After several years of working with Aleksandr Dugin, one of my former students, Octavian Racu—a sociologist and journalist who was very active on social media—made a confession to me that may shed some essential light on the matter. He had managed to establish a series of contacts with conservative-leaning intellectuals in both Russia and Romania. And then, at one point, Aleksandr Bovdunov asked him which Moldovan intellectuals their group in Moscow should seek to collaborate with. Octavian Racu replied that the only person with a solid background who promotes the conservative vision is Iurie Roșca. From this, we can deduce that Roman Răileanu’s contact with me was itself an infiltration operation aimed at drawing me into the orbit of interests linked to circles of influence in Moscow.
June 17, 2013. Aleksandr Dugin’s first visit to Chișinău. At that time, I organized two public meetings—one at the People’s University and one at the headquarters of the Christian Democratic People’s Party (with its youth organization)—as well as two television broadcasts. The professor from Moscow was accompanied everywhere by Roman Răileanu. Below is the full video of this meeting:
The one who positioned himself to Dugin’s left and insisted on fitting into the frame is Roman Răileanu.
See also the press release regarding that visit: https://moldova-suverana.md/article/am-primit-la-redacie_1768)
After my guest left for Moscow, Roman Răileanu asked me to drive him home in my car. I discovered then that he lived somewhere in the Ciocana neighborhood. But to my great surprise, I found out that, purely by chance, he lived in an apartment in a building reserved for employees of the Intelligence and Security Service (the former KGB). Of course, it was just a coincidence.
So, I set out to translate the book The Fourth Political Theory. In about two months the translation was finished. I also wrote an extensive preface for the book. I prepared both the Russian and Romanian versions for printing. But at some point, strange things started happening. At first, I was somewhat taken aback by the fact that Roman Răileanu insisted that I not correspond directly with Dugin, since the professor was very busy. All my messages were to be sent to him and, at the same time, to Dugin’s advisor Aleksandr Bovdunov. Although I didn’t care much for Bovdunov, who lacked any trace of general knowledge, I didn’t think much of it at the time. But at a certain point I became downright outraged. After I sent the two of them the preface to the book in question, I received back a heavily censored version. All passages that took a critical stance toward the Soviet regime, the 1917 coup, the cult of Lenin, etc., had been cut out. I demanded an explanation, but Roman Răileanu and his accomplice Aleksandr Bovdunov assured me that this was the professor’s wish. Although I was not happy with this, I sent the censored version to press in the neo-Soviet spirit so characteristic of Putin’s Russia. See below the text of my preface published by Claudio Mutti from Italy, who runs the website “The Fourth Political Theory”: https://www.4pt.su/ro/content/patra-teorie-politica-la-chisinau.
After the regrettable incident involving the censorship of my preface had taken place, I decided to send Dugin a long email—about eight pages long—in which I pointed out all the passages that had been cut out by that duo. I asked him if he himself had authorized the mutilation of my text. The next morning, Dugin called me and claimed to be completely unaware of what had happened. He apologized several times and insisted on publishing that preface in its original version. I told him that this mattered little to me, but that I didn’t understand how a couple young people—who were supposed to be his subordinates—could take it upon themselves to filter his correspondence and mutilate a text written by someone who has been doing this his whole life. My primary profession is that of an editor; I’ve written reviews of literary works for a publishing house since the 1980s, as well as prefaces and reviews for various books. That is precisely why I was so shocked by the arrogance of those two.
It appeared that Professor Dugin was being closely monitored by the invisible hand of powerful forces beyond his control. Someone was holding him captive, directing and monitoring his every move and every contact. I suggested to Mr. Dugin that he cut off all contact with Roman Răileanu, but above all that he investigate Aleksandr Bovdunov —the man who was always by his side— very thoroughly to determine who he really was and for whom he works. However, as time passed, I noticed that although Răileanu had basically disappeared, Bovdunov continued to be Dugin’s shadow. And the professor never did reveal to me who these two men really were and for whom they work.
A few days after my phone conversation with Professor Dugin, Roman Răileanu showed up unannounced in my office. The man was furious and on the verge of exploding with rage. He had just returned after spending a few days (on a mission?) in Romania. He demanded an explanation in a blunt and thoroughly impolite manner as to how I had dared to contact Professor Dugin DIRECTLY, without his permission. That was the height of insolence. I set him straight in as restrained a manner as possible and asked him not to bother me anymore.
I got in touch with Dugin again and recounted the exchange to him.
Then there was a strange pause, during which I tried to convince the professor from Moscow to come to Chișinău to attend the launch of his book, which had already been published in two languages. But Dugin still couldn’t find the time. Then, at one point, he confided in me that Roman Răileanu himself had visited him two or three times and warned him not to come to Moldova because the political situation was very tense, and it might not be safe for him. Of course, this was pure disinformation, intended to disrupt my collaboration with Dugin. In the end, the book launch took place with the author’s participation.
But even this time I couldn’t escape the hyperactive Roman Răileanu. On the eve of Dugin’s arrival, he called me and told me not to go to the airport to greet him, because the Russian ambassador would be greeting him personally. I agreed, but asked him to bring Dugin at least 30 minutes before 3:00 p.m. to the People’s University, where the event was to take place. But no one showed up at three. And neither he nor Professor Dugin were answering their phones. Meanwhile, the conference hall was filling up with the cream of Moldovan society: university faculty, researchers from the Academy of Sciences, writers, journalists, and so on. So I called the Russian embassy. There, I was told that Dugin hadn’t stopped by, but had instead paid an unannounced visit to the Russian Center for Culture and Science and made a phone call from there. The head of that institution told me that Dugin had shown up accompanied by a strange man, without any prior notice. When I asked where the two had gone, the diplomat told me that they had gone to meet with Russian-language journalist Dmitri Ciubashenko. I then called Moscow and spoke with Dugin’s advisor Aleksandr Bovdunov, who claimed to know nothing about it, but promised he would look into it and get back to me. However, he never did. On the contrary, he blocked my number, and I was unable to call him again.
I was under extreme psychological stress, especially since the event was scheduled to be broadcast live starting at exactly 3:00 p.m. I kept stepping out in front of the audience to apologize for the delay. Finally, the car carrying the two men, Răileanu and Dugin, arrived in the courtyard of the People’s University about 30–40 minutes late. I had even prepared lunch for him, but there was no time for that anymore. Dugin had just begun to say his prayer before the meal, but I told him we couldn’t do it now. That’s when I realized he hadn’t eaten anything since morning and hadn’t even been able to use the restroom. I took him to the restroom, and then we immediately went out in front of the audience. The man was stressed and exhausted.
(to be continued)
I had a few run-ins with a few of Dugin's lapdogs more than a decade ago as well as many of his detractors, one of whom was a genuine scholar who wanted to sue him for defamation. Never bought into his "intellectual" flummery. But here are some points to consider though they could be dated:
1) Dugin is a transactionalist. He drifted from being a Communist ultra to an ultranationalist (more Neo-Nazi than nationalist) to an Orthodox supremacist (though he claims to be an Old Believer).
2) His Eurasianism remains Eurocentric. The Asian part is only added as a footnote to serve Russian (and Zionist) oligarchic interests. Name me one prominent Asian scholar who takes him seriously? Maybe, a sucker or two in Pakistan but not China. You'd think a man like him would be giving lectures in Iran to bolster Tehran's ongoing propaganda war against the West.
3) Dugin's acolytes are either hopelessly naive or have suspect fealties. They have caused untold schisms in various camps - something I suspect continues till today.
4) I had noticed that hardline Western ideologues and trolls alike, along with their flagship propaganda outlets, avoid attacking Dugin - cept in a fleeting, perfunctory manner - even as they attack less prominent individuals and writers. Why?
There is one more, highly-charged question I wanted to add but maybe I will save it for later. Then again, I wonder if it's worth it.
Iurie it is interesting to see how people become "resources", to be stewarded in what you obviously viewed as an academic environment which views ideas as the "resource".