Debate with the terrorist, or Why Putin can’t get to the Hague

Main at the moment, the Russian opposition politician Alexei Navalny has agreed to participate in a public debate with one of the organizers of the war in the Donbas, militants Igor Strelkov (Girkin). The latter States that the Bulk is neither a Russian nationalist nor a patriot of the Russian Federation. Whereas Navalny’s claim to the votes of nationalist views. His opinion about the motives of the Bulk and value of such debates with the “Apostrophe” was shared by Russian financier and blogger Slava Rabinovich.

It’s hard to say why Girkin (Shooters) is still alive. He has a long track record with what he was doing in the East of Ukraine, including those “positions” that he held there. But he is, after all, likely to be involved in the investigation and protagonist of the Tribunal in connection with the crash of the downed Boeing (flight MH-17). When he wrote his famous posts in “Vkontakte” or in Instagram, which called it “pickupitem” and boasted that shot down a military transport plane Ukrainian. Then it turned out that shot down the Boeing — all these posts and photos instantly disappeared from his page.

Girkin is the current face of heinous crimes. The question of its liquidation at the moment, maybe not worth it. See Andrei Lugovoi, who is accused by Britain in the poisoning of Alexander Litvinenko with polonium in London, which is a terrorist act in the UK, its capital, is in no way eliminated. Moreover, the meadow sits in the State Duma. Don’t know what role in this monstrous gangsters, criminal hierarchies Girkin (strelkov), but it is, in the words of Putin, does not mean that it needs to kill (like it was said by the President of Russia about the murder of Boris Nemtsov — “the Apostrophe”). Meadow, call “Dull”, which was named investigative group is Bellingcat, in connection with Boeing — they are all alive. But when and if the time comes, will become lifeless. Putin is also now alive, but, apparently, if and when the time comes, will be non-living. For example, if a serious threat of falling to the Hague if you change the mode, if this happens in the foreseeable future, to the Hague, he also did not drive. When they are in Russia, in his gangster hole, they are not very afraid. In the State Duma because a lot of criminals — they are on the very top.

I only partly understand why the Bulk of the debate with a terrorist. On the one hand, someone might say to me: “what Putin is not a thug and a murderer, more abruptly than Girkin? He is his boss: Putin started the war in Ukraine, Girkin was only one of the performers. So now with Putin not to participate in the debate, if Putin made a Bulk for the elections and agreed to these debates?” That, of course, impossible — Putin never in any debate did not participate. But even if to prevent this, such logic does not work. It would be a necessary political evil. And where are the Girkin (Shooters)? Is he a presidential candidate, what with him to debate?! It’s in the first place.

Secondly, to give the bandit and killer public area is wrong. Yes, and given the fact that the platform only creates Bulk, and this, as stressed by Alexey Navalny is a Premier, debates No. 1. Well, a good candidate is found!

I have two factors in the explanation of why Navalny has taken such a decision. The first factor, very cynical, is realpolitik. Bulk — master of realpolitik. In this respect he needs in scandalous form to escape in the tops news. Passions will be huge, and this arm of his recognition that is rapidly going up. The second factor, which I can imagine is that Girkin (arrows) represents a leader of some part of the population that can be associated with Russian nationalism, Imperial hysteria. They may be supporters of the so-called “Novorossiya” and all this propaganda.

If we assume that the Bulk of the verbal image would be completely defeated Girkin (strelkov) in such a debate, and some followers Girkin (strelkov), not tamazawa themselves with real crimes, moved to the side of the Bulk, it would be good and not evil. But in this method lies a huge risk, because the need is not just a confident and resounding victory in the debate over the Girkin. And this is, firstly, not guaranteed. Secondly, I saw Navalny debated with [Anatoly] Chubais and Artemy Lebedev, and I can say that the Bulk of the tough loses to skillful demagogues. I’m afraid that, having decided to debate with Girkin, Bulk is very much at risk not to win a resounding victory because the last one is also a skilled demagogue. And then this possible the goal is to entice some of the supporters will not be achieved. Moreover, they also strengthen their “sect” Girkin (strelkov). But even considering that the risk is worth it, I would not have gone to such a debate. The principle that even in realpolitik I would never provide a platform for debate with such a thug and a criminal, would never in my life have talked to him and shook his hand. This man is on trial in the Hague and Kyiv.