Center for Strategic Assessment and forecasts

Autonomous non-profit organization

Home / Science and Society / Analytical work: the experience of Russian and foreign experts / Articles
The empirical method and the art of foresight
Material posted: Publication date: 26-02-2017
Any housewife easy anticipate the future. For example, it without effort will predict with an accuracy of hours souring the soup or milk (real, not modern), left in hot weather without refrigeration. Similarly, the specialist in the field of communal services no problems with high accuracy will determine the start time of the Fukushima disaster in the city utilities which has not been repaired and has not been updated since their creation.

All these predictions rely on the Foundation of knowledge and experience. Knowledge of the processes of fermentation or durability of utilities suggests that the milk left in the heat, sour, and utilities, without constant care and upgrading, will fall apart. Experience, summarizing similar cases, enables a high degree of accuracy to determine the period of time during which must occur appropriate changes.

In this case an unexpected change in external factors can not cancel the implementation of the forecast, but unable to seriously shift the time frame. For example, cold is able in half to two times delay the process of souring milk. And reducing the burden on utilities as a result of de-urbanization or depopulation can extend the life of utilities. However, if there is no intersystem change (utilities began to regularly repair, destroyed in milk lactic acid bacteria), we can speak only about the deferred sentence.

Only the change of one or several endogenous factors capable of eliminating the conditions in which forecast was correct. In this case it would be about the conversion (reforming) system, in which existing knowledge and experience, describing the principles of its functioning, cease to operate. In fact, we are dealing with a different system, which shall be assessed from a different angle.

In history we can identify the repeated rapid changes of internal conditions of existence of the system causing rapid change in its reaction to external impacts. For example, Russia Peter I the Great Russia and his father Alexei Mikhailovich quietest – two different States, one territory and the same people. The principles of the state organization as a result of internal changes (reforms) have changed so much that Russia won the Northern war in the face of tougher opposition, what was conducted the previous (lost to Russia) war in the same direction.

Similarly, a drastic change in the internal principles of functioning of the system occurred during the reign of Alexander II (in comparison with Russia of Nicholas I). But here state power, successfully solving the issues of modernization and restore the international position of the Empire, and missed the problem a sharp increase in political activity not previously included in policy social groups, which ultimately led to the revolution.


Thus, internal changes aimed at addressing system issues can in the process of solving one problem to create another. And this other problem can be painlessly solved in the framework of the new system configuration and deadly for the reformed system.

In principle, any political system in the reform period are highly vulnerable to internal and external influences. This is the most dangerous for the system period, since the crumbling of the old interaction is not always able to replaced with new ones. However, where such replacement occurs on time, new interactions are not stable enough, though, because there are always large and influential social groups who wish to return to the "good old days". Similarly, there are always radical groups who want to accelerate the process "of achieving universal happiness." For the first reforms are too rapid and radical for a second too slow and insufficient.

Using this theoretical base, to understand what is happening with Ukraine and Ukraine is as easy as to predict the souring of milk.

The fundamental difference between the regime Poroshenko from all previous ones is that, despite the desire of the authorities and elite groups, leave everything as it was under Yanukovych, but without Yanukovych, Ukraine has entered a period of reform of its government. The point that this reform is deeply reactionary and post-Maidan government tries by all means to block, does not change the essence of the ongoing processes. Moreover, as we know from history (the empirical method) any incomplete or not timely reform creates a revolutionary situation.

Modes of Kravchuk, Kuchma, Yushchenko and Yanukovych were internally stable because, talking about the reforms, nothing, in fact, not changed. Ukrainian state existed on the basis of partition, appropriation and squandering of the Soviet legacy. Someone got more, someone less, but the existing resource base helped to maintain social stability. Of course, with this approach, the resource base sufficiently rapidly decreased. Methods of dealing with this problem, the authorities have been three:

  • maneuvering between Russia and the West with the aim of obtaining economic benefits and preferences;
  • external borrowing;
  • the reduction in the number of financial-political groups admitted to the section of the pie.

Note that until the end of 2013 the authorities if you do not understand something intuitively felt the importance of the social component, therefore, tried to shift the main costs of unsolvable economic problems on the shoulders of the population (who also got it, but in principle the standard of living in the capital and strategically important regional centers was high enough, and in other places, tolerable), and on the shoulders dekulakize oligarchic groups. The redistribution of property dekulakize allowed temporarily to meet the needs of the system. And then was time for the next one.

Under these conditions, sharply increased the price of access for businesses to government. Only part of the government gave a guarantee (though not completely) from dispossession. Since the era of the late Kuchma, the system rapidly evolved in the direction of concentration of power and property in the hands of one group. This is well illustrated by the successive formation and subsequent disintegration of the "families" of Kuchma, Yushchenko and Yanukovych.

If not for the external influence, as expressed in the organization of Maidan created under Kuchma, the system was stable enough to ensure the victory of the clan over the rest of Kuchma's oligarchic clans, the concentration of all power and ownership in the same hands. As a result, the instant disappearance of the ability to mix the social contradictions by dispossession "foreign" (they would have just left) and the precipitous growth of the revolutionary crisis. In the end, the ruling clan would be torn left and right populists, who would start a war among themselves for the right to govern Ukraine.

This development was possible and Yushchenko, and Yanukovych. Only external intervention in the natural development of the Ukrainian system of "pirate economy" (captured/shared/eaten), due to the beginning of the geopolitical (global) of a US attack on Russia led to successive shifts of the pre-eminent clan. Being externally imposed and disguised as the revolutionary actions, these shifts have led to rapid exhaustion of the limited resources of the system through all-new stages, as well as to the deterioration of the quality of governance by replacing entire layers of bureaucracy, the loyalty of which was questioned by the new regime.

In turn, the rapid decline of the resource base and the loss of skills of adaptive management led to a further increase in the price of power (particularly the presidency) on the principle of "winner takes all" and to preserve in the Arsenal of the opposing sides is the only method of suppressing the opponent with brute force.

Since the decomposition of the superstructure could not be regarded as reliable power, the price went non-system fighters. Since the militants are purposefully grown and raised Nazi organizations and parties increased their political weight (not due to demand for the voters, but because of the dependence of the elite on their services). That is why Nazi fighters all the time of Board of Yanukovych, the government supported and financed almost more active than the opposition.

This is a key point. By the beginning of the reign of Yanukovych regime has almost exhausted the legal methods of domination and began to prepare for the use of terrorist methods of governance. The reason is simple – the internal resource for various Maidan exhausted faster than anticipated, and attracting foreign was limited to the impossibility of the policy of "multi-vector". Since the beginning of 2000-ies the question of choice "with us or against us" was put firmly and Russia and the West.

Maneuvers Yanukovych tried to leave open both ways, only delayed the outcome, but did not cancel it. Had he remained in power, he would still have signed the Association agreement (it was required by the principle of balance, which was based on Ukrainian foreign policy), after which the inevitable was the transition to terrorist rule, relying on the informal Nazi "death squads" operating in contact with the KGB. And then still there would be a breakdown in the civil war, but in conditions worse than the current, because Yanukovych would retain power over the Donbas and the Crimea.

The rigidity of the confrontation between financial and political groups in the struggle for resources and the exhaustion of their legal methods of political struggle led to the fact that Yanukovych was ousted by force. For the sake of it, with the help of the West was paralyzed and laid out the superstructure and the Nazis on the contrary structured, organized, armed and legalized.

The coup of February 2014 was the tipping point. Firstly, the Ukrainian foreign policy strategy of "multidirectional" was buried forever. Secondly, had catalyzed the process of starting a civil war. Thirdly, the government was forced to abandon the monopoly of violence in favor of the Nazi "death squads" or, as they called in Ukraine, "volunteer" and "territorial" battalions, over time wityh in the national guard under and Mat, and formed their most motivated and capable part.

From the fact that the Nazis formally become "security forces", their essence has not changed. In Ukraine, there was "night of the long knives" on the contrary. In Germany, Hitler did not allow the storm troopers to seize control of the army, for which, relying on the army, thinned stormtroopers. In Ukraine, the stormtroopers became the army, the interior Ministry and intelligence agencies, because of the power structure before the revolution has been expanded so that he was not able not only to dictate its will to power (as did the German generals) or even just to help the Nazis organized resistance. Ukrainian security forces surrendered to the Nazis themselves ratifitsirovala.

That is why, as mentioned above, the Poroshenko regime is radically different from the preceding. He would like to live by the same rules that Yanukovych, but can't. Released by the Nazis, which the government may not oppose nor with the help of security forces (old), nor with the left political alternative (eliminated) would not only spur of the moment to participate in government on the sidelines, but to reform the entire system. Controlling high government posts and parliamentary faction of the oligarchic groups are resisting such reform, because it will lose access to the political levers to ensure their economic and financial power. But, as mentioned above, urgent and not held on time, the reform creates the conditions for revolution. In our case, for the Nazi revolution.

The Ukrainian elite itself has grown and nourished the Nazis, just for their comfort, removed from the political arena all alternative political forces, she gave them to hand control over the security forces. Thus, the Ukrainian elite is split and in his deadly struggle with each other for power constantly uses the services of those same Nazis.

In these circumstances, the problem is not whether there will be another coup d'état, marking the last stage of the Nazi revolution, and when it will take place and who will unite the Nazis and lead a new regime.

And again, after the coup the inevitable civil war in Ukraine. As you can see, the scheme of "the oligarchs-the Nazis-the civil war" works in various forms and combinations, but in any case (from Kuchma to Poroshenko). The only difference is that Kuchma is still some time could "govern in the old way", as Poroshenko. That is, the movement of oligarchic rule through the Nazi dictatorship to the civil war – the inner essence of the organic system, we can't change just as it is impossible to get the soup to turn sour in the heat. To change the situation it would be possible through external influence, but this influence requires the mobilization of too many resources in terms of unused global confrontation can't afford neither Russia nor the USA nor the EU.

This is the time to remember Minsk world. It's clear that it was impossible, and so many unclear why it was made.

Minsk world have created the conditions in which the international community (agreement confirmed by the UN security Council resolution) demanded unreformable system reform. And required the Minsk peace reform is the only chance for Ukraine to survive as a state and not falling into the abyss of civil war.

But, we know that the system does not have the internal resource to implement the provisions of Minsk. Similarly, we know that no one is willing to provide the necessary for the reform of the external resource. In this situation Ukraine for three years is a political headache, and the resource black hole of our Western friends and partners that the regime has created and are responsible for it.

Knowing it will all end in Ukraine (and it would be very scary), they want to delay unpleasant moment. But the delay time is possible only by investing in the project, all large and big money. To invest in the doomed project, they don't want to. Ukrainian provocations, designed to make Russia a party to the conflict and to transfer to it responsibility for Ukraine, the goal is not reached. The cries of "disinterested" of "patriots" from the opposition about the urgent need to rescue out of trouble the brotherly people (presumably the German, who has to spend money on maintenance of Ukraine), too.

The longer Ukraine is an inevitable process complete the Nazi revolution, the worse for the country and the population there will be consequences and the more bleak example of friendship with the West and integration in the EU will get the world community.

To throw it is impossible, but bear no urine. More importantly, how much money is in Kiev no pump and no support, but an objective historical processes do not cheat. Time the doctor told in a mortuary means in a mortuary. This is realized in Kiev, why is there in recent months of growing hysteria and coup any day even the most inveterate optimists. It is understood in Europe, trompowsky taking advantage of a pause in U.S. foreign policy to push the Ukrainian issue somewhere in the tenth row according to priority.

While in the United States will not achieve the political consensus (or the opposing camps finally get into a confrontation), they will not be able to formulate a strategic framework for the prospective foreign policy of the new administration. Until there's clarity with the United States, the EU will refrain from sharp turns. And two or three months the international political routine of the current Ukraine survive will be very difficult.

Rostislav Ishchenko


RELATED MATERIALS: Science and Society
Возрастное ограничение