Who dreams "colour revolutions" dreams?
Russian President Vladimir Putin, in an interview with the “Mir" TV and radio company in 2017, said that Russia is vitally interested in stability in the post-Soviet space. Among the threats to this that he named were technologies that lead to the destabilisation of the state.
What exactly these technologies are was explained by Defence Minister Sergey Shoigu. These are "colour revolutions" that allow “with minimal expenditure of resources and limited use of their own weapons and armed forces to crush regional powers, accomplishing political and economic goals”.
“Colour revolutions” are the collective name of the processes of power change at the beginning of the 21st century in six states of Eastern Europe, Central Asia and North Africa: in Yugoslavia ("bulldozer revolution" in 2000), Georgia ("rose revolution" in 2003), Ukraine (twice - "orange revolution" in 2004 and "Euromaidan" in 2014), Kyrgyzstan ("tulip revolution" in 2005), Tunisia ("jasmine revolution" in 2011) and Egypt ("date revolution" in 2011).
The protest processes in December 2011 in the city of Zhanaozen of the Republic of Kazakhstan and August 2020 in Belarus can be added to the same series (unlike those listed above, they did not lead to a change of power).
Most of these states belong to countries that were part of the Soviet Union, the socialist camp (like Yugoslavia) or were in close contact with it (Egypt, Tunisia). Unlike military coups, they are carried out by citizens of the country, begin with peaceful rallies, and end with an active standoff with the authorities, including with the use of weapons, which lead to the fall of established regimes.
The similarity of the processes, as well as the specifics of the countries in which they were carried out, allows us to combine the regime changes in different states into one category with a general term.
On the given map, all the recorded "orange revolutions" are located around the territory of the Russian Federation. The beginning of active actions falls at the end of the calendar year. The question "who benefits" remains open.
After the bipolar world became unipolar as a result of the collapse of the USSR and started to be led by the United States, the division of spheres of influence became the main point of geopolitics. The re-creation of the union of previously united states, first of all, was unprofitable for Western civilisation. It is much easier to influence disparate states than those that are united together in one fist. There is also a question of weakening power within the country too. And it is what happened.
After the collapse of the Union, multinational corporations and companies actively engaged in monopolising the extraction of natural resources, importing "brains", subordinating economies. These corporations are another beneficiary besides Western powers. The action is accompanied by the inculcation of a capitalist worldview, the imposition of the perception of false democratic ideals.
History does not cite a single case when these processes have led to the qualitative development of states that have undergone such changes. The standard of living in the countries of the victorious revolutions allows us to judge their place in international rankings. The most authoritative is the UN Human Development Index. Russia ranks 52nd in it, Belarus - 53rd. At the same time, the countries defeated by the colour revolutions: Georgia – 61st, Serbia – 64th, Ukraine – 74th, Kyrgyzstan – 120th place. The results of colour reforms can be seen in Syria and Libya.
Theories of methods of overthrowing undesirable political regimes were developed by American authors who are part-time statesmen and political figures of the USA at the turn of the 20th-21st centuries: Joseph Nye, G. Sharp, Z. Brzezinski, Michael E. McFaul, John F. Tefft, H. Hale, H. Kissinger.
Most of the above authors have put their theoretical research into practice, using the experience gained over many years of work in the Pentagon, the State Department, the White House, the National Intelligence Council, the National Security Council and in senior diplomatic positions. They also adjusted the ideological basis of colour coups. Thus, the transit of Western-style democracy is considered as part of the foreign policy strategy and the issue of US national security.
From this environment, I would like to single out Gene Sharp and Joseph Nye separately. The former is considered the "Machiavelli of nonviolent struggle," which is not entirely justified in his own words. He collected and described in detail in the essay "From dictatorship to democracy" almost two hundred methods of nonviolent struggle, as well as some variants of their interaction.
Being at the head of a group of representatives of the Albert Einstein Institute (an NGO created by him dealing with the study of nonviolent resistance), he helped the Baltic countries "fight for independence" in 1990-1991. Whereas the participation of the manual, written according to his work and translated into almost 40 languages, which is real "instructions for coups", is no longer his merit.
Gene Sharp (now deceased) said that he, as a writer and author of manuals, was pleased that his texts could change something in the world, but urged not to exaggerate the role of his books: "You can print anything, but it's just pieces of paper that lie on the table. The people who do the work deserve praise."
Another example can be given: the famous automatic rifle developed by Mikhail Timofeevich Kalashnikov is used all over the world, and it happens to be both in "good" hands and in "bad" ones. But the moral side of its use cannot be blamed on the famous designer as the author.
However, Sharp laid the foundations, which were later refined and used in practice. Its basic postulate is that no government can be homogeneous. And that even the most powerful vertical, in the end, consists of people: "There are different cultures, different languages and religions. But if we talk about this work, all people are the same" (Gene Sharp).
The technique boils down to finding the weak points of the regime. To do this, he researched and systematised specific tools. For example: refusal to cooperate with the authorities: social refusal (includes 16 methods), political (38 methods) and economic. The latter category, in turn, is divided into boycotts (26 methods) and strikes (23 methods).
The political scientist Joseph Nye made a much greater contribution to the practice of applying colour revolutions. In 1990, he developed the concept of "soft power". The policy of its promotion is associated with the popularisation and promotion of its own Western culture, language and cultural values. At the same time, the resources and technologies of "soft power" are used to undermine the state and social structure of another country, its sovereignty.
It's the biography of Nye that allows to conclude that this technology is the basis for the implementation of colour revolutions, including in the post-Soviet space. He held the following positions: Chairman of the National Intelligence Council, Assistant Secretary of Defence for International Security Affairs. He advised the administrations of Bill Clinton and then Barack Obama. Is it worth reminding that it was during the leadership of the United States by these presidents that all the listed coups "happened".
In recent years, J. Nye develops the concept of "smart power", the theoretical basis of which is the ability to coordinate and combine the capabilities and resources of "soft" and "hard" forces." Of course, the technologies of colour revolutions cannot be attributed exclusively to "soft power". But even in the sphere of "non-forceful" methods, North American political strategists act very harshly.
"Double standards" and aggressive ideological propaganda are actively used in the Western media, especially in cases when events do not develop according to the scenario of the Anglo-Saxons. Thus, the separation of Kosovo from Serbia appears to be a democratic right of citizens to self-determination, and referendums on the independence of Crimea and Southeastern Ukraine are a manifestation of separatism.
The direct actors are various political parties, NGOs, youth movements, mass media, social networks. Semiotic tools are actively used: symbols, images, ideas, myths.
The analysis of events in Yugoslavia, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan and Ukraine allowed us to identify a number of features and patterns:
a) in the content and sequence of actions;
b) applied technologies.
The generalised algorithm includes nine components:
1. Search for the energy potential of public groups capable of participating in the revolution or their creation, including through NGOs.
2. Identification (or creation) of political parties, public associations, movements (such as "anti-waste collection", "anti-vaccinators"), which can become the engine of political protest.
3. Training in paramilitary youth camps, both on the territory of the country of the coup and on the territory of third countries, of special "shock forces of the revolution" through special trainings.
4. Building a chain of practical goals that are as close as possible to the real demands of the masses (for example, about raising the subsistence minimum - only the leadership that needs to be displaced is to blame).
5. Ensuring the advantage of the opposition media within the country, as well as support for the opposition in the international media.
6. The use of spectacular mass actions to awaken the discontented persons to activity (Pussy Riot, processions with flags, "light a candle", various flash mobs, concerts).
7. Bringing society into a state of anarchy, organising mass riots, opposing law enforcement agencies (rushing at police shields under cameras, throwing molotov cocktails at security forces, handing flowers to security forces, photo shoots with kneeling in front of a cordon, etc.). At the same time - making demands and ultimatums to the authorities.
8. Nomination of the leader of public opinion to the post of head of state. Implementation of management through specially trained specialists.
9. After the seizure of power, conducting secret purges in the state apparatus.
With the arrival of global digitalisation, "colour technologies" have been supplemented with a number of specific tools. Conventionally, they can be divided into two main categories: digital (conducted in the information space) and non-digital (conducted outside the information field on streets, squares, etc.).
Digital technologies
- Creation of an information resource that publishes "insiders", "plums", or "what is being hidden". For example, YouTube or Telegram channel.
- Publications of high-profile news, preferably of a criminal nature with the participation of government representatives. For this purpose - provoking by “peaceful" demonstrations, public exposure, etc. As a result - a sharp increase in the number of subscribers of the resource.
- Establishing "feedback", when the opportunity to forward a particular news item to a resource in one click creates a pleasant illusion of self-importance and involvement in the "top". In some cases, such resources become a kind of "helpline", where people turn in the hope of solving the problems that bother them or sharing the painful.
- Transformation of everyday problems into a political agenda. For example: “The residents of Ivanov Street have a problem: the sewer broke in the yard." Next comes the signal conversion, in which there can be two options: advertising “To avoid the repetition of such cases, buy higher-quality products of the company…", or a political agenda: "For your problem you should blame: plumber/mayor/minister/government/parliament/president”.
Non-digital technologies
- The use of visual marketing tools, reliance on images, for example: the fist of "Otpor", orange scarves, blue balloons, posters “Belarusian lives matter", etc.
- Putting subscribers of channels on the square for joint actions, pickets.
- Dissemination of methods of specific communication with law enforcement agencies, behaviour at rallies, participation in protests
- Creation of a joint "protest headquarters”, tent camps with festive euphoric attributes (songs, lanterns, joyful emotions, chants, incantations, etc.); massive informational and psychological impact on the voter through mass media and messengers in order to form a prejudice about the "inevitable fall" of power.
Both digital and non-digital technologies
- Conducting "sociological surveys" on a pre-selected topic. In this case, the questions are drawn up in such a way as to form a certain negative image of the government. An example of the work of the tool can be called "don't think about the green elephant".
There are plenty of grounds for the germination of "colour revolutions": economic crises, unfavourable epidemiological situation caused by COVID-19, social tension caused by the concentration of wealth in the hands of a small group of the population. There will always be protest moods in certain circles of society, that's the way it is. If to repeat Sharp's words shown at the beginning of the article: "There are different cultures, different languages and religions. But if we talk about this work, all people are the same."
In conditions when the "orange revolutions" have won among many of our neighbours, when a threat to the sovereignty of the Russian Federation is directly indicated, it is necessary to develop an effective state system for countering colour revolutions.
We can consider many options for counteraction. Including control over the information space, NGOs, targeted work of relevant special structures. However, it seems to us that all the indicated processes of attempts at reconstruction will be levelled in a highly educated society built on moral and ethical values received in the family.
In this regard, it is necessary to focus on two main areas: education, especially primary and secondary, as well as on strengthening the institution of the family, more extensive support for large families.
Accompanying counteraction tools can be named as following:
- creation of a common ideology, civic identity, and national idea for all the peoples of the Russian Federation;
- a system of income redistribution aimed at creating a middle class, eradicating groups of overly affluent population;
- the development of a patriotic civil society, the creation of really active and interesting for various social groups (especially young people, and from all regions of the country) public organisations with a positive agenda;
- a system of appointment to public positions, as well as municipal ones through the social credit system, when the population of a particular locality can replace its head at any time by expressing distrust of them, or by issuing an assessment (as it is in these same multifunctional centres for provision of public and municipal services, "how do you evaluate the work of an employee").
We should proceed from the fact that a strong and united Russia, as well as its neighbours, is unprofitable for the collective West. If it is impossible to wage a "hot" war, cognitive and "orange revolutions" will come into play. This must be understood both at the highest level and at the household level. The prerequisites for this already exist: it is worth remembering the same demonstrations at Bolotnaya Square and look at the level of domestic secondary education.
Society needs consolidation on the basis of national values, national ideas, the first and main of which can be the Russian family. We must not forget about the need for high-quality education and health care. None of these ideas will be viable without the nourishment of them by educated and healthy populations.