Evaluation of Russia by finnish intelligence colonel

Evaluation of Russia by Finnish Intelligence Colonel (Original video lecture)

The Russians are, as it were, followers of the Eastern Roman tradition. Religion, conservatism and the relationship to authority came from there. It means that one does not challenge authority. Authority is obtained from God. He who leads us has received authority from God to lead us. He is infallible. Authority will not be challenged under any circumstances. This idea comes from Byzantine Russia. (some parallels in How the World Thinks - global philosophy) The mistakes are happening here within the boyars. Between the people and the infallible Tsar, there is a boyars.

During the Mongol rule the only ways to survive were lying, corruption and violence. This still lives very deep in Russia’s strategic culture.

Romanov was then elected Tsar and the Russians realized that a strong leader was better than chaos. In addition to all this when the authority comes from God and the autocrat is indeed a leader. It was stated there that only sovereignty will save Russia. It has been several hundred years in their genetic inheritance that autocracy is the only right solution. That is, autocracy is better than chaos and mayhem.

One interesting thing, this area. From the Polish border to Moscow, through to Urals, is a plateau that is easy to attack with both horses and tanks. That is what has been done. Napoleon attacked, the Germans attacked and so on. That idea is also in the genetic inheritance of the Russians. That someone is always attacking. “We will be conquered”. They have no shelter, no mountains, no rivers. There are no lakes between the east and the capital. Geographically, Russia has always been easy to conquer, which also influences their thinking.

During the Soviet era, tenure continued instead of ownership. That is, in the Soviet Union when you reached a certain position of power you had tenure. You gotta visit your dacha and the Yalta and you had a servant who was looking out for you. However, you did not own these, but you had possession, a tenure of these.

Another point is that when you reach a certain position, you are entitled to a certain amount of corruption. That is, a certain degree of power gives you the right to a certain degree of corruption, too. At a lower rank, you didn’t get to steal that much. The higher you get, the more you get to steal. It had rules. Those rules had to be followed, they weren’t written rules, of course, but everyone knew these rules of the game.

The Russians have the ability to expect and endure a tremendous amount of suffering. This is an amazing trait for them. They are able to anticipate and endure suffering. They have made suffering as if it was a virtue. When you suffer on behalf of the Soviet Union or Russia, things turn out really nice when all that is over. For example, when you die or when you reach communism. “There are no refrigerators and no real food, but when we get to communism then there will be everything.”

On the other hand, they also have a wonderful way of forming two realities: they formed a Soviet public reality and a kitchen table reality. Around the kitchen table things were really being discussed. I had a chat at the kitchen table in 1986, extremely interesting. Perestroika was about to start just then. It was interesting because they are like two different people when they go outside compared to how they’re around the kitchen table. There are two different realities that are still operating in Russia.

80% of Russians get all their information from television. These television channels are under the control of Putin and his close associates. That is, 80% of Russians receive filtered information. They do not get the facts from the media. In Russia the values ​​and norms are already strong and the information that is constantly being fed is different from our western point of view. Therefore, it is quite certain that the goals and actions of Russians will not be the same as how we would perform in the same situations. This is the story told by the Russian media under their leaders: “Russia is a besieged fort that is at constant war with the West and the enemy is inside.”

Kennan wrote: “Russia is deaf to the logic of reason but very sensitive to the logic of power.” Lenin once said: “Try it with a bayonet, if it’s soft, push. If it’s hard, leave.”

The Russians are imperialists as are the Americans. But American imperialism is based on the fact that they want to have resources, oil, or whatever. On the other hand, Russian imperialism is based on fear. To compare, the cause and starting point of Russian imperialism is quite different. Russian imperialism is based on someone potentially attacking them again.

Roughly speaking, they have clumsy and skillful information influence. We may not realize skillful influencing as influencing at all. With clumsy influencing the goal is to draw our attention away. Johan Bäckman (activist working for the Russian government), for example, is involved in clumsy information influencing. When Johan Bäckman speaks for Russia we notice “Hey, he’s speaking for Russia” And we’re pleased with ourselves for seeing this influence on information, when, in fact, Bäckman’s job (and that of people like him for Russia) is to draw our attention away as a diversion in order for the skillful information to take place somewhere else more effectively.

Russia is technologically backward and has always been. Someone said that the Russian has invented nothing but a samovar and even there the faucet was stolen from the Germans. I don’t know if the story is true but that’s the saying. The Russians themselves tried to build computers in the late 1970s they made a decision. “No, we don’t have the capacity to do that, we have to copy IBM.” The IBM 360 was the system that the Russians started to copy. The war in Afghanistan made procurement a little more difficult, but they still got IBM equipment through cover companies, including Japan. The equipment they dismantled upon receiving them, made similar parts, copied them and then assembled again.

Russian truth. After all, language tells how people think, how they perceive the world and how society thinks. The United States has two words for positive rights: “liberty” and “freedom” and so on.  Russia has two words for the truth and three words for the lie. It is certainly not a coincidence.  There’s the word “pravda”, which is truth but not absolute truth. Rather the kind of truth that gets rid of awkward, wicked situations. It’s like tactical truth.  “Istina” is the opposite of a lie. Istina is true, as true as can be. But pravda is rather… sometimes it can be true, at other times not so true. Three words for lie: “Vranyo” is a white lie, but of the strategic level. It is also kind of a way to get rid of nasty situations. The Russians know it, we don’t know it. We think that there is only truth and lies in the world. It’s just black and white, or plus and minus. We think so because we usually have it that way. The lie in Russia was born under Mongol rule. During Mongol rule: Violence and lying were the way to survive. This tradition has been in their system ever since. Russia has the word “krugovaya poruka” (круговая порука), or gang guarantee. By the way, the Finnish word “porukka” (gang) comes from here. It means that when we have some set of people with a common goal. Be it the Kremlin leadership or the Russian armed forces or whatever. We have a common goal and I step out of the circle and lie to an outsider. My gang hears that I lie but they don’t judge me as a liar. Because they understand that I am using tactical truth (vranyo) to achieve the greater goals of our gang. The use of tactical truth, or a lie, is accepted if it is done for the benefit of the in-group. Just like you can steal when you don’t steal too much or from the wrong guy. You also get to lie if you lie for the sake of the gang. For us in the West, the truth is black and white.

This is based on the fact that we in the West, under the rule of law, when we make an argument we need to be able to 100%, unequivocally prove the claim to be true. But when Russia makes an argument, there are always small gaps left here and there that we (westerners) start to think about, “Is that really so?” The notion of lie and truth works differently in Russia.

Or this one. The president said “We have nothing to do with interfering in the 2016 U.S. presidential election”. He says just like that. The Russians who see and hear this know that “We were there, but we didn’t get caught.” Then the West thinks, “Well, who could it be, if it wasn’t the Russians?” Because we don’t realize the use of Russian tactical truth.