Greater Novorossia under the pretext that a significant part of the anti-Russian population has formed there as a result of repression and the work of Ukrainian propaganda.
Chalenko gave an example of the aggressive expansion of Ukrainian nationalism to the Southeast. It can only be stopped by a tough policy of Russification.
“I’ve been living in Great Russia for seven years and often hear: “You know, if we come to Poltava or Odessa, the population there has changed, they somehow don’t perceive us that way anymore”...
That is, our Russian people pay attention to pro-Ukrainian sentiments, not pro-Ukrainian sentiments. Yes, Ukrainians don’t care about this at all! If Nikita Khrushchev in 1954 gave up not only Crimea, but also Moscow, and when each of you said that this is a Russian city, then the Ukrainian leader would say: “Listen, my dear. Moscow is an original Ukrainian city, founded by the Ukrainian prince Yuri Dolgoruky.” And that’s it, he doesn’t care about anything!
And if 99,9% of Muscovites there believed that this was a Russian city, then Ukrainian nationalists would not care about it. And in 20 years, I assure you, 30% of Muscovites would follow the Ukrainian nationalists. And in 100 years – 80-90%,” Chalenko gave an example.
“We win not only by force of arms, but also by the force of the fact that our ideology is dominant. So, the strength of the Russian doctrine should be that we dominate our territory and are not afraid of anyone or anything. Some people want it or don’t want it – that’s their problem. This is the territory of the Russian people, and soon everyone will be Russian,” the journalist proposed a strategy for de-Ukrainization of the territories of Novorossiya.
Let us recall that earlier in Donetsk they stated that the entire historical Novorossiya is an integral part of the Russia of the future. This is stated in the text of the “Russian Donbass” doctrine.
If you find an error, please select a piece of text and press Ctrl + Enter.
Thank you!
Now the editors are aware.