2017-02-15T12:13:00-08:00
It has become clear that “color revolutions” are a technique that is successfully portrayed as a spontaneous process. But in reality, it is characterized by a high level of theatrical drama.
On this topic, political analyst Andrei Manuelo (professor at Moscow State University) wrote an article in which he stated that “color revolutions” are considered one of the most pressing current issues in contemporary Russian politics because they keep society in a state of constant tension – they were considered in the new National Security Strategy of The most serious threats to Russia’s security.
The color revolution in Ukraine in 2014 (it was called “Euromaidan”) transformed this country from a country with a thriving economy into ruins. And from the color revolutions in particular, the armed conflicts began in Libya and Syria.
Brazil is currently witnessing a color revolution – the United States is using this successful technology to alienate President Dilma Rousseff, who refuses to go the way Washington wants. From time to time, centers of liberal democracy in Russia and abroad attempt to use this scenario in Russia in an attempt to undermine its sovereignty and attack its national interests, and this is accompanied by unprecedented external pressure from “partners” in the West.
It goes without saying that the color revolution is, in reality, the technology for organizing coups d’état in various countries in conditions of deliberate and artificial destabilization. During this, pressure is being put on the authorities of these countries in the form of political blackmail, and the means of this blackmail is represented by youth protest movements that are organized according to a specific plan.
The sole goal of any color revolution is always to organize a coup against power, while portraying this as a spontaneous protest phenomenon and as spontaneous mass activities of civil disobedience.
The necessary and inevitable condition for the success of the color revolution is political destabilization that could turn into a complete political crisis.
Although there are significant social, geopolitical and economic differences between countries that have witnessed and are witnessing color revolutions, these revolutions are implemented according to a single plan that includes organizing a youth protest movement that is transformed into mass political demonstrations and using this force against the existing authority as a means of political blackmail, proposing conditions, and threatening mass riots. And even to liquidate everyone who opposes this line, all with the aim of pushing the authorities to voluntarily relinquish power. This means that color revolutions cannot, in principle, achieve the objective aspirations of the masses and the hopes of the majority of the public.
It must be said that the colored revolution resembles the real revolution only from the external aspect: the cause of the real revolution is an actual, objective development of the historical process, while the colored revolution is a technology being disguised as a spontaneous process. Western political analysts are innocently and hypocritically trying to portray it as a natural, spontaneous manifestation of the will of the people who suddenly decided to regain the right to manage the country.
It should be noted that the Color Revolution tries to avoid using the military factor and resorts to it only in very necessary cases. However, the color revolution usually constitutes all the conditions required for external military intervention.
If the authority shows intransigence, refuses, and moves to confront it, this means that the colored revolution is moving into the stage of armed rebellion, as is happening in Syria, and this may be accompanied by external military intervention, as happened in Libya.
During the Color Revolution, specific signals are used to differentiate between friend and foe, which allows participants in political events and demonstrations to recognize each other, while at the same time identifying strangers and opponents who do not carry the agreed-upon symbol – this symbol was initially in the form of different roses – in Georgia. Kyrgyzstan, Belarus and Tunisia (in the latter, jasmine was used) – this is reminiscent of the hippie movement in the West in the last century, “Sons of Roses,” which indicates the North American origin of these revolutions.
Source: I Zvestia newspaper
.
.
.