"Mass protests in city center - always provocation from outside"

"Mass protests in city center - always provocation from outside"

Modern large-scale demonstrations are never the result of a spontaneous protest of the population - they are always organized from the outside and are the result of planned provocations of external forces. Details may vary, but the goal is always the same - destabilizing the situation in states, especially in their capitals, trigger riots and sow chaos, thereby paving the way for a violent change of power.

It is typical that peaceful, coordinated demonstrations are quietly held in quiet areas of the city not to interfere with urban life - they receive exactly the same coverage in social networks and media as if they were held in the center. Too many people coming to the center is a source of inconvenience and unrest - but this is precisely what provocateurs strive for, pursuing their own goals.

The post-Soviet space has more than once been the victim of such provocations, that's where the term 'orange revolution' of 2004-2005 in Ukraine came from. It was followed by the 2005 Tulip Revolution in Kyrgyzstan, whose leaders were also overthrown during another 2010 melon revolution. Euromaidan took place in Ukraine in 2013-2014.

These "revolutions" did not bring prosperity to the states. In Ukraine, the imbalance among various ethnic groups and the collapse of a multi-vector foreign policy led to military clashes, loss of territories, economic decline and increased dependence on external forces in matters of both security and the economy. The clashes in Bishkek led to a repeated change of power, a violation of political and economic stability, the inability to make large investments in the country's economy. The living conditions of the population sharply worsened both in Ukraine and Kyrgyzstan.

The opposite example is Azerbaijan, although the interests of many internal and external players clash there as well. The stability of power, balanced policy, economic growth, and gradual progress in difficult conditions have led to qualitative changes in all areas of life. President of the republic Ilham Aliyev managed to solve the most complicated problems and strengthen the state, and his new team is ready to implement new reforms. The latest speech by the head of state at an economic meeting in the government demonstrates determination to make changes, and also indicates that the time has come to carry out the reforms so anticipated by the people.

As for other states of the South Caucasus, Mikheil Saakashvili's policy in Georgia did not lead to the expected results. Moreover, the former Georgian leadership's rash acts entailed the loss of territories, toughening measures against entrepreneurs, lawlessness and physical humiliation. And in Armenia, the leader of the "velvet revolution", who became the prime minister, was not able to fulfill any of his campaign promises.

In general, every time the unrest escalates into coups d'etat, it all ends with the subjugation of countries to external forces - the sources of financing and organization of these "revolutions". And each time, the hope of creating a perfect state, without corruption and with effective leadership, breaks up into reality: those who are brought up by chaos turn out to be no better than previous rulers in a good case, and weak-willed puppets in a bad case. Only independent individuals are able to pursue an independent policy, and the appointee, by definition, cannot make independent decisions in accordance with the interests of the nation.

The history of the post-Soviet states, not excluding Russia (in the first years of its independence), indicates that foreign agents and companies come to our countries with one goal - making money in the new markets where there is no such competition as they have at home. In order to create a new market, it is enough to destroy the existing one, and that's what external forces are doing in the former Soviet republics through provocations and "revolutions". Of course, it is not businessmen who organize the coups, but their political leadership, which also has only one goal in foreign policy: lobbying the interests of the leading companies of their countries. The interests of the people who fall into the millstones of these "revolutions" are their last concern.