Quote from Timothy Fitzpatrick on November 24, 2022, 12:20

Founding congress of OPOD "EURASIA"

04/21/2001
transcript

Revsky Vladislav Evgenievich:Political movement "Eurasia". It promises to be a: Eurasian, for the Eurasian idea is an integral part of Russian history. This explains all its geographical, cultural, civilizational and economic features; b: centrist, that is, capable of consolidating around itself congenial socio-political structures based on a common Eurasian idea; Putin. In one of his last articles, Vladimir Vladimirovich called Russia a Eurasian country that opens up new Eastern prospects, so the task of our movement is to make it possible to put this thesis into practice. The idea of ​​​​creating such a movement has long been in the minds of the fatherland .

The founding congress was attended by 49 delegates representing 48 regions of the country, that is, subjects of the Russian Federation. Registration continues, so we will receive more accurate information in the report of the credentials committee. Thus, there is a quorum for the opening of the congress. There is a proposal to declare the founding congress of the All-Russian Political Public Movement "Eurasia" open. Who is for this proposal - please vote. Who is against? Who abstained? Accepted.

Dear participants and delegates of the congress! Allow us to declare our congress open. (Applause. The Russian anthem sounds.) Please, sit down.

We continue our work. Dear participants of our forum! We need to elect the working bodies of the congress. The proposals of the organizing committee have been handed out to you and, I will not repeat on the secretariat, credentials committee, editorial and counting committees, but with your permission I will announce the updated composition of the committee.

1. Father Vsevolod , deputy. Chairman of the Department for External Church Relations of the Russian Orthodox Church.

2. Sheikh Ul-Islam Tolgat Tajutdin , Chief Mufti of the Central Spiritual Administration of Muslims.

3. Chairman of the Coordinating Council of the Spiritual Administrations of the Muslims of the North Caucasus Mufti of Ingushetia Sheikh Magomet Aldobagachiev .

4. Representative of the Buddhist traditional sankhiya of Russia Sanjay Lama .

5. Aleksandr Ivanovich Varaksin , deputy of the city duma of Yekaterinburg, chairman of the Sverdlovsk regional branch of the All-Russian political public movement "Eurasia".

6. Yuri Ivanovich Bokan , Doctor of Philosophical Sciences.

7. Grankin Stanislav Mikhailovich , Vice-President of the Regional Public Foundation for the Promotion of Peace and Cooperation in the Caucasus "Unity".

8. Alexander Dugin , Head of the Geopolitical Expertise Section of the Expert Advisory Council on National Security Issues under the Chairman of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly and the Russian Federation, President of the Center for Geopolitical Expertise International Non-Commercial Foundation.

9. Posokhov Sergei Alekseevich , Assistant to the President of the Republic of Belarus.

10. Ezerov Andrei Viktorovich , secretary of Metropolitan Alimpiy.

11. Zhidilyaev Vyacheslav Alekseevich , Chairman of the "Democratic Party of Russia".

12. Klachkov Pavel Vladimirovich , head of the Eurasian Center for Initiatives, assistant to a deputy of the State Duma of the Russian Federation.

13. Klokotov Nikolai Pavlovich , teacher of the Academy of the General Staff, lieutenant general.

14. Osipov Yuri Mikhailovich , professor, academician of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences.

15. Yuriev Mikhail Zinovievich , Vice Speaker of the State Duma 1995-2000

16. Pashchenko Vitaly Yakovlevich , Chairman of the socio-political center of Moscow State University.

17. Executive Secretary of the Department of Religious Education Shlyonov Valery Lvovich .

18. Prokofiev Yury Anatolyevich , director of TV-inform, laureate of the State Prize of the Russian Federation.

19. Revsky Vladislav Evgenievich , chairman of the board of the regional public organization of veterans of special services and law enforcement agencies of the club "Honor and Dignity", a member of the Writers' Union of Russia.

20. Suslov Petr Evgenievich , President of the Regional Public Foundation for the Promotion of Peace and Cooperation in the Caucasus "Unity".

21. Andrey Valentinovich Tatyanchikov , chairman of the Tatar regional branch of the Eurasia movement.

22. Tokaev Enver Saidovich , head of the laboratory of the Moscow State University of Applied Technology, Doctor of Technical Sciences, professor, academician, laureate of the State Prize of the USSR, laureate of the State Prize of the Russian Federation.

23. Farid-Salman Khaydarov , Mufti of the Regional Spiritual Administration of Muslims of Tatarstan, Assistant to the Supreme Mufti of Russia for Information Interaction.

24. Alexander Kirillovich Fefilov , Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences, Candidate of Technical Sciences.

If there are no changes and additions, I put it to the vote. Who is in favor, please vote. Who is against, who abstained? Accepted. I ask the members of the elected presidium to take their places on the presidium, and I ask the members of the credentials committee to gather in the foyer where the registration for work took place.

We also need to approve the agenda of the congress, while they are seated

our delegates and guests of the founding congress. The following issues were put on the agenda of the congress (they are in the working materials, but I will repeat):

1. Creation of the all-Russian political public movement "Eurasia" and its main ideological aspects. Speaker Candidate of Philosophical Sciences Alexander G. Dugin.

2. Adoption of the charter of the movement "Eurasia".

3. The election of the political council, the leader of the movement, he is also the chairman of the political council according to the charter, and his deputy.

4. Elections of the control and revision commission.

5. Organizational issues.

6. Adoption of a resolution following the results of the founding congress.

Whoever is in favor of approving the agenda of the congress, I ask you to vote. Who abstained? Unanimously. For the normal work of our congress, we also need the rules of the congress. It is in the working papers. The main report is up to 25 minutes, speeches are up to 5 minutes, voting on all issues is open, and we take a break every 1.5 hours of work. Who is for this regulation of work, please vote. Who is against? Who abstained? Accepted. We are starting to implement the approved agenda. The floor on the first question of the creation of the all-Russian political social movement "Eurasia" and its main worldview aspects is given to the candidate of philosophical sciences Alexander Gelievich Dugin .

While the speaker is leaving, I have a suggestion: to submit questions to the speaker in the presidium in writing. No objections? Is there a need to vote? Not? Accepted. Speaker's word.

Dear colleagues! Dear friends! Very respected people have gathered here today. The organizing committee of the "Eurasia" movement could not, due to certain objective reasons, talk personally with each of the participants and offer personal entry into our socio-political movement, the goals and meaning of which I will now outline. But, nevertheless, I ask you and offer to those who share our ideas, those who agree with our goals, in addition to those people who have already agreed, from the many respected and famous personalities that are in this room, our doors open, and we will be very glad to the presence and participation in our movement of each of you. Once again, I apologize that, due to organizational problems, we were not able to properly address everyone. Thank you for being here.

I will lay out the basic principles of what this movement is and what we are striving for. The first section of my report is called "Eurasianism as a Worldview". What is "Eurasian Philosophy"? Eurasian philosophy is a philosophy that expresses the constants of Russian history. There were different periods in our national history, often opposite each other in ideological orientation, in terms of the level of statehood, in the place that our people, our state occupied in the context of other peoples and states, but nevertheless, all the way from Kievan Rus to today's democratic Russia, going through the difficult times of decline and ups, incredible ups, when the power of our state, our people extended to almost half of the world, we, nevertheless, retained certain constant values, otherwise there would be no continuity, there would be no concept of "Russian state", otherwise there would be no unity of some cultural general type. So, the philosophy of Eurasianism covers this vector in the most general way, constantly unchanged, developing, but preserving the inner essence. The main principle of Eurasian philosophy is flourishing complexity. Never in Russian history, in the history of our statehood, have we known a mono-ethnic state, a state that would be based solely on the dominance of a homogeneous ethnos. From the very beginning of the emergence of Slavic statehood, we see that various tribes are united, mostly Slavic, but also Fino-Ugric. Later, the heyday of Rus' came at the moment when the most powerful Genghis Khan joined this complex and in itself ethno-cultural ensemble of Rus', Tatar impulse. This is the basis of the philosophy of Eurasianism, that Russians are not, say, an ethnic and racial community that has a kind of, how to say, monopoly on statehood. We also exist thanks to the alliance, thanks to the infusion of a powerful Turkic factor into our common state historical construction. And Eurasian philosophers were the first to note this, evaluating the Turkic factor extremely positively.

Eurasianism today in our world exists in a complex international situation and, nevertheless, the exact analogue of multipolarity, the principle of which is written in the national security doctrine of the Russian Federation, is the Eurasian principle of flourishing complexity. It was the diversity of poles, the diversity of constituent elements, each of which did not lose its uniqueness, that constituted the meaning of the Eurasian Russian state. And in exactly the same way, this principle, respectful of a multipolar, diverse, multicolored world, is defended by today's Russia in the international situation. In this sense, we can say that the concept of our national security already embodies the fundamental principle of Eurasianism.

The ideology of Eurasianism has a long history. It's a fortuitous worldview. For the first time, its foundations were formulated by the great Russian thinkers Prince Nikolai Trubetskoy, Pyotr Savitsky, Nikolai Alekseev, the son of our greatest scientist Georgy Vernadsky, Ilyin, Suvchinsky, Yakov Brombeg, Efros, Korsavin and other best people of Russia. They developed the foundations of the Eurasian worldview. Until the end, of course, the ideology of Eurasianism at that time - in the 10s, 20s, 30s - was not requested. This is understandable, since Marxism has won in Russia. But what is the assessment of the Soviet period itself? Among the Eurasians, it differed sharply from both the supporters of Marxism and its harsh opponents. Historical Eurasians viewed the Soviet Union as some kind of extreme, heretical, if you like, variety of Eurasianism, as extreme leftist Eurasianism, filled with numerous contradictory elements, which, by and large, from the point of view of the Eurasians, held back the full-fledged evolution of the Soviet state, the Russian state in the twentieth century. If we consider Eurasianism as a language, then the Eurasianists considered the Soviet period a dialect of this language, one of the varieties of this language, a contradictory variety, and, therefore, doomed, from their point of view, sooner or later, to collapse, to collapse. Alas, this happened, but not when the Eurasianists thought, in the 30s and 40s, since the mobilization of our people and our patriotic national instinct during the Second World War largely prolonged the existence of the Soviet period, mobilizing and opening the way for national patriotic elements, but still, sooner or later, this happened and happened in strict accordance with the predictions, with the prophecies of the Eurasians. At the same time, the Eurasians did not say definitively "no" to the Soviet idea, they did not say definitively "no" to the Soviet state.

They also saw positive, creative aspects in it, they saw the conformity with the implementation of Russia's national interests and an ideocratic system, incorrect, but ideocratic. It was half good because it was an ideocracy, half bad because it was Marxist. But Eurasianism has always maintained that Russia has its own path. This path does not coincide with the main path of Western civilization. This is one of the most important and most important theses of the Eurasian worldview. Russia and the West are different civilizations, different civilizational models, different value systems. Russia and the West have completely different paths. This was not invented yesterday or today, it is not a myth of the Cold War, bilateral, of the 20th century; we see the origins of the disengagement in Christian civilization already practically in the 10th century, and in 1054, when Latinism fell away from the Orthodox Church, it has already acquired an almost theological justification through the great schism. Accordingly, the contradictions between East and West have been established for a very, very long time. The entire world history of the last millennium showed the opposite of both the Orthodox Eurasian Eastern world and Western civilization. This opposition did not disappear anywhere, the Eurasians believed, and cannot disappear anywhere, since even the modern, partly secular, secular forms of our social regimes - Russian, Eastern, wider and Western, stem from different roots. These different roots, even at the level of sicularization of mortification, give completely different forms. In this sense, the Eurasianists came close to the formula of the basic law of geopolitics, which states that between Eurasia and Atlantism, between the Eurasian meta-civilization, the core of which is our Rus', and the Western Atlantic community lies an irremovable civilizational contradiction that cannot end in any positive synthesis or alliance. Either we or they. In this regard, the Eurasian philosophy and its current continuation was absolutely determined and strict. There can be no fusion with the Western world, let's say, fruitful for our civilization, for our state, for the Russian and other peoples inhabiting Russia. As a matter of fact, we are faced with this even today, when the West, from such a benevolent supplier of humanitarian aid, turned to us with its rather evil face, ignoring our interests in Eastern Europe, pursuing a completely own policy in the Caucasus that does not take into account our interests, practically carrying out those activities, which otherwise than cold aggression against the modern, democratic, I emphasize, you can’t name Russia. And in this regard, the Eurasianists turned out to be absolutely right: no change in our political system, no adaptation of our ideology to the universal one, although this is not a universal ideology, it is only Western ideology, and more specifically, American ideology, will not save us, Russians, representatives of the Russian state. , the Russian state from pressure from the West. And we see complete confirmation of this correctness of the Eurasians in the book representatives of the Russian state, the Russian state from pressure from the West. And we see complete confirmation of this correctness of the Eurasians in the book representatives of the Russian state, the Russian state from pressure from the West. And we see complete confirmation of this correctness of the Eurasians in the bookZbigniew Brzezinski“The Grand Chessboard”, where he makes it clear that a good Russia for an American is a non-existent Russia. This is dismembered Russia, this is oppressed Russia, divided into several sectors mastered by neighboring states. In fact, the victory in the Cold War of the United States of America logically means that Russia is what is taken, how to say, indemnity, lands and territories received, as it were, by the right of the winner, and in this sense, no illusions should be built here. We know the West throughout its history. Behind his humanistic and civilizational rhetoric was always rigidity, colonization, his own interests, conquest and control over other peoples. All these aspects, and also the crisis of our national idea at the moment makes Eurasianism very important strategic, philosophical and, I would say that it is in many ways a socio-political tool and element of our domestic and foreign policy. But we were talking now about the origins of Eurasian philosophy.

I want to emphasize that interest in Eurasianism awoke with renewed vigor in the 1980s. It was associated with the growing popularity of the works of Lev Nikolaevich Gumilyov , who was called the last Eurasian of the old galaxy. But in parallel with the interest in archival Eurasianism, in the founding fathers of Eurasianism, a new wave of creativity in this direction is emerging, and I am very glad that one of the founders of this neo-Eurasian line in science, respected Professor Panarin, is present in this hall today. With people like Panarin, our group, people from various institutions, from Moscow State University, from other higher educational institutions in Russia, began to forge the ideology and philosophy of neo-Eurasianism, a new chord, a new appeal to this philosophy filled with a lot of creative intuition.

Neo-Eurasianism arose in the mid-1980s. At that moment, it turned out that the prophecies and predictions of the old Eurasian school were completely coming true. The Soviet ideology could not cope with the challenge of the times. Being one or another bond of our socio-political space, Marxism, however, could not at all give adequate answers to the challenges of the time. Due to the fact that, for the sake of orthodoxy, such important aspects for human life as spirituality, as faith, as interest and respect for the national factor, were brought, we faced a colossal tragedy of our people, with the collapse of the great Eurasian state, and the first Eurasians were still in in the mid-80s, they hoped that this could have been avoided, and even then the Eurasian idea suggested a way out, how not to give up our positions in the world, not following the lead of the West, to preserve our power, to save our state and get away from those limiting, negative, hyper-ideologized, actually sectarian aspects of Marxist philosophy that held back our development and did not allow our state to adequately exist in the modern world. But, alas! In fact, unfortunately, at that moment these ideas were not requested. The opposite direction won.

In neo-Eurasianism, a huge, significant contribution, a great contribution was also made by the school that I represent, the school of Russian geopolitics, which coincides with Eurasianism in its methodology, in its main value and methodological guidelines. Eurasianism was seriously enriched by traditionalist philosophy, the history of religion, this level among the founding fathers of Eurasianism was developed quite fragmentarily, at the present stage, neo-Eurasian philosophy is a harmonious historical and religious apparatus that allows you to perfectly comprehend and realize the subtlest changes in the religious life of various communities, various states and peoples. This historical and religious component was actively developed and, as it were, reshaped in neo-Eurasianism. We gave the neo-Eurosian idea a powerful geopolitical apparatus, in particular, I am the author of the textbook "Fundamentals of Geopolitics", which is largely accepted as a teaching aid in many educational institutions, where, if you like, a scientific geopolitical interpretation of Eurasianism is given. And yet, the founding fathers of Eurasianism were largely driven by emotions, good wishes, and some intuitions; at the level of geopolitics, all this acquires a scientific character and the opposition to which, the founding fathers of Eurasianism said, also acquires the character of a certain strategic imperative. This is the law from which we are not free. The scientific presentation of Eurasian geopolitics has changed the very status of the Eurasian worldview, now it is not just a philosophical idea, it is also a tool for strategic planning, an economic approach to various issues, since the Eurasian index began to acquire a scientific and methodological character. which is largely accepted as a textbook in many educational institutions, where, if you like, a scientific geopolitical interpretation of Eurasianism is given. And yet, the founding fathers of Eurasianism were largely driven by emotions, good wishes, and some intuitions; at the level of geopolitics, all this acquires a scientific character and the opposition to which, the founding fathers of Eurasianism said, also acquires the character of a certain strategic imperative. This is the law from which we are not free. The scientific presentation of Eurasian geopolitics has changed the very status of the Eurasian worldview, now it is not just a philosophical idea, it is also a tool for strategic planning, an economic approach to various issues, since the Eurasian index began to acquire a scientific and methodological character. which is largely accepted as a textbook in many educational institutions, where, if you like, a scientific geopolitical interpretation of Eurasianism is given. And yet, the founding fathers of Eurasianism were largely driven by emotions, good wishes, and some intuitions; at the level of geopolitics, all this acquires a scientific character and the opposition to which, the founding fathers of Eurasianism said, also acquires the character of a certain strategic imperative. This is the law from which we are not free. The scientific presentation of Eurasian geopolitics has changed the very status of the Eurasian worldview, now it is not just a philosophical idea, it is also a tool for strategic planning, an economic approach to various issues, since the Eurasian index began to acquire a scientific and methodological character. scientific geopolitical interpretation of Eurasianism. And yet, the founding fathers of Eurasianism were largely driven by emotions, good wishes, and some intuitions; at the level of geopolitics, all this acquires a scientific character and the opposition to which, the founding fathers of Eurasianism said, also acquires the character of a certain strategic imperative. This is the law from which we are not free. The scientific presentation of Eurasian geopolitics has changed the very status of the Eurasian worldview, now it is not just a philosophical idea, it is also a tool for strategic planning, an economic approach to various issues, since the Eurasian index began to acquire a scientific and methodological character. scientific geopolitical interpretation of Eurasianism. And yet, the founding fathers of Eurasianism were largely driven by emotions, good wishes, and some intuitions; at the level of geopolitics, all this acquires a scientific character and the opposition to which, the founding fathers of Eurasianism said, also acquires the character of a certain strategic imperative. This is the law from which we are not free. The scientific presentation of Eurasian geopolitics has changed the very status of the Eurasian worldview, now it is not just a philosophical idea, it is also a tool for strategic planning, an economic approach to various issues, since the Eurasian index began to acquire a scientific and methodological character. at the level of geopolitics, all this acquires a scientific character and the opposition to which, the founding fathers of Eurasianism said, also acquires the character of a certain strategic imperative. This is the law from which we are not free. The scientific presentation of Eurasian geopolitics has changed the very status of the Eurasian worldview, now it is not just a philosophical idea, it is also a tool for strategic planning, an economic approach to various issues, since the Eurasian index began to acquire a scientific and methodological character. at the level of geopolitics, all this acquires a scientific character and the opposition to which, the founding fathers of Eurasianism said, also acquires the character of a certain strategic imperative. This is the law from which we are not free. The scientific presentation of Eurasian geopolitics has changed the very status of the Eurasian worldview, now it is not just a philosophical idea, it is also a tool for strategic planning, an economic approach to various issues, since the Eurasian index began to acquire a scientific and methodological character.

In principle, almost all areas of our domestic and foreign policy activities can be indexed to one degree or another in terms of dividing the non-Eurasian and Atlantic nature of a large-scale project action. Accordingly, economic models have been developed. Neo-Eurasianism turned to the so-called heterodox economic tradition, which represented a third path between classical liberalism and Marxism. This third way can be called unorthodox liberalism, or unorthodox socialism, almost all the same, since this school of the third way in economics is considered to include the most diverse, multidimensional models for solving an economic problem. When we first turn to the founding fathers of this heterodox school, to Friedrich List, to Sismandia, even to Kiints, and apply the theoretical recipes of these economists to the Russian situation, we instantly get just a perfect match. It is tragic that this third path in economics did not replace Marxism. And we have moved from one orthodoxy that is disastrous for Russia to another orthodoxy, no less disastrous, instead of turning to this third path of economics, which required the subordination of purely economic reforms to state, national and geopolitical interests. To the same extent, this happened in parallel with the fact that during perestroika and the first stage of reforms, the Eurasian ideas of philosophy and politics were not demanded. And we have moved from one orthodoxy that is disastrous for Russia to another orthodoxy, no less disastrous, instead of turning to this third path of economics, which required the subordination of purely economic reforms to state, national and geopolitical interests. To the same extent, this happened in parallel with the fact that during perestroika and the first stage of reforms, the Eurasian ideas of philosophy and politics were not demanded. And we have moved from one orthodoxy that is disastrous for Russia to another orthodoxy, no less disastrous, instead of turning to this third path of economics, which required the subordination of purely economic reforms to state, national and geopolitical interests. To the same extent, this happened in parallel with the fact that during perestroika and the first stage of reforms, the Eurasian ideas of philosophy and politics were not demanded.

Now a few words about the political fate of Eurasianism in this last decade. This is a very important point, because it explains to a large extent the evolution of our political position, social political position, and explains the action, the action that is taking place today in this hall. So, unfortunately, I emphasize once again that since the end of the 80s, with the collapse of the Soviet system, Atlanticist, pro-American values ​​have prevailed in our society. If Marxism was a dialect of Eurasianism, then Atlanticism is the complete antithesis of Eurasianism. And since our state, in its constants and depth, is based precisely on Eurasian values, then, of course, as it was obvious to us from the very beginning, these liberal-democratic reforms, this one-sided extreme, extremist Westernism, could not lead to anything good. In this regard, it was precisely by following our philosophy, our view, our system of values ​​that we were forced to find ourselves in political opposition. The opposition is not just a state one. Eurasians have always and traditionally supported the state principle, sought to strengthen national security, the strategic power of the state, were apologists and champions of social, national and religious harmony. But the transitional period that has existed in recent decades was built both in foreign policy and in domestic policy in such a way as not to establish state institutions, not to make our state, our people stronger, more prosperous, richer, more free, but almost the other way around. Everything that was done in the Atlanticist style was done consciously, or by someone unconsciously, but against Russia, against all the peoples inhabiting the Russian Federation. The state was destroyed, an unfinished and inconsistent, stupid, fragmentary economic reform was carried out, and thanks to this, we almost rolled into the abyss.

At this moment, the Eurasian ideas, representatives of the Eurasian worldview identified with that patriotic flank in our society, which warned in many voices about the disastrous nature of this course. Moreover, I emphasize that Eurasianism itself was not and is neither right nor left, neither liberal nor socialist. If Eurasians see the elements of protecting the statehood of Eurasian values ​​in the right or left, in people of national orientation or economic right, and also in people of socialist orientation, the Eurasians logically, based on their internal worldview, from their basic value orientations, support them. And in this sense, it is not surprising that the dominance of Atlanticism led and was accompanied by the marginalization of Eurasian ideas.

Most of the Eurasian scientific centers, most of the Eurasian publications, publications, conferences, as well as the Eurasian analysis of current political and economic events, of course, could not make their way to the forefront of our political and cultural life during this period. Eurasianism in the period of Atlanticist value, practically ideological occupation of Russia, which, thank God, I will now explain, is ending, and, one might say, has ended, was put, well, as if in the rank of politically incorrect teachings, since the statement about the originality of the Russian path, the idea of Russia

as a special civilization, neither Eastern nor Western, having its own interests in domestic and foreign policy, having the right and duty to determine its own projects on a global, planetary scale - these are the ideas that make up the essence and core of Eurasianism, of course, were considered as something unacceptable in the broad political picture, in the politically correct space, which was organized and modulated exactly according to Atlanticist patterns.

After the publication of my great work “The Great War of the Continents”, where I first proposed in 1991 to introduce this index of division into Eurasians and Atlanists, rigidly, as a methodological model, in journalism, in politics, in economics, in socio-political aspects, the then Minister Foreign Affairs Andrei Kozyrevsaid, “So what? According to Dugin's classification, I am an atlantist. And I'm proud of it." Such statements within, say, a truly Atlanticist power, within the framework of the United States of America, if some government official or just a political figure declared that he was a Eurasian, immediately such a person would simply be interned, since this is a violation of all the norms of strategic America's interests. America is building its own strategic model as a confrontation and blocking of the Eurasian civilizational and strategic space. We have an incredible thing: the Minister of Foreign Affairs declares that, in fact, speaking about his Atlanticism, that the interests of the American state and the Western Atlantic bloc of NATO are more important for him, the Russian people and the Russian statesman rather than the interests of his own people. It, of course, there was a peak and a triumph. Naturally, this is not only Kozyrev, but, there, Borovoy, Novodvorskaya ...

What can I say, most of our domestic media, implicitly, implicitly proceeded precisely from such ideas. We just finished with NTV, NTV held on to these positions to the last, it was the position of Mr. Kiselyov, Mr. Gusinsky that there are only one world interests - these are American, there is only one model of a socio-political structure - this is the structure of the United States of America and their analogues, and there are only one strategic interests - these are the interests of the Western world. Those who oppose them wherever they are are, from the point of view of these people, well, barbarians, there, idiots and so on. And, of course, that we want that in such a situation, with such a colossal, absolutely dramatic, catastrophic distortion, the Eurasian idea could, as it were, calmly pour out onto television screens,

For ten years we have been fighting this state of affairs, we have fought radically, we have fought by any means, but we have been fighting for what? I want to emphasize that we fought for our state, for the revival of Russia, for peace among peoples, for an active, meaningful, and not pretentious, interfaith dialogue. I want to emphasize that Eurasianism pays special attention to the history of religion, pays special attention to the understanding of confessional problems. Among the Eurasians and neo-Eurasians, there are especially serious and deep experts in the main classical traditional religions, while Orthodoxy, first of all, Islam, Judaism, Buddhism. From our point of view, these subtle and often neglected in the economic and socio-political aspects of matter, as the matter of religion, the matter of the spirit, the matter of metaphysics, have a huge, and perhaps decisive for people's lives. And in this regard, the religious factor is not some kind of prejudice that has been preserved since ancient times, it is an active position, and despite the forms of direct destruction, direct aggression against faith and religion, which we have been witnessing for many decades, we have not been able to burn the truth of faith from the hearts Eurasian people. And this is equally important for the Orthodox, for us, for Muslims, for Jews, for Buddhists. Without this religious, spiritual revival, without the establishment of the ideal of Eurasian piety, despite the fact that each of our traditional religions sees a person differently and gives him somewhat different commandments, the essence is the same: people must be pure, whole, pious, set an ideal put the true and spiritual above the material, above the concrete, above the selfish. No one has the right to condemn his brother for his sins, this is the prerogative of God, but nevertheless, to prevent the decay of morals, not to allow society, especially young people, and in principle, all generations, to decompose and dissolve in the God-forsaken world. This is one of the most important imperatives of Eurasianism. And in this regard, there is no fundamental difference between various confessions and religions in the support of a normal state, a normal society.

Unfortunately, we have been placed by historical conditions in the need to oppose the Atlanticist leadership and Atlanticist power. But the situation began to seriously change since the mid-1990s. Our Russian leadership, after a tilt towards Atlanticism, understood, gradually began to understand, let’s say, that this direction is deadly for the country, that despite our steps towards the West, NATO does not stop expanding to the east, does not stop destroying, brutally destroying our Serb brothers, that The West took our benevolent attitude towards it as a sign of our weakness, proving that no humanitarian rhetoric means anything to these people, they understand the law of force. They reckon with the strong, they despise the weak, humiliate and bully. And when faced with this directly, seeing the failure of the Atlanticist reforms, and disastrous, and the suicidality of this course, events began to change. At first, the most outspoken Atlanticists were removed from power, in particular, the same Mr. Kozyrev, whose decision to resign, between us, took place not without the influence of this phrase; at the same time, the slow, painful process of the exit of the Russian government, Russian society, Russian business and the Russian media, the Russian scientific community from this Atlatist impasse began. And in the last years of the reign of Boris Nikolayevich Yeltsin, we saw convulsive, extremely clumsy, I would say, extremely inadequate, but nevertheless attempts to somehow find a different course, slow down the fall into the abyss, offer something different, something more in line with the interests of our state. At first, the most outspoken Atlanticists were removed from power, in particular, the same Mr. Kozyrev, whose decision to resign, between us, took place not without the influence of this phrase; at the same time, the slow, painful process of the exit of the Russian government, Russian society, Russian business and the Russian media, the Russian scientific community from this Atlatist impasse began. And in the last years of the reign of Boris Nikolayevich Yeltsin, we saw convulsive, extremely clumsy, I would say, extremely inadequate, but nevertheless attempts to somehow find a different course, slow down the fall into the abyss, offer something different, something more in line with the interests of our state. At first, the most outspoken Atlanticists were removed from power, in particular, the same Mr. Kozyrev, whose decision to resign, between us, took place not without the influence of this phrase; at the same time, the slow, painful process of the exit of the Russian government, Russian society, Russian business and the Russian media, the Russian scientific community from this Atlatist impasse began. And in the last years of the reign of Boris Nikolayevich Yeltsin, we saw convulsive, extremely clumsy, I would say, extremely inadequate, but nevertheless attempts to somehow find a different course, slow down the fall into the abyss, offer something different, something more in line with the interests of our state. at the same time, the slow, painful process of the exit of the Russian government, Russian society, Russian business and the Russian media, the Russian scientific community from this Atlatist impasse began. And in the last years of the reign of Boris Nikolayevich Yeltsin, we saw convulsive, extremely clumsy, I would say, extremely inadequate, but nevertheless attempts to somehow find a different course, slow down the fall into the abyss, offer something different, something more in line with the interests of our state. at the same time, the slow, painful process of the exit of the Russian government, Russian society, Russian business and the Russian media, the Russian scientific community from this Atlatist impasse began. And in the last years of the reign of Boris Nikolayevich Yeltsin, we saw convulsive, extremely clumsy, I would say, extremely inadequate, but nevertheless attempts to somehow find a different course, slow down the fall into the abyss, offer something different, something more in line with the interests of our state.

But, apparently, ideological and personal aspects did not allow and were an obstacle for the final turn to take place under the previous president. Even in my personal destiny, over the years, just since 1997-98, quite significant changes have been taking place. From a tough patriotic opposition, I moved, I'm moving on to greater and greater cooperation with the authorities. In 1998, I became an adviser to the chairman of the State Duma and covered and reviewed the evolution of our leadership. At that time, I already recognized positive and Eurasian features in this, at the same time I was convinced of the inability of the patriotic opposition, the so-called, despite the colossal support of its course and its slogans by the majority of the population, the inability to realize and implement its plans, the inability to organize, the inability to act constructively , constructively, propose positive projects and implement them in practice. Gradually, alas, this opposition degenerated into empty cries, into opposition to the government and the president at any cost, and instead of creation, in fact, a certain appendage of that structure, a transitional structure, incapacitated, dependent, arose.

But the real step and milestone in the history of the neo-Eurasian worldview in Russia was the arrival and election of President Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin. Here, those tendencies, Eurasian tendencies, which were desperately and without any attention knocking on the door of the Russian authorities, almost, well, just like by magic, received sanction and development. And during the year that President Putin has been in power, we see that the green light has been given to those Eurasian initiatives that have been accumulating all these years, starting with the creation of the Eurasian Economic Community, which was proclaimed last year and the decision on which was signed by the heads of the five countries of the customs union. The process of unification of Russia with Belarus was intensified, which, by the way, was initiated and laid down under Boris Nikolayevich Yeltsin by Dmitry Borisovich Ryurikov, who is a member of the central council of our movement, our close and close associate. Now he holds the post of Plenipotentiary Ambassador of the Russian Federation to the Republic of Uzbekistan. In fact, the Eurasian tendencies were promoted and approved by the President of Kazakhstan, Nursultan Nazarbayev, and also when Putin came to power, this initiative received its support in the Kremlin.

Gradually, it became obvious that the current leadership of the country is unambiguously, let's say, not abruptly, without jerks, as it should be, prudent and responsible politicians, are moving to Eurasian positions. The last point of confirmation of, say, our assessment of the evolution of Russian power in the Eurasian key was the policy statement of Russian President Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin in Brunei at the Congress of the Heads of the Pacific Rim. In his exclusive interview for the presidential website "Strana RU" of the Internet, Vladimir Vladimirovich made a clear, unambiguous statement: "Russia is a Eurasian country." For those people who understand the meaning of what follows, this is not just a geographic or casual statement by the President, it is a program expressed in a single phrase: "Russia is a Eurasian country." And we, specialists and connoisseurs of Eurasianism, we, the developers of the neo-Eurasian project, we perfectly understand what follows from this. In fact, even if the president does not continue, I gave a detailed, detailed commentary on the Internet, which was called: “Russia is a Eurasian country, which means ...” and then 30 signs are listed, what follows from this and what it means , and gradually, step by step, albeit perhaps more slowly than we would like, but these steps are being taken; in fact, we see that the course towards statehood, towards strengthening the sovereignty of Russia, towards stabilizing the vertical of power, towards a harmonious solution of interfaith and interethnic issues, towards the improvement of the Russian economy, towards the transition to an autonomous economic policy regime, when we refuse loans from the International Monetary Fund and now the only thing what binds us is obligations to which self-respecting states, even if these obligations were made unfairly, incorrectly by the previous generation of politicians and economists, heads of economic departments, nevertheless we see that the course has been taken unambiguously. And at that moment we realized the need for a final and full-fledged, total transition to the positions of political centrism. Not centrism because it seems to correspond to the course, but because this course, the course of the current government, the course of the current center in its main parameters corresponds to the system of views that we have suffered and endured. heads of economic departments, in response, however, we see that the course has been taken unambiguously. And at that moment we realized the need for a final and full-fledged, total transition to the position of political centrism. Not centrism because it seems to correspond to the course, but because this course, the course of the current government, the course of the current center in its main parameters corresponds to the system of views that we have suffered and endured. heads of economic departments, in response, however, we see that the course has been taken unambiguously. And at that moment we realized the need for a final and full-fledged, total transition to the positions of political centrism. Not centrism because it seems to correspond to the course, but because this course, the course of the current government, the course of the current center in its main parameters corresponds to the system of views that we have suffered and endured.

When they say that, well, someone supports the president with certain reservations, with such and such reservations, in fact, it is, as it were, clear that these reservations are worth it. We support the president totally, radically, so we define our position as a radical center. If, from the point of view of our analysis, certain moments arise, well, say, not corresponding to a strict Eurasian view, moments, we believe that in this case they should not be criticized, but should be corrected on the example of experience, on the example of real action.

Of course, now the centrist flank, precisely in the party-political aspect, is represented quite diversely: now four pro-presidential factions have united. We are very positive about this process. This is very good, and the more centrist parties there are in the State Duma, the more support the President of the Russian Federation has, the better. But it so happened in our last historical period that these parties were largely designed and created for opportunistic reasons. They represent a kind of permanent political class, ready to support and implement the ideas of almost, if not, any government. A full-fledged, democratic party society has not developed in Russia, and from the point of view of the Eurasian ideology, it cannot develop, since we have a different country, parties, full-fledged parties - reflect the experience of Western humanity and the logic of their history, our parties, as a rule, are the beginnings or some such quasi-party organizations. And in this regard, the opportunistic party center that supports the president and to which we have an extremely positive attitude, nevertheless, causes concern in us, since this same center supported - simply, practically, the same people, or a significant percentage of them - the most incredible and most anti-state, anti-Eurasian tendencies. This shows what, by and large, alas, he can, how to say, achieve, what this is fraught with. which supports the president and to whom we have an extremely positive attitude, nevertheless, causes us concern, since this same center supported - simply, practically, the same people, or a significant percentage of them - the most incredible and most anti-state, anti-Eurasian tendencies. This shows what, by and large, alas, he can, how to say, achieve, what this is fraught with. which supports the president and to whom we have an extremely positive attitude, nevertheless, causes us concern, since this same center supported - simply, practically, the same people, or a significant percentage of them - the most incredible and most anti-state, anti-Eurasian tendencies. This shows what, by and large, alas, he can, how to say, achieve, what this is fraught with.

Therefore, such a center is a center, if you like, a conformist one. Our center and our Eurasian positions, our radical support for the president is precisely centrism by Eurasian conviction. We support the president creatively, we support him as a Eurasian leader, and we strive not only to declare this, but to delegate the colossal developments of the Eurasian philosophy, Eurasian strategy, the Eurasian methodological apparatus, including the current scientific leadership, we are ready to cooperate in the closest way and in any form with him in order to help this fateful phenomenon and event, which are the Eurasian reforms of Vladimir Putin. We do not just say “yes”, but we know what, in fact, should be done in this vein.

And now I come to why, in fact, we are gathered here. As a result of such an analysis, a consistent analysis, we came to the conclusion that a new type of movement is needed, a movement that does not aim to rush into the electoral party election race, does not aim to create another political clan in which another nest of corruption has settled , conjuncture, clan system and so on. We are making a movement that does not yet exist in the Russian Federation, a movement based on a worldview approach. This is a worldview, Eurasian movement, and if we define its goals and objectives, they are as follows: our goal is not to come to power and not fight for power, our goal is to fight for influence on power. These are different forms. The party model assumes a certain blackmail of the authorities, that is, parties can leave the meeting of the State Duma, they can present an ultimatum, they can reject, not adopt a certain law. This is a form of bargaining, or trading. It seems to us that this democratic form, characteristic of Western institutions, in Russian conditions only gives rise to clannishness, corruption, and, by and large, it would be better if the parliament were, as it were, non-partisan and pro-presidential, in general, in fact, without special divisions into parties , to which, thank God, in my opinion, everything is going now, that is, simply as a form of some kind of administrative, how to say, additionally another department of the presidential administration, only rendered in such a legislative form. And in this regard, we believe that truly effective participation in power and influence on power should be measured by other standards.

There are several topics that can be mastered exclusively by Eurasian philosophy, applied to the current socio-political aspects. First of all, these are inter-ethnic, inter-confessional conflicts. When talking about interfaith conflicts, the following moment usually arises: either we are talking about a quiet and peaceful coexistence of people cool to their own faith, and therefore indifferent to the religion of others. Such people are opportunistic, say, inter-confessional pacifists. As a rule, they are also present at various round tables on pacifying interreligious conflicts. Although this in itself may be good, but, alas, it usually does not do much good. They are opposed in the confessional sphere by the so-called fanatics or radicals, who call for tough inter-confessional opposition. This is even more terrible, of course, even worse, because it inflicts an irreparable blow to our people, because it sets off among themselves those forces that should, together, in the name of common piety and faith, each their own, take up arms against modern, dictated by the West, cultural, immoral, pseudo-ethical models. So, Eurasianism offers a different option here.

We propose the union of deep, active, believing people, fundamental believers, if you like, fundamentalists, each in their own environment, each in their own religion, and precisely the union of, say, positively creative, Eurasian-minded fundamentalists, both in Russia and wider, in the CIS countries, in the world. It should be a new model of interfaith dialogue based on understanding the depths of one's own tradition and understanding the depths of the traditions of another nation. In this sense, we kind of unite the poles. We call on people who deeply and vividly experience the uniqueness of their own faith, we call them not to merge, in any way, everyone defends their worldviews and their own tradition, but to deep mutual understanding and strategic alliance of traditions. This Eurasian methodology is capable, as time now shows, be extremely effective in a number of cases. And when representatives of confessions actually see that the Eurasian model in no way infringes on the dignity of any church, no religion, helps to solve specific inter-confessional problems, without extinguishing the fire of faith, but, on the contrary, kindling it, this is certainly , is a colossal tool, including in social and political normalization. The problem is especially acute in the North Caucasus. Now situations are brewing, and rather tense ones, in Tatarstan, in the Islamic regions. From our point of view, for the organic entry of the existence, as it has been for centuries, of the Islamic tradition and the Muslim world with the Russians, in the Russian state, not just as allies, but as full-fledged, full-fledged participants in our common state, our common power, the Eurasian project is the ideal formula here. Certain models of this project are now being worked out by us in a specific policy for the settlement and normalization of the situation in the Caucasus region. In the same way interethnic conflicts are resolved on the Eurasian platform. And there is no opposition between nationalism and internationalism. Even the founding father of Eurasianism, Prince Trubetskoy, spoke of pan-Eurasian nationalism, when the self-affirmation of every people and every nation within Russia is supported by the center, and is not opposed to the affirmation of other peoples. This positive, creative, harmonious, symphonic, if we use such a Church Slavonic word, the Eurasian principle of unification, it is this principle that makes it possible to solve national problems. Those who believe that everything has been decided with regard to national problems in Russia, are deeply mistaken. Analysis shows that colossal sources and centers of conflict are maturing, and not without the influence of our geopolitical opponents, the Atlanticists. Moreover, recently there was open information about the presence of CIA officers in the Chechen opposition, according to our operational data, according to our analysis, this has not only been discovered now, it has been from the very beginning of the Chechen conflict, and if it were not for the actions of agents of influence who do not have neither Chechens, nor Muslims, nor, of course, Russians, if it were not for these extraneous factors, including economic, political, strategic, cultural and simply undercover, this bloody conflict would not have happened. Again, we see a third force everywhere, this Atlanticist factor, which is the source of our main troubles. that colossal sources and centers of conflict are ripening, and not without the influence of our geopolitical opponents, the Atlanticists. Moreover, recently there was open information about the presence of CIA officers in the Chechen opposition, according to our operational data, according to our analysis, this has not only been discovered now, it has been from the very beginning of the Chechen conflict, and if it were not for the actions of agents of influence who do not have neither Chechens, nor Muslims, nor, of course, Russians, if it were not for these extraneous factors, including economic, political, strategic, cultural and simply undercover, this bloody conflict would not have happened. Again, we see a third force everywhere, this Atlanticist factor, which is the source of our main troubles. that colossal sources and centers of conflict are ripening, and not without the influence of our geopolitical opponents, the Atlanticists. Moreover, recently there was open information about the presence of CIA officers in the Chechen opposition, according to our operational data, according to our analysis, this has not only been discovered now, it has been from the very beginning of the Chechen conflict, and if it were not for the actions of agents of influence who do not have neither Chechens, nor Muslims, nor, of course, Russians, if it were not for these extraneous factors, including economic, political, strategic, cultural and simply undercover, this bloody conflict would not have happened. Again, we see a third force everywhere, this Atlanticist factor, which is the source of our main troubles. Moreover, recently there was open information about the presence of CIA officers in the Chechen opposition, according to our operational data, according to our analysis, this has not only been discovered now, it has been from the very beginning of the Chechen conflict, and if it were not for the actions of agents of influence who do not have neither Chechens, nor Muslims, nor, of course, Russians, if it were not for these extraneous factors, including economic, political, strategic, cultural and simply undercover, this bloody conflict would not have happened. Again, we see a third force everywhere, this Atlanticist factor, which is the source of our main troubles. Moreover, recently there was open information about the presence of CIA officers in the Chechen opposition, according to our operational data, according to our analysis, this has not only been discovered now, it has been from the very beginning of the Chechen conflict, and if it were not for the actions of agents of influence who do not have neither Chechens, nor Muslims, nor, of course, Russians, if it were not for these extraneous factors, including economic, political, strategic, cultural and simply undercover, this bloody conflict would not have happened. Again, we see a third force everywhere, this Atlanticist factor, which is the source of our main troubles. it was from the very beginning of the Chechen conflict, and if it weren’t for the actions of agents of influence who have nothing to do with Chechens, Muslims, or, of course, Russians, if it weren’t for these extraneous factors, including economic, political, strategic, cultural and simply undercover, then this bloody conflict would not have happened. Again, we see a third force everywhere, this Atlanticist factor, which is the source of our main troubles. it was from the very beginning of the Chechen conflict, and if it weren’t for the actions of agents of influence who have nothing to do with Chechens, Muslims, or, of course, Russians, if it weren’t for these extraneous factors, including economic, political, strategic, cultural and simply undercover, then this bloody conflict would not have happened. Again, we see a third force everywhere, this Atlanticist factor, which is the source of our main troubles.

So here's what I want to say. Thanks to these conclusions and having agreed on our main positions with a representative of state structures, turning to the support of those people in the regions who supported us and who, as it were, long ago or now recently, joined the pan-Eurasian movement, which in fact has existed almost since the late 80s, now only acquiring registration, it was decided to create such a movement, to hold a founding congress. Delegates from 50 regions came to us, our friends, our like-minded people came to us. It is also gratifying that our movement includes a sufficient number of representatives of business, the financial elite. Responsible and forward-looking people in this field have long understood that short-term profit models, the purely speculative nature of the economy will never provide stability and confident prosperity, as well as genuine business security. In the troubled waters of chaos and economic decay, depression, only the lowest businessmen can fish. Today, many entrepreneurs and bankers are aware of the importance of long-term and medium-term planning, understand the importance and vital need for participation in socio-political processes. Far from all, as it turns out, Russian businessmen and even oligarchs work in a comprador manner, striving at any cost to bring their fortune to the offshore zones. The number of those who are aware of the inseparable connection of their business with the fate of the country, with the strategic course of Russia is constantly growing. This is how the backbone of Eurasian entrepreneurship and the Eurasian financial system is gradually taking shape. Obviously, that there is a place for such people in our ranks. Eurasianism involves long-term planning and invites people involved in large-scale economic projects not only to support our movement, but also to participate in determining the strategic interests of our state in the economic sphere. Here you can not only strengthen business security, but also participate in strategic planning. Particularly pleased now is the participation in the Eurasia movement. Support was expressed by representatives of the resource-extraction industry, transport systems, and the military-industrial complex. The well-being, revival, stability and prosperity of our economy, of course, depend on the success of the Eurasian course of the Russian leadership. involved in large-scale economic projects, not only in supporting our movement, but also in complicity, in determining the strategic interests of our state in the economic sphere. Here you can not only strengthen business security, but also participate in strategic planning. Particularly pleased now is the participation in the Eurasia movement. Support was expressed by representatives of the resource-extraction industry, transport systems, and the military-industrial complex. The well-being, revival, stability and prosperity of our economy, of course, depend on the success of the Eurasian course of the Russian leadership. involved in large-scale economic projects, not only in supporting our movement, but also in complicity, in determining the strategic interests of our state in the economic sphere. Here you can not only strengthen business security, but also participate in strategic planning. Particularly pleased now is the participation in the Eurasia movement. Support was expressed by representatives of the resource-extraction industry, transport systems, and the military-industrial complex. The well-being, revival, stability and prosperity of our economy, of course, depend on the success of the Eurasian course of the Russian leadership. but also participate in strategic planning. Particularly pleased now is the participation in the Eurasia movement. Support was expressed by representatives of the resource-extraction industry, transport systems, and the military-industrial complex. The well-being, revival, stability and prosperity of our economy, of course, depend on the success of the Eurasian course of the Russian leadership. but also participate in strategic planning. Particularly pleased now is the participation in the Eurasia movement. Support was expressed by representatives of the resource-extraction industry, transport systems, and the military-industrial complex. The well-being, revival, stability and prosperity of our economy, of course, depend on the success of the Eurasian course of the Russian leadership.

In conclusion of my report, I would like to say words of gratitude to my associates, who have made considerable efforts to ensure that our founding congress takes place. Most of all, the chairman of our organizing committee of the Eurasia movement, Petr Evgenievich Suslov , president of the Unification Foundation, a sincere patriot of Russia, who proved his loyalty to the state in rather difficult situations, in Afghanistan, Angola, Chechnya, did the most for this. He is an excellent organizer, and without his most active moral and physical participation, most likely I would not have dared to take such a responsible step as the creation of an independent socio-political movement. A huge, invaluable contribution was also made by the participants of the Unity Foundation, for which I sincerely thank them. I am grateful to the administration of the President of the Russian Federation, the Moscow Patriarchate and personally to the MetropolitanKirill , the Central Spiritual Board of Muslims of the Russian Federation, and, of course, respected Talgat-Hazrat Tudzhutdin , the Federation of Jewish Organizations of Russia and personally Chief Rabbi Berl Lazar for all possible help and support provided by all of them in the creation of "Eurasia". I am very pleased that the Plenipotentiary of the Sanjay Lamathe Buddhist community of Russia also came to our founding congress. I am glad that the congress is attended by representatives of so many regions of Russia, Russians and Tatars, Orthodox and Jews, youth and the military, entrepreneurs and people's deputies of various levels, honored workers of science, culture, artists and scientists. Eurasia is multidimensional and multicolored, our movement is also supposed to be very polysyllabic and colorful, if you like. This is our wealth. Eurasia is the cause of all of us, so different, so dissimilar, but united by a higher spirit and faith in our Fatherland, love for it, devotion to it. Everything else depends on us now. And earlier attempts were made to create something decent, animated, truly valuable and alive in Russian socio-political life. And every time, alas, it did not live up to expectations. I consider it a matter of honor for myself and for all of us to violate this pattern at least once on the symbolic threshold of millennia, we must found and nurture something really worthwhile. And the hardships and victories in the revival of great Eurasia, our common homeland, our ideal, from now on, we hope, we will share with you. What can I wish for? On a good and difficult path, friends, and no matter how our difficult life turns, I believe, I firmly believe that the rays of unearthly truth will illuminate our land and bring goodness, justice and light to all warriors in such a long-awaited, so desired victory. Eurasia first of all, the rest later. our ideal, from now on, we hope to share with you. What can I wish for? On a good and difficult path, friends, and no matter how our difficult life turns, I believe, I firmly believe that the rays of unearthly truth will illuminate our land and bring goodness, justice and light to all warriors in such a long-awaited, so desired victory. Eurasia first of all, the rest later. our ideal, from now on, we hope to share with you. What can I wish for? On a good and difficult path, friends, and no matter how our difficult life turns, I believe, I firmly believe that the rays of unearthly truth will illuminate our land and bring goodness, justice and light to all warriors in such a long-awaited, so desired victory. Eurasia first of all, the rest later.

The report is over, so, we agreed, we will send questions to the speaker to the presidium in writing. Answers at the end of the congress.

Dear participants of the congress! Before proceeding to the discussion of our report, there is a proposal to give the floor to the welcoming people. The founding congress of the All-Russian political public movement "Eurasia". The floor is given to Father Vsevolod . Deputy Chairman of the Department for External Church Relations of the Russian Orthodox Church. Prepare Father John's secretary.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for giving me the floor and for inviting me to this congress. Very many of the ideas that were expressed in the report of Alexander Gel'evich and in the documents distributed at this congress are close to the hierarchy of the Russian Orthodox Church. Indeed, today the country is going through a rather painful and dangerous ideological crossroads. After the collapse of the ideology that was imposed on us in the Soviet period, and after the realization by many of its spiritual bankruptcy, the ideology that they tried to establish in the 90s, the resulting vacuum is a real threat to the present and future of the country. Those forces that have not been able to fill this vacuum over the past few decades may today be interested in seeing that this vacuum is preserved and that none of the forces capable of filling it, didn't get that opportunity. It seems that we should be quite clear that the preservation of this vacuum is detrimental, and we need to join forces so that the country finds its own worldview and so that it can build its present and build its future on some solid spiritual, moral, intellectual basis, not breaking with their own past.

We have something to say to the world around us, and I am deeply convinced of this. Our civilization has answers to the challenges of globalization, to the challenges of the so-called post-modern society, we should not despair, we should in no case go on the defensive, allow ourselves to be pushed to the margins of European, Eurasian and world processes, we must remember that I may now say a sharp thing enough and maybe say a bold thing, but this is a thing that we obviously have to realize. We are the majority in the world, people who do not base their life values, their lifestyle, their way of thinking on the values ​​of Western secular liberal humanism, there is a majority in the world and we must behave like the majority, we must try to do everything to be reasonable,

We should, it seems, not be afraid of the challenge of globalization, economic, cultural, informational, it carries both certain dangers and new opportunities for Russia, for a dialogue of interaction between the unity of traditional cultures, primarily Orthodox and Eastern Christian culture, and Islamic culture. We can and must take advantage of the new opportunities that globalization opens up, we must obviously realize that the so-called postmodern society cannot be built on the values ​​of modernity, on the values ​​that today are shared by the avant-garde, so-called part of Western society, we must offer our own values ​​to the globalizing world, we must respond to the challenges of the new economic and political reality, which are noted by many in the world today, and we have these answers,

What was said today about the importance of interreligious dialogue and interaction is very important, but this dialogue can be renewed and the hierarchy of the Russian Orthodox Church is very clearly aware of this. It is no coincidence that it was our church that became the initiator, one of the initiators of the creation of the interreligious council of Russia and the holding of an interreligious peacemaking forum. For our church, this dialogue is not a protocol function, it is not a task for putting another tick in the reports, it is an urgent need, which is dictated by the growth of interethnic and interfaith conflicts, and at the same time by those very important, truly unique opportunities that our religious traditional communities, if we can together influence the processes taking place in the country, in Europe, in Eurasia and in the world. Our dialogue needs to be updated, strengthened and, obviously, more and more it is necessary to build it not on the basis of Western models of interreligious dialogue, that is, ultimately, on the basis of the assertion that the only thing that unites us is the Western humanistic standard, we need to build this dialogue on the basis of our own spiritual traditions , on the basis of a resolute refusal to level or ignore our differences, but on the basis of a common will to interact for the good of society, for the good of people. The Church is ready to interact for the sake of such a good with any public organizations, with any political movements. As you know, the church is open to interaction with every political force that is interested in interacting with the church and which is ready to cooperate with it in certain matters aimed at the benefit of society, people, and country. But once again I would like to make it very clear, to emphasize that here, in my opinion, there have already been several perplexed questions on this subject. The Church does not bless political organizations, it does not delegate clergy to the governing bodies of political organizations, it does not allow the participation of the clergy in organizations of this kind, and I participate here, and other clergy of our church participate here only as observers. The participation of the church through the delegation of clergy in the activities of a political organization is impossible, and it is very clearly stated in the decision of one of the bishops' councils that there can be no blessing on the activities of political organizations, and if it was given by someone earlier, it is considered as if it had not been. And it's very important so that the political figures and representatives of the media present here clearly remember this position of the church, which was officially expressed by our bishops' councils. At the same time, if political support is refused, from singling out one or another political organization from their general ranks, the church is ready for the interaction of each of them, including with the new movement "Eurasia", which today proclaims goals so close to the church, expresses a very actively shared the language of the hierarchy of the idea, and in this regard, I would like to once again emphasize our complete readiness for cooperation in matters useful for Russia, for our people, for each of us. Thank you. from the separation of one or another political organization from their general row, the church is ready for the interaction of each of them, including with the new movement "Eurasia", which today proclaims goals so close to the church, expresses ideas very actively shared by the language of the hierarchy, and in this regard, more I would like to emphasize our complete readiness for cooperation in matters useful for Russia, for our people, for each of us. Thank you. from the separation of one or another political organization from their general row, the church is ready for the interaction of each of them, including with the new movement "Eurasia", which today proclaims goals so close to the church, expresses ideas very actively shared by the language of the hierarchy, and in this regard, more I would like to emphasize our complete readiness for cooperation in matters useful for Russia, for our people, for each of us. Thank you.

The floor is given to the Executive Secretary of the Department of Religious Education and Catachization Shlenov Valery Lvovich . I'm sorry, get ready Tolgatu Tajutdin.

I convey greetings to you from Father Superior John Ekonomtsev , who was unable to attend due to a number of circumstances. Here he sent his greeting, I will first read it out, and then I will say a few words additionally.

“Dear participants and guests of the Congress of the Eurasian Movement! Please accept our heartfelt congratulations on this significant event - the opening of the congress of your movement. The Eurasian movement, by its very name, takes on a great historical task: to unite East and West not as a conglomeration of disparate and warring national states, but as the deepest spiritual unity of a power capable of recreating and embodying the centuries-old historical community of cultures and destinies of peoples. Only Russia, by its geopolitical position, connecting two continents, and endowed with the reconciling love granted to it by God, with sympathy and compassion for near and far, can become the basis of the coming Eurasian synthesis, which should determine the fate of mankind in the third millennium. At the foundation of Russian statehood, there has always been the Russian Orthodox Church, with its free principles and unceasing witness to the immutable truth and love of Christ. It is significant that both the Muslim faith and other traditional confessions of the peoples living in the Russian Empire were distinguished by their amazing peacefulness and tolerance towards people of other cultures. We hope that the now resurgent Eurasian movement will be able to become an important factor in the formation of a renewed Russian statehood, inconceivable without its traditional foundations, that it will be able to rally the healthy forces of various peoples who are aware of the inseparability of their fate in the face of danger and the disappearance in the mixing cauldron of globalism that depersonalizes and devastates the souls of people . The light of eternal truth will help overcome darkness, cope with the obsession of time, dictating the ascent further and further down into the abyss of hopelessness. I wish the opening congress of the Eurasian movement to pass in the spirit of peace and harmony. Fruitful work to you, God's help and support to you. Hegumen Ioann Ekonomtsev, Chairman of the Department of Religious Education and Catechization of the Russian Orthodox Church, Rector of the Russian Orthodox University named after St. John the Apostle the Theologian.

I would also like to say just a few words. We need to think a little about something more substantial, perhaps. Once upon a time, I loved to remember, and now even this is significant, because exactly a century ago, the then Chief Prosecutor of the Holy Synod, Konstantin Petrovich Pobedonostsev, when he received people who came to him to organize philosophical religious meetings, and someone began exalting words about Russia to speak, he said: “Russia, but what is Russia, and one can say that Eurasia without God is an icy desert where a dashing person walks.” And over the last century, we have been largely convinced of the justice of this, we have our own foundations, our own foundation, and, by the way, a common foundation in many respects. At one time, more than 25 years ago, when I was working on a book about Amir Timur, which, however, did not see the light of day due to the circumstances of the time, I saw that a person who goes deep enough, cannot but notice, feel, feel the commonality of the spiritual space behind all of us standing. In addition, the current civilization, which claims to be the only and unique one that has deified time, has itself become a prisoner of time, of time as a deified force with its idols of evolution, idols of the market, idols of the relativity of everything in the world, especially that It is convenient not to notice and pass by something. And only addressing precisely what does not come to eternity can all of us, this is our common task, because Islam has always had a striving for eternity, for immutability, for the truth, which one does not come to, because time itself one should put oneself in the appropriate place, not make a god out of him, as Western civilization did, itself more and more mired in this impasse. And it seems that our common task here is to turn somewhere, because we are doomed on these paths, on the paths of Western civilization. We can't go anywhere. We will sink lower and lower, and only if we turn to our own, to our basis, which is both different and one in some way with us, ... (end of tape) ... eternity can finally lead us all out of dead end. No wonder any vacation in worship ends: "And now, and forever, and forever and ever."

Host: Thank you. (Applause). Sheikh -ul Islam Talgat-Tajutdin , the supreme mufti of the central spiritual administration of Muslims, has the floor.

In the name of the Creator, all-merciful and merciful. Dear compatriots, dear presidium, I cordially greet you on behalf of the Muslims of Russia, peace, the goodness of the Almighty and I wish you his help in this great cause. Maybe it seemed surprising to someone that Muslims are represented here, and, moreover, a considerable part of the clergy, and we, perhaps, arrived early, only for this reason in the forefront, another one and a half, two hours, but why did we come here and why did we here with you. Yes, because this is what we see on the walls - “Russia is a Eurasian country”, thank God, our president speaks clearly and clearly about this, but this is so, who can say what is wrong? No other continent on the globe is as connected as Europe and Asia. Even America, North and South, is one isthmus with a little finger. And then, they want a free zone now, a full economic zone of more than thirty states to unite. Africa is also a small isthmus ... And the Almighty bound us, completely and completely. Both Europe and Asia. And the people who live here. They didn't live, they live. It was in America that the Indians used to live. And Tatars, and Bashkirs, and Muslims, and Buddhists lived here even when Russia, and Tatarstan, and Bashkortastan did not exist. And God forbid that both our children and our grandchildren always live. That is why we are here, together with you at this convention. And we consider this movement our movement. Not just an invention of scientists, philosophers, because everything that is written in the program, the vast majority, we heard it from our fathers, from mothers, from grandmothers, from grandfathers. It was passed down to us by our ancestors. We were united by one single homeland. And we tirelessly repeat: “Yes, our homeland, our fatherland is Holy Rus'.” Maybe

Source: http://med.org.ru/article/42