The causes for the current situation, which is to be described as treason by Russia in the form that the region ins denied quitting its claims, reach back to the first treason by the Nazis and Stalin’s blowback which emptied the territory as a punishment for the collaboration. To understand the seriousness of the three stages, it must be remembered that the Nazis had built a huge apparatus of secret paramilitary agents whose structural absurdity was not far from the current entities and whose staff was largely killed in the final battles of WWII. This apparatus was unleashed on it ahead of the military conquest by the regular army, and it brought about the first treason although the Caucasus proved to be the high water mark of the latter. Mostly for that reason, it was then hit all the harder by Stalin’s reciprocation. And today, it is being betrayed a third time, not only by Russia but even more so by the European and American heirs of the Nazis whose terror might escalate like elsewhere if no longer contained by Russia.

This situation is one stage further than the double treason in Syria where the opposition has been betrayed first by the regime and then by the imperialists, and these who point out that foreign meddling in opposition affairs is treason and going to have serious consequences can reference the Caucasus as the textbook example of future expectations for other cases that are in an earlier stage. Such interference, even if it is successful in terms of regime change, by its very nature is treason. The only worse thing would be if it did not originate from a foreign regime but the local one or its allies. But even then a foreign regime learning of this could only choose between becoming complicit or openly betraying that regime. Any attempt of state interference with opposition is totally wrong and can never make good for itself, and as in the case of the Caucasus the damage might endure even after the source of the manipulation was removed. The original failure lies of course in the lack of prevention of the establishment of such a secret state construct. Once it does exist, destruction is not a matter of if but of what – in the best case it is only the totalitarian state which is facing destruction. But the track record is disproportionate destruction to everyone else before it comes to that.

If there was a sort of Stalin of Africa who had removed the North Americans from Libya, and would then punish its population for the collaboration by means of the same internal displacement typical of the empire that had taken it over, and two generations later there still was ongoing conflict between that region and some form of central power, then there would be a current equivalent. In that sense the Caucasus was the Libya of the Nazis, although if a landmine is discovered today in Libya it could be from either invasion. But the comparison finds its limits in the fact that Africa is burdened with the sick colonialism of failing European states and/or confederate entities which thereby squander their right to exist, while Moscow, even though having relapsed behind the Revolution, remains a counterweight against a fourth treason to be faced by the Caucasus. The latter might be the case if Russia was weakened by other empires. So today the Caucasus is in the situation that it is so lucky only to face Russia, which is a brutal enemy, but not as much of a sick and depraved one as the European or American regimes.

From that perspective the so-called „blue insurrection“ in Ukraine can be understood as another example how such treason works and fails. The blatant attempt to switch from one sphere of influence into the other by trying to contain the need to remove the totalitarian mechanisms of control, which now has obviously failed in the sense of achieving Brussels objective, did not only do so due to the toxic asset in the legacy, which in that case would only be transformed into a Russian investment in Europe, but also because what Brussels has to offer is not really attractive from the insurrectionary perspective: If the white spot on the Ukrainian map that once was the Chernobyl area is the window through which its issues can be understood, then a centralised electricity grid in which Ukraine would depend on its Western neighbours at an even worse extent than Europe depends on Russian fossil gas cannot be attractive the way it seems meant to appear so.

The treason of Kiev was blown up in Volgograd. Everyone in Ukraine can now see that the choice between Europe and Russia is between carrot and stick – it does not matter to make a selection there but to overthrow the entire constellation. And though in the Caucasian perspective Russia appears to be the main enemy, and Europe is not an option, there is an unseen deeper choice behind that. Outside of the Russian influence the choice offered by the imperialists is between golden stick and contaminated carrot, and the Caucasian struggle still has to realise its role in the third choice, which is about which of these two sets it is going to favour short of World Revolution. The disambiguation it is facing is between the goal of systematically weakening Russia as it was weakened before Lenin came in, only to see it devoured by external imperialism such as was Libya on a much smaller scale, and deliberately hitting it for any collaboration with or appeasement of these empires in order to make it keep up its own affairs against them instead of trying to lean on the Caucasus.

It could be argued that the Volgograd double attack, not only in its effects but also in its intention, already was an instance of such tactics. Though the release of political prisoners self-evidently is a good thing, in the case of Putin it was only meant to exploit – he explicitly mentioned this at the start – the suffering of their mothers, in order to shame other empires which display less mercy towards these they persecute into participation in the Sochi sports event. So the internal interest to prevent it entirely and the external interest to avoid other empires making any gains from Russia successfully came together. It is situations like this where progress can be made on either goal as it cannot in one-dimensional struggles. How it comes that under certain circumstances change from the zero sum game scenario into a mutual amplification of benefit can be observed is explicable from the mathematics of the so-called nuclear threshold described in earlier essays.

Not only does the presence of toxic assets have a very practical effect on any territorial conflict, like the swamps where entire armies drowned in WWI just because it remained their only way to go, but it also changes the underlying calculations. While the Russian stick in Ukraine is molten down like a fuel rod in a reactor ruin, the European carrot offered there has already accumulated the toxins thereof. If the Ukrainians bite it, as the paid leader of their insurrection seems to be willing to do, they will depend on Europe´s relationship with the reactor maker, and on ephemeral whims of its institutions to trade away bedrock positions on such issues in package of larger deals. Ukraine would be in the role of a person that clicks yes on a software installation disclaimer because it is too bulky to read. If this was to result in an increased toxicity of the area then it would begin to concern the interests of neighbours in preventable ways. In the case an affiliation with Europe did multiply the radioactive risk, the Caucasus might find itself beyond the threshold without even having noticed. And if it wants to handle that as its own affair, rather than be represented in it by Russia, the people there cannot avoid to develop a political stance on the heirs of their first traitors while preserving the strength of their positions towards the later ones.

The consequences of the first European unification under the Nazis for the Caucasus have been the entry point to this analysis. The second wave of European unification is of the same nature – the colonialism which in pushing to the outside fails to reach its desired dimension is pushing to the inside instead, and after it devoured its own creators, attempting to expand in even worse ways. Of course the failed original colonialism can also be found, in form of armies dispatched into Africa, proving that there is no significant difference between the two. In fact the so-called „European Union“ is neither European nor an union, but a conglomerate of failed states pooling their currencies to delay collapse with a military-industrial complex standing on its head rather than on its feet. While in North America or Russia the military has an industry, in Europe the industry does have a military, which it keeps in larvae stadium in order to parasite on their failed militarist business model without having to pay the same blood toll.

Without the imperialist war pursued by the biggest death merchants, the third largest weapons exporter cannot sustain itself, and they know it and exploit it, worst against these who do not know. As a diplomatic option, to those for whom its institutions are one, Europe represents the speculation that a collapse of a major military-industrial complex respectively currency could be a limited event from which replacement candidates might reap benefits rather than a domino effect running through the entire totalitarian world market as most political gestures do these days. Not only is this a speculation becoming ever more unlikely, as the accumulated imperialist overstretch of it is much more likely to release either huge shocks or none rather than small ones, it also means that the two currency bubbles within the entity, Frankfurt and London, the big and the little economic waste dumps, are more likely to turn out to be groundless constructs at once than one after another. So if the so-called stability of the European currencies takes ever higher speculations aiming to prolong the fraud, at some point another betrayal of the Caucasus on the model of the first could become attractive to pay for.

But does the rebellion in the Caucasus pursue a sharp anti-European and anti-American stance beyond the horizon of the Russia conflict? The incentives European regimes might use to lure into the above mentioned scenario do at some extent also depend on the successes or lack thereof of the carrot-stick-approach in collaboration with others elsewhere. Persia appears to have put a hand on the European carrot, such as Syria has put one on the American stick. It is never possible to announce for certain how thin the ice on the currency already is before it is going to swallow everything that puts weight on it, but taking place in an environment that is in closer resemblance to the European one than any other conflict in its geographical proximity, the proven non-includability of the Caucasus into the surrounding empires could be a matter of interest to the few and far between who push against the democratic fascism of the European regimes. Hence the aim to prevent the Caucasus from becoming an imperialist propaganda platform, by weakening all empires not just the hosting one, has a meaning beyond regional issues.

If Russia were to use the energy it wastes on attempting to colonise the Caucasus in pushing against so many instances of American military occupation in its proximity it cannot be interested in, then it would already display the appropriate response against the diplomatic waste they have dumped on it. But Putin and his likewise moronic advisers seem to be fixated on an expectation that he could feed off repeating the mistakes of the Americans. The blowback might be from the Caucasus but not only to its own benefit. It might also be for that of people in Russia and Europe who want the imperialist regimes in these territories to end, but can do little more than maintain conditions that allow any collapse occurring for any reason to take down all other segments of the world´s military-industrial complex as well. The intention of this article is to provide the best overview over the entire international constellation, so when a fire finally comes to be its last one all its branches are being shut down permanently without any hesitation.

It is not so much that this should matter in the Caucasus for the purpose to create the opportunity for Europe to rid itself from the same kind of treason its regimes also have committed externally, but that a clean cut to remove the entire military-industrial complex without leaving any centralised conglomerates out of which it could regenerate also is in the interest of Africa, which cannot stand the abuse as an imperialist chessboard any longer, and only get out of the actually not so great game alive if all the imperialist players fall at once rather than unloading their rivalling death struggles on it. When colonialist aggression was challenged with an attack on a corporate gas exploitation site in Algeria a year ago, it turned out to be too much of a conservative approach, failing to anticipate the independence it was aimed at – instead of taking the facility and waiting for someone to make demands against the corporation they should have focused on the target-rich timetable of parallel events.

It is the risk of every militant resistance that it might degenerate to the level where it comes to display all the patterns of an approach of treason by a foreign regime, and therefore has to be left alone to see whether it can actually develop into something independent or only parasite on it. If it is in fact independent but does not realise the necessity of such safety filters then it might be overrun before it realises why, as in this case. That is hopefully not to be expected in the Caucasus, where the resistance is hardened by continuous struggle. Independence is too vulnerable to risk it for offers of operational hierarchy only resulting in increased vulnerability towards external speculation. But at the same time the horizon of struggle must not limit itself to the the closest enemy. Whatever kind of action is going to come to rip apart the speculative illusion Russia is attempting to project on the Caucasus, success is going to depend on the tactics of the proverbial tailor who strikes many flies with one hit: Only if the political shocks do not just rattle Moscow, but Washington and Brussels as well they can contribute to finally sink the economic shipwreck of the military-industrial complex rather than to mere rotations of staff prolonging its misery.

If the Russia-federation and Unitedstates respectively their militaries resemble a small and a big mosquito plague, then Brussels though only a small country is like the stinky rainwater barrel that needs to be emptied in time, as anyone lifting the lid only a tiny bit can easily observe. The best action against Russia as an empire is the one which teaches the Kremlin to shift its efforts to where they actually benefit itself – and others – against external imperialist domination. When seen from the mountaintops of the Caucasus, the categorical imperative of Antifascism, if not its karma, points at the necessity to prevent and forever exclude any such treason by or further existence of secret armies as these maintained by the Nazis before they were forgotten by this world, because the consequences never are desirable.