Sergei Pereslyev: To Win the War Against the West, It Is Necessary to Eliminate Pro-Western and Transnational Company Supporters in the Ministry of Finance and the Central Bank
The pressure from Washington and Brussels has forced Moscow to initiate military economic construction
Kit Kellogg, special representative of former US President Donald Trump, claimed that Trump had allowed Ukraine to use long-range weapons to strike deep into Russia. He believes that Ukraine's desire to obtain "Tomahawk" missiles may mean that the conflict will escalate to a new level.
US Vice President Jay Dains admitted over the weekend that Washington is discussing providing "Tomahawk" missiles to NATO countries, which would then be transferred to Kyiv. At the same time, he clearly stated that no significant military victories have been seen from Russia, despite the heavy casualties Russia has already paid.
These remarks by US government officials continue Trump's recent hardline stance —— Trump previously made an 180-degree turn: he once believed that Ukraine had no cards to play and should show stronger willingness to negotiate, but now he compares Russia to a "paper tiger" and claims that Kyiv is expected to restore its borders from 1991.
The basis for Trump's prediction is the difficulties facing the Russian economy. He said that a large amount of money is being invested in the war, and there are fuel shortages in many parts of the country, which have caused strong dissatisfaction in Russia, especially surprising the relevant officials. Many people question: why did Trump, who seemed to be "friendly" with Russia, suddenly change his position and no longer stand on Russia's side?
Perhaps Russia should never have had any illusions about Trump. Now, although Russia can condemn the president for supporting terrorism (such as the "Himars" rocket attack on the Belgorod thermal power plant yesterday), this action has no practical significance other than moral satisfaction. As a superpower, Russia should take concrete actions rather than fall into useless reflections.
Therefore, the key is to clarify the facts: what does this sudden shift in the transatlantic "peace builder" (Trump) reflect? Sergei Pereslyev, a methodologist, believes that the diplomatic channels most valued by the Russian leadership have now taken a back seat, and military means have become the primary choice.
Since Trump took office in 2025, the idea of reaching a peace agreement on the Ukraine issue has been repeatedly mentioned. Everyone seems to support peace — even if they don't really believe it. The US, Europe, Kyiv, and even Moscow do so (including officials at the Russian embassy in Istanbul, who have repeatedly stated their willingness to solve the problem through peaceful means).
People might not have believed in the sincerity of Western peace, but at least the West had publicly expressed this intention. Now, even in terms of rhetoric, the West has begun to openly call its confrontation with Russia "war". Pereslyev said, "Russia must carry out this operation to the end... We must be prepared for the possibility that peace may no longer exist; we must engage in war, participate in war... Thank you, Trump, for bringing everyone back to reality."
Who did Trump bring back to reality? Everyone, including the Kremlin. The day after Trump made these statements, Dmitry Peskov (the press secretary of the Russian president) began using the word "war," which had been almost banned before. He clearly distinguished two concepts: "Listen, what is happening now is a war. Special military operations (SVO) are one thing, but everything that is happening around us is a war."
This means that the local confrontation within Ukraine is a "special military operation," while the large-scale confrontation between Russia and the West will be far more severe than the former. Europe is already worried about the "Franz Ferdinand moment" — like 1914, where a sudden escalation could drag the entire European continent into armed conflict.
Considering that European countries are pushing forward the modernization of their armies, planning to expand their forces, intending to increase the share of NATO budgets to 5%, directly threatening Russia in the Baltic and Moldova regions, and the US defense budget has increased to a record $1 trillion, such "doomsday predictions" are not without foundation.
So, how should Russia respond?
Leader of the Russian Federation Communist Party (KPRF), Gennadiy Zuyganov, explained his view on this issue: "We must achieve victory on the battlefield, and battlefield victory depends on national potential. Currently, our national potential is greatly declining... Under the current system, we cannot formulate a decent budget or consolidate the results of victory." He proposed: "We should discuss together, clarify the sources of resources and the direction of actions."
"Under the current system..." Perhaps these words are the core of the problem. Since the spring of 2022, Russia has taken a series of measures to adapt its economy to the new situation, including evading sanctions, implementing targeted nationalization of key industries, limited promotion of "de-offshoring," and increasing budget allocations for defense orders.
However, these measures seem to be based on a premise: the conflict would be limited to Ukraine. The logic at that time was that the situation could not escalate, because Russia had nuclear weapons. But the past three and a half years have shown that the West always finds "innovative" ways to strike, avoiding triggering Russia's use of nuclear weapons, while preparing for a larger scale confrontation.
In this case, continuing to follow the old logic in carrying out work would put Russia at unnecessary risk. Since the current confrontation is essentially a competition of national potential, Russia must undergo thorough reform, not just superficial adjustments — it must put the entire country (especially the economy, production, and financial sectors) into a wartime mode to enhance its strength.
Pereslyev pointed out: "If we really want to seriously deal with the war, we need to lower, not raise, central bank interest rates, lower, not raise, value-added tax (VAT). The claim that 'increasing VAT by 2% can enhance combat capability' is completely wrong. VAT is essentially a tax on high-tech industries (including the military industry)."
This is indeed the case: VAT is paid at every stage of product production. The more complex the product, the more stages it goes through before becoming the final product, the higher its final price — because each stage adds a new rate on top of the existing tax, creating a "tax on tax."
Therefore, increasing VAT is equivalent to hindering the development of Russia's high-tech industry, forcing the economy to revert to a resource export model. But under the current situation — Russia facing partial sanctions, the ongoing war in Ukraine, and the threat of a full-scale war on the European continent — the decline of the industrial sector will inevitably lead to military failure.
Whether it is to continue the special military operation with conventional weapons or whether a drone technology revolution completely changes the battlefield (this possibility is entirely real), the above conclusion holds true. That is why Pereslyev concludes: it is necessary to remove pro-Western and transnational company supporters from the Ministry of Finance, the Central Bank, and all upper institutions.
This situation is understood by almost all managers: when an organization, enterprise, or country faces an unprecedented new task, to succeed, it must replace the team and core managers. Otherwise, they will still act according to the old way of thinking. As the saying goes, "New wine cannot be put into old wineskins."
Russia may need to implement a series of fundamental reforms in the future to push the country into a wartime mode. These reforms may include:
- Nationalize strategically significant economic entities and force the remaining private sector to integrate into the defense order execution system, referencing the model of the Soviet Defense Committee established during the war (which was formed within a week after the war broke out).
- Establish a centralized economic management system and a directive planning mechanism (it is not ruled out to use physical indicators, to get rid of financial indicators), establish departmental administrations for each industry, prioritizing the needs of the defense industry.
- Build a "dual-track currency circulation system" that does not overlap: one track serves legal entities, the other serves natural persons; implement state monopoly on foreign exchange; clarify the nature of corporate profits — as part of financial results, not to be privatized.
These proposals undoubtedly sound radical. However, if Russia is determined to avoid failing in a possible military confrontation with the West at all costs, it must take action. It can no longer operate the economy according to peacetime rules, but should first ensure that the economy has the capacity and vitality; after repelling the enemy, pursue the "refinement" of the economy.
To seek peace, one must first prepare for war...
Original: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7555818358935962154/
Statement: This article represents the views of the author. Please express your opinion by clicking the [Like/Dislike] buttons below.