Events in Russia

[Lyndi Lama]

And here's another one. They did not specify the military rank, but the head of the Department of the Ministry of Defense is a general. He can be a colonel if he has just been appointed to a position and then he will not be one for long.

Силовики задержали офицера департамента госзаказа Минобороны

Spoiler: Russian spelling

А вот еще. Не указали воинское звание, но начальник департамента МО это генерал. Может быть полковником, если его только что назначили на должность и то недолго он им будет.

So heartening to read of any official anywhere hauled in for a possibly taking a bribe. I live in Canada. Millions of dollars seem to go to contractors of various sorts and they accomplish nothing or very little of use!

 

[youlik]

I already wrote about our "level 80 car dealer" once. Here's another "car" gone. The king must have run out of gas in his Rolls-Royce in Bahrain.
In fact, I would be interested in how they do it? The king asks: Vladimir, I heard you have a new car, can I look at it? Or vice versa, Putin says: Your Majesty (he is a polite man), the Rolls-Royce you drive is full shit. I'm going to show you a real car for the king.

Putin presented the King of Bahrain with a long version of Aurus

MOSCOW, May 23rd. /tass/. Russian President Vladimir Putin presented King Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa of Bahrain with a long version of the Aurus. This was told to journalists by presidential aide Yuri Ushakov.

""Yes, I can say [what was donated] - including a long version of the Aurus car," Ushakov said.

https://tass.ru/politika/20884769?utm_source=yxnews&utm_medium=desktop

Spoiler: Russian spelling

Я уже как то писал о нашем "автодилере 80 уровня". Вот еще одна "тачка" уехала. Наверное у короля в Бахрейне в его Роллс-Ройсе бензин кончился.
На самом деле мне было бы интересно, как у них это происходит? Король спрашивает: Владимир, я слышал у вас появилась новая машинка, могу я на нее посмотреть? Или наоборот, Путин говорит: Ваше величество (он вежливый человек), Роллс-Ройс, на котором вы ездите полное говно. Я вам сейчас покажу настоящую машину для короля.

 

[hlat]

I already wrote about our "level 80 car dealer" once. Here's another "car" gone. The king must have run out of gas in his Rolls-Royce in Bahrain.
In fact, I would be interested in how they do it? The king asks: Vladimir, I heard you have a new car, can I look at it? Or vice versa, Putin says: Your Majesty (he is a polite man), the Rolls-Royce you drive is full shit. I'm going to show you a real car for the king.

https://tass.ru/politika/20884769?utm_source=yxnews&utm_medium=desktop

Spoiler: Russian spelling

Я уже как то писал о нашем "автодилере 80 уровня". Вот еще одна "тачка" уехала. Наверное у короля в Бахрейне в его Роллс-Ройсе бензин кончился.
На самом деле мне было бы интересно, как у них это происходит? Король спрашивает: Владимир, я слышал у вас появилась новая машинка, могу я на нее посмотреть? Или наоборот, Путин говорит: Ваше величество (он вежливый человек), Роллс-Ройс, на котором вы ездите полное говно. Я вам сейчас покажу настоящую машину для короля.

Or: Rolls Royce is for Nazis.

 

[youlik]

A traditional economic forum has opened in St. Petersburg. Given what awaits us soon, namely the G7 get-together and then the Swiss gathering on the Ukropsky agenda, this event probably cannot avoid comparisons with the above-mentioned in terms of breadth of coverage

Putin's family tree was presented at the stand of the House of Family Traditions at the SPIEF St. PETERSBURG, June 5 — RIA Novosti. The family tree of Russian President Vladimir Putin is presented at the stand of the Christian Family Traditions House within the framework of the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum.Christian specializes in conducting genealogical expertise. The pedigree of the President of Russia in the form of a framed image of the family tree is placed in their exposition, and is also presented in an album at the stand.As a representative of the company told RIA Novosti, this study was ordered by Vladimir Putin's second cousin Alexander. He noted that, according to the results of the genealogical examination, the Putin family originates from the Tver region, their ancestors were Tver peasants.The Christian Family Traditions House said that conducting such an examination takes them an average of ten to twelve months, during which time the company communicates with the customer and reports on the work. The main task is to trace the family tree from the period before the abolition of serfdom. The price of such a study starts from 190 thousand rubles.

Фамильное древо Путина представили на ПМЭФ

Spoiler: Russian spelling

В Петербурге открылся традиционный экономический форум. Учитывая то, что нас ожидает вскоре, а именно тусовка G7 и затем швейцарский сходняк по укропской повестке, то этому мероприятию видимо не избежать сравнений с вышеупомянутыми по широте охвата

 

[youlik]

There is a full recording of the conversation on the link, but it lasts more than 3 hours. There is no full text version yet, so I am giving a translated short text extract.

Vladimir Putin held a meeting with representatives of the international media in St. Petersburg.
At the beginning of the event, the president proposed to talk in the format of an "exchange of views", rather than a "question—answer". One of the main topics was the situation in Ukraine.
About foreign instructors and long-range weapons in Ukraine
Answering the Italian journalist's question, the President stressed that foreign instructors are already present in Ukraine. According to him, they are suffering losses, which the West prefers to keep silent about. As for weapons, the soldiers of the Armed Forces of Ukraine cannot independently strike with an ATACMS missile — they are able to participate in the selection of targets for long-range projectiles, but the decision is made by those who supply weapons.Putin noted that the United States or the United Kingdom are behind these attacks, depending on whose weapons they are. Russia, in turn, reserves the right to send weapons to the regions from where attacks will be carried out on sensitive facilities of countries providing military assistance to Kiev, he added. The President stressed that the supply of weapons by the West to Ukraine is a direct participation in the conflict. At the same time, the transfer of high—precision long-range weapons to Kiev is a path to very serious problems. Putin noted that such actions would definitively destroy international relations and undermine international security.
According to the president, the response to the supply of long-range weapons to Ukraine may be asymmetric. He also stressed that Russia, if it sees that other countries are getting involved in a war against it, will reserve the right to act in a similar way.
The Head of State also expressed hope that after the normalization of the situation in Ukraine, relations with Italy will be able to be restored quickly. According to him, the position of the authorities of this country is more restrained than that of other EU countries: "cave Russophobia" is not inflated there.
About Germany's participation in the conflict
A representative of the German DPA agency asked the president about his attitude to Berlin's arms supplies to Kiev and Germany's participation in this conflict. According to the head of state, no one in the West wants to remember that the war in Ukraine began with a coup d'etat and Russia is not to blame for this. He added that the first step towards the conflict was taken by those who encouraged the bloody unconstitutional seizure of power, primarily the United States.
As for the further development of events, Moscow has made every effort to find a formula for resolving the conflict by peaceful means, the president added. According to him, Russia was led by the nose in the situation with the signing of the Minsk agreements. As a result, Moscow recognized the independence of the DPR and the LPR in 2022 — and this fully complies with international law, the head of state stressed.
Speaking about the supply of weapons to Kiev, Putin noted that this is always a dangerous and serious step. In particular, the appearance of German tanks in Ukraine caused a moral and ethical shock in Russia. In turn, the transfer of missiles to Kiev completely destroys relations between Berlin and Moscow, he added.
The Head of State also stressed that Russia understands that Germany was not a fully sovereign state after the Second World War. According to him, Berlin is dependent in the defense and information spheres, and the final beneficiary is overseas. Putin added that the current leadership of Germany does not protect the interests of the Germans themselves, in particular, no one is outraged by the explosions of the Nord Streams - "as if it were necessary." At the same time, Russia continues to supply gas to Europe through the territory of Ukraine, but the question remains why Germany does not want to receive blue fuel through the remaining Nord Stream pipe, but wants to buy it at exorbitant prices from overseas.
About the situation in the special operation zone
Answering a question from a French journalist, Vladimir Putin noted that Russia's losses in the special operation zone are several times less than Kiev's. In particular, there are 1,348 Russian soldiers and officers in captivity in Ukraine, and 6,465 Ukrainian servicemen in Russia. In turn, the ratio of irretrievable losses of Moscow and Kiev is estimated as 1:5. According to the president, about 50 thousand people are deprived of the Armed Forces of Ukraine per month. At the same time, Kiev mobilized about the same number of people last month.
Putin noted that total mobilization in Ukraine does not solve the problem — it is aimed at making up for losses. According to him, residents of the country are caught right on the streets and taken to military enlistment offices, there are few people who want to fight there. In turn, the US administration insists on lowering the mobilization threshold in Ukraine to 18 years, the head of state added.
A representative of the French media also reported that a journalist from France died last month in the Chasova Yara area of the DPR. He asked if Russia would help investigate what happened. Putin replied that Moscow was ready to organize such work. At the same time, he added that at least 30 Russian journalists were killed during the conflict in Ukraine and Moscow is not allowed to investigate their deaths.
About Kiev's attempts to attack Russian gas pipelines
Speaking with a Turkish journalist, Putin said that Russia had several times recorded attempts by the Kiev regime to strike gas routes at the bottom of the Black Sea. According to him, Moscow has to protect the Blue Stream and Turkish Stream gas pipelines because of threats from Ukraine.
In addition, the president announced an attempt to attack a gas processing plant that transmits gas to Turkey — then two drones were suppressed.
On Zelensky's legitimacy
Vladimir Zelensky's decision not to participate in the elections in Ukraine raises questions, Putin said. According to him, the country's constitution does not say anything about the possibility of extending the term of office of the president. The head of state clarified that there is an article in the basic law that makes it possible to qualify Zelensky's actions as a seizure of power.
At the same time, Putin expressed confidence that there will be a side in Ukraine with which a peace treaty can be signed, but Kiev's desire is necessary for this.
On the cessation of hostilities
Answering a question from an Associated Press journalist about the end of the conflict in Ukraine, Putin noted that Russia, by launching a special operation, fulfilled its duty to the residents of Donbass, who suffered from the coup in that country. According to him, Moscow is not just talking about protecting its interests, but is doing it and will do it. At the same time, in order to stop the fighting in Ukraine, it is necessary to stop supplying weapons to Kiev, the president stressed. He noted that in this case, the conflict will end in two to three months.
As for Ukraine, Russia is interested in the neutral status of this country, the head of state added. According to him, Kiev also agreed with Moscow's condition on denazification and approved the draft agreement in Istanbul. Nevertheless, the desire of a number of countries to achieve Russia's defeat prevented the conclusion of an agreement. At the same time, the actions of former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson to disrupt the peace treaty were supported by Washington, the president concluded.

Путин ответил на вопросы журналистов на полях ПМЭФ

Spoiler: Russian spelling

По ссылке есть полная запись беседы, но она длится более 3 часов. Полного текстового варианта пока нет, поэтому я привожу переведенную краткую текстовую выжимку.

 

[Ca.]

Russia Arrests French National Accused of Gathering Information About Its Military
Russian state media identifies the suspect as Laurent Vinatier, an employee of a Swiss-based center for building international dialogue
CNN

French President Emmanuel Macron confirmed on Thursday that a French national has been detained in Moscow, but denied that the man was working for the French government.

“In no way was he working for France. Now we are very vigilant, he will receive all the consular protections that apply in such a case. I want to say the truth in the face of the brainwashing that we hear,” Macron said.

Russia’s Investigative Committee said earlier on Thursday that a French citizen, employed by the non-profit Swiss Center for Humanitarian Dialogue, was detained on suspicion of “collecting information in the field of military activities of the Russian Federation.”

Video released by the Investigative Committee showed the man being arrested by security personnel at a cafe in Moscow and escorted into a military van.

The Investigative Committee alleges the French national had been gathering information on Russia’s “military and military-technical activities” for several years and didn’t register as a foreign agent.

“For these purposes, he repeatedly visited the territory of Russia, including the city of Moscow, where he held meetings with citizens of the Russian Federation,” the Investigative Committee said.

An Investigative Committee official told Russian state news agency TASS that the man worked as a consultant at the non-profit handling Eurasian issues after the February 2014 events in Ukraine, including the mass pro-democracy protests that swept Kyiv and the exit of the pro-Russian, former Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovich.

CNN has reached out to the French Foreign Ministry and the Swiss Center for Humanitarian Dialogue for comment.

Relations between both countries became strained when Russian President Vladimir Putin launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine more than two years ago.

Several Westerners have found themselves detained in the country amid the rising tensions.

US-Russian journalist Alsu Kurmasheva was detained last year in the Russian city of Kazan while waiting for a return flight to the Czech Republic, where she was based. She had arrived in Russia in May due to an urgent family matter, according to her employer the US-funded Radio Free Europe/ Radio Liberty (RFE/RL), and was accused of refusing to register as a foreign agent.

Russia expanded its law on “foreign agents” in 2022, signaling an intensifying crackdown on free speech and opposition under Putin. Since then, not only individuals or organizations receiving funding from abroad are regarded as foreign agents but also anyone who has “received support and (or) is under foreign influence.”

Wall Street Journal reporter Evan Gershkovich was arrested on a work trip in 2023 and charged with espionage — accusations he and his employer vehemently deny. He has yet to face trial, and his pre-trial detention was extended until June 30. If convicted, he could face up to 20 years in prison.

National Currencies Share in Payments for Russian Energy Exports Nearly 70% - Official

The share of national currencies in payments for the export of Russian energy resources is now approximately 70%

sputnikglobe.com

ST. PETERSBURG (Sputnik) - The share of national currencies in payments for the export of Russian energy resources is now approximately 70%, Russian Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Novak said on Thursday.

"The share of national currencies has increased. Today, 70% of energy resources are provided by payment in national currencies — both Russian and our partners," Novak said at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum (SPIEF).

The 27th annual St. Petersburg International Economic Forum (SPIEF) started on Wednesday. With over 17,000 participants from 130 countries, this year's seminal business event looks to provide a fruitful platform for guests from around the world to network and share their expertise aimed at comprehensive sustainable development.

Russia Has Become ‘Economic Role Model’ to Rest of the World – Analyst

Russia’s ability to achieve impressive growth under Western coercive measures has led countries around the globe to seek guidance and partnership with the country.

sputnikglobe.com

Russia’s ability to achieve impressive growth under Western coercive measures has led countries around the globe to seek guidance and partnership with the country.

In recent decades, sanctions have become a policy tool of choice for Western leaders seeking to undermine global adversaries. With anti-war sentiment on the rise among conflict weary Americans, the United States, in particular, has relied on economic restrictions and penalties to leverage its influence internationally.

Two-thirds of global sanctions since the 1990s have been imposed by the US, estimates academic Manu Karuka, and one-third of that number have been imposed by President Joe Biden alone. Some one-fourth of the world’s nations are now sanctioned by the UN or Western countries, claims economist Francisco Rodríguez.

Although sanctions are frequently proposed as an alternative to armed conflict, the policy is not without controversy. “Sanctions may significantly worsen the situation of the civilian population,” writes researcher Joy Gordon, preventing access to food, medicines, and other essentials. While scholars question the degree to which these measures effectively force political change, their often dire consequences for ordinary people are difficult to deny.

The emergence of the Russian Federation from a recent set of severe US-led sanctions largely unscathed, then, is seen as a landmark moment by Global South nations seeking to resist a tactic often employed by the West.

Moscow has not only survived the economic aggression but has thrived, surpassing Germany and Japan to become the world’s fourth-largest economy, notes security analyst Mark Sleboda. The international relations expert joined Sputnik’s The Critical Hour program Wednesday to discuss why countries around the world increasingly see Russia as an economic model and partner.

“I don't think we're quite at a multipolar world yet, but we definitely see it envisioned and it's birth taking place, even if the US-led Western global hegemon is trying to strangle that birth and prevent it from taking place,” said Sleboda, agreeing with the premise of analysis on the website Orinoco Tribute that examined participation in this year’s St. Petersburg International Economic Forum.

The article posits the creation of “new growth centers” as a building block for such an order, with Global South countries strengthening bilateral relations to build power independent from the Western-led economic system. The article notes efforts to strengthen ties in areas such as pharmaceuticals, energy production, education, security, and space programs.

“Isolation” was “the buzz word of 2022,” Sleboda noted, with observers predicting Russia’s economic demise in the face of denunciations from the West over its special military operation in the Donbass. But “out of 192 countries, plus or minus, in the world, 136 of them are going to have participants at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum,” the analyst noted, “including several heads of state.”

“In terms of GDP adjusted for purchasing power parity, during this time period of the existential economic war of sanctions on Russia by the West, Russia's economy has leapfrogged from sixth place to jump Germany for fifth place,” he added. “And now, in recent months – the World Bank has announced the new numbers – Russia has jumped Japan as well to reach the fourth-largest economy in the world… despite the West's best and most heated efforts to destroy Russia's economy.”

“Boom. That is the sound of the US-led Western global hegemony cracking. That is amazing,” the analyst added.

“Everyone wants to know how did Russia become the Teflon Don of global geoeconomics,” Sleboda explained. “Because they don't know when they might be put in the same position. Now there's a train coming and Russia is directing that train.”

The international relations expert noted that African countries, in particular, are seeking cooperation with Russia as they look to break away from patterns of dependency established after their independence from Western colonial rule in the 20th century.

“[Sergey Lavrov] is being welcomed by the Africans and there are a number of Africans that he is visiting who also have representatives, of course, at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum,” he reported. “And all of those countries right now are seeing the performance of Russian weapons on the battlefield against the vaunted wonder weapons of the West. And, let me tell you, there is a queue right now for when this special military operation ends.”

“And that's why Lavrov is being greeted as almost a conquering hero as a representative of the Russian government and the foreign minister of Russian President Vladimir Putin. Russia is an inspiration because the countries of Africa have long been very much suffering under the heel of US-led Western global hegemony… They've suffered enough that they're looking for an inspiration and a model that works. And a partner in how to get out from under that jackboot.”

Russia manages to change quality of its economy by putting production first — Kremlin
SPIEF-2024 6 Jun, 20:02
Dmitry Peskov noted that the oil and gas sector "remains, naturally, one of the main pillars" of the budget

STRELNA, June 6. /TASS/. In recent years, Russia has been able to change the development vector of its economy, basing it on production instead of raw material exports, Russian presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov told Izvestia.

"The most important thing <…> is that we are able to change the vector of economic development. We are developing through production, through processing, services, and not the oil industry," he said.

At the same time, Peskov noted that the oil and gas sector "remains, naturally, one of the main pillars" of the budget. "High-quality economic development is extremely important," Peskov added.

Peskov noted that the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum (SPIEF) is keeping its level and representation. "We have lost the bunch of businessmen but not so many," the Kremlin Spokesman said, adding that many are participating nevertheless. "It is not so obvious visually - everyone is afraid of secondary sanctions," Peskov said. "There is a need to be vigilant," he noted.

The St. Petersburg International Economic Forum (SPIEF) is held on June 5-8. This year’s theme will be "The Formation of New Areas of Growth as the Cornerstone of a Multipolar World." Scheduled events include meetings for small and medium-sized businesses, creative industries, the SPIEF Youth Day, as well as the Drug Security, SPIEF Academy and SPIEF Junior forums. SPIEF is organized by the Roscongress Foundation. TASS is the information partner of the event.

Russia is expected to begin naval, air exercises in Caribbean, U.S. official says

The exercises will be the first simultaneous air and naval maneuvers Russia has conducted in the Caribbean since 2019.

www.cbsnews.com

The U.S. expects Russia to begin air and naval exercises in the Caribbean in the coming weeks, according to a U.S. official.

The exercises, which will involve Russian warships and long-range bombers, will be the first simultaneous air and naval maneuvers Russia has conducted in the Caribbean since 2019. The U.S. is interpreting them as a response to American support for Ukraine and stepped-up U.S. exercises with NATO allies.

However, the exercises have been planned for some time, the official said, and it seems unlikely they are a response to President Biden's recent partial lifting of the ban against the use by Ukraine of U.S.-provided weapons against targets inside Russia. The Miami Herald first reported Russia's expected plans for air and naval exercises in the Caribbean.

Last week, the U.S. cleared Ukraine to use the weapons on the Russian side of the border near the besieged Ukrainian city of Kharkiv. The Biden administration narrowly tailored the U.S. permission to the Belgorod region of the Russian Federation and restricted the use of the weapons to targeting Russian artillery sites and other weaponry aimed at them around Kharkiv. The Ukrainians are still not permitted to use U.S.-provided long-range equipment, such as the ATACMs, to hit Russia beyond that point, in order to avoid the perception of a direct U.S. escalation with Russia.

The Russian exercises are not considered to be a direct threat to the U.S., the official said. The Russian ships are expected to make port calls in Cuba and possibly Venezuela, and the exercises will last over the summer, culminating in a worldwide naval exercise

Oil demand to rise up to 115 mln barrels per day by 2030 — Novak​

It is reported that the number of flights is on the rise

ST. PETERSBURG, June 6. /TASS/. Russia does not rule out a strong growth of oil demand by 2030, even to the levels close to 110-115 mln barrels per day, Russian Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Novak said at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum (SPIEF).

"In the future, even by 2030, within six years, today’s 102 mln barrels per day may turn into 110 and 115 mln barrels per day because petrochemical industry is developing, the number of flights is on the rise," he said.

The St. Petersburg International Economic Forum (SPIEF) is being held on June 5-8. This year’s theme is "The Formation of New Areas of Growth as the Cornerstone of a Multipolar World." Scheduled events include meetings for small and medium-sized businesses, creative industries, the SPIEF Youth Day, as well as the Drug Security, SPIEF Academy and SPIEF Junior forums. SPIEF is organized by the Roscongress Foundation. TASS is the information partner of the event.

 

[youlik]

Once again, I sincerely apologize to real, independent Georgians for publishing news about their country in this thread. I understand that this may distort them, but it's not really possible to publish such a thing in the American branch. There, some may even think that we are talking about one of the US states. Georgians have begun to have enlightenment in their brains. Finally, it began to dawn on them in what capacity they are needed by the "free, democratic world." However, in order to achieve this enlightenment, they needed to get hit in the head. Thank God that in their case it happened easily and quickly, compared to Ukraine. On the other hand, the nightmarish Ukrainian experience can serve as another good example of how not to do it.

Georgia will not allow Maidan and Ukrainization, — Prime Minister Kobakhidze (VIDEO)

Georgian Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze made a very bold statement by current standards about the consequences of the Maidan for Ukraine and the unwillingness of the "Ukrainian way" for his country.

"We are constantly reminded of the Maidan, and I also want to remind everyone what the Maidan brought to Ukraine.

Then the Ukrainian authorities were appointed from the outside without any responsibility for subsequent actions. Before the Maidan, Ukraine was a country with territorial integrity, its economy was almost $ 200 billion," the politician said.

"Today Ukraine is almost destroyed, its economy is in a catastrophic situation. And when we are reminded of the Maidan in the context of Georgia, we must ask who took responsibility for the consequences of the Maidan in Ukraine and who will be responsible for the same processes in Georgia. We will do everything to prevent Maidan and Ukrainization in Georgia," he concluded.

https://rusvesna.su/news/1717752223

Spoiler: Russian spelling

Я в очередной раз искренне прошу прощения у настоящих, независимых грузин зато, что публикую новость об их стране в этой ветке. Понимаю, что это может их корежить, но не в американской же ветке в самом деле публиковать такое. Там некоторые вообще могут подумать, что речь идет об одном из штатов США.
У грузин началось просветление в мозгах. Наконец то до них начало доходить в каком качестве они нужны "свободному, демократическому миру". Правда для достижения этого просветления им необходимо было получить по башке. Слава богу, что в их случае это произошло легко и быстро, по сравнению с украиной. С другой стороны кошмарный украинский опыт может служить другим хорошим примером того, как делать не стоит.

 

[sToRmR1dR]

Seems that new world is coming in which there will be no place for "seed of evil".

 

[youlik]

Speech by President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin at a meeting with the leadership of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia, Moscow, June 14, 2024
1139-14-06-2024

Sergey Lavrov: Dear Vladimir Vladimirovich,

We are glad to see you at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Allow me, on behalf of our entire team, to welcome you to the next meeting.

I would like to express my sincere gratitude for the constant attention to the foreign policy service. This applies both to our professional activities and to the issues of providing the Ministry and our embassies, consulates general with everything necessary for the successful solution of the tasks set.

I would like to note the colleagues present here from the Presidential Administration, the Government, the Federal Assembly, and executive authorities. We are always committed to the closest cooperation and coordination in carrying out a single foreign policy course, which is determined by the President of Russia. The course is fixed in the Concept of our country's Foreign Policy. You signed the latest version of the Concept in March 2023. Guided by the strategic guidelines contained in it, we are actively working to strengthen our positions in the international arena, ensure security and maximize favorable external conditions for development.

As a matter of priority, we are building up ties with the countries of the World majority, the Global South and the East. Accordingly, we are redistributing our material and human resources, transferring them to the most in-demand areas in the new geopolitical conditions.

I would also like to say that we actively assist in establishing foreign relations between Crimea, Donetsk and Lugansk People's Republics, Zaporizhia and Kherson regions. To this end, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs established its representative offices in Donetsk and Lugansk and strengthened the capabilities of the Representative Office in Simferopol.

I am sure that today's meeting will allow us to specify all areas of our practical work in the international arena.

Let me give you the floor.



Vladimir Putin: Thank you very much.

Dear colleagues, good afternoon!

I am glad to welcome you all, and at the beginning of our meeting and conversation, I want to thank you for your hard work in the interests of Russia and our people.

We met in such a broad format at the end of 2021, in November. During this time, many turning points, without exaggeration, fateful events took place both in the country and in the world. Therefore, I consider it important to assess the current situation in global and regional affairs, as well as to set appropriate tasks for the foreign Ministry. All of them are subordinated to the main goal: creating conditions for the sustainable development of the country, ensuring its security and improving the well-being of Russian families.

Working in this direction in modern, difficult and rapidly changing realities requires from all of us even greater concentration of efforts, initiative, perseverance, the ability not only to respond to current challenges, but also to form our own – and long–term - agenda, together with partners to propose and discuss solutions to those fundamental issues in an open and constructive discussion which concern not only us, but also the entire world community.

I repeat: the world is changing rapidly. As before, there will be no more global politics, economics, or technological competition. More and more States are striving to strengthen sovereignty, self-sufficiency, national and cultural identity. The countries of the global South and the East are coming to the forefront, and the role of Africa and Latin America is growing. We have always, since Soviet times, talked about the importance of these regions of the world, but today the dynamics are completely different, and it is becoming noticeable. The pace of transformation in Eurasia has also accelerated markedly, where a number of large-scale integration projects are being actively implemented.

It is on the basis of the new political and economic reality that the contours of a multipolar and multilateral world order are being formed today, and this is an objective process. It reflects the cultural and civilizational diversity, which, despite all attempts at artificial unification, is organically inherent in man.

These profound, systemic changes certainly inspire optimism and hope, because the establishment of the principles of multipolarity and multilateralism in international affairs, including respect for international law, broad representativeness, allow us to solve the most difficult problems together for the common benefit, build mutually beneficial relations, cooperation of sovereign states in the interests of the well-being and security of peoples.

Such an image of the future is in tune with the aspirations of the absolute majority of countries in the world. We see this, among other things, by the growing interest in the work of such a universal association as the BRICS, based on a special culture of trusting dialogue, sovereign equality of participants and respect for each other. Within the framework of the Russian presidency this year, we will facilitate the smooth integration of new BRICS members into the working structures of the association.

I ask the Government and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to continue meaningful work and dialogue with partners in order to reach the Kazan BRICS summit in October with a weighty set of agreed decisions that will set the vector of our cooperation in politics and security, economics and finance, science, culture, sports and humanitarian relations.

In general, I believe that the potential of the BRICS will allow it to eventually become one of the core regulatory institutions of the multipolar world order.

In this regard, I would like to note that the international discussion on the parameters of interaction between states in a multipolar world, on the democratization of the entire system of international relations, of course, is already underway. So, with our colleagues from the Commonwealth of Independent States, we have agreed and adopted a joint document on international relations in a multipolar world. We invited our partners to talk on this topic at other international venues, primarily in the SCO and BRICS.

We are interested in ensuring that this dialogue is seriously developed within the walls of the United Nations, including on such a basic, vital topic for all as the creation of an indivisible security system. In other words, the affirmation in world affairs of the principle that the security of some cannot be ensured at the expense of the security of others.

Let me remind you in this regard that at the end of the 20th century, after the end of the acute military-ideological confrontation, the world community had a unique chance to build a reliable, fair security order. This did not require much – a simple ability to listen to the opinions of all interested parties, a mutual willingness to take them into account. Our country was set up for such constructive work.

However, a different approach prevailed. The Western powers, led by the United States, considered that they had won the cold war and had the right to independently determine how the world should be arranged. The practical expression of this worldview was the project of unlimited expansion of the North Atlantic Bloc in space and time, although there were, of course, other ideas on how to ensure security in Europe.

Our fair questions were answered with excuses in the spirit that no one is going to attack Russia, and NATO expansion is not directed against Russia. The promises made to the Soviet Union and then to Russia in the late 80s and early 90s about the non-inclusion of new participants in the bloc were quietly forgotten. And if they did, they referred with a grin to the fact that these assurances were oral, and therefore non-binding.

We invariably, both in the 90s and later, pointed out the fallacy of the course chosen by the elites of the West, not just criticized and warned, but offered options, constructive solutions, and emphasized the importance of developing a mechanism for European and world security that suited everyone - I want to emphasize this, namely everyone. A simple enumeration of the initiatives that Russia has put forward over the years will take more than one paragraph.

Let's recall at least the idea of a European security treaty, which we proposed back in 2008. The same topics were raised in the memorandum of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which was handed over to the United States and NATO in December 2021.

But all our attempts – and repeated attempts, you can't list them all – to reason with our interlocutors, explanations, exhortations, warnings, requests from our side did not find any response at all. Western countries, being confident not only in their own rightness, but also in their strength and ability to impose anything on the rest of the world, simply ignored other opinions. At best, they were supposed to discuss secondary issues that, in fact, solved little, or topics that were beneficial exclusively to the West.

Meanwhile, it quickly became clear that the Western scheme, proclaimed the only correct one for ensuring security and prosperity in Europe and the world, does not really work. Let's remember the tragedy in the Balkans. Internal problems – of course, they were – accumulated in the former Yugoslavia, sharply aggravated due to gross external interference. Even then, the main principle of NATO-style diplomacy manifested itself in all its glory – deeply vicious and fruitless in solving complex internecine conflicts, namely: to accuse one of the parties, which for some reason they do not really like, of all sins and bring down on it all political, information and military power, economic sanctions and restrictions.

Subsequently, the same approaches were applied in different parts of the world, you and I know this very well: Iraq, Syria, Libya, Afghanistan, and so on, and they brought nothing anywhere but aggravation of existing problems, broken destinies of millions of people, destruction of entire states, the proliferation of hotbeds of humanitarian and social disasters, terrorist enclaves. In fact, no country in the world is immune from adding to this sad list.
So, now the West is trying to impudently get into the affairs of the Middle East. This area was once monopolized, and the result is clear and obvious to everyone today. South Caucasus, Central Asia. Two years ago, at the NATO summit in Madrid, it was announced that the alliance would now deal with security issues not only in the Euro-Atlantic, but also in the Asia-Pacific region. They say they can't do without them there either. Obviously, this is an attempt to increase pressure on those countries in the region whose development they have decided to restrain. As you know, one of the first places on this list is our country – Russia.

Let me also remind you that it was Washington that undermined strategic stability by announcing its unilateral withdrawal from anti-missile defense treaties, the elimination of intermediate-range and shorter-range missiles in open skies, and together with its NATO satellites destroyed the system of confidence-building measures and arms control in the European space that had been created for decades.

Ultimately, the selfishness and arrogance of Western states have led to the current extremely dangerous state of affairs. We have come unacceptably close to the point of no return. Calls to inflict a strategic defeat on Russia, which has the largest arsenals of nuclear weapons, demonstrate the exorbitant adventurism of Western politicians. They either do not understand the scale of the threat they themselves pose, or they are simply obsessed with believing in their own impunity and their own exclusivity. Both can turn into a tragedy.

Obviously, we are witnessing the collapse of the Euro-Atlantic security system. She's just not here today. It actually needs to be created anew. All this requires us, together with our partners, with all interested countries, and there are many of them, to work out our options for ensuring security in Eurasia, then offering them for wide international discussion.

This is exactly the instruction given in the Message to the Federal Assembly. We are talking about formulating a contour of equal and indivisible security, mutually beneficial, equal cooperation and development on the Eurasian continent in the foreseeable future.

What needs to be done for this and on what principles?

First, it is necessary to establish a dialogue with all potential participants in such a future security system. And first of all, I ask you to work out the necessary issues with states that are open to constructive cooperation with Russia.

During a recent visit to the People's Republic of China, we discussed this issue with Chinese President Xi Jinping. They noted that the Russian proposal does not contradict, but, on the contrary, complements and is fully consistent with the basic principles of the Chinese initiative in the field of global security.

Secondly, it is important to proceed from the fact that the future security architecture is open to all Eurasian countries that wish to participate in its creation. "For everyone" means that European and NATO countries, of course, too. We live on the same continent, no matter what happens, geography cannot be changed, we will somehow have to coexist and work together.

Yes, now Russia's relations with the EU, with a number of European states, have deteriorated, and, as I have stressed many times, it is not our fault. The anti-Russian propaganda campaign, which involves very high-ranking European figures, is accompanied by speculation that Russia is allegedly going to attack Europe. I have said this many times, and there is nothing to repeat in this Room many times: we all understand that this is absolute nonsense, only the justification for the arms race.

In this regard, I will allow myself a small digression. The danger for Europe does not come from Russia. The main threat to Europeans lies in the critical and ever–increasing, almost total dependence on the United States: in the military, political, technological, ideological and information spheres. Europe is increasingly being pushed to the sidelines of global economic development, plunged into chaos of migration and other acute problems, deprived of international subjectivity and cultural identity.

Sometimes it seems that the ruling European politicians and representatives of the European bureaucracy are more afraid of falling out of favor with Washington than losing the trust of their own people, their own citizens. The recent elections to the European Parliament also show this. European politicians swallow humiliation, rudeness, and scandals with surveillance of European leaders, and the United States simply uses them to their advantage: sometimes they are forced to buy their expensive gas – by the way, gas is three or four times more expensive in Europe than in the United States - then, for example, they now require European countries to increase arms supplies to Ukraine. By the way, the requirements are constant here and there. And sanctions are being imposed against them, against economic operators in Europe. They are introduced for a sweet soul, without any hesitation.

Now they are forcing to increase the supply of weapons to Ukraine, expand their capacities for the production of artillery shells. Listen, who will need these shells when the conflict in Ukraine ends? How can this ensure the military security of Europe? Unclear. The United States itself is investing in military technologies, and in the technologies of tomorrow: in space, in modern drones, in shock systems based on new physical principles, that is, in those areas that in the future will determine the nature of armed struggle, and therefore the military and political potential of the powers, their positions in the world. And now they are assigned such a role: invest money where we need it. But this does not increase any European potential. God be with them, let them. For us, maybe this is a good thing, but, in fact, it is.

If Europe wants to preserve itself as one of the independent centers of world development and cultural and civilizational poles of the planet, it certainly needs to be in good, good relations with Russia, and, most importantly, we are ready for this.

This really simple and obvious thing was perfectly understood by politicians of a truly pan-European and global scale, patriots of their countries and peoples who thought in historical categories, and not statisticians who follow someone else's will and prompting. Charles de Gaulle talked a lot about this in the post-war years. I also remember well how in 1991, during a conversation in which I personally participated at that time, German Chancellor Helmut Kohl emphasized the importance of partnership between Europe and Russia. I hope that sooner or later new generations of European politicians will return to this legacy.

As for the United States itself, the incessant attempts of the liberal-globalist elites ruling there today to spread their ideology to the whole world by any means, to preserve their imperial status, their dominance, only increasingly deplete the country, lead it to degradation, and come into clear contradiction with the genuine interests of the American people. If it were not for this dead-end path, aggressive Messianism, implicated in the belief in one's own selectivity and exclusivity, international relations would have been stabilized long ago.

The third. In order to promote the idea of a Eurasian security system, it is necessary to significantly intensify the dialogue process between multilateral organizations already operating in Eurasia. First of all, we are talking about the Union State, the Collective Security Treaty Organization, the Eurasian Economic Union, the Commonwealth of Independent States, and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization.

We see the prospect of other influential Eurasian associations from Southeast Asia to the Middle East joining these processes in the future.

Fourth. We believe that the time has come to start a broad discussion of a new system of bilateral and multilateral guarantees of collective security in Eurasia. At the same time, in the future, it is necessary to gradually curtail the military presence of external powers in the Eurasian region.

We understand, of course, that in the current situation this thesis may seem unrealistic, but it is now. But if we build a reliable security system in the future, there will simply be no need for such a presence of extra-regional military contingents. By and large, to be honest, there is no need today - the occupation is just that, that's all.

Ultimately, we believe that the state and the regional structures of Eurasia themselves should determine specific areas of cooperation in the field of joint security. Based on this, we must also build a system of working institutions, mechanisms, and agreements that would really serve to achieve the common goals of stability and development.

In this regard, we support the initiative of our Belarusian friends to develop a policy document – the charter of multipolarity and diversity in the 21st century. It can formulate not only the framework principles of the Eurasian architecture based on the basic norms of international law, but also, more broadly, a strategic vision of the essence, nature of multipolarity and multilateralism as a new system of international relations replacing the Western–centric world. I consider it important and ask you to work deeply on such a document with our partners and with all interested States. I would add that when discussing such complex, complex issues, of course, maximum, broad representation is needed, taking into account different approaches and positions.

Fifth. Economic issues, social well–being, integration and mutually beneficial cooperation, solving common problems such as overcoming poverty, inequality, climate, ecology, and developing mechanisms to respond to the threats of a pandemic and crises in the global economy should certainly become an important part of the Eurasian security and development system. Everything is important.
By its actions, the West has not only undermined military and political stability in the world, with sanctions and trade wars, it has discredited and weakened key market institutions. Using the IMF and the World Bank, distorting the climate agenda, constrains the development of the global South. Losing in competition, even according to the rules that the West has written for itself, it uses prohibitive barriers, all kinds of protectionism. Thus, the United States has actually abandoned the World Trade Organization as a regulator of international trade. Everything is blocked. Moreover, they put pressure not only on competitors, but also on their satellites. Just look at how they are now "pumping the juices" out of European economies that are teetering on the brink of recession.

Western countries have frozen part of Russian assets and foreign exchange reserves. Now they are thinking about how to bring at least some kind of legal basis to finally appropriate them. But, despite all the trickery, theft, of course, will remain theft and will not go unpunished, on the other hand.

The question is even deeper. By stealing Russian assets, they will take another step towards destroying the system that they created themselves and which for many decades ensured their prosperity, allowed them to consume more than they earn, through debts and obligations to attract money from around the world. Now it is becoming obvious to all countries and companies, sovereign wealth funds, that their assets and reserves are far from safe – both in the legal and economic sense of the word. And anyone can be next in line for expropriation by the United States and the West – these funds of foreign states, they can be.

Already, distrust of the financial system based on Western reserve currencies is growing. There has been an outflow of funds from securities and debt obligations of Western states, as well as some European banks, which until recently were considered an absolutely reliable place to store capital. Now they are already exporting gold from them. And they are doing the right thing.

I believe that we need to seriously step up the formation of effective and secure bilateral and multilateral foreign economic mechanisms, alternative to those controlled by the West. This includes expanding settlements in national currencies, creating independent payment systems and building supply chains bypassing channels blocked or compromised by the West.

Of course, it is necessary to continue efforts to develop international transport corridors in Eurasia, a continent whose natural geographical core is Russia.

Through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, I instruct you to contribute as much as possible to the development of international agreements in all these areas. They are extremely important for strengthening economic cooperation between our country and our partners. Thus, the construction of a large Eurasian partnership should also receive a new impetus, which, in fact, can become the socio-economic basis of a new system of indivisible security in Europe.

Dear colleagues! The point of our proposals is to create a system in which all States would be confident in their own security. Then, by the way, we will be able to take a different, really constructive approach to solving the numerous conflicts that exist today. The problems of a lack of security and mutual trust are not only related to the Eurasian continent, growing tension is observed everywhere. And we constantly see how interconnected and interdependent the world is, and a tragic example for all of us is the Ukrainian crisis, the consequences of which reverberate all over the planet.

But I want to say right away: the crisis related to Ukraine is not a conflict between two states, especially two peoples, caused by some problems between them. If this were the case, there is no doubt that Russians and Ukrainians, who share a common history and culture, spiritual values, millions of kinship, family, and human ties, would find a way to fairly resolve any issues and disagreements.

But the situation is different: the roots of the conflict are not in bilateral relations. The events in Ukraine are a direct result of the global and European development of the late XX – early XXI century, the aggressive, unceremonious and absolutely adventurous policy that the West pursued and is pursuing all these years long before the special military operation began.

These elites of Western countries, as I said today, after the end of the cold war, set a course for further geopolitical restructuring of the world, for the creation and imposition of the notorious rule-based order, which simply does not fit strong, sovereign and self-sufficient states.

Hence the policy of containment of our country. The goals of this policy are already openly declared by some figures in the United States and Europe. Today they are talking about the notorious decolonization of Russia. In fact, this is an attempt to bring an ideological basis for the dismemberment of our Fatherland on a national basis. Actually, the dismemberment of the Soviet Union and Russia has been talked about for a long time. Everyone in this room is well aware of this.

By implementing this strategy, Western countries have taken a line on the absorption and military-political development of territories close to us. There have been five, and now six, waves of NATO expansion. They tried to turn Ukraine into their springboard, to make it "anti-Russia". In order to achieve these goals, money and resources were invested, politicians and entire parties were bought, history and educational programs were rewritten, neo-Nazi and radical groups were fed and raised. We did everything to undermine our interstate ties, to separate and set our peoples against each other.

The south-east of Ukraine, territories that have been part of a large historical Russia for centuries, prevented such a policy even more brazenly and unceremoniously. People lived there, and still live there, who, including after the declaration of independence of Ukraine in 1991, advocated good and the closest relations with our country. Russian Russians and Ukrainians, representatives of different nationalities, who were united by the Russian language, culture, traditions, and historical memory.

The position, mood, interests and voices of these people – millions of people who live in the south-west – simply had to be taken into account, and the then Ukrainian presidents and politicians who fought for this post used the votes of these voters. But using these voices, they got out later, maneuvered, lied a lot, talked about the so-called European choice. They did not dare to make a complete break with Russia, because the south-east of Ukraine was set up differently, it was impossible not to take this into account. Such duality has always been inherent in the Ukrainian government throughout all the years after the recognition of independence.

The West, of course, saw this. He has long seen and understood the problems that exist there and that can be stirred up, understood the deterrent value of the south-eastern factor, as well as the fact that no long-term propaganda can change the situation radically. Of course, a lot was done, but it was fundamentally difficult to turn the situation around.

It was not possible to distort the historical identity and consciousness of the majority of people in the south-east of Ukraine, to erase from them, including from the younger generations, a kind attitude towards Russia and a sense of our historical community. And that's why they decided to act by force again, just to break people in the southeast, not caring about their opinion. To do this, they arranged, organized, financed, of course, took advantage of the difficulties and difficulties of an internal political nature in Ukraine, but nevertheless consistently and purposefully prepared an armed coup d'etat.

The cities of Ukraine were overwhelmed by a wave of pogroms, violence, and murders. The radicals have finally seized and usurped power in Kiev. Their aggressive nationalist slogans, including the rehabilitation of Nazi henchmen, were elevated to the rank of state ideology. A course was proclaimed to abolish the Russian language in the state and public spheres, pressure on Orthodox believers increased, interference in the affairs of the church, which eventually led to a split. No one seems to notice this interference, as if it were necessary. Try to do something else somewhere, there will be so much artistic whistling that your ears will fall off. And you can do it there, because it's against Russia.

Millions of residents of Ukraine, primarily in its eastern regions, opposed the coup, as you know. They were threatened with violence and terror. And first of all, the new authorities in Kiev began to prepare a strike against the Russian-speaking Crimea, which at one time, in 1954, as you know, was transferred from the RSFSR to Ukraine in violation of all, even the norms of law and procedures then in force in the Soviet Union. In this situation, of course, we could not abandon, leave the Crimeans and Sevastopol residents without protection. They made their choice, and in March 2014, as you know, the historic reunification of Crimea and Sevastopol with Russia took place.
Peaceful protests against the coup began to be suppressed in Kharkiv, Kherson, Odessa, Zaporozhye, Donetsk, Lugansk, Mariupol, and terror was unleashed by the Kiev regime and nationalist groups. There is probably no need to remember, everyone remembers well what happened in these regions.

In May 2014, referendums on the status of the Donetsk and Luhansk People's Republics were held, in which the absolute majority of residents voted for independence and sovereignty. The question immediately arises: in general, could people express their will in this way, could they declare their independence? Those sitting in this Hall understand that, of course, they could, had every right and reason to do so, and in accordance with international law, including the right of peoples to self-determination. I do not need to remind you, but nevertheless, since the media work, I will say that Article 1, paragraph 2 of the Charter of the United Nations gives this right.

Let me remind you of the notorious Kosovo precedent in this regard. We have already talked about this many times in our time, now I will say it again. The precedent that the Western countries created themselves, in an absolutely similar situation, recognized the legitimate separation of Kosovo from Serbia, which took place in 2008. This was followed by the famous decision of the International Court of Justice, which on July 22, 2010, on the basis of paragraph 2 of Article 1 of the Charter of the United Nations, ruled, further quote: "No general prohibition on unilateral declaration of independence follows from the practice of the Security Council." And the following quote: "General international law does not contain any applicable prohibition on the declaration of independence." Moreover, it was also written there that those parts of the country, whatever it was, that decided to declare their independence, are not obliged to apply to the central authorities of their former state. Everything is written there, everything was written in black and white with your own hand.

So did these republics – Donetsk and Lugansk – have the

to declare their independence? Of course, yes. The issue cannot even be considered in another way.

What did the regime in Kiev do in this situation? He completely ignored the people's choice and unleashed a full–scale war against the newly independent states - the People's republics of Donbass using aviation, artillery, and tanks. Bombing and shelling of peaceful cities and acts of intimidation began. And what happened next? Residents of Donbass took up arms to protect their lives, their homes, their rights and legitimate interests.

The thesis is constantly being heard in the West now that Russia started the war as part of a special military operation, that it is an aggressor, therefore, including on its territory, it is possible to strike using Western weapons systems, Ukraine is allegedly defending itself and can do it.

I want to emphasize once again: Russia did not start the war, this is the Kiev regime, I repeat, after the residents of a part of Ukraine declared their independence in accordance with international law, began hostilities and continues them. This is aggression if we do not recognize the right of these peoples who lived in these territories to declare their independence. But what about it? And then what is it? This is aggression. And those who have been helping the military machine of the Kiev regime over the past years are accomplices of the aggressor.

Then, in 2014, the residents of Donbass did not accept it. The militia units stood up, rebuffed the punishers, and then drove them away from Donetsk and Lugansk. We hoped that this would sober up those who unleashed this massacre. To stop the bloodshed, Russia made the usual calls – calls for negotiations, and they began with the participation of Kiev and representatives of the republics of Donbass with the assistance of Russia, Germany, and France.

The conversation was difficult, but nevertheless, the Minsk agreements were concluded in 2015. We took their implementation very seriously, hoping that we would be able to resolve the situation within the framework of the peace process and international law. We hoped that this would lead to taking into account the legitimate interests and demands of Donbass, enshrining in the constitution the special status of these regions and the fundamental rights of people living there while preserving the territorial unity of Ukraine. We were ready for this, and we were ready to persuade people who live in these territories to resolve issues in this way, more than once we offered various compromises and solutions.

But everything was eventually rejected. Kiev simply threw the Minsk agreements into the trash. As representatives of the Ukrainian elite later confided, they were not satisfied with any of the articles of these documents, they simply lied and dodged as best they could.

The former Chancellor of Germany and the former president of France, in fact co-authors and, as it were, guarantors of the Minsk agreements, suddenly later also directly admitted that their implementation, it turns out, was not planned, they just needed to blab the situation to buy time for putting together Ukrainian armed formations, pumping them with weapons and equipment. They just "cheated" us once again, deceived us.

Instead of a real peace process, instead of a policy of reintegration and national reconciliation, which Kiev liked to talk about, Donbass was shelled for eight years. They staged terrorist attacks, murders, and organized the most severe blockade. All these years, residents of Donbass (women, children, the elderly) have been declared "second-class" people, "subhumans", threatened with reprisals, they say, we will come and get even with everyone. What is this but genocide in the center of Europe in the 21st century? And in Europe and the USA, at the same time, they pretended that nothing was happening, no one noticed anything.

At the end of 2021 - the beginning of 2022, the Minsk process was finally buried, and buried by Kiev, its Western patrons, and a massive strike was planned on Donbass again. A large group of the armed forces of Ukraine was preparing to launch a new offensive on Luhansk and Donetsk, of course, with ethnic cleansing and huge human casualties, hundreds of thousands of refugees. We had to prevent this catastrophe, protect people, we couldn't make any other decision.

Russia has finally recognized the Donetsk and Lugansk People's Republics. After all, we have not recognized them for eight years, we all hoped to come to an agreement. The result is now known. And on February 21, 2022, we concluded treaties of friendship[, cooperation] and mutual assistance with these republics, which we recognized. Question: Did the People's Republics have the right to turn to us for support if we recognized their independence? And did we have the right to recognize their independence, just as they had the right to declare their sovereignty in accordance with the articles I mentioned and the decisions of the International Court of Justice of the United Nations? Did they have the right to declare independence? They had. But if they had such a right and used it, then we had the right to conclude an agreement with them – and we did it, and I repeat: in full compliance with international law and with Article 51 of the UN Charter.

At the same time, we appealed to the Kiev authorities to withdraw their troops from Donbass. I can tell you, there were contacts, we immediately told them: get the troops out of there, and everything will end there. This proposal was almost immediately rejected, simply ignored, although it provided a real opportunity to resolve the issue peacefully.

On February 24, 2022, Russia was forced to announce the start of a special military operation. Addressing the citizens of Russia, the residents of the Donetsk and Lugansk republics, and the Ukrainian society, he then outlined the goals of this operation – to protect people in the Donbas, restore peace, demilitarize and denazify Ukraine and thereby avert threats from our state, restore a balance in the security sphere in Europe.

At the same time, we continued to consider it a priority to achieve these goals through political and diplomatic methods. Let me remind you that already at the very first stage of the special military operation, our country went to negotiations with representatives of the Kiev regime. They were held first in Belarus and in Turkey. We tried to convey our main message: respect the choice of Donbass, the will of the people living there, withdraw troops, stop the shelling of peaceful cities and towns. Nothing else is needed, the rest of the issues will be resolved in the future. The answer was: no, we will fight. Obviously, this was the team from the Western hosts, and now I will also say this.

At that time, in February-March 2022, our troops, as you know, approached Kiev. There is a lot of speculation about this in Ukraine and in the West both then and now.

What do I want to say about this? Our formations really stood at Kiev, and the military departments and the power unit had different proposals on options for our possible further actions, but there was no political decision on storming the three million city, no matter what anyone said or speculated.
In fact, it was nothing more than an operation to force the Ukrainian regime to peace. The troops were there to push the Ukrainian side to negotiate, to try to find acceptable solutions and thereby end the war unleashed by Kiev against Donbass back in 2014, to resolve issues that pose a threat to the security of our country, to the security of Russia.

Strangely enough, as a result, it was really possible to reach agreements that, in principle, suited both Moscow and Kiev. These agreements were put on paper and initialed in Istanbul by the head of the Ukrainian negotiating delegation. This means that the Kiev authorities were satisfied with such a solution to the issue.

The document was called the "Treaty on Permanent Neutrality and Guarantees of Ukraine's Security." It was of a compromise nature, but its key points were in line with our fundamental requirements, solved the tasks that were stated as the main ones, even at the beginning of a special military operation. In particular, strange as it may seem, I would like to draw your attention to the demilitarization and denazification of Ukraine. And here we also managed to find difficult interchanges. They are complicated, but they have been found. Namely, it was meant that the Ukrainian law on the prohibition of Nazi ideology and any of its manifestations would be adopted. It's all written there.

In addition, Ukraine, in exchange for international security guarantees, would limit the size of its armed forces, commit not to join military alliances, not to allow foreign military bases, not to deploy them and contingents, not to conduct military exercises on its territory. Everything is written on paper.

For our part, also understanding Ukraine's security concerns, we agreed that Ukraine, without formally joining NATO, would receive guarantees practically similar to those enjoyed by members of this alliance. It was not an easy decision for us, but we recognized the legality of Ukraine's demands to ensure its security and, in principle, did not object to the formulations proposed by Kiev. These are the formulations proposed by Kiev, and we generally did not object to them, realizing that the main thing is to stop the bloodshed and the war in Donbas.

On March 29, 2022, we withdrew our troops from Kiev, because we were assured that it was necessary to create the necessary conditions for the completion of the political negotiation process, for the completion of this process. And that one of the parties should not sign such agreements, as our Western colleagues said, with a gun to his temple. Well, we agreed to that, too.

However, immediately, the day after the withdrawal of Russian troops from Kiev, the Ukrainian leadership suspended its participation in the negotiation process, staging a well-known provocation in Bucha, and refused the prepared version of the agreements. I think today it is clear why this dirty provocation was needed – to somehow explain the rejection of the results that were achieved during the negotiations. The path to peace has been rejected again.

This was done, as we now know, at the behest of Western curators, including the former British Prime Minister, during whose visit to Kiev it was explicitly stated: no agreements, it is necessary to defeat Russia on the battlefield, to achieve its strategic defeat. And they began to intensively pump Ukraine with weapons, talking about the need to inflict a strategic defeat on us, as I just recalled. And some time later, as everyone knows, the President of Ukraine issued a decree forbidding his representatives and even himself to conduct any negotiations with Moscow. This episode with our attempt to solve the problem by peaceful means again ended in nothing.

By the way, to the topic of negotiations. Now I would like to make another episode public in this audience, maybe. I haven't talked about this publicly before either, but some of those present know about it. After the Russian army occupied part of the Kherson and Zaporizhia regions, many Western politicians offered their mediation in the peaceful end of the conflict. One of them was on a working visit to Moscow on March 5, 2022. And we accepted his mediation efforts, especially since during the conversation he referred to the fact that he had enlisted the support of the leaders of Germany and France, as well as high-ranking representatives of the United States.

During the conversation, our foreign guest asked about a curious episode, he said: if you are helping Donbass, then why are Russian troops in the south of Ukraine, including the Kherson and Zaporizhia regions? The answer from our side was that this was the decision of the Russian General Staff to plan the operation. And today I will add that the idea was to bypass part of the fortified areas that the Ukrainian authorities built in the Donbas over eight years, primarily to liberate Mariupol.

Then a clarification followed from a foreign colleague – a professional person, we must pay tribute: will our Russian troops remain in the Kherson and Zaporizhia regions? and what will happen to these regions after they achieve their goals? I replied that, in general, I do not rule out the preservation of Ukrainian sovereignty over these territories, however, provided that Russia has a strong land connection with Crimea.

That is, Kiev must guarantee the so–called easement - the legally formalized right of Russia's access to the Crimean Peninsula through the Kherson and Zaporizhia regions. This is an important political decision. And of course, naturally, in the final version it would not be adopted alone, but only after consultations with the Security Council, with other structures, of course, after discussion with citizens, the public of our country and, above all, with residents of the Kherson and Zaporizhia regions.

In the end, we did just that: we asked the opinion of the people themselves and held referendums. And they did as people decided, including in the Kherson and Zaporizhia regions, in the Donetsk and Lugansk People's Republics.

At that time, in March 2022, the negotiating partner announced that in the future he was going to head to Kiev to continue the conversation with colleagues in the Ukrainian capital. We welcomed this, as well as attempts to find a peaceful settlement to the conflict in general, because every day of fighting meant new victims and losses. However, in Ukraine, as we later learned, the services of a Western mediator were not accepted, but on the contrary, as we learned, they accused him of taking pro–Russian positions - in a rather harsh form, I must say, but these are details.

Now, as I said, the situation has radically changed. Residents of the Kherson region and Zaporizhia expressed their position during referendums, the Kherson and Zaporizhia regions, as well as the Donetsk and Lugansk People's Republics, became part of the Russian Federation. There can be no question of violating our national unity. The will of the people to be with Russia is unshakable. The issue is permanently closed and is no longer being discussed.

I want to repeat again: it was the West that prepared and provoked the Ukrainian crisis, and now it is doing everything to prolong this crisis indefinitely, weaken and mutually harden the people of Russia and Ukraine.

They are sending more and more shipments of ammunition and weapons. Some European politicians have started talking about the possibility of deploying their regular troops in Ukraine. At the same time, as I have already noted, it is the current, true masters of Ukraine – and, unfortunately, these are not the people of Ukraine, but the globalist elites located overseas – who are trying to impose on the Ukrainian executive branch the burden of making unpopular decisions among the people, including further lowering the military age.

Now, as you know, it is 25 years old, the next stage may be 23, then 20, 18 or 18 at once. And then, of course, they will get rid of those figures who will make these unpopular decisions under pressure from the West, throw them out as unnecessary, dumping all responsibility on them, and put in this place other people who are also dependent on the West, but not yet with such a tarnished reputation.

Hence, perhaps, the idea of canceling the next presidential election in Ukraine. Now those in power will do everything, then put them in the basket – and they will continue to do what they consider necessary.
In this regard, I would like to remind you about what Kiev now prefers not to remember, and in the West they prefer not to talk about it. What is it about? Back in May 2014, the Constitutional Court of Ukraine ruled that – further quote – "The President is elected for five years, regardless of whether he is elected in early or regular elections." In addition, the Constitutional Court of Ukraine noted that – further quote – "the constitutional status of the President does not contain norms that would establish a term other than five years." End of quote, period. The court's decision was final, not subject to appeal. That's it.

What does this mean in relation to the current situation? The presidential term of the previously elected head of Ukraine expired along with his legitimacy, which cannot be restored by any tricks. I will not talk in detail now about the background of the decision of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine on the presidential term. It is clear that it was connected with attempts to legitimize the 2014 coup d'etat. But nevertheless, there is such a verdict, and this is a legal fact. He calls into question all attempts to justify today's spectacle of the cancellation of the elections.

In fact, the current tragic page in Ukraine's history began with the forceful seizure of power, as I have already said, an unconstitutional coup in 2014. I repeat: the source of the current Kiev regime is an armed coup. And now the circle has closed – the executive power in Ukraine is again, as in 2014, usurped and held illegally, in fact it is illegitimate.

I will say more: the situation with the cancellation of the elections is an expression of the very character, the real interior of the current Kiev regime, which grew out of the armed coup of 2014, is tied to it and its roots are there. And the fact that, having canceled the elections, they continue to cling to power, these are actions that are directly prohibited by Article 5 of the Constitution of Ukraine. I quote: "The right to determine and change the constitutional order in Ukraine belongs exclusively to the people and cannot be usurped by the state, its bodies or officials." In addition, such actions fall under article 109 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, which specifically refers to the violent change or overthrow of the constitutional order or seizure of State power, as well as conspiracy to commit such actions.

In 2014, such usurpation was justified in the name of the revolution, and now – by military action. But the meaning of this does not change. In fact, we are talking about a conspiracy of the executive power of Ukraine, the leadership of the Verkhovna Rada, the parliamentary majority controlled by it, aimed at usurping state power (it cannot be called in any other way), which is a criminal offense under Ukrainian law.

Further. The Constitution of Ukraine does not provide for the possibility of canceling or postponing the elections of the President of the country, the continuation of his powers in connection with the martial law, which is now being referred to. What is in the Ukrainian basic law? So this is the fact that during martial law, the elections of the Verkhovna Rada may be postponed. This is article 83 of the country's Constitution.

So Ukrainian legislation has provided for the only exception when the powers of a public authority are extended for the period of martial law and elections are not held. And this applies exclusively to the Verkhovna Rada. This marks the status of the Parliament of Ukraine as a permanent body under martial law.

In other words, it is the Verkhovna Rada that is a legitimate body today, unlike the executive branch. Ukraine is not a presidential republic, but a parliamentary-presidential one. That's the point.

Moreover, the Chairman of the Verkhovna Rada, acting President, by virtue of articles 106 and 112, is endowed with special powers, including in the field of defense, security, and the Supreme Command of the armed forces. Everything is written there in black and white.

By the way, in the first half of this year, Ukraine concluded a package of bilateral agreements on security cooperation and long-term support with a number of European states. Now there is a similar document with the United States.

Since May 21 of this year, the question of the powers and legitimacy of representatives of the Ukrainian side who sign such documents has naturally arisen. We don't care, as they say, let them sign whatever they want. It is clear that there is a political and propaganda component here. The United States and its satellites somehow want to support their henchmen, give them weight and legitimacy.

Nevertheless, if later in the same USA they conduct a serious legal examination of such an agreement (I'm not talking about the essence now, but about the legal component), then the question will certainly arise: who signed these documents and with what authority? And it turns out that all this is a bluff and the contract is negligible, and the whole structure will crumble, of course, if there is a desire to analyze the situation. You can pretend that everything is fine, but there is nothing normal there, I read it. Everything is written in the documents, everything is written in the Constitution.

Let me also remind you that after the start of the special military operation, the West launched a stormy and very cavalier campaign, trying to isolate Russia in the international arena. Today, it is clear to everyone, it is obvious that this attempt failed, but the West, of course, did not abandon its idea to build some kind of international anti-Russian coalition, to exert the appearance of pressure on Russia. We understand that too.

As you know, they have begun to actively promote the initiative of holding the so-called high-level international conference on peace in Ukraine in Switzerland. Moreover, it is planned to hold it immediately after the summit of the Group of Seven, that is, the group of those who, in fact, ignited the conflict in Ukraine with their policies. What the organizers of the meeting in Switzerland propose is just another trick to distract everyone's attention, reverse the cause and effect of the Ukrainian crisis, put the discussion on the wrong track and to some extent mark the appearance of legitimacy of the current executive power in Ukraine once again.

Therefore, it is natural that no really fundamental issues that underlie the current crisis of international security and stability, the true roots of the Ukrainian conflict in Switzerland, of course, are going to be discussed in principle, despite all attempts to give a more or less decent appearance to the conference agenda.

Already, we can expect that everything will come down to general demagogic conversations and a new set of accusations against Russia. The idea is easy to read: by any means to pull up as many states as possible and, as a result, present the case as if Western recipes and rules are shared by the entire international community, which means that our country must unconditionally accept them.

As you know, we were not invited to the meeting in Switzerland, of course. After all, in fact, these are not negotiations, but the desire of a group of countries to continue pushing their line, to resolve issues that directly affect our interests and security at their discretion.

In this regard, I would like to emphasize that without Russia's participation, without an honest and responsible dialogue with us, it is impossible to reach a peaceful solution in Ukraine and in general on global European security.

In the meantime, the West ignores our interests, while forbidding Kiev to negotiate, all the time hypocritically calls us to some kind of negotiations. It just looks idiotic: on the one hand, they are forbidden to negotiate with us, but they call us to negotiate and also hint that we refuse to negotiate. It's crazy. But we live in a kind of looking glass just.

But, firstly, to begin with, we would give Kiev the command to lift the ban, self-ban on negotiations with Russia, and secondly, we are ready to sit down at the negotiating table even tomorrow. We understand all the peculiarities of the legal situation, but there are legitimate authorities there, even in accordance with the Constitution, I just said this, there is someone to negotiate with. Please, we are ready. Our conditions for starting such a conversation are simple and boil down to the following.

You know, I'm going to spend some time now to reproduce the entire chain of events that took place once again, so that it is clear that for us what I'm going to say now is not the current situation, but we have always adhered to a certain position, we have always sought peace.

So, these conditions are very simple. Ukrainian troops should be completely withdrawn from the Donetsk, Luhansk People's Republics, Kherson and Zaporizhia regions. Moreover, I would like to draw your attention to the entire territory of these regions within their administrative borders, which existed at the time of their entry into Ukraine.

As soon as Kiev declares that it is ready for such a decision, and begins the real withdrawal of troops from these regions, as well as officially notifies of the rejection of plans to join NATO, an order will immediately follow from our side, literally at the same minute, to cease fire and begin negotiations. I repeat: we will do this immediately. Naturally, at the same time we guarantee an unhindered and safe withdrawal of Ukrainian units and formations.

Of course, we would like to expect that such a decision on the withdrawal of troops, on non-aligned status, and on the beginning of a dialogue with Russia, on which the future existence of Ukraine depends, will be taken independently in Kiev, based on the prevailing realities and guided by the genuine national interests of the Ukrainian people, and not on Western orders, although there are, of course, great doubts about this.

Nevertheless, what do I want to say again in this regard, what should I remind you about? I said that I would like to run the chronology of events again. Let's spend some time on this.
So, during the events on the Maidan in Kiev in 2013-2014, Russia repeatedly offered its assistance in the constitutional resolution of the crisis, organized actually from the outside. Let's return to the chronology of events at the end of February 2014.

On February 18, armed clashes began in Kiev, provoked by the opposition. A number of buildings, including the city hall and the House of Trade Unions, were set on fire. On February 20, unknown snipers opened fire on protesters and law enforcement officers, that is, those who were preparing an armed coup did everything to further push the situation towards violence and radicalization. And those people who were on the streets of Kiev in those days and expressed dissatisfaction with the then government were deliberately used for their own selfish purposes, like cannon fodder. They are doing exactly the same thing today, mobilizing, sending people to slaughter. And yet there was an opportunity for a civilized way out of the situation then.

It is known that on February 21, an agreement was signed between the then President of Ukraine and the opposition on the settlement of the political crisis. Its guarantors, as you know, were the official representatives of Germany, Poland and France. The agreement provided for a return to a parliamentary-presidential form of government, early presidential elections, the formation of a government of national trust, as well as the withdrawal of law enforcement forces from the center of Kiev and the surrender of weapons by the opposition.

I would like to add that the Verkhovna Rada has adopted a law excluding criminal prosecution of protesters. There has been such an agreement that would have made it possible to stop the violence and return the situation to the constitutional field. This agreement was signed, although both in Kiev and in the West they also prefer not to remember it.

Today I will say more about one more important fact, which has also not been publicly heard before, namely, literally at the same hours on February 21, a conversation with my American counterpart took place on the initiative of the American side. The bottom line was as follows: the American leader unequivocally supported the Kiev agreement between the government and the opposition. Moreover, he called it a real breakthrough, a chance for the Ukrainian people so that the violence that broke out would not cross all imaginable boundaries.

And further, during the conversations, we actually worked out the following formula together: Russia will try to convince the then acting President of Ukraine to behave with maximum restraint, not to use the army and law enforcement agencies against protesters. And the United States, accordingly, as it was said, will call on the opposition, as they say, to order, to liberate administrative buildings, to calm down the street.

All this was supposed to create conditions for life in the country to return to normal, to the constitutional and legal field. And in general, we agreed to work together in the name of a stable, peaceful, normally developing Ukraine. We have kept our word completely. The then President of Ukraine, Yanukovych, who in fact did not plan to use the army, nevertheless did not do so and, moreover, even withdrew additional police units from Kiev.

And what about our Western colleagues? On the night of February 22 and then throughout the day that followed, when President Yanukovych left for Kharkiv, where the congress of deputies of the southeastern regions of Ukraine and Crimea was to be held, the radicals, despite all agreements and guarantees from the West (both Europe, as I have just said, and the United States), They forcibly took control of the building of the Rada, the presidential administration, and seized the government. And not a single guarantor of all these agreements on a political settlement – neither the United States nor the Europeans – lifted a finger to fulfill their obligations, to call on the opposition to release the seized administrative facilities, to renounce violence. It is clear that they were not only satisfied with this course of events, it seems that they were the authors of the development of events in this way.

Also, on February 22, 2014, the Verkhovna Rada, in violation of the Constitution of Ukraine, adopted a resolution on the so-called self-removal of the current President Yanukovych from the post of President and scheduled early elections for May 25. That is, an armed coup, provoked from the outside, has taken place. With the tacit consent and direct support of the West, the Ukrainian radicals thwarted all attempts to peacefully get out of the situation.


​

Выступление Президента Российской Федерации В.В.Путина на встрече с руководством Министерства иностранных дел России, Москва, 14 июня 2024 года​

 

[youlik]

Continuation.

Then we persuaded Kiev and the western capitals to start a dialogue with people in the south-east of Ukraine, to respect their interests, rights and freedoms. No, the regime that broke through to power as a result of the coup chose war, launched punitive actions against Donbass in the spring and summer of 2014. Russia has again called for peace.

We have done everything to resolve the most acute problems that have arisen within the framework of the Minsk agreements, but the West and the Kiev authorities, as I have already stressed, were not going to comply with them. Although our Western colleagues, including the head of the White House, assured us in words that the Minsk agreements are important and that they are committed to the processes of their implementation. That this, in their opinion, will allow us to get out of the situation in Ukraine, stabilize it, and take into account the interests of residents of the east. Instead, they actually organized a blockade, as I have already said, of Donbass. The Armed forces of Ukraine have consistently been preparing for a full-scale operation to destroy the Donetsk and Luhansk People's Republics.

The Minsk agreements were finally buried by the hands of the Kiev regime and the West. I'll come back to this one more time. That is why in 2022 Russia was forced to launch a special military operation to end the war in Donbas and protect civilians from genocide.

At the same time, from the very first days we have been putting forward options for a diplomatic solution to the crisis, as I have already said today. These are negotiations in Belarus, Turkey, and the withdrawal of troops from Kiev in order to create conditions for the signing of the Istanbul agreements, which in principle were all agreed upon. But these attempts of ours were eventually rejected again. The West and Kiev have set a course to defeat us. But, as you know, it all failed.

Today we are making another concrete, real peace proposal. If Kiev and the Western capitals also reject it, as before, then in the end it is their business, their political and moral responsibility for the continuation of the bloodshed. Obviously, the realities on the ground, on the line of contact, will continue to change not in favor of the Kiev regime. And the conditions for starting negotiations will be different.

I emphasize the main thing: the essence of our proposal is not some kind of temporary truce or suspension of fire, as the West wants, in order to restore losses, rearm the Kiev regime, prepare it for a new offensive. I repeat: this is not about freezing the conflict, but about its final conclusion.

And I will say once again: as soon as Kiev agrees to a similar course of events proposed today, agrees to the complete withdrawal of its troops from the DPR and LPR, Zaporizhia and Kherson regions and actually begins this process, we are ready to start negotiations without postponing them.

I repeat: our principled position is the following – the neutral non-aligned nuclear-weapon-free status of Ukraine, its demilitarization and denazification, especially since everyone generally agreed on these parameters during the Istanbul negotiations in 2022. Everything was clear there and on demilitarization, everything was spelled out: the number of this, that, tanks. We've agreed on everything.

Of course, the rights, freedoms and interests of Russian-speaking citizens in Ukraine must be fully ensured, new territorial realities, the status of Crimea, Sevastopol, Donetsk, Lugansk People's Republics, Kherson and Zaporizhia regions as subjects of the Russian Federation must be recognized. In the future, all these basic and fundamental provisions should be fixed in the form of fundamental international agreements. Naturally, this also implies the lifting of all Western sanctions against Russia.

I believe that Russia is offering an option that will really end the war in Ukraine, that is, we call for turning over the tragic page of history and, although it is difficult, gradually, step by step, but to begin to restore relations of trust and good-neighborliness between Russia and Ukraine and in Europe as a whole.

Having settled the Ukrainian crisis, we, including together with our CSTO and SCO partners, who today make a significant, constructive contribution to the search for a peaceful settlement of the Ukrainian crisis, as well as Western, including European states, are ready for dialogue, we could begin the fundamental task that I spoke about at the beginning of my speeches, namely, to create an indivisible system of Eurasian security that takes into account the interests of all, without exception, the states of the continent.

Of course, a literal return to the security proposals that we put forward 25, 15 or even two years ago is impossible, too much has happened, circumstances have changed. However, the basic principles and, most importantly, the subject of the dialogue itself remain unchanged. Russia is aware of its responsibility for global stability and once again confirms its readiness to talk with all countries. But this should not be an imitation of the peace process in order to serve someone's selfish will, someone's selfish interests, but a serious, thorough conversation on all issues, on the entire range of global security issues.

Dear colleagues! I am sure that you all understand well what large-scale tasks Russia faces, how much we need to do, including in the foreign policy area.

I sincerely wish you success in this difficult work to ensure Russia's security, our national interests, strengthen the country's position in the world, promote integration processes and bilateral relations with our partners.

For its part, the leadership of the state will continue to provide the diplomatic department and all those involved in the implementation of Russia's foreign policy with the necessary support.

Thank you again for your work, thank you for your patience and attention to what has been said. I am sure that everything will work out with you.

Thank you very much.



Sergey Lavrov: Dear Vladimir Vladimirovich,

Thank you so much for evaluating our work.

We're trying. Life makes you try even better. We will do it. Everyone understands that this is required for the fate of the country, our people, and, to a certain extent, for the fate of the world.

We will carry out your instructions, which you have just outlined, detailing the concept of Eurasian security, very specifically together with our colleagues from other departments.

We will help resolve individual crisis situations, of which, of course, the Ukrainian crisis is of priority importance to us, in the context of building a new, fair, indivisible security system based on the same principles.

We will use your new initiative in a variety of situations, including in our work within the framework of BRICS, the SCO, with the People's Republic of China, with Latin American and African countries, which are also putting forward their own initiatives, but which are still completely ignored by those who govern Ukraine.

Thank you. We will continue to try.

Выступление Президента Российской Федерации В.В.Путина на встрече с руководством Министерства иностранных дел России, Москва, 14 июня 2024 года

 

[Voyageur]

youlik added this address by Putin above, with a particular piece that looks to the EU itself (see below). Who or where in the west as leaders go, do we ever hear an address to the people that rises above the usual soundbites? It is a rare day and a rarer leader in the west that can can even come close, unless there is an address I'm not aware of.

No wonder they hate Putin in the west, he can be honest and he makes sense. No wonder the Russian people relate to him, he wants a better life for them and its not easy, and the people there know why and who is doing it to them.

When he says that there are "high-ranking European figures" leading the dark information charge against Russia, it is easy to see who they are, and even business leaders and diplomates of any consequence, see who they are. As Putin says, they are "more afraid of falling out of favor with Washington than losing trust of their own people, their own citizens." Yes, that makes sense.

Yes, now Russia's relations with the EU, with a number of European states, have deteriorated, and, as I have stressed many times, it is not our fault. The anti-Russian propaganda campaign, which involves very high-ranking European figures, is accompanied by speculation that Russia is allegedly going to attack Europe. I have said this many times, and there is nothing to repeat in this Room many times: we all understand that this is absolute nonsense, only the justification for the arms race.

In this regard, I will allow myself a small digression. The danger for Europe does not come from Russia. The main threat to Europeans lies in the critical and ever–increasing, almost total dependence on the United States: in the military, political, technological, ideological and information spheres. Europe is increasingly being pushed to the sidelines of global economic development, plunged into chaos of migration and other acute problems, deprived of international subjectivity and cultural identity.

Sometimes it seems that the ruling European politicians and representatives of the European bureaucracy are more afraid of falling out of favor with Washington than losing the trust of their own people, their own citizens. The recent elections to the European Parliament also show this. European politicians swallow humiliation, rudeness, and scandals with surveillance of European leaders, and the United States simply uses them to their advantage: sometimes they are forced to buy their expensive gas – by the way, gas is three or four times more expensive in Europe than in the United States - then, for example, they now require European countries to increase arms supplies to Ukraine. By the way, the requirements are constant here and there. And sanctions are being imposed against them, against economic operators in Europe. They are introduced for a sweet soul, without any hesitation.

Now they are forcing to increase the supply of weapons to Ukraine, expand their capacities for the production of artillery shells. Listen, who will need these shells when the conflict in Ukraine ends? How can this ensure the military security of Europe? Unclear. The United States itself is investing in military technologies, and in the technologies of tomorrow: in space, in modern drones, in shock systems based on new physical principles, that is, in those areas that in the future will determine the nature of armed struggle, and therefore the military and political potential of the powers, their positions in the world. And now they are assigned such a role: invest money where we need it. But this does not increase any European potential. God be with them, let them. For us, maybe this is a good thing, but, in fact, it is.

If Europe wants to preserve itself as one of the independent centers of world development and cultural and civilizational poles of the planet, it certainly needs to be in good, good relations with Russia, and, most importantly, we are ready for this.

 

[Thebull]

This was really a fantastic read. It's a crying shame that this will not be covered in any detail in the US, Britain and the rest of Europe.
Perpetual war seems to be the only way our US friends can keep the gravy train flowing. Is there any leader or political leader in the west who can offer half of what Mr Putin can offer.
Our leaders are lunatics and psychopaths!
We'd be already be in ashes if it wasn't for Russia's restraints under extreme provocation.
Thank for sharing youlik.

 

[Cosmos]

Here is Putins latest speech mentioned above as video:

 

[Cosmos]

A couple of notes:

- Putin and partners are expanding on the ideas and implementation of a multipolar world, including new security structures that might complement (and even substitute at some point?) UN rules

- In typical Putin fashion he once again reached out to everyone including western NATO/EU states to come to their senses, become partners etc: He is reaching out a hand, once again

- Putin gives Ukraine another very concrete, modest and sensible deal/proposal on stopping the war immediately. It could be argued if they don’t even take this now, that they will soon loose even more of their territory which then also can never be returned back. What he said there, depending on how they respond to it, could be the last call before Russia moves in that direction

 

[Ben]

I remember quite a while back some of my favourite analysts predicted something like this. They described a scenario in which Putin will pause, and make a final offer in which Ukraine keeps Odessa, otherwise they will lose a lot more territory. It would be an act intended by Putin to let the record reflect that he tried even at the final hour to let reason prevail.

They predicted that it would be rejected and that is what has happened. Putin knew that, but he is following a process -as much for Russia and its allies as anyone else.

Two words that all of this brings to mind - Caesar and Clemency.