A special military operation is a clash between two types of world order

The Special Military Operation can only end with a Russian victory. Interview with Alexander Dugin.

There are two main views on what is happening in Ukraine. Some say it is a "civil war", others say it is a clash of civilisations. What do you think?

The Special Military Operation (SMO) in Ukraine is a global phenomenon. It can be interpreted in different ways and the individual interpretations do not contradict each other but complement each other. It is a clash of civilisations, according to Huntington. After the end of the bipolar world, there was a unipolar world (Fukuyama's end of history) for some time, but it has come to an end. Russia is establishing itself as a separate civilisation and refusing to submit to the West and liberal globalism. It is therefore a conflict of two civilisations: the West, which still claims universality and unity (hegemony, globalism); and the Russian, Orthodox-Eurasian.

The SMO is a civil war within a single East Slavic nation. Its south-western part (the Malorussians) came under the influence of Atlanticism. An artificial Ukrainian Nazi identity was implanted and Anti-Russia was created. Today, Russia is fighting Anti-Russia, but on a single territory. Therefore, the actions of the Russian army in Ukraine and the attacks of Ukrainian troops on Russian territory (Belgorod, Rostov, Kursk oblasts, Krasnodar Krai) - equate the space of Ukraine and Russia into something unified. Here there will be either a Eurasian or an Atlantic power, but the struggle itself takes place on common territory within the same artificially divided nation. That is why this war is a civil war.

The SMO is a battle between two types of world order: unipolar and multipolar. Russia is fighting not only for its national interests, but also for a new model of world architecture, it cannot be the second pole today, it is fighting for the right to be one of the poles and invites other participants to become a pole, such as China, a pole already available, India, Islamic countries, Latin America, Africa and also Europe.

Russia, according to her, represents traditional culture. The West, on the other hand, is a kind of anti-Christ. Why?

Russia represents a traditional society, but of course not completely. In any case, Russia is more traditional than the West. So the traditional values - religion, family, fidelity to history, identity, the ban on gay marriage - are all contained in our Constitution. In the West the values are just the opposite, anti-traditional. But who is the main enemy of the sacred tradition? Who overthrows the value system by calling evil good? The Antichrist. The modern liberal globalist West is the Antichrist.

It is true that the word war cannot be used in Russia. Is it part of propaganda or are there other reasons?

The SMO is not a war, because Ukraine is not the enemy. The operation is against Ukrainian Nazism and Russophobia. To the extent that the Ukrainian government supports Nazism and encourages Russophobia, to the extent that it too becomes a target of the SMO.

Do you think we are heading towards a third world war?

It is very possible. NATO actively supports and arms the Ukraine and the Nazi death battalions. So NATO is not only not trying to end the conflict, it is inflaming it. Moscow cannot fail to see the active role of NATO countries in this situation. The world is on the brink of a nuclear war.

And on the brink of a new world order?

The new world order implies the establishment of a world government. This idea is openly expressed by the OI liberals (it is openly described in every OI textbook), the ideologues of the Davos Forum and the supporters of the Great Reset. Russia and China as sovereign poles are obstacles on the road to the New World Order.
The SMO is directed against exactly that, against the New World Order, World Government and the Great Reset.

It is the aggressor, not the aggressed, who is guilty of war. At least, this is often the case. Could this damage Russia's image?

The guilty party is always the one who lost. The US has been the aggressor many times in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries, and no one (or hardly anyone) accepts the blame for the bombing of Yugoslavia, the invasion of Iraq, the occupation of Afghanistan, or complicity in the civil wars in Libya and Syria on the US and NATO. Whoever wins is right. Russia's image will only be ruined if it fails to implement the goals set and declared in the SMO: the complete demilitarisation and denazification of Ukraine.Winners are never judged and losers are always judged.

Or do you think the Ukrainians are the aggressors?

The aggressors are the West and the globalist elites, who have artificially created an aggressive Russophobic Nazi regime in Ukraine, which has been destroying the peaceful population of the Donbass for 8 years and is preparing for an offensive in the near future. Russia has taken pre-emptive action.

How will Putin emerge from this conflict?

Only as a winner. He has no other way out of this situation for external and internal reasons.

You said that Putin was forced to launch a military operation against Ukraine. Would you like to explain this thought of yours?

Putin was forced to launch it because the Ukrainian army was ready to launch an attack on the Donbass. If he had been successful in this, a military aggression against Crimea would have followed. Putin did not wait for this to start and struck first. Any ruler in his place, committed to the sovereignty of his power, would have done the same.

What do you think of the Azov battalion?

It is a Nazi terrorist entity similar to ISIS (a terrorist organisation banned in the Russian Federation). It was created and trained by Western instructors. Azov tortured, killed, raped and mercilessly exterminated the local population of the Donbass, because most of them were recruited from Western Ukraine, a very different ethnic entity. Azov resists the Russian army so fiercely today because its members have been outlawed by Russia and are subject to extermination as terrorists.

As a person of culture, how do you hope that what is happening will end? And especially when and how do you think it will end?

Nobody knows. Culture has nothing to do with it. SMO can only end with a victory for Russia. If there is no victory, there will be no end to hostilities.

Translation by Lorenzo Maria Pacini