The further a region is from Moscow, the stronger and more justified its residents see the process of separation from Moscow and gaining independence. There is more than one reason for this. Here are just a few of them:
1. Voluntarism and arbitrariness of the federal centre in determining the development plan for the region, or rather the lack of development or development only in what benefits Moscow.
2. Relocation of environmentally polluting industries and other environmentally polluting processes, such as “peaceful nuclear explosions,” to regions remote from the federal centre.
3. The feasibility of developing economic and cultural ties between remote regions and developed neighbouring countries located much closer than the federal centre, which this federal centre prevents in every possible way or, again, reserves the right to decide: what is beneficial for this federal centre, and what is not.
4. Historical resentment: once upon a time the regions lived without Moscow’s orders and coped with it very well
But as we approach Moscow, the picture of sentiment changes. Already in the European part of the Russian Federation, we seem to find ourselves on a road with reverse traffic. In the morning we understand that life is given once and why these extra efforts, then here it is, Moscow, several hundred kilometres away, with its money, entertainment, and opportunities. In the evening we understand that life is given once and we seem to be making our way home, to the historical cradle of our people (not the fact that they are Russian), and we ask ourselves “Why are we worse?” or “How much longer can we dance to the tune of the sniggering Moscow nomenclature?”
Listening to how representatives of individual national and regional liberation movements convince themselves that everything will work out and they will be able to separate from Moscow, I want to say: of course, everything will work out for you, your arguments are ironclad, but there is one thing: Moscow will not want to let go of its influence.
Why, the closer to Moscow, the more uncertain the voices about secession sound? There are reasons for this too:
1. I don’t want to spend extra effort on gaining independence, Moscow is nearby and it will feed you.
2. I don’t want to be separated from my compatriots: we are all Russians.
3. Moscow’s propaganda influences the fact that we must defend Moscow and give it the “best part” – this is the capital! The closer to Moscow the stronger the voice of this propaganda. In essence, Moscow keeps all of its closest satellites on a short leash: just the constant hammering of the idea of the historical unifying role of the militia of 1612 is worth it. In Nizhny Novgorod, there is even a subway train called “Minin”. Meanwhile, it is somehow casually mentioned that once the rivals of Moscow were the following principalities: Tver, Ryazan, Nizhny Novgorod-Suzdal, Gorodets, Galich-Merskoye, Vladimirskoye, Muromskoye, Shuiskoye. But about 500 years ago, something went wrong: starting from a small historical core, which included the modern Moscow, Vladimir, Ivanovo, Kostroma, Yaroslavl and Nizhny Novgorod regions, Muscovy turned into the largest and (by the way, most disgusting) colonial empire.
Now think about how dangerous the revival of the (Great) Russian state will now be, which, purely theoretically, can include: the same historical core – Muscovy, plus Pskov, Smolensk, Belgorod, Voronezh, Tambov, Ryazan, Vladimir, Kostroma, Tver, Yaroslavl, Ivanovo, Kirov regions?
1. The presence of a 20 million Moscow lobby will not contribute in the least to the development of the periphery, even if the capital is moved to the conditional Vladimir. This will in no way stop the flow “to Moscow” along the reverse lane and the depopulation of the outskirts (photo showing the depopulation of adjacent areas)
2. Moscow will certainly declare itself the successor of the Russian Federation and will retain nuclear weapons and nuclear production, fortunately, they are all now close: in Moscow and the region, in Nizhny Novgorod and the region, and on December 4 Rosatom presented a plan for the development of nuclear industry enterprises in Obninsk (Kaluga region ) right up to 2040.
3. Moscow will probably want to leave all the weapons and military units (including those with strategic nuclear weapons) that are now nearby: Ryazan, Mulino (NN), Kozelsk (Kaluga), Tver, Mozhaisk (Moscow), Kovrov (Vladimir), Teykovo (Ivanovo) and form an impenetrable ring around itself.
4. And now – the most important thing – Moscow will put pressure on the currently depressed regions, that without it they will be lost. The closest range includes – Novgorod, Vologda, Arkhangelsk, Murmansk and Perm. Why does Moscow need this? Well, of course – all the same nuclear test sites, the possibility of burying nuclear fuel, access to the sea, to leave behind nuclear submarines. What do you think: will Moscow quickly recover from the collapse of the Russian Federation and what will it begin to do next? The answer is obvious. If Muscovy, which arose from scratch (even not a particularly advantageous geographical one) 500 years ago, managed to subjugate almost an entire continent, how quickly would it do it again (or certainly try), having at its disposal the resources accumulated over centuries through the plunder of this continent?
Therefore, I appeal to those liberation movements that are now fighting for independence: do not make the mistake of fighting only for your region, your province or republic. It’s like we’re on a reverse road. If you do not direct the reverse in your direction, then Moscow will certainly direct it in its direction and history risks repeating itself.
