#  > Prikbord >  > Het nieuws van de dag >  Vladimir Poetin - Redevoeringen

## Olive Yao

.
25 april 2005

Jaarlijkse toespraak voor de Federale Vergadering van de Russische Federatie

Kremlin, Moskou

President Vladimir Putin:

Distinguished Members of the Federal Assembly,

Citizens of Russia,

In this Address of 2005 I will dwell on a number of fundamental ideological and political issues. I believe such a discussion is essential at the current stage of Russia's development. The most important social and economic tasks facing us, including specific national projects, were set out in the previous Address. I intend to elaborate them in the coming Budget Address and in a series of other documents.

At the same time I would ask you to consider last year's and this years Address to the Federal Assembly as a unified program of action, as our joint program for the next decade.

I consider the development of Russia as a free and democratic state to be our main political and ideological goal. We use these words fairly frequently, but rarely care to reveal how the deeper meaning of such values as freedom and democracy, justice and legality is translated into life.

Meanwhile, there is a need for such an analysis. The objectively difficult processes going on in Russia are increasingly becoming the subject of heated ideological discussions. And they are all connected with talk about freedom and democracy. Sometimes you can hear that since the Russian people have been silent for centuries, they are not used to or do not need freedom. And for that reason, it is claimed our citizens need constant supervision.

I would like to bring those who think this way back to reality, to the facts. To do so, I will recall once more Russias most recent history.

Above all, we should acknowledge that the collapse of the Soviet Union was a major geopolitical disaster of the century. As for the Russian nation, it became a genuine drama. Tens of millions of our co-citizens and compatriots found themselves outside Russian territory. Moreover, the epidemic of disintegration infected Russia itself.

Individual savings were depreciated, and old ideals destroyed. Many institutions were disbanded or reformed carelessly. Terrorist intervention and the Khasavyurt capitulation that followed damaged the country's integrity. Oligarchic groups  possessing absolute control over information channels  served exclusively their own corporate interests. Mass poverty began to be seen as the norm. And all this was happening against the backdrop of a dramatic economic downturn, unstable finances, and the paralysis of the social sphere.

Many thought or seemed to think at the time that our young democracy was not a continuation of Russian statehood, but its ultimate collapse, the prolonged agony of the Soviet system.

But they were mistaken.

That was precisely the period when the significant developments took place in Russia. Our society was generating not only the energy of self-preservation, but also the will for a new and free life. In those difficult years, the people of Russia had to both uphold their state sovereignty and make an unerring choice in selecting a new vector of development in the thousand years of their history. They had to accomplish the most difficult task: how to safeguard their own values, not to squander undeniable achievements, and confirm the viability of Russian democracy. We had to find our own path in order to build a democratic, free and just society and state.

When speaking of justice, I am not of course referring to the notorious take away and divide by all formula, but extensive and equal opportunities for everybody to develop. Success for everyone. A better life for all.

In the ultimate analysis, by affirming these principles, we should become a free society of free people. But in this context it would be appropriate to remember how Russian society formed an aspiration for freedom and justice, how this aspiration matured in the public mind.

Above all else Russia was, is and will, of course, be a major European power. Achieved through much suffering by European culture, the ideals of freedom, human rights, justice and democracy have for many centuries been our society's determining values.

For three centuries, we  together with the other European nations  passed hand in hand through reforms of Enlightenment, the difficulties of emerging parliamentarism, municipal and judiciary branches, and the establishment of similar legal systems. Step by step, we moved together toward recognizing and extending human rights, toward universal and equal suffrage, toward understanding the need to look after the weak and the impoverished, toward women's emancipation, and other social gains.

I repeat we did this together, sometimes behind and sometimes ahead of European standards.

It is my firm belief that for present-day Russia democratic values are no less important than economic success or peoples social welfare.

First, every law-abiding citizen is only entitled to firm legal guarantees and state protection in a free and just society. And, no doubt, safeguarding rights and freedoms is crucial both to Russia's economic development and its social and political life.

The right to be elected or appointed to a state post, as well as the opportunity to use public services and public information, must be equally available to all the countrys citizens. And any person who breaks the law must know that punishment is inevitable.

Second, only in a free society do economically active citizens have the right to participate in a competitive struggle as equals and choose their partners, and earn accordingly. The prosperity of every individual should be determined by his or her labor and abilities, qualifications, and effort. President Vladimir Putin:

Distinguished Members of the Federal Assembly,

Citizens of Russia,

In this Address of 2005 I will dwell on a number of fundamental ideological and political issues. I believe such a discussion is essential at the current stage of Russia's development. The most important social and economic tasks facing us, including specific national projects, were set out in the previous Address. I intend to elaborate them in the coming Budget Address and in a series of other documents.

At the same time I would ask you to consider last year's and this years Address to the Federal Assembly as a unified program of action, as our joint program for the next decade.

I consider the development of Russia as a free and democratic state to be our main political and ideological goal. We use these words fairly frequently, but rarely care to reveal how the deeper meaning of such values as freedom and democracy, justice and legality is translated into life.

Meanwhile, there is a need for such an analysis. The objectively difficult processes going on in Russia are increasingly becoming the subject of heated ideological discussions. And they are all connected with talk about freedom and democracy. Sometimes you can hear that since the Russian people have been silent for centuries, they are not used to or do not need freedom. And for that reason, it is claimed our citizens need constant supervision.

I would like to bring those who think this way back to reality, to the facts. To do so, I will recall once more Russias most recent history.

Above all, we should acknowledge that the collapse of the Soviet Union was a major geopolitical disaster of the century. As for the Russian nation, it became a genuine drama. Tens of millions of our co-citizens and compatriots found themselves outside Russian territory. Moreover, the epidemic of disintegration infected Russia itself.

Individual savings were depreciated, and old ideals destroyed. Many institutions were disbanded or reformed carelessly. Terrorist intervention and the Khasavyurt capitulation that followed damaged the country's integrity. Oligarchic groups  possessing absolute control over information channels  served exclusively their own corporate interests. Mass poverty began to be seen as the norm. And all this was happening against the backdrop of a dramatic economic downturn, unstable finances, and the paralysis of the social sphere.

Many thought or seemed to think at the time that our young democracy was not a continuation of Russian statehood, but its ultimate collapse, the prolonged agony of the Soviet system.

But they were mistaken.

That was precisely the period when the significant developments took place in Russia. Our society was generating not only the energy of self-preservation, but also the will for a new and free life. In those difficult years, the people of Russia had to both uphold their state sovereignty and make an unerring choice in selecting a new vector of development in the thousand years of their history. They had to accomplish the most difficult task: how to safeguard their own values, not to squander undeniable achievements, and confirm the viability of Russian democracy. We had to find our own path in order to build a democratic, free and just society and state.

When speaking of justice, I am not of course referring to the notorious take away and divide by all formula, but extensive and equal opportunities for everybody to develop. Success for everyone. A better life for all.

In the ultimate analysis, by affirming these principles, we should become a free society of free people. But in this context it would be appropriate to remember how Russian society formed an aspiration for freedom and justice, how this aspiration matured in the public mind.

Above all else Russia was, is and will, of course, be a major European power. Achieved through much suffering by European culture, the ideals of freedom, human rights, justice and democracy have for many centuries been our society's determining values.

For three centuries, we  together with the other European nations  passed hand in hand through reforms of Enlightenment, the difficulties of emerging parliamentarism, municipal and judiciary branches, and the establishment of similar legal systems. Step by step, we moved together toward recognizing and extending human rights, toward universal and equal suffrage, toward understanding the need to look after the weak and the impoverished, toward women's emancipation, and other social gains.

I repeat we did this together, sometimes behind and sometimes ahead of European standards.

It is my firm belief that for present-day Russia democratic values are no less important than economic success or peoples social welfare.

----------


## Olive Yao

.
First, every law-abiding citizen is only entitled to firm legal guarantees and state protection in a free and just society. And, no doubt, safeguarding rights and freedoms is crucial both to Russia's economic development and its social and political life.

The right to be elected or appointed to a state post, as well as the opportunity to use public services and public information, must be equally available to all the countrys citizens. And any person who breaks the law must know that punishment is inevitable.

Second, only in a free society do economically active citizens have the right to participate in a competitive struggle as equals and choose their partners, and earn accordingly. The prosperity of every individual should be determined by his or her labor and abilities, qualifications, and effort. Everyone has the right to dispose of what he or she earned at will, including bequeathing it to his/her children.

In that way, the observance of principles of justice is directly connected with the equality of opportunities. And this in turn must be guaranteed by no one other than the state.

Third, the Russian state, if it wants to be just, must help its impoverished citizens and those that cannot work  the disabled, pensioners and orphans. These people must live a decent life and the main benefits must be accessible to them.

All these functions and duties are directly invested in the state by society.

And finally a free and just society has no internal borders or travel restrictions, and is open to the rest of the world. This enables citizens of our country to fully enjoy the benefits of human civilization in its entirety, including education, science, world history and culture.

It is our values that determine our desire to see Russia's state independence grow, and its sovereignty strengthened. Ours is a free nation. And our place in the modern world, I wish to particularly emphasize this, will only depend on how strong and successful we are.

I dealt at such length with these key and on the whole general concepts to show how these principles must be reflected in our daily work. I think these activities should be pursued as a minimum along three lines: first  measures to develop the state; second  strengthening the law, developing the political system, and making the judicial system more effective; and, third  developing the individual and civil societyas a whole.

First, about the state.

You know that in the last five years we have had to tackle difficult tasks to prevent the degradation of state and public institutions in our country. At the same time, we had to create the foundation for development in the next few years and decades. We cleared the debris together and gradually moved ahead. In that sense, the stabilization policy was practically a policy of reaction to the accumulated problems. This policy was, in general, successful. However, it has reached the limit of its effectiveness.

It must be replaced with a policy oriented towards the future. And for that, we must have an efficient state. However, despite many positive changes, this key problem has not been solved so far.

Our bureaucratic apparatus is still largely an exclusive and often arrogant caste regarding state service as an alternative form of business. Therefore, our priority remains making state management more effective, ensuring that officials strictly obey the law, and quality public services are provided to the population.

A specific feature of recent times has been that the dishonest part of our bureaucracy (at the federal and local levels alike) has been particularly keen on using the achieved stability in its own mercenary interests. It started using the favorable conditions and emerging opportunities to achieve its own selfish goals rather than to increase the prosperity of society.

It is worth mentioning that in this respect the party and corporate elites behave no better than the state bureaucracy.

Today, when we have created the necessary preconditions for serious and large-scale work, if the state falls into the trap of finding simplified solutions, the bureaucratic reaction will only benefit from it. Instead of a breakthrough, we will face stagnation. The potential of civil society will not be used effectively, while the level of corruption, irresponsibility and lack of professionalism will rocket, throwing us back on the way of economic and intellectual degradation and creating a growing rift between the authorities and public interests, with state apparatus refusing to heed public requests.

I repeat: we cannot be satisfied with the current situation in the country. While freeing major mass media from the oligarchs censorship, we failed to protect them from the unhealthy zeal of certain officials. Focusing the efforts of law enforcement bodies on the fight against crime, including tax evasion, we encountered frequent violations of the rights of our business community, and sometimes a blatant racket on the part of state officials.

Many bureaucrats believe this situation will never be changed, and such violations are the inevitable result of past and current polices.

I must disappoint them. Our plans do not include handing over the country to the inefficient rule of a corrupted bureaucracy.

We proceed from the idea that it is both essential and economically advantageous to have developed democratic procedures in the country; that it is politically prudent to maintain a responsible dialogue with society. Therefore, a modern Russian official must learn to speak with the public using the modern language of cooperation, the language of common public interest, dialogue and real democracy, rather than the jargon of military orders.

This is our fundamental approach and we will strictly follow it.

Another important task in the sphere of state development is bolstering the Federation. The major goal that we are pursuing is to build an effective state system within the current national borders.

You know that constituent members of the Federation have recently begun to display a desire to unite. It is a positive trend, and it is important to avoid turning it into another political campaign. We should not forget that Federation members do not merge for the sake of unification itself, but to make their management more efficient, and their social and economic policies more effective, which will ultimately lead to increased social prosperity.

Naturally, this process is complicated, but in certain cases, and I want to stress, not always or everywhere, but in certain cases, it is the only way to consolidate the states resources to manage such a unique and vast country as Russia. After all, many constituent members of the Russian Federation have compound subordination, and they often have to face problems related to the delineation of powers between various state bodies (primarily in the sphere of taxation and budget allocation). However, all the efforts have so far been wasted on disputes and coordination, and sometimes even on legal action in the courts, including the Constitutional Court. All this is happening when new opportunities have already emerged and we need to implement a number of large national projects.

You know specific examples well. The ongoing unification of the Krasnoyarsk Region, the Taimyr and the Evenkia autonomous districts must help the development of new deposits of natural resources and provide the eastern regions of Siberia with constant energy supplies. Clear and sound administrative decisions must open up new opportunities for major investments in the development of Russias regions.

In my opinion a third important task is to pursue vigorous policy in promoting liberalization in private enterprise. Id like to focus on measures to stabilize civil law relations and to achieve a dramatic increase in opportunities for free enterprise and capital investment.

First, measures need to be taken to consolidate civil law relations. I have already mentioned that we should reduce the statute of limitations for minor transactions to three years. Now this statute is 10 years. This proposal is already in the focus of a broad discussion and for this reason I would like to emphasize once again the ideas that guided us.

Stability of the right to private property is the alpha and omega of any business. The rules to which the state adheres in this sphere should be clear to everyone, and, importantly, these rules should be stable. This enables people developing their business to plan normally both this business and their own lives. This allows citizens to feel comfortable and conclude, without any apprehensions, contracts on such vital issues as the acquisition of housing or its privatization, which has already been almost completed in our country. In general, this encourages people to buy property and expand production.

At the same time, those people who deviated from law in business transactions cannot be ignored. The state should certainly respond to that. But I must point out that three years is also a big term that gives both the parties concerned and the state enough time for clearing up their relations in court. Id like to emphasize that a three-year statute of limitations has been the longest one in our legislation in the last hundred years. Ten years is too long both in terms of economic and legal considerations. Such a term creates a host of uncertainties, primarily dampening the ardor of the state, and not only of the state but also of other participants in the process. Incidentally, we have submitted our proposals on the relevant amendments to law to the Government of the Russian Federation. Regrettably, we have not heard a thing from them so far even though all they have to do is to amend one word in one clause. I request that formal agreement be accelerated.

Secondly, it is necessary to help our citizens legalize in a simplified way the real estate that belongs to them de facto. I mean garages, housing, suburban cottages and the relevant land plots in different cooperative societies and horticultural associations.

The legalization procedures should be as simple as possible, while the relevant paperwork should not create additional difficulties for our citizens. Incidentally, this will open up such additional opportunities as the legal inheritance of property, and will allow citizens to take out a mortgage in a bank with this property as security.

And, thirdly, the flow of capital accumulated by our citizens needs to be encouraged into our national economy. Citizens should be allowed to declare the money they have saved in previous years, in the previous period, in a simplified procedure. This procedure should be accompanied by only two provisions: one should pay a 13 per cent income tax and deposit the relevant sums into Russian bank accounts.

This money should work in our economy, in our country, not lie in offshore zones.

----------


## Olive Yao

.
Another, systemic task of state development, in my view, is concerned with the work of tax and customs agencies. I believe their priority task should be to check compliance with tax and customs legislation, rather than the fulfillment of some plans to collect taxes and duties.

The fiscal agencies in any country should obviously exercise control over the correct payment of taxes. But it would be fair to say that our tax system has been in the making in the past few years; it took time and rich legal and judicial practice to receive clear answers to all of our questions.

The fiscal agencies must not close their eyes to legal violations. But we should find ways for back taxes from previous years to be repaid in the interests of the state without destroying the economy and pushing business into a corner. The tax agencies must not terrorize business by returning to the same problem again and again. They should work rhythmically, promptly reacting to violations but spotlighting above all inspections of the current period.

I believe that all of the above measures will help stabilize civil transactions, create additional guarantees for the long-term development of business, and ultimately ensure greater freedom of enterprise and a fair approach taken by the state to it.

And finally, one more crucial problem: Russia is extremely interested in a major inflow of private, including foreign, investment. This is our strategic choice and strategic approach.

In practice, investors sometimes face all kinds of limitations, including some that are explained by national security reasons, though these limitations are not legally formalized. This uncertainty creates problems for the state and investors.

It is time we clearly determined the economic sectors where the interests of bolstering Russias independence and security call for predominant control by national, including state, capital. I mean some infrastructure facilities, enterprises that fulfill state defense orders, mineral deposits of strategic importance for the future of the country and future generations, as well as infrastructural monopolies.

We should draft and legally formalize a system of criteria to determine the limitations on foreign participation in such sectors of the economy. Simultaneously a corresponding list of industries or facilities will be determined that shall not be extended or receive extended interpretation. Some industrialized countries use this approach and we should also use it.

While maintaining such control and limitations in some economic sectors, we should create favorable conditions for the inflow of private capital to all the other attractive sectors. I think you will agree that, regrettably, we have accomplished too little in this sphere so far.

I repeat, all of these decisions must be formalized in legislation. The goal of these measures is apparent: investors do not need riddles and charades. They will invest their money only in a stable economy with clear and comprehensible rules of the game. And this approach will be fair to both society and the state, which should protect its prospective interests and take care of the countrys development for years and decades to come.

Dear Colleagues,

The creation of an effective legal and political system is an essential condition for developing democracy in our country. But developing democratic procedures should not come at the cost of law and order, the stability that we worked so hard to achieve, or the continued pursuit of our chosen economic course.

The democratic road we have chosen is independent in nature, a road along which we move ahead, all the while taking into account our own specific internal circumstances. But we must and we shall move forward, basing our action on the laws and on the guarantees our constitution provides.

Of course, the state authorities must refrain from any abuse of the administrative levers they have at their disposal, and must work continually to open up new opportunities for building up the institutions of a genuine democracy in our country.

To deny our people, to deny ourselves the ability to live according to democratic laws is to have no respect either for ourselves or for our fellow citizens and would signify that we neither understand the past nor see the future.

State power, wrote the great Russian philosopher Ivan Ilyin, has its own limits defined by the fact that it is authority that reaches people from outside State power cannot oversee and dictate the creative states of the soul and mind, the inner states of love, freedom and goodwill. The state cannot demand from its citizens faith, prayer, love, goodness and conviction. It cannot regulate scientific, religious and artistic creation It should not intervene in moral, family and daily private life, and only when extremely necessary should it impinge on peoples economic initiative and creativity. Let us not forget this.

Russia is a country that has chosen democracy through the will of its own people. It chose this road of its own accord and it will decide itself how best to ensure that the principles of freedom and democracy are realised here, taking into account our historic, geopolitical and other particularities and respecting all fundamental democratic norms. As a sovereign nation, Russia can and will decide for itself the timeframe and conditions for its progress along this road.

But consistent development of democracy in Russia is possible only through legal means. All methods of fighting for national, religious and other interests that are outside the law contradict the very principles of democracy and the state will react to such methods firmly but within the law.

We want all our law-abiding citizens to be able to be proud of the work of our law enforcement agencies and not to cross the street when they see someone in uniform. There can be no place in our law enforcement agencies for people whose primary aim is to fill their own pockets rather than uphold the law. The motivation for our law enforcement officers should be above all about providing quality protection of our citizens rights and freedoms.

Finally, if part of Russian society continues to see the court system as corrupt, there can be no speaking of an effective justice system in our country.

Overall, I want to note that we need principally new approaches to fighting crime in our country. The relevant decisions will be prepared.

Eradicating the sources of terrorist aggression on Russian territory is an integral part of ensuring law and order in our country. We have taken many serious steps in the fight against terrorism over recent years. But we cannot allow ourselves to have any illusions  the threat is still very real, we still find ourselves being dealt serious blows and criminals are still committing terrible crimes in the aim of frightening society. We need to summon our courage and continue our work to eradicate terrorism. The moment we show signs of weakness, lack of firmness, the losses would become immeasurably greater and could result in a national disaster.

I hope for energetic work to strengthen security in the southern part of Russia and firmly establish the values of freedom and justice there. Developing the economy, creating new jobs and building social and production infrastructure are prerequisites for this work.

I support the idea of holding parliamentary elections in the Republic of Chechnya this year. These elections should lay the foundation for stability and for developing democracy in this region.

I want to note that the North Caucasus region already has good conditions for achieving rapid economic growth. The region has one of Russias best-developed transport infrastructures, a qualified labour force, and surveys show that the number of people in this region wanting to start up their own business is higher than the national average. At the same time, however, the shadow economy accounts for a bigger share in this region and there is criminalisation of economic relations in general. In this respect, the authorities should not only work on strengthening the law enforcement and court systems in the region, but should also help develop business activity among the population.

We should be paying no less attention to other strategically important regions of the Russian Federation. Here, I am referring to the Far East, Kaliningrad Region and other border areas. In these areas we should be concentrating state resources on expanding the transport, telecommunications and energy infrastructure, including through the creation of cross-continent corridors. These regions should become key bases for our cooperation with our neighbours.

Esteemed Assembly,

Very soon, on May 9, we shall celebrate the 60th anniversary of victory. This day can be justly called the day of civilisations triumph over fascism. Our common victory enabled us to defend the principles of freedom, independence and equality between all peoples and nations.

It is clear for us that this victory was not achieved through arms alone but was won also through the strong spirit of all the peoples who were united at that time within a single state. Their unity emerged victorious over inhumanity, genocide and the ambitions of one nation to impose its will on others.

But the terrible lessons of the past also define imperatives for the present. And Russia, bound to the former Soviet republics  now independent countries  through a common history, and through the Russian language and the great culture that we share, cannot stay away from the common desire for freedom.

Today, with independent countries now formed and developing in the post-Soviet area, we want to work together to correspond to humanistic values, open up broad possibilities for personal and collective success, achieve for ourselves the standards of civilisation we have worked hard for  standards that would emerge as a result of common economic, humanitarian and legal space.

While standing up for Russias foreign political interests, we also want our closest neighbours to develop their economies and strengthen their international authority. We would like to achieve synchronisation of the pace and parameters of reform processes underway in Russia and the other members of the Commonwealth of Independent States. We are ready to draw on the genuinely useful experience of our neighbours and also to share with them our own ideas and the results of our work.

Our objectives on the international stage are very clear  to ensure the security of our borders and create favourable external conditions for the resolution of our domestic problems. We are not inventing anything new and we seek to make use of all that European civilisation and world history has accumulated.

Also certain is that Russia should continue its civilising mission on the Eurasian continent. This mission consists in ensuring that democratic values, combined with national interests, enrich and strengthen our historic community.

We consider international support for the respect of the rights of Russians abroad an issue of major importance, one that cannot be the subject of political and diplomatic bargaining. We hope that the new members of NATO and the European Union in the post-Soviet area will show their respect for human rights, including the rights of ethnic minorities, through their actions.

Countries that do not respect and cannot guarantee human rights themselves do not have the right to demand that others respect these same rights.

We are also ready to take part in an effective partnership with all countries in order to find solutions to global problems  from finding effective ways to protect the environment to space exploration, and from preventing global man-made disasters to addressing the threat of the spread of AIDS. And of course we are also ready to join efforts to fight challenges to the modern world order such as international terrorism, cross-border crime and drug trafficking.

----------


## Olive Yao

.
I would like now to say a few words about our priorities for developing civil society. [Sergei] Witte once wrote, The state does not so much create as add substance. The genuine creators are all the citizens themselves The aim should be not to hinder independence, but to develop it and encourage it in every way.

This piece of advice is still just as relevant today.

I think that our primary task should be to ensure that our citizens have objective information. This is a political issue of vital importance and it is directly linked to putting the principles of freedom and justice into practice in our state policy.

I think that in this respect the draft law on information openness of the state agencies is a very important document. It is important that it be passed as soon as possible. Its implementation will enable people to receive more objective information about the work of the state bodies and will help them to protect their own interests.

I also wanted to raise another, very specific, issue here today, namely, what must be done to ensure that national television fully takes into account Russian civil societys most relevant needs and protects its interests. We need to establish guarantees that will ensure that state television and radio broadcasting are as objective as possible, free from the influence of any particular groups, and that they reflect the whole spectrum of public and political forces in the country.

I propose reinforcing the Public Councils powers in the area of civilian control over respect for freedom of speech by the television channels. To do this, a commission could be established with the Public Council that would be made up of people respected by the professional community, who would ensure the independence of broadcasting policy and bring in qualified specialists to help them in their work. To this effect, I plan to introduce to the State Duma the relevant amendments to the legislation. Furthermore, all parliamentary factions should have access to the media.

I am sure that these proposed measures will improve the quality and objectivity of the information our society receives today, intensify cultural life and enable everyone, even those in the most remote corners of our country, to have access to the immense wealth of achievements that our modern world offers.

Finally, I would like to say a few words about guarantees for the activities of political parties in parliament. I think that every faction should have an equal opportunity to express its views on the key development issues facing the country, propose its representatives to head committees and commissions and seek to have the problems that interest it included on the agenda.

I think we also need to confirm by law the procedures for parliamentary investigations.

Furthermore, in the interests of continuing to strengthen the role of political parties in forming state power, I propose that the State Council of Russia discuss precisions to the new procedures for appointing the chief officials of the executive branch of power in the regions. The President could propose a representative of the party that wins the regional elections as candidate for this post.

Dear colleagues,

Having spoken about the fundamental problems of developing the state and civil society, I cannot ignore a number of concrete issues that are long since needing to be addressed.

It is my firm conviction that success in many areas of our life depends on resolving the acute demographic problems we face. We cannot accept the fact that on average Russian women live 10 years less than women in Western European countries, and Russian men live a whole 16 years less on average.

But not only can many of the reasons for this mortality rate in Russia be addressed, in many cases the costs involved would not even be very high. For example, almost 100 people a day are killed here in traffic accidents. The reasons for these accidents are well known and we should take a whole series of measures to improve this dramatic situation.

We keep coming back to the state of the healthcare sector. An active discussion is underway today to find ways of improving this sector. Without anticipating the final decision, I can say that I am sure that, above all, we need to ensure that medical care is accessible and of high quality, and we need to revive the traditions of preventive medicine as a part of the Russian healthcare system.

I particularly want to stress another, more complex issue for our society  the consequences of alcoholism and drug addiction. Around 40,000 people a year die from alcohol poisoning in Russia, above all as a result of drinking alcohol surrogates. Most of these people are young men, the breadwinners for their families. But prohibitive methods will not resolve this problem. Our work should be focused on encouraging the young generation to make a conscious choice in favour of a healthy way of life, encourage them to get involved in sports and physical culture. Every young man should be aware that a healthy way of life is a key to success, a key to his personal success. But I did not see any desire to address this problem at federal level when I looked through the budget programmes for next year and the governments investment programmes. We realise that these issues come more under the competence of the regional and municipal authorities, but without support from the federal government we will not manage to resolve this problem. I ask you to make the necessary changes.

The low birth rate is another national problem. There are more and more families in the country with just one child. We need to make being a mother and being a father more prestigious and create conditions that will encourage people to give birth and raise children.

Incidentally, I think it would be a good decision to abolish the inheritance tax, because billion-dollar fortunes are all hidden away in off-shore zones anyway and are not handed down here. Meanwhile, people have to pay sums they often cannot even afford here just for some little garden shack.

I also think that an increase in our population should be accompanied by a carefully planned immigration policy. It is in our interest to receive a flow of legal and qualified workers. But there are still a lot of companies in Russia making use of the advantages of illegal immigration. Without any rights, after all, illegal immigrants are convenient in that they can be exploited endlessly. They are also a potential danger from the point of view of breaking the law.

But the issue here is not just one of scaling back the shadow sector of the economy but of bringing real benefit for the entire Russian state and society.

Ultimately, every legal immigrant should have the chance to become a Russian citizen.

We cannot afford to postpone tackling these problems. We need to act simultaneously to create conditions that will encourage people to have children, lower the mortality rate and bring order to immigration. I am sure that our society is up to these tasks and that we will gradually stabilise the size of the Russian population.

We also must find definitive solutions for other problems that have built up over the years. This concerns, above all, wages for teachers, medical doctors, people working in the arts and sciences, and servicemen. They should finally begin to see benefits from the economic growth in the country.

It is they who carry the responsibility for ensuring that future generations of Russian citizens grow up healthy and educated and preserve the traditions and spiritual values of their forebears.

It is they who set the modern standards for societys development and take part in forming the countrys current and future elite. They are the guardians of our countrys rich cultural and spiritual heritage. This is why the quality of these peoples work is no less important for the country than economic growth results. What kind of country we will be living in tomorrow, what level of freedom, justice and democracy we will have, and how reliably our country will be defended all depends on them.

But at the same time, the level of real wages in these sectors is still lower than it was at the end of the 1980s. The average public sector wage is still considerably lower than the average wage in the country in general. Of the common tariff grids 18 rates, 12 are lower than the survival minimum. In other words, most employees of budget-funded organisations face a very high risk of ending up in poverty. This humiliating situation is stopping people from being able to work effectively and creatively.

I think we need to increase public sector wages at least 1.5-fold in real terms over the next three years. In other words, public sector wages should rise at least 1.5 times faster than prices for consumer goods.

I stress that what we are talking about here is the necessary minimum below which we must not and do not have the right to go. In this way, we could substantially reduce the disparity between public and private sector wages in the country. And we should also remember that setting wages for most budget-funded organisations and paying them on time is the responsibility of the regional authorities. We need to establish inter-budgetary relations in such a way so that the regions are also able to increase public sector wages at a faster pace.

But we should also keep in mind that simply increasing wages is not going to solve all the problems in the public sector. The time has long since come for introducing financial solutions and mechanisms that will encourage better results and more effective organisation of the social sphere. Financial policy should be used as an incentive for increasing the accessibility and quality of social services.

Finally, we need to create conditions for actively raising investment from other sources besides state funds into the healthcare, education, science and culture sectors.

I want to stress also that the objectives of modernising the education and healthcare systems that were set out in the previous Address should still be pursued, but pursued very carefully.

Reorganisation for its own sake is not the aim. The aim is to improve the quality of service, make services accessible for the majority of citizens and ensure that they have a genuine influence on socio-economic progress in the country.

In speaking of our values, I would like to raise another issue I think is very important, that of the level of public morals and culture.

It is well known that a good business reputation has always been a prerequisite for concluding deals, and human decency has been a necessary condition for taking part in state and public life. Russian society has always condemned immorality, and indecent behaviour has always been publicly reprimanded.

Law and morals, politics and morality have traditionally been considered close and related concepts in Russia, at least, such was always the declared ideal and aim. Despite the problems we all know, the level of morality in tsarist Russia and during the Soviet years was always a very meaningful scale and criteria for peoples reputation, at work, in society and in private life. No one can deny that values such as close friendship, mutual assistance, trust, comradeship and reliability have flourished in Russia over the course of centuries, becoming enduring and immutable values here.

Prominent Russian legal theorist, Professor Lev Petrazhitsky, noted that the duties to help the needy and pay workers their agreed wages are above all ethical norms of conduct. I want to note that this was written almost 100 years ago, in 1910.

I think that unless it follows the basic moral standards accepted in civilised society, Russian business is unlikely to earn a respectable reputation. It will be unlikely to earn respect, not just in the wider world, but even more important, within its own country. After all, many of the difficulties faced by the economy and by politics in Russia today have their roots in precisely this problem of the greater part of Russian society having no trust in the wealthy class.

----------


## Olive Yao

.
We should remember that corruption among state officials and rising crime are also consequences of the lack of trust and moral strength in our society. Russia will begin to prosper only when the success of each individual depends not only on his level of wealth but also on his decency and level of culture.

Dear citizens of Russia,

Esteemed Federal Assembly,

Our country is about to celebrate the anniversary of our great victory, a victory that came at the terrible cost of countless lives and sacrifices.

The soldiers of the Great Patriotic War are justly called the soldiers of freedom. They saved the world from an ideology of hatred and tyranny. They defended our countrys sovereignty and independence. We will always remember this.

Our people fought against slavDear colleagues,

Having spoken about the fundamental problems of developing the state and civil society, I cannot ignore a number of concrete issues that are long since needing to be addressed.

It is my firm conviction that success in many areas of our life depends on resolving the acute demographic problems we face. We cannot accept the fact that on average Russian women live 10 years less than women in Western European countries, and Russian men live a whole 16 years less on average.

But not only can many of the reasons for this mortality rate in Russia be addressed, in many cases the costs involved would not even be very high. For example, almost 100 people a day are killed here in traffic accidents. The reasons for these accidents are well known and we should take a whole series of measures to improve this dramatic situation.

We keep coming back to the state of the healthcare sector. An active discussion is underway today to find ways of improving this sector. Without anticipating the final decision, I can say that I am sure that, above all, we need to ensure that medical care is accessible and of high quality, and we need to revive the traditions of preventive medicine as a part of the Russian healthcare system.

I particularly want to stress another, more complex issue for our society  the consequences of alcoholism and drug addiction. Around 40,000 people a year die from alcohol poisoning in Russia, above all as a result of drinking alcohol surrogates. Most of these people are young men, the breadwinners for their families. But prohibitive methods will not resolve this problem. Our work should be focused on encouraging the young generation to make a conscious choice in favour of a healthy way of life, encourage them to get involved in sports and physical culture. Every young man should be aware that a healthy way of life is a key to success, a key to his personal success. But I did not see any desire to address this problem at federal level when I looked through the budget programmes for next year and the governments investment programmes. We realise that these issues come more under the competence of the regional and municipal authorities, but without support from the federal government we will not manage to resolve this problem. I ask you to make the necessary changes.

The low birth rate is another national problem. There are more and more families in the country with just one child. We need to make being a mother and being a father more prestigious and create conditions that will encourage people to give birth and raise children.

Incidentally, I think it would be a good decision to abolish the inheritance tax, because billion-dollar fortunes are all hidden away in off-shore zones anyway and are not handed down here. Meanwhile, people have to pay sums they often cannot even afford here just for some little garden shack.

I also think that an increase in our population should be accompanied by a carefully planned immigration policy. It is in our interest to receive a flow of legal and qualified workers. But there are still a lot of companies in Russia making use of the advantages of illegal immigration. Without any rights, after all, illegal immigrants are convenient in that they can be exploited endlessly. They are also a potential danger from the point of view of breaking the law.

But the issue here is not just one of scaling back the shadow sector of the economy but of bringing real benefit for the entire Russian state and society.

Ultimately, every legal immigrant should have the chance to become a Russian citizen.

We cannot afford to postpone tackling these problems. We need to act simultaneously to create conditions that will encourage people to have children, lower the mortality rate and bring order to immigration. I am sure that our society is up to these tasks and that we will gradually stabilise the size of the Russian population.

We also must find definitive solutions for other problems that have built up over the years. This concerns, above all, wages for teachers, medical doctors, people working in the arts and sciences, and servicemen. They should finally begin to see benefits from the economic growth in the country.

It is they who carry the responsibility for ensuring that future generations of Russian citizens grow up healthy and educated and preserve the traditions and spiritual values of their forebears.

It is they who set the modern standards for societys development and take part in forming the countrys current and future elite. They are the guardians of our countrys rich cultural and spiritual heritage. This is why the quality of these peoples work is no less important for the country than economic growth results. What kind of country we will be living in tomorrow, what level of freedom, justice and democracy we will have, and how reliably our country will be defended all depends on them.

But at the same time, the level of real wages in these sectors is still lower than it was at the end of the 1980s. The average public sector wage is still considerably lower than the average wage in the country in general. Of the common tariff grids 18 rates, 12 are lower than the survival minimum. In other words, most employees of budget-funded organisations face a very high risk of ending up in poverty. This humiliating situation is stopping people from being able to work effectively and creatively.

I think we need to increase public sector wages at least 1.5-fold in real terms over the next three years. In other words, public sector wages should rise at least 1.5 times faster than prices for consumer goods.

I stress that what we are talking about here is the necessary minimum below which we must not and do not have the right to go. In this way, we could substantially reduce the disparity between public and private sector wages in the country. And we should also remember that setting wages for most budget-funded organisations and paying them on time is the responsibility of the regional authorities. We need to establish inter-budgetary relations in such a way so that the regions are also able to increase public sector wages at a faster pace.

But we should also keep in mind that simply increasing wages is not going to solve all the problems in the public sector. The time has long since come for introducing financial solutions and mechanisms that will encourage better results and more effective organisation of the social sphere. Financial policy should be used as an incentive for increasing the accessibility and quality of social services.

Finally, we need to create conditions for actively raising investment from other sources besides state funds into the healthcare, education, science and culture sectors.

I want to stress also that the objectives of modernising the education and healthcare systems that were set out in the previous Address should still be pursued, but pursued very carefully.

Reorganisation for its own sake is not the aim. The aim is to improve the quality of service, make services accessible for the majority of citizens and ensure that they have a genuine influence on socio-economic progress in the country.

In speaking of our values, I would like to raise another issue I think is very important, that of the level of public morals and culture.

It is well known that a good business reputation has always been a prerequisite for concluding deals, and human decency has been a necessary condition for taking part in state and public life. Russian society has always condemned immorality, and indecent behaviour has always been publicly reprimanded.

Law and morals, politics and morality have traditionally been considered close and related concepts in Russia, at least, such was always the declared ideal and aim. Despite the problems we all know, the level of morality in tsarist Russia and during the Soviet years was always a very meaningful scale and criteria for peoples reputation, at work, in society and in private life. No one can deny that values such as close friendship, mutual assistance, trust, comradeship and reliability have flourished in Russia over the course of centuries, becoming enduring and immutable values here.

Prominent Russian legal theorist, Professor Lev Petrazhitsky, noted that the duties to help the needy and pay workers their agreed wages are above all ethical norms of conduct. I want to note that this was written almost 100 years ago, in 1910.

I think that unless it follows the basic moral standards accepted in civilised society, Russian business is unlikely to earn a respectable reputation. It will be unlikely to earn respect, not just in the wider world, but even more important, within its own country. After all, many of the difficulties faced by the economy and by politics in Russia today have their roots in precisely this problem of the greater part of Russian society having no trust in the wealthy class.

We should remember that corruption among state officials and rising crime are also consequences of the lack of trust and moral strength in our society. Russia will begin to prosper only when the success of each individual depends not only on his level of wealth but also on his decency and level of culture.

Dear citizens of Russia,

Esteemed Federal Assembly,

Our country is about to celebrate the anniversary of our great victory, a victory that came at the terrible cost of countless lives and sacrifices.

The soldiers of the Great Patriotic War are justly called the soldiers of freedom. They saved the world from an ideology of hatred and tyranny. They defended our countrys sovereignty and independence. We will always remember this.

Our people fought against slavery. They fought for the right to live on their own land, to speak their native language and have their own statehood, culture and traditions.

They fought for justice and for freedom. They stood up for their right to independent development and they gave our Motherland a future.

Just what kind of future this will be now depends on us, on todays generation.

Thank you for your attention.

----------


## Olive Yao

.
Vertaling

Dat was precies de periode waarin de ontwikkelingen van betekenis plaatsvonden in Rusland. Onze samenleving wekte niet alleen de energie van zelfbehoud op, maar ook de wil tot een nieuw en vrij leven. In die moeilijke jaren moest het Russische volk zowel hun soevereiniteit van hun staat hooghouden als zonder dwalen een keuze maken bij het kiezen van een nieuwe vector van ontwikkeling in de duizend jaar van hun geschiedenis. Ze moesten de moeilijkste taak volbrengen: hoe hun eigen waarden veilig te stellen, onmiskenbare prestaties niet te verspillen en de levensvatbaarheid van de Russische democratie te bevestigen. We moesten onze eigen weg vinden om een democratische, vrije en rechtvaardige samenleving en staat op te bouwen.

Als ik over rechtvaardigheid spreek, [bedoel ik ]uitgebreide en gelijke kansen voor iedereen om zich te ontwikkelen. Succes voor iedereen. Een beter leven voor allen.

()

"Staatsmacht", schreef de grote Russische filosoof Ivan Ilyin, "heeft zijn eigen grenzen die worden bepaald door het feit dat dit autoriteit is die mensen van buitenaf bereikt ... Staatsmacht kan de creatieve staten van ziel en geest, de innerlijke staten van liefde, vrijheid en goede wil niet overzien en niet dicteren. De staat kan van zijn burgers geen geloof, gebed, liefde, goedheid en overtuiging eisen. Hij kan wetenschappelijke, religieuze en artistieke schepping niet reguleren ... Hij mag niet ingrijpen in het morele, gezins- en dagelijkse privleven, en alleen wanneer het uiterst noodzakelijk is, mag hij het economisch initiatief en de creativiteit van mensen aantasten. Laten we dit niet vergeten.

----------


## Olive Yao

.
Commentaar

----------


## Olive Yao

.
10 februari 2007

Toespraak bij de Conferentie van Mnchen over Veiligheidspolitiek

Mnchen, Duitsland

Vladimir Putin:

Thank you very much dear Madam Federal Chancellor, Mr Teltschik, ladies and gentlemen!

I am truly grateful to be invited to such a representative conference that has assembled politicians, military officials, entrepreneurs and experts from more than 40 nations.

This conferences structure allows me to avoid excessive politeness and the need to speak in roundabout, pleasant but empty diplomatic terms. This conferences format will allow me to say what I really think about international security problems. And if my comments seem unduly polemical, pointed or inexact to our colleagues, then I would ask you not to get angry with me. After all, this is only a conference. And I hope that after the first two or three minutes of my speech Mr Teltschik will not turn on the red light over there.

Therefore. It is well known that international security comprises much more than issues relating to military and political stability. It involves the stability of the global economy, overcoming poverty, economic security and developing a dialogue between civilisations.

This universal, indivisible character of security is expressed as the basic principle that security for one is security for all. As Franklin D. Roosevelt said during the first few days that the Second World War was breaking out: When peace has been broken anywhere, the peace of all countries everywhere is in danger.

These words remain topical today. Incidentally, the theme of our conference  global crises, global responsibility  exemplifies this.

Only two decades ago the world was ideologically and economically divided and it was the huge strategic potential of two superpowers that ensured global security.

This global stand-off pushed the sharpest economic and social problems to the margins of the international communitys and the worlds agenda. And, just like any war, the Cold War left us with live ammunition, figuratively speaking. I am referring to ideological stereotypes, double standards and other typical aspects of Cold War bloc thinking.

The unipolar world that had been proposed after the Cold War did not take place either.

The history of humanity certainly has gone through unipolar periods and seen aspirations to world supremacy. And what hasnt happened in world history?

However, what is a unipolar world? However one might embellish this term, at the end of the day it refers to one type of situation, namely one centre of authority, one centre of force, one centre of decision-making.

It is world in which there is one master, one sovereign. And at the end of the day this is pernicious not only for all those within this system, but also for the sovereign itself because it destroys itself from within.

And this certainly has nothing in common with democracy. Because, as you know, democracy is the power of the majority in light of the interests and opinions of the minority.

Incidentally, Russia  we  are constantly being taught about democracy. But for some reason those who teach us do not want to learn themselves.

I consider that the unipolar model is not only unacceptable but also impossible in todays world. And this is not only because if there was individual leadership in todays  and precisely in todays  world, then the military, political and economic resources would not suffice. What is even more important is that the model itself is flawed because at its basis there is and can be no moral foundations for modern civilisation.

Along with this, what is happening in todays world  and we just started to discuss this  is a tentative to introduce precisely this concept into international affairs, the concept of a unipolar world.

And with which results?

Unilateral and frequently illegitimate actions have not resolved any problems. Moreover, they have caused new human tragedies and created new centres of tension. Judge for yourselves: wars as well as local and regional conflicts have not diminished. Mr Teltschik mentioned this very gently. And no less people perish in these conflicts  even more are dying than before. Significantly more, significantly more!

Today we are witnessing an almost uncontained hyper use of force  military force  in international relations, force that is plunging the world into an abyss of permanent conflicts. As a result we do not have sufficient strength to find a comprehensive solution to any one of these conflicts. Finding a political settlement also becomes impossible.

We are seeing a greater and greater disdain for the basic principles of international law. And independent legal norms are, as a matter of fact, coming increasingly closer to one states legal system. One state and, of course, first and foremost the United States, has overstepped its national borders in every way. This is visible in the economic, political, cultural and educational policies it imposes on other nations. Well, who likes this? Who is happy about this?

In international relations we increasingly see the desire to resolve a given question according to so-called issues of political expediency, based on the current political climate.

And of course this is extremely dangerous. It results in the fact that no one feels safe. I want to emphasise this  no one feels safe! Because no one can feel that international law is like a stone wall that will protect them. Of course such a policy stimulates an arms race.

The forces dominance inevitably encourages a number of countries to acquire weapons of mass destruction. Moreover, significantly new threats  though they were also well-known before  have appeared, and today threats such as terrorism have taken on a global character.

I am convinced that we have reached that decisive moment when we must seriously think about the architecture of global security.

And we must proceed by searching for a reasonable balance between the interests of all participants in the international dialogue. Especially since the international landscape is so varied and changes so quickly  changes in light of the dynamic development in a whole number of countries and regions.

Madam Federal Chancellor already mentioned this. The combined GDP measured in purchasing power parity of countries such as India and China is already greater than that of the United States. And a similar calculation with the GDP of the BRIC countries  Brazil, Russia, India and China  surpasses the cumulative GDP of the EU. And according to experts this gap will only increase in the future.

There is no reason to doubt that the economic potential of the new centres of global economic growth will inevitably be converted into political influence and will strengthen multipolarity.

In connection with this the role of multilateral diplomacy is significantly increasing. The need for principles such as openness, transparency and predictability in politics is uncontested and the use of force should be a really exceptional measure, comparable to using the death penalty in the judicial systems of certain states.

However, today we are witnessing the opposite tendency, namely a situation in which countries that forbid the death penalty even for murderers and other, dangerous criminals are airily participating in military operations that are difficult to consider legitimate. And as a matter of fact, these conflicts are killing people  hundreds and thousands of civilians!

But at the same time the question arises of whether we should be indifferent and aloof to various internal conflicts inside countries, to authoritarian regimes, to tyrants, and to the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction? As a matter of fact, this was also at the centre of the question that our dear colleague Mr Lieberman asked the Federal Chancellor. If I correctly understood your question (addressing Mr Lieberman), then of course it is a serious one! Can we be indifferent observers in view of what is happening? I will try to answer your question as well: of course not.

But do we have the means to counter these threats? Certainly we do. It is sufficient to look at recent history. Did not our country have a peaceful transition to democracy? Indeed, we witnessed a peaceful transformation of the Soviet regime  a peaceful transformation! And what a regime! With what a number of weapons, including nuclear weapons! Why should we start bombing and shooting now at every available opportunity? Is it the case when without the threat of mutual destruction we do not have enough political culture, respect for democratic values and for the law?

I am convinced that the only mechanism that can make decisions about using military force as a last resort is the Charter of the United Nations. And in connection with this, either I did not understand what our colleague, the Italian Defence Minister, just said or what he said was inexact. In any case, I understood that the use of force can only be legitimate when the decision is taken by NATO, the EU, or the UN. If he really does think so, then we have different points of view. Or I didnt hear correctly. The use of force can only be considered legitimate if the decision is sanctioned by the UN. And we do not need to substitute NATO or the EU for the UN. When the UN will truly unite the forces of the international community and can really react to events in various countries, when we will leave behind this disdain for international law, then the situation will be able to change. Otherwise the situation will simply result in a dead end, and the number of serious mistakes will be multiplied. Along with this, it is necessary to make sure that international law have a universal character both in the conception and application of its norms.

And one must not forget that democratic political actions necessarily go along with discussion and a laborious decision-making process.

Dear ladies and gentlemen!

The potential danger of the destabilisation of international relations is connected with obvious stagnation in the disarmament issue.

Russia supports the renewal of dialogue on this important question.

It is important to conserve the international legal framework relating to weapons destruction and therefore ensure continuity in the process of reducing nuclear weapons.

Together with the United States of America we agreed to reduce our nuclear strategic missile capabilities to up to 17002000 nuclear warheads by 31 December 2012. Russia intends to strictly fulfil the obligations it has taken on. We hope that our partners will also act in a transparent way and will refrain from laying aside a couple of hundred superfluous nuclear warheads for a rainy day. And if today the new American Defence Minister declares that the United States will not hide these superfluous weapons in warehouse or, as one might say, under a pillow or under the blanket, then I suggest that we all rise and greet this declaration standing. It would be a very important declaration.

Russia strictly adheres to and intends to further adhere to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons as well as the multilateral supervision regime for missile technologies. The principles incorporated in these documents are universal ones.

In connection with this I would like to recall that in the 1980s the USSR and the United States signed an agreement on destroying a whole range of small- and medium-range missiles but these documents do not have a universal character.

Today many other countries have these missiles, including the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea, the Republic of Korea, India, Iran, Pakistan and Israel. Many countries are working on these systems and plan to incorporate them as part of their weapons arsenals. And only the United States and Russia bear the responsibility to not create such weapons systems.

----------


## Olive Yao

.
It is obvious that in these conditions we must think about ensuring our own security.

At the same time, it is impossible to sanction the appearance of new, destabilising high-tech weapons. Needless to say it refers to measures to prevent a new area of confrontation, especially in outer space. Star wars is no longer a fantasy  it is a reality. In the middle of the 1980s our American partners were already able to intercept their own satellite.

In Russias opinion, the militarisation of outer space could have unpredictable consequences for the international community, and provoke nothing less than the beginning of a nuclear era. And we have come forward more than once with initiatives designed to prevent the use of weapons in outer space.

Today I would like to tell you that we have prepared a project for an agreement on the prevention of deploying weapons in outer space. And in the near future it will be sent to our partners as an official proposal. Lets work on this together.

Plans to expand certain elements of the anti-missile defence system to Europe cannot help but disturb us. Who needs the next step of what would be, in this case, an inevitable arms race? I deeply doubt that Europeans themselves do.

Missile weapons with a range of about five to eight thousand kilometres that really pose a threat to Europe do not exist in any of the so-called problem countries. And in the near future and prospects, this will not happen and is not even foreseeable. And any hypothetical launch of, for example, a North Korean rocket to American territory through western Europe obviously contradicts the laws of ballistics. As we say in Russia, it would be like using the right hand to reach the left ear.

And here in Germany I cannot help but mention the pitiable condition of the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe.

The Adapted Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe was signed in 1999. It took into account a new geopolitical reality, namely the elimination of the Warsaw bloc. Seven years have passed and only four states have ratified this document, including the Russian Federation.

NATO countries openly declared that they will not ratify this treaty, including the provisions on flank restrictions (on deploying a certain number of armed forces in the flank zones), until Russia removed its military bases from Georgia and Moldova. Our army is leaving Georgia, even according to an accelerated schedule. We resolved the problems we had with our Georgian colleagues, as everybody knows. There are still 1,500 servicemen in Moldova that are carrying out peacekeeping operations and protecting warehouses with ammunition left over from Soviet times. We constantly discuss this issue with Mr Solana and he knows our position. We are ready to further work in this direction.

But what is happening at the same time? Simultaneously the so-called flexible frontline American bases with up to five thousand men in each. It turns out that NATO has put its frontline forces on our borders, and we continue to strictly fulfil the treaty obligations and do not react to these actions at all.

I think it is obvious that NATO expansion does not have any relation with the modernisation of the Alliance itself or with ensuring security in Europe. On the contrary, it represents a serious provocation that reduces the level of mutual trust. And we have the right to ask: against whom is this expansion intended? And what happened to the assurances our western partners made after the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact? Where are those declarations today? No one even remembers them. But I will allow myself to remind this audience what was said. I would like to quote the speech of NATO General Secretary Mr Woerner in Brussels on 17 May 1990. He said at the time that: the fact that we are ready not to place a NATO army outside of German territory gives the Soviet Union a firm security guarantee. Where are these guarantees?

The stones and concrete blocks of the Berlin Wall have long been distributed as souvenirs. But we should not forget that the fall of the Berlin Wall was possible thanks to a historic choice  one that was also made by our people, the people of Russia  a choice in favour of democracy, freedom, openness and a sincere partnership with all the members of the big European family.

And now they are trying to impose new dividing lines and walls on us  these walls may be virtual but they are nevertheless dividing, ones that cut through our continent. And is it possible that we will once again require many years and decades, as well as several generations of politicians, to dissemble and dismantle these new walls?

Dear ladies and gentlemen!

We are unequivocally in favour of strengthening the regime of non-proliferation. The present international legal principles allow us to develop technologies to manufacture nuclear fuel for peaceful purposes. And many countries with all good reasons want to create their own nuclear energy as a basis for their energy independence. But we also understand that these technologies can be quickly transformed into nuclear weapons.

This creates serious international tensions. The situation surrounding the Iranian nuclear programme acts as a clear example. And if the international community does not find a reasonable solution for resolving this conflict of interests, the world will continue to suffer similar, destabilising crises because there are more threshold countries than simply Iran. We both know this. We are going to constantly fight against the threat of the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.

Last year Russia put forward the initiative to establish international centres for the enrichment of uranium. We are open to the possibility that such centres not only be created in Russia, but also in other countries where there is a legitimate basis for using civil nuclear energy. Countries that want to develop their nuclear energy could guarantee that they will receive fuel through direct participation in these centres. And the centres would, of course, operate under strict IAEA supervision.

The latest initiatives put forward by American President George W. Bush are in conformity with the Russian proposals. I consider that Russia and the USA are objectively and equally interested in strengthening the regime of the non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and their deployment. It is precisely our countries, with leading nuclear and missile capabilities, that must act as leaders in developing new, stricter non-proliferation measures. Russia is ready for such work. We are engaged in consultations with our American friends.

In general, we should talk about establishing a whole system of political incentives and economic stimuli whereby it would not be in states interests to establish their own capabilities in the nuclear fuel cycle but they would still have the opportunity to develop nuclear energy and strengthen their energy capabilities.

In connection with this I shall talk about international energy cooperation in more detail. Madam Federal Chancellor also spoke about this briefly  she mentioned, touched on this theme. In the energy sector Russia intends to create uniform market principles and transparent conditions for all. It is obvious that energy prices must be determined by the market instead of being the subject of political speculation, economic pressure or blackmail.

We are open to cooperation. Foreign companies participate in all our major energy projects. According to different estimates, up to 26 percent of the oil extraction in Russia  and please think about this figure  up to 26 percent of the oil extraction in Russia is done by foreign capital. Try, try to find me a similar example where Russian business participates extensively in key economic sectors in western countries. Such examples do not exist! There are no such examples.

I would also recall the parity of foreign investments in Russia and those Russia makes abroad. The parity is about fifteen to one. And here you have an obvious example of the openness and stability of the Russian economy.

Economic security is the sector in which all must adhere to uniform principles. We are ready to compete fairly.

For that reason more and more opportunities are appearing in the Russian economy. Experts and our western partners are objectively evaluating these changes. As such, Russias OECD sovereign credit rating improved and Russia passed from the fourth to the third group. And today in Munich I would like to use this occasion to thank our German colleagues for their help in the above decision.

Furthermore. As you know, the process of Russia joining the WTO has reached its final stages. I would point out that during long, difficult talks we heard words about freedom of speech, free trade, and equal possibilities more than once but, for some reason, exclusively in reference to the Russian market.

And there is still one more important theme that directly affects global security. Today many talk about the struggle against poverty. What is actually happening in this sphere? On the one hand, financial resources are allocated for programmes to help the worlds poorest countries  and at times substantial financial resources. But to be honest  and many here also know this  linked with the development of that same donor countrys companies. And on the other hand, developed countries simultaneously keep their agricultural subsidies and limit some countries access to high-tech products.

And lets say things as they are  one hand distributes charitable help and the other hand not only preserves economic backwardness but also reaps the profits thereof. The increasing social tension in depressed regions inevitably results in the growth of radicalism, extremism, feeds terrorism and local conflicts. And if all this happens in, shall we say, a region such as the Middle East where there is increasingly the sense that the world at large is unfair, then there is the risk of global destabilisation.

It is obvious that the worlds leading countries should see this threat. And that they should therefore build a more democratic, fairer system of global economic relations, a system that would give everyone the chance and the possibility to develop.

Dear ladies and gentlemen, speaking at the Conference on Security Policy, it is impossible not to mention the activities of the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). As is well-known, this organisation was created to examine all  I shall emphasise this  all aspects of security: military, political, economic, humanitarian and, especially, the relations between these spheres.

What do we see happening today? We see that this balance is clearly destroyed. People are trying to transform the OSCE into a vulgar instrument designed to promote the foreign policy interests of one or a group of countries. And this task is also being accomplished by the OSCEs bureaucratic apparatus which is absolutely not connected with the state founders in any way. Decision-making procedures and the involvement of so-called non-governmental organisations are tailored for this task. These organisations are formally independent but they are purposefully financed and therefore under control.

According to the founding documents, in the humanitarian sphere the OSCE is designed to assist country members in observing international human rights norms at their request. This is an important task. We support this. But this does not mean interfering in the internal affairs of other countries, and especially not imposing a regime that determines how these states should live and develop.

It is obvious that such interference does not promote the development of democratic states at all. On the contrary, it makes them dependent and, as a consequence, politically and economically unstable.

We expect that the OSCE be guided by its primary tasks and build relations with sovereign states based on respect, trust and transparency.

----------


## Olive Yao

.
Dear ladies and gentlemen!

In conclusion I would like to note the following. We very often  and personally, I very often  hear appeals by our partners, including our European partners, to the effect that Russia should play an increasingly active role in world affairs.

In connection with this I would allow myself to make one small remark. It is hardly necessary to incite us to do so. Russia is a country with a history that spans more than a thousand years and has practically always used the privilege to carry out an independent foreign policy.

We are not going to change this tradition today. At the same time, we are well aware of how the world has changed and we have a realistic sense of our own opportunities and potential. And of course we would like to interact with responsible and independent partners with whom we could work together in constructing a fair and democratic world order that would ensure security and prosperity not only for a select few, but for all.

Thank you for your attention.

----------


## Olive Yao

.
Vertaling

Ik ben van mening dat het unipolaire model niet alleen onaanvaardbaar is, maar ook onmogelijk in de wereld van vandaag.

(...)

De stenen en betonblokken van de Berlijnse muur worden al lang als souvenirs uitgedeeld. Maar we mogen niet vergeten dat de val van de Berlijnse Muur mogelijk was dankzij een historische keuze  een keuze die ook gemaakt is door ons volk, het volk van Rusland  een keuze voor democratie, vrijheid, openheid en een oprecht partnerschap met alle de leden van de grote Europese familie.

En nu proberen ze nieuwe scheidslijnen en muren aan ons op te leggen  deze muren mogen dan virtueel zijn, ze verdelen niettemin, muren die dwars door ons continent heen gaan. En is het mogelijk dat we opnieuw vele jaren en decennia nodig zullen hebben, evenals meerdere generaties politici, om deze nieuwe muren te ontmantelen en te ontmantelen?

()

[De leidende landen van de wereld] moeten daarom een meer democratisch, eerlijker systeem van mondiale economische betrekkingen opbouwen, een systeem dat iedereen de kans en de mogelijkheid geeft om zich te ontwikkelen.

----------


## Olive Yao

.
Commentaar

----------


## Olive Yao

.
A plea for caution from Russia

Vladimir Putin | New York Times Op-Ed 11 september 2013

RECENT events surrounding Syria have prompted me to speak directly to the American people and their political leaders. It is important to do so at a time of insufficient communication between our societies.

Relations between us have passed through different stages. We stood against each other during the cold war. But we were also allies once, and defeated the Nazis together. The universal international organization  the United Nations  was then established to prevent such devastation from ever happening again.

The United Nations founders understood that decisions affecting war and peace should happen only by consensus, and with Americas consent the veto by Security Council permanent members was enshrined in the United Nations Charter. The profound wisdom of this has underpinned the stability of international relations for decades.

No one wants the United Nations to suffer the fate of the League of Nations, which collapsed because it lacked real leverage. This is possible if influential countries bypass the United Nations and take military action without Security Council authorization.

The potential strike by the United States against Syria, despite strong opposition from many countries and major political and religious leaders, including the pope, will result in more innocent victims and escalation, potentially spreading the conflict far beyond Syrias borders. A strike would increase violence and unleash a new wave of terrorism. It could undermine multilateral efforts to resolve the Iranian nuclear problem and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and further destabilize the Middle East and North Africa. It could throw the entire system of international law and order out of balance.

Syria is not witnessing a battle for democracy, but an armed conflict between government and opposition in a multireligious country. There are few champions of democracy in Syria. But there are more than enough Qaeda fighters and extremists of all stripes battling the government. The United States State Department has designated Al Nusra Front and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, fighting with the opposition, as terrorist organizations. This internal conflict, fueled by foreign weapons supplied to the opposition, is one of the bloodiest in the world.
Mercenaries from Arab countries fighting there, and hundreds of militants from Western countries and even Russia, are an issue of our deep concern. Might they not return to our countries with experience acquired in Syria? After all, after fighting in Libya, extremists moved on to Mali. This threatens us all.

From the outset, Russia has advocated peaceful dialogue enabling Syrians to develop a compromise plan for their own future. We are not protecting the Syrian government, but international law. We need to use the United Nations Security Council and believe that preserving law and order in todays complex and turbulent world is one of the few ways to keep international relations from sliding into chaos. The law is still the law, and we must follow it whether we like it or not. Under current international law, force is permitted only in self-defense or by the decision of the Security Council. Anything else is unacceptable under the United Nations Charter and would constitute an act of aggression.

No one doubts that poison gas was used in Syria. But there is every reason to believe it was used not by the Syrian Army, but by opposition forces, to provoke intervention by their powerful foreign patrons, who would be siding with the fundamentalists. Reports that militants are preparing another attack  this time against Israel  cannot be ignored.

It is alarming that military intervention in internal conflicts in foreign countries has become commonplace for the United States. Is it in Americas long-term interest? I doubt it. Millions around the world increasingly see America not as a model of democracy but as relying solely on brute force, cobbling coalitions together under the slogan youre either with us or against us.

But force has proved ineffective and pointless. Afghanistan is reeling, and no one can say what will happen after international forces withdraw. Libya is divided into tribes and clans. In Iraq the civil war continues, with dozens killed each day. In the United States, many draw an analogy between Iraq and Syria, and ask why their government would want to repeat recent mistakes.

No matter how targeted the strikes or how sophisticated the weapons, civilian casualties are inevitable, including the elderly and children, whom the strikes are meant to protect.

The world reacts by asking: if you cannot count on international law, then you must find other ways to ensure your security. Thus a growing number of countries seek to acquire weapons of mass destruction. This is logical: if you have the bomb, no one will touch you. We are left with talk of the need to strengthen nonproliferation, when in reality this is being eroded.

We must stop using the language of force and return to the path of civilized diplomatic and political settlement.

A new opportunity to avoid military action has emerged in the past few days. The United States, Russia and all members of the international community must take advantage of the Syrian governments willingness to place its chemical arsenal under international control for subsequent destruction. Judging by the statements of President Obama, the United States sees this as an alternative to military action.

I welcome the presidents interest in continuing the dialogue with Russia on Syria. We must work together to keep this hope alive, as we agreed to at the Group of 8 meeting in Lough Erne in Northern Ireland in June, and steer the discussion back toward negotiations.

If we can avoid force against Syria, this will improve the atmosphere in international affairs and strengthen mutual trust. It will be our shared success and open the door to cooperation on other critical issues.

My working and personal relationship with President Obama is marked by growing trust. I appreciate this. I carefully studied his address to the nation on Tuesday. And I would rather disagree with a case he made on American exceptionalism, stating that the United States policy is what makes America different. Its what makes us exceptional. It is extremely dangerous to encourage people to see themselves as exceptional, whatever the motivation. There are big countries and small countries, rich and poor, those with long democratic traditions and those still finding their way to democracy. Their policies differ, too. We are all different, but when we ask for the Lords blessings, we must not forget that God created us equal.

----------


## Olive Yao

.
Vertaling

De mogelijke aanval van de Verenigde Staten tegen Syri, ondanks sterke tegenstand van veel landen en belangrijke politieke en religieuze leiders, waaronder de paus, zal resulteren in meer onschuldige slachtoffers en escalatie, waardoor het conflict zich mogelijk tot ver buiten de grenzen van Syri zal uitbreiden. Een aanval zou het geweld doen toenemen en een nieuwe golf van terrorisme ontketenen. Het zou de multilaterale inspanningen om het Iraanse nucleaire probleem en het Isralisch-Palestijnse conflict op te lossen ondermijnen en het Midden-Oosten en Noord-Afrika verder destabiliseren. Het zou het hele systeem van internationaal recht en orde uit balans kunnen brengen.

()

Mijn werk- en persoonlijke relatie met president Obama wordt gekenmerkt door groeiend vertrouwen. Ik waardeer dit. Ik heb dinsdag zorgvuldig zijn toespraak tot de natie bestudeerd. En ik zou het liever oneens zijn met een zaak die hij maakte over Amerikaans uitzonderlijkheid, waarin hij stelde dat het beleid van de Verenigde Staten is "wat Amerika anderss maakt. Dat maakt ons uitzonderlijk". Het is uiterst gevaarlijk om mensen aan te moedigen zichzelf als uitzonderlijk te zien, wat de motivatie ook is. Er zijn grote landen en kleine landen, rijk en arm, landen met een lange democratische traditie en landen die nog steeds hun weg naar democratie vinden. Hun beleid verschilt ook. We zijn allemaal verschillend, maar als we om de zegeningen van de Heer vragen, mogen we niet vergeten dat God ons gelijk heeft geschapen.

----------


## Olive Yao

.
Commentaar

----------


## Olive Yao

.
Vertaling

Het is de moeite waard om het Westen eraan te herinneren dat het zijn koloniale beleid in de Middeleeuwen begon, en daarna volgde de wereldwijde slavenhandel, de genocide van indianenstammen in Amerika, de plundering van India, Afrika, de oorlogen van Engeland en Frankrijk tegen China, waarna het gedwongen werd zijn havens open te stellen voor de handel in opium. Wat ze deden was hele naties aan de drugs zetten, doelbewust hele etnische groepen uitroeien omwille van land en hulpbronnen, en een echte jacht op mensen als dieren organiseerden. Dit is in strijd met de aard van de mens, waarheid, vrijheid en rechtvaardigheid.

()

Westerse landen herhalen al eeuwenlang dat ze vrijheid en democratie brengen voor andere volkeren. Alles is precies het tegenovergestelde: in plaats van democratie  onderdrukking en uitbuiting; in plaats van vrijheid  slavernij en geweld. De hele unipolaire wereldorde is inherent antidemocratisch en niet vrij, ze is door en door bedrieglijk en hypocriet.

(...)

Het Westen is bereid om over alles heen te stappen om het neokoloniale systeem in stand te houden dat het mogelijk maakt om te parasiteren, in feite om de wereld te plunderen op kosten van de macht van de dollar en technocratische dictaten, om echte financile afdracht van de mensheid te incasseren, om de belangrijkste bron van onverdiende welvaart, de winst van de hegemon, eruit te halen. Het handhaven van deze winst is hun belangrijkste, oprechte en absoluut egostische motief. Daarom is totale opheffing van soevereinitiet in hun belang. Vandaar hun agressie tegen onafhankelijke staten, ()

()

De heersende elites van sommige staten stemmen er vrijwillig mee in om dit te doen, gaan vrijwillig akkoord om vazallen te worden; anderen worden omgekocht, gentimideerd. En als het niet lukt, vernietigen ze hele staten en laten ze humanitaire rampen, rampen, runes, miljoenen verwoeste, verminkte menselijke lotsbestemmingen, terroristische enclaves, sociale rampgebieden, protectoraten, kolonin en semi-kolonies achter. Het maakt ze niet uit, zolang ze maar hun eigen voordeel krijgen.

()

----------


## Olive Yao

.
12 juli 2021

Vladimir Poetin 

Over de historische eenheid van Russen en Oekraners


During the recent Direct Line, when I was asked about Russian-Ukrainian relations, I said that Russians and Ukrainians were one people  a single whole. These words were not driven by some short-term considerations or prompted by the current political context. It is what I have said on numerous occasions and what I firmly believe. I therefore feel it necessary to explain my position in detail and share my assessments of today's situation.

First of all, I would like to emphasize that the wall that has emerged in recent years between Russia and Ukraine, between the parts of what is essentially the same historical and spiritual space, to my mind is our great common misfortune and tragedy. These are, first and foremost, the consequences of our own mistakes made at different periods of time. But these are also the result of deliberate efforts by those forces that have always sought to undermine our unity. The formula they apply has been known from time immemorial  divide and rule. There is nothing new here. Hence the attempts to play on the national question and sow discord among people, the overarching goal being to divide and then to pit the parts of a single people against one another.

To have a better understanding of the present and look into the future, we need to turn to history. Certainly, it is impossible to cover in this article all the developments that have taken place over more than a thousand years. But I will focus on the key, pivotal moments that are important for us to remember, both in Russia and Ukraine.

Russians, Ukrainians, and Belarusians are all descendants of Ancient Rus, which was the largest state in Europe. Slavic and other tribes across the vast territory  from Ladoga, Novgorod, and Pskov to Kiev and Chernigov  were bound together by one language (which we now refer to as Old Russian), economic ties, the rule of the princes of the Rurik dynasty, and  after the baptism of Rus  the Orthodox faith. The spiritual choice made by St. Vladimir, who was both Prince of Novgorod and Grand Prince of Kiev, still largely determines our affinity today.

The throne of Kiev held a dominant position in Ancient Rus. This had been the custom since the late 9th century. The Tale of Bygone Years captured for posterity the words of Oleg the Prophet about Kiev, Let it be the mother of all Russian cities.

Later, like other European states of that time, Ancient Rus faced a decline of central rule and fragmentation. At the same time, both the nobility and the common people perceived Rus as a common territory, as their homeland.

The fragmentation intensified after Batu Khan's devastating invasion, which ravaged many cities, including Kiev. The northeastern part of Rus fell under the control of the Golden Horde but retained limited sovereignty. The southern and western Russian lands largely became part of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, which  most significantly  was referred to in historical records as the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and Russia.

Members of the princely and boyar clans would change service from one prince to another, feuding with each other but also making friendships and alliances. Voivode Bobrok of Volyn and the sons of Grand Duke of Lithuania Algirdas  Andrey of Polotsk and Dmitry of Bryansk  fought next to Grand Duke Dmitry Ivanovich of Moscow on the Kulikovo field. At the same time, Grand Duke of Lithuania Jogaila  son of the Princess of Tver  led his troops to join with Mamai. These are all pages of our shared history, reflecting its complex and multi-dimensional nature.

Most importantly, people both in the western and eastern Russian lands spoke the same language. Their faith was Orthodox. Up to the middle of the 15th century, the unified church government remained in place.

At a new stage of historical development, both Lithuanian Rus and Moscow Rus could have become the points of attraction and consolidation of the territories of Ancient Rus. It so happened that Moscow became the center of reunification, continuing the tradition of ancient Russian statehood. Moscow princes  the descendants of Prince Alexander Nevsky  cast off the foreign yoke and began gathering the Russian lands.

In the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, other processes were unfolding. In the 14th century, Lithuania's ruling elite converted to Catholicism. In the 16th century, it signed the Union of Lublin with the Kingdom of Poland to form the PolishLithuanian Commonwealth. The Polish Catholic nobility received considerable land holdings and privileges in the territory of Rus. In accordance with the 1596 Union of Brest, part of the western Russian Orthodox clergy submitted to the authority of the Pope. The process of Polonization and Latinization began, ousting Orthodoxy.

As a consequence, in the 1617th centuries, the liberation movement of the Orthodox population was gaining strength in the Dnieper region. The events during the times of Hetman Bohdan Khmelnytsky became a turning point. His supporters struggled for autonomy from the PolishLithuanian Commonwealth.

In its 1649 appeal to the king of the PolishLithuanian Commonwealth, the Zaporizhian Host demanded that the rights of the Russian Orthodox population be respected, that the voivode of Kiev be Russian and of Greek faith, and that the persecution of the churches of God be stopped. But the Cossacks were not heard.

Bohdan Khmelnytsky then made appeals to Moscow, which were considered by the Zemsky Sobor. On 1 October 1653, members of the supreme representative body of the Russian state decided to support their brothers in faith and take them under patronage. In January 1654, the Pereyaslav Council confirmed that decision. Subsequently, the ambassadors of Bohdan Khmelnytsky and Moscow visited dozens of cities, including Kiev, whose populations swore allegiance to the Russian tsar. Incidentally, nothing of the kind happened at the conclusion of the Union of Lublin.

In a letter to Moscow in 1654, Bohdan Khmelnytsky thanked Tsar Aleksey Mikhaylovich for taking the whole Zaporizhian Host and the whole Russian Orthodox world under the strong and high hand of the Tsar. It means that, in their appeals to both the Polish king and the Russian tsar, the Cossacks referred to and defined themselves as Russian Orthodox people.

Over the course of the protracted war between the Russian state and the PolishLithuanian Commonwealth, some of the hetmans, successors of Bohdan Khmelnytsky, would detach themselves from Moscow or seek support from Sweden, Poland, or Turkey. But, again, for the people, that was a war of liberation. It ended with the Truce of Andrusovo in 1667. The final outcome was sealed by the Treaty of Perpetual Peace in 1686. The Russian state incorporated the city of Kiev and the lands on the left bank of the Dnieper River, including Poltava region, Chernigov region, and Zaporozhye. Their inhabitants were reunited with the main part of the Russian Orthodox people. These territories were referred to as Malorossia (Little Russia).

The name Ukraine was used more often in the meaning of the Old Russian word okraina (periphery), which is found in written sources from the 12th century, referring to various border territories. And the word Ukrainian, judging by archival documents, originally referred to frontier guards who protected the external borders.

On the right bank, which remained under the PolishLithuanian Commonwealth, the old orders were restored, and social and religious oppression intensified. On the contrary, the lands on the left bank, taken under the protection of the unified state, saw rapid development. People from the other bank of the Dnieper moved here en masse. They sought support from people who spoke the same language and had the same faith.

During the Great Northern War with Sweden, the people in Malorossia were not faced with a choice of whom to side with. Only a small portion of the Cossacks supported Mazepa's rebellion. People of all orders and degrees considered themselves Russian and Orthodox.

Cossack senior officers belonging to the nobility would reach the heights of political, diplomatic, and military careers in Russia. Graduates of Kiev-Mohyla Academy played a leading role in church life. This was also the case during the Hetmanate  an essentially autonomous state formation with a special internal structure  and later in the Russian Empire. Malorussians in many ways helped build a big common country  its statehood, culture, and science. They participated in the exploration and development of the Urals, Siberia, the Caucasus, and the Far East. Incidentally, during the Soviet period, natives of Ukraine held major, including the highest, posts in the leadership of the unified state. Suffice it to say that Nikita Khrushchev and Leonid Brezhnev, whose party biography was most closely associated with Ukraine, led the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) for almost 30 years.

In the second half of the 18th century, following the wars with the Ottoman Empire, Russia incorporated Crimea and the lands of the Black Sea region, which became known as Novorossiya. They were populated by people from all of the Russian provinces. After the partitions of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, the Russian Empire regained the western Old Russian lands, with the exception of Galicia and Transcarpathia, which became part of the Austrian  and later Austro-Hungarian  Empire.

The incorporation of the western Russian lands into the single state was not merely the result of political and diplomatic decisions. It was underlain by the common faith, shared cultural traditions, and  I would like to emphasize it once again  language similarity. Thus, as early as the beginning of the 17th century, one of the hierarchs of the Uniate Church, Joseph Rutsky, communicated to Rome that people in Moscovia called Russians from the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth their brothers, that their written language was absolutely identical, and differences in the vernacular were insignificant. He drew an analogy with the residents of Rome and Bergamo. These are, as we know, the center and the north of modern Italy.

Many centuries of fragmentation and living within different states naturally brought about regional language peculiarities, resulting in the emergence of dialects. The vernacular enriched the literary language. Ivan Kotlyarevsky, Grigory Skovoroda, and Taras Shevchenko played a huge role here. Their works are our common literary and cultural heritage. Taras Shevchenko wrote poetry in the Ukrainian language, and prose mainly in Russian. The books of Nikolay Gogol, a Russian patriot and native of Poltavshchyna, are written in Russian, bristling with Malorussian folk sayings and motifs. How can this heritage be divided between Russia and Ukraine? And why do it?

The south-western lands of the Russian Empire, Malorussia and Novorossiya, and the Crimea developed as ethnically and religiously diverse entities. Crimean Tatars, Armenians, Greeks, Jews, Karaites, Krymchaks, Bulgarians, Poles, Serbs, Germans, and other peoples lived here. They all preserved their faith, traditions, and customs.

I am not going to idealise anything. We do know there were the Valuev Circular of 1863 an then the Ems Ukaz of 1876, which restricted the publication and importation of religious and socio-political literature in the Ukrainian language. But it is important to be mindful of the historical context. These decisions were taken against the backdrop of dramatic events in Poland and the desire of the leaders of the Polish national movement to exploit the Ukrainian issue to their own advantage. I should add that works of fiction, books of Ukrainian poetry and folk songs continued to be published. There is objective evidence that the Russian Empire was witnessing an active process of development of the Malorussian cultural identity within the greater Russian nation, which united the Velikorussians, the Malorussians and the Belorussians.

----------


## Olive Yao

.
At the same time, the idea of Ukrainian people as a nation separate from the Russians started to form and gain ground among the Polish elite and a part of the Malorussian intelligentsia. Since there was no historical basis  and could not have been any, conclusions were substantiated by all sorts of concoctions, which went as far as to claim that the Ukrainians are the true Slavs and the Russians, the Muscovites, are not. Such hypotheses became increasingly used for political purposes as a tool of rivalry between European states.

Since the late 19th century, the Austro-Hungarian authorities had latched onto this narrative, using it as a counterbalance to the Polish national movement and pro-Muscovite sentiments in Galicia. During World War I, Vienna played a role in the formation of the so-called Legion of Ukrainian Sich Riflemen. Galicians suspected of sympathies with Orthodox Christianity and Russia were subjected to brutal repression and thrown into the concentration camps of Thalerhof and Terezin.

Further developments had to do with the collapse of European empires, the fierce civil war that broke out across the vast territory of the former Russian Empire, and foreign intervention.

After the February Revolution, in March 1917, the Central Rada was established in Kiev, intended to become the organ of supreme power. In November 1917, in its Third Universal, it declared the creation of the Ukrainian People's Republic (UPR) as part of Russia.

In December 1917, UPR representatives arrived in Brest-Litovsk, where Soviet Russia was negotiating with Germany and its allies. At a meeting on 10 January 1918, the head of the Ukrainian delegation read out a note proclaiming the independence of Ukraine. Subsequently, the Central Rada proclaimed Ukraine independent in its Fourth Universal.

The declared sovereignty did not last long. Just a few weeks later, Rada delegates signed a separate treaty with the German bloc countries. Germany and Austria-Hungary were at the time in a dire situation and needed Ukrainian bread and raw materials. In order to secure large-scale supplies, they obtained consent for sending their troops and technical staff to the UPR. In fact, this was used as a pretext for occupation.

For those who have today given up the full control of Ukraine to external forces, it would be instructive to remember that, back in 1918, such a decision proved fatal for the ruling regime in Kiev. With the direct involvement of the occupying forces, the Central Rada was overthrown and Hetman Pavlo Skoropadskyi was brought to power, proclaiming instead of the UPR the Ukrainian State, which was essentially under German protectorate.

In November 1918  following the revolutionary events in Germany and Austria-Hungary  Pavlo Skoropadskyi, who had lost the support of German bayonets, took a different course, declaring that Ukraine is to take the lead in the formation of an All-Russian Federation. However, the regime was soon changed again. It was now the time of the so-called Directorate.

In autumn 1918, Ukrainian nationalists proclaimed the West Ukrainian People's Republic (WUPR) and, in January 1919, announced its unification with the Ukrainian People's Republic. In July 1919, Ukrainian forces were crushed by Polish troops, and the territory of the former WUPR came under the Polish rule.

In April 1920, Symon Petliura (portrayed as one of the heroes in today's Ukraine) concluded secret conventions on behalf of the UPR Directorate, giving up  in exchange for military support  Galicia and Western Volhynia lands to Poland. In May 1920, Petliurites entered Kiev in a convoy of Polish military units. But not for long. As early as November 1920, following a truce between Poland and Soviet Russia, the remnants of Petliura's forces surrendered to those same Poles.

The example of the UPR shows that different kinds of quasi-state formations that emerged across the former Russian Empire at the time of the Civil War and turbulence were inherently unstable. Nationalists sought to create their own independent states, while leaders of the White movement advocated indivisible Russia. Many of the republics established by the Bolsheviks' supporters did not see themselves outside Russia either. Nevertheless, Bolshevik Party leaders sometimes basically drove them out of Soviet Russia for various reasons.

Thus, in early 1918, the Donetsk-Krivoy Rog Soviet Republic was proclaimed and asked Moscow to incorporate it into Soviet Russia. This was met with a refusal. During a meeting with the republic's leaders, Vladimir Lenin insisted that they act as part of Soviet Ukraine. On 15 March 1918, the Central Committee of the Russian Communist Party (Bolsheviks) directly ordered that delegates be sent to the Ukrainian Congress of Soviets, including from the Donetsk Basin, and that one government for all of Ukraine be created at the congress. The territories of the Donetsk-Krivoy Rog Soviet Republic later formed most of the regions of south-eastern Ukraine.

Under the 1921 Treaty of Riga, concluded between the Russian SFSR, the Ukrainian SSR and Poland, the western lands of the former Russian Empire were ceded to Poland. In the interwar period, the Polish government pursued an active resettlement policy, seeking to change the ethnic composition of the Eastern Borderlands  the Polish name for what is now Western Ukraine, Western Belarus and parts of Lithuania. The areas were subjected to harsh Polonisation, local culture and traditions suppressed. Later, during World War II, radical groups of Ukrainian nationalists used this as a pretext for terror not only against Polish, but also against Jewish and Russian populations.

In 1922, when the USSR was created, with the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic becoming one of its founders, a rather fierce debate among the Bolshevik leaders resulted in the implementation of Lenin's plan to form a union state as a federation of equal republics. The right for the republics to freely secede from the Union was included in the text of the Declaration on the Creation of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and, subsequently, in the 1924 USSR Constitution. By doing so, the authors planted in the foundation of our statehood the most dangerous time bomb, which exploded the moment the safety mechanism provided by the leading role of the CPSU was gone, the party itself collapsing from within. A parade of sovereignties followed. On 8 December 1991, the so-called Belovezh Agreement on the Creation of the Commonwealth of Independent States was signed, stating that the USSR as a subject of international law and a geopolitical reality no longer existed. By the way, Ukraine never signed or ratified the CIS Charter adopted back in 1993.

In the 1920's-1930's, the Bolsheviks actively promoted the localization policy, which took the form of Ukrainization in the Ukrainian SSR. Symbolically, as part of this policy and with consent of the Soviet authorities, Mikhail Grushevskiy, former chairman of Central Rada, one of the ideologists of Ukrainian nationalism, who at a certain period of time had been supported by Austria-Hungary, was returned to the USSR and was elected member of the Academy of Sciences.

The localization policy undoubtedly played a major role in the development and consolidation of the Ukrainian culture, language and identity. At the same time, under the guise of combating the so-called Russian great-power chauvinism, Ukrainization was often imposed on those who did not see themselves as Ukrainians. This Soviet national policy secured at the state level the provision on three separate Slavic peoples: Russian, Ukrainian and Belorussian, instead of the large Russian nation, a triune people comprising Velikorussians, Malorussians and Belorussians.

In 1939, the USSR regained the lands earlier seized by Poland. A major portion of these became part of the Soviet Ukraine. In 1940, the Ukrainian SSR incorporated part of Bessarabia, which had been occupied by Romania since 1918, as well as Northern Bukovina. In 1948, Zmeyiniy Island (Snake Island) in the Black Sea became part of Ukraine. In 1954, the Crimean Region of the RSFSR was given to the Ukrainian SSR, in gross violation of legal norms that were in force at the time.

I would like to dwell on the destiny of Carpathian Ruthenia, which became part of Czechoslovakia following the breakup of Austria-Hungary. Rusins made up a considerable share of local population. While this is hardly mentioned any longer, after the liberation of Transcarpathia by Soviet troops the congress of the Orthodox population of the region voted for the inclusion of Carpathian Ruthenia in the RSFSR or, as a separate Carpathian republic, in the USSR proper. Yet the choice of people was ignored. In summer 1945, the historical act of the reunification of Carpathian Ukraine with its ancient motherland, Ukraine  as The Pravda newspaper put it  was announced.

Therefore, modern Ukraine is entirely the product of the Soviet era. We know and remember well that it was shaped  for a significant part  on the lands of historical Russia. To make sure of that, it is enough to look at the boundaries of the lands reunited with the Russian state in the 17th century and the territory of the Ukrainian SSR when it left the Soviet Union.

The Bolsheviks treated the Russian people as inexhaustible material for their social experiments. They dreamt of a world revolution that would wipe out national states. That is why they were so generous in drawing borders and bestowing territorial gifts. It is no longer important what exactly the idea of the Bolshevik leaders who were chopping the country into pieces was. We can disagree about minor details, background and logics behind certain decisions. One fact is crystal clear: Russia was robbed, indeed.

When working on this article, I relied on open-source documents that contain well-known facts rather than on some secret records. The leaders of modern Ukraine and their external patrons prefer to overlook these facts. They do not miss a chance, however, both inside the country and abroad, to condemn the crimes of the Soviet regime, listing among them events with which neither the CPSU, nor the USSR, let alone modern Russia, have anything to do. At the same time, the Bolsheviks' efforts to detach from Russia its historical territories are not considered a crime. And we know why: if they brought about the weakening of Russia, our ill-wishers are happy with that.

Of course, inside the USSR, borders between republics were never seen as state borders; they were nominal within a single country, which, while featuring all the attributes of a federation, was highly centralized  this, again, was secured by the CPSU's leading role. But in 1991, all those territories, and, which is more important, people, found themselves abroad overnight, taken away, this time indeed, from their historical motherland.

What can be said to this? Things change: countries and communities are no exception. Of course, some part of a people in the process of its development, influenced by a number of reasons and historical circumstances, can become aware of itself as a separate nation at a certain moment. How should we treat that? There is only one answer: with respect!

You want to establish a state of your own: you are welcome! But what are the terms? I will recall the assessment given by one of the most prominent political figures of new Russia, first mayor of Saint Petersburg Anatoly Sobchak. As a legal expert who believed that every decision must be legitimate, in 1992, he shared the following opinion: the republics that were founders of the Union, having denounced the 1922 Union Treaty, must return to the boundaries they had had before joining the Soviet Union. All other territorial acquisitions are subject to discussion, negotiations, given that the ground has been revoked.

In other words, when you leave, take what you brought with you. This logic is hard to refute. I will just say that the Bolsheviks had embarked on reshaping boundaries even before the Soviet Union, manipulating with territories to their liking, in disregard of people's views.

----------


## Olive Yao

.
The Russian Federation recognized the new geopolitical realities: and not only recognized, but, indeed, did a lot for Ukraine to establish itself as an independent country. Throughout the difficult 1990's and in the new millennium, we have provided considerable support to Ukraine. Whatever political arithmetic of its own Kiev may wish to apply, in 19912013, Ukraine's budget savings amounted to more than USD 82 billion, while today, it holds on to the mere USD 1.5 billion of Russian payments for gas transit to Europe. If economic ties between our countries had been retained, Ukraine would enjoy the benefit of tens of billions of dollars.

Ukraine and Russia have developed as a single economic system over decades and centuries. The profound cooperation we had 30 years ago is an example for the European Union to look up to. We are natural complementary economic partners. Such a close relationship can strengthen competitive advantages, increasing the potential of both countries.

Ukraine used to possess great potential, which included powerful infrastructure, gas transportation system, advanced shipbuilding, aviation, rocket and instrument engineering industries, as well as world-class scientific, design and engineering schools. Taking over this legacy and declaring independence, Ukrainian leaders promised that the Ukrainian economy would be one of the leading ones and the standard of living would be among the best in Europe.

Today, high-tech industrial giants that were once the pride of Ukraine and the entire Union, are sinking. Engineering output has dropped by 42 per cent over ten years. The scale of deindustrialization and overall economic degradation is visible in Ukraine's electricity production, which has seen a nearly two-time decrease in 30 years. Finally, according to IMF reports, in 2019, before the coronavirus pandemic broke out, Ukraine's GDP per capita had been below USD 4 thousand. This is less than in the Republic of Albania, the Republic of Moldova, or unrecognized Kosovo. Nowadays, Ukraine is Europe's poorest country.

Who is to blame for this? Is it the people of Ukraine's fault? Certainly not. It was the Ukrainian authorities who waisted and frittered away the achievements of many generations. We know how hardworking and talented the people of Ukraine are. They can achieve success and outstanding results with perseverance and determination. And these qualities, as well as their openness, innate optimism and hospitality have not gone. The feelings of millions of people who treat Russia not just well but with great affection, just as we feel about Ukraine, remain the same.

Until 2014, hundreds of agreements and joint projects were aimed at developing our economies, business and cultural ties, strengthening security, and solving common social and environmental problems. They brought tangible benefits to people  both in Russia and Ukraine. This is what we believed to be most important. And that is why we had a fruitful interaction with all, I emphasize, with all the leaders of Ukraine.

Even after the events in Kiev of 2014, I charged the Russian government to elaborate options for preserving and maintaining our economic ties within relevant ministries and agencies. However, there was and is still no mutual will to do the same. Nevertheless, Russia is still one of Ukraine's top three trading partners, and hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians are coming to us to work, and they find a welcome reception and support. So thats what the aggressor state is.

When the USSR collapsed, many people in Russia and Ukraine sincerely believed and assumed that our close cultural, spiritual and economic ties would certainly last, as would the commonality of our people, who had always had a sense of unity at their core. However, events  at first gradually, and then more rapidly  started to move in a different direction.

In essence, Ukraine's ruling circles decided to justify their country's independence through the denial of its past, however, except for border issues. They began to mythologize and rewrite history, edit out everything that united us, and refer to the period when Ukraine was part of the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union as an occupation. The common tragedy of collectivization and famine of the early 1930s was portrayed as the genocide of the Ukrainian people.

Radicals and neo-Nazis were open and more and more insolent about their ambitions. They were indulged by both the official authorities and local oligarchs, who robbed the people of Ukraine and kept their stolen money in Western banks, ready to sell their motherland for the sake of preserving their capital. To this should be added the persistent weakness of state institutions and the position of a willing hostage to someone else's geopolitical will.

I recall that long ago, well before 2014, the U.S. and EU countries systematically and consistently pushed Ukraine to curtail and limit economic cooperation with Russia. We, as the largest trade and economic partner of Ukraine, suggested discussing the emerging problems in the Ukraine-Russia-EU format. But every time we were told that Russia had nothing to do with it and that the issue concerned only the EU and Ukraine. De facto Western countries rejected Russia's repeated calls for dialogue.

Step by step, Ukraine was dragged into a dangerous geopolitical game aimed at turning Ukraine into a barrier between Europe and Russia, a springboard against Russia. Inevitably, there came a time when the concept of Ukraine is not Russia was no longer an option. There was a need for the anti-Russia concept which we will never accept.

The owners of this project took as a basis the old groundwork of the Polish-Austrian ideologists to create an anti-Moscow Russia. And there is no need to deceive anyone that this is being done in the interests of the people of Ukraine. The Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth never needed Ukrainian culture, much less Cossack autonomy. In Austria-Hungary, historical Russian lands were mercilessly exploited and remained the poorest. The Nazis, abetted by collaborators from the OUN-UPA, did not need Ukraine, but a living space and slaves for Aryan overlords.

Nor were the interests of the Ukrainian people thought of in February 2014. The legitimate public discontent, caused by acute socio-economic problems, mistakes, and inconsistent actions of the authorities of the time, was simply cynically exploited. Western countries directly interfered in Ukraine's internal affairs and supported the coup. Radical nationalist groups served as its battering ram. Their slogans, ideology, and blatant aggressive Russophobia have to a large extent become defining elements of state policy in Ukraine.

All the things that united us and bring us together so far came under attack. First and foremost, the Russian language. Let me remind you that the new Maidan authorities first tried to repeal the law on state language policy. Then there was the law on the purification of power, the law on education that virtually cut the Russian language out of the educational process.

Lastly, as early as May of this year, the current president introduced a bill on indigenous peoples to the Rada. Only those who constitute an ethnic minority and do not have their own state entity outside Ukraine are recognized as indigenous. The law has been passed. New seeds of discord have been sown. And this is happening in a country, as I have already noted, that is very complex in terms of its territorial, national and linguistic composition, and its history of formation.

There may be an argument: if you are talking about a single large nation, a triune nation, then what difference does it make who people consider themselves to be  Russians, Ukrainians, or Belarusians. I completely agree with this. Especially since the determination of nationality, particularly in mixed families, is the right of every individual, free to make his or her own choice.

But the fact is that the situation in Ukraine today is completely different because it involves a forced change of identity. And the most despicable thing is that the Russians in Ukraine are being forced not only to deny their roots, generations of their ancestors but also to believe that Russia is their enemy. It would not be an exaggeration to say that the path of forced assimilation, the formation of an ethnically pure Ukrainian state, aggressive towards Russia, is comparable in its consequences to the use of weapons of mass destruction against us. As a result of such a harsh and artificial division of Russians and Ukrainians, the Russian people in all may decrease by hundreds of thousands or even millions.

Our spiritual unity has also been attacked. As in the days of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, a new ecclesiastical has been initiated. The secular authorities, making no secret of their political aims, have blatantly interfered in church life and brought things to a split, to the seizure of churches, the beating of priests and monks. Even extensive autonomy of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church while maintaining spiritual unity with the Moscow Patriarchate strongly displeases them. They have to destroy this prominent and centuries-old symbol of our kinship at all costs.

I think it is also natural that the representatives of Ukraine over and over again vote against the UN General Assembly resolution condemning the glorification of Nazism. Marches and torchlit processions in honor of remaining war criminals from the SS units take place under the protection of the official authorities. Mazepa, who betrayed everyone, Petliura, who paid for Polish patronage with Ukrainian lands, and Bandera, who collaborated with the Nazis, are ranked as national heroes. Everything is being done to erase from the memory of young generations the names of genuine patriots and victors, who have always been the pride of Ukraine.

For the Ukrainians who fought in the Red Army, in partisan units, the Great Patriotic War was indeed a patriotic war because they were defending their home, their great common Motherland. Over two thousand soldiers became Heroes of the Soviet Union. Among them are legendary pilot Ivan Kozhedub, fearless sniper, defender of Odessa and Sevastopol Lyudmila Pavlichenko, valiant guerrilla commander Sidor Kovpak. This indomitable generation fought, those people gave their lives for our future, for us. To forget their feat is to betray our grandfathers, mothers and fathers.

----------


## Olive Yao

.
The anti-Russia project has been rejected by millions of Ukrainians. The people of Crimea and residents of Sevastopol made their historic choice. And people in the southeast peacefully tried to defend their stance. Yet, all of them, including children, were labeled as separatists and terrorists. They were threatened with ethnic cleansing and the use of military force. And the residents of Donetsk and Lugansk took up arms to defend their home, their language and their lives. Were they left any other choice after the riots that swept through the cities of Ukraine, after the horror and tragedy of 2 May 2014 in Odessa where Ukrainian neo-Nazis burned people alive making a new Khatyn out of it? The same massacre was ready to be carried out by the followers of Bandera in Crimea, Sevastopol, Donetsk and Lugansk. Even now they do not abandon such plans. They are biding their time. But their time will not come.

The coup d'tat and the subsequent actions of the Kiev authorities inevitably provoked confrontation and civil war. The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights estimates that the total number of victims in the conflict in Donbas has exceeded 13,000. Among them are the elderly and children. These are terrible, irreparable losses.

Russia has done everything to stop fratricide. The Minsk agreements aimed at a peaceful settlement of the conflict in Donbas have been concluded. I am convinced that they still have no alternative. In any case, no one has withdrawn their signatures from the Minsk Package of Measures or from the relevant statements by the leaders of the Normandy format countries. No one has initiated a review of the United Nations Security Council resolution of 17 February 2015.

During official negotiations, especially after being reined in by Western partners, Ukraine's representatives regularly declare their full adherence to the Minsk agreements, but are in fact guided by a position of unacceptability. They do not intend to seriously discuss either the special status of Donbas or safeguards for the people living there. They prefer to exploit the image of the victim of external aggression and peddle Russophobia. They arrange bloody provocations in Donbas. In short, they attract the attention of external patrons and masters by all means.

Apparently, and I am becoming more and more convinced of this: Kiev simply does not need Donbas. Why? Because, firstly, the inhabitants of these regions will never accept the order that they have tried and are trying to impose by force, blockade and threats. And secondly, the outcome of both Minsk‑1 and Minsk‑2 which give a real chance to peacefully restore the territorial integrity of Ukraine by coming to an agreement directly with the DPR and LPR with Russia, Germany and France as mediators, contradicts the entire logic of the anti-Russia project. And it can only be sustained by the constant cultivation of the image of an internal and external enemy. And I would add  under the protection and control of the Western powers.

This is what is actually happening. First of all, we are facing the creation of a climate of fear in Ukrainian society, aggressive rhetoric, indulging neo-Nazis and militarising the country. Along with that we are witnessing not just complete dependence but direct external control, including the supervision of the Ukrainian authorities, security services and armed forces by foreign advisers, military development of the territory of Ukraine and deployment of NATO infrastructure. It is no coincidence that the aforementioned flagrant law on indigenous peoples was adopted under the cover of large-scale NATO exercises in Ukraine.

This is also a disguise for the takeover of the rest of the Ukrainian economy and the exploitation of its natural resources. The sale of agricultural land is not far off, and it is obvious who will buy it up. From time to time, Ukraine is indeed given financial resources and loans, but under their own conditions and pursuing their own interests, with preferences and benefits for Western companies. By the way, who will pay these debts back? Apparently, it is assumed that this will have to be done not only by today's generation of Ukrainians but also by their children, grandchildren and probably great-grandchildren.

The Western authors of the anti-Russia project set up the Ukrainian political system in such a way that presidents, members of parliament and ministers would change but the attitude of separation from and enmity with Russia would remain. Reaching peace was the main election slogan of the incumbent president. He came to power with this. The promises turned out to be lies. Nothing has changed. And in some ways the situation in Ukraine and around Donbas has even degenerated.

In the anti-Russia project, there is no place either for a sovereign Ukraine or for the political forces that are trying to defend its real independence. Those who talk about reconciliation in Ukrainian society, about dialogue, about finding a way out of the current impasse are labelled as pro-Russian agents.

Again, for many people in Ukraine, the anti-Russia project is simply unacceptable. And there are millions of such people. But they are not allowed to raise their heads. They have had their legal opportunity to defend their point of view in fact taken away from them. They are intimidated, driven underground. Not only are they persecuted for their convictions, for the spoken word, for the open expression of their position, but they are also killed. Murderers, as a rule, go unpunished.

Today, the right patriot of Ukraine is only the one who hates Russia. Moreover, the entire Ukrainian statehood, as we understand it, is proposed to be further built exclusively on this idea. Hate and anger, as world history has repeatedly proved this, are a very shaky foundation for sovereignty, fraught with many serious risks and dire consequences.

All the subterfuges associated with the anti-Russia project are clear to us. And we will never allow our historical territories and people close to us living there to be used against Russia. And to those who will undertake such an attempt, I would like to say that this way they will destroy their own country.

The incumbent authorities in Ukraine like to refer to Western experience, seeing it as a model to follow. Just have a look at how Austria and Germany, the USA and Canada live next to each other. Close in ethnic composition, culture, in fact sharing one language, they remain sovereign states with their own interests, with their own foreign policy. But this does not prevent them from the closest integration or allied relations. They have very conditional, transparent borders. And when crossing them the citizens feel at home. They create families, study, work, do business. Incidentally, so do millions of those born in Ukraine who now live in Russia. We see them as our own close people.

Russia is open to dialogue with Ukraine and ready to discuss the most complex issues. But it is important for us to understand that our partner is defending its national interests but not serving someone else's, and is not a tool in someone else's hands to fight against us.

We respect the Ukrainian language and traditions. We respect Ukrainians' desire to see their country free, safe and prosperous.

I am confident that true sovereignty of Ukraine is possible only in partnership with Russia. Our spiritual, human and civilizational ties formed for centuries and have their origins in the same sources, they have been hardened by common trials, achievements and victories. Our kinship has been transmitted from generation to generation. It is in the hearts and the memory of people living in modern Russia and Ukraine, in the blood ties that unite millions of our families. Together we have always been and will be many times stronger and more successful. For we are one people.

Today, these words may be perceived by some people with hostility. They can be interpreted in many possible ways. Yet, many people will hear me. And I will say one thing  Russia has never been and will never be anti-Ukraine. And what Ukraine will be  it is up to its citizens to decide.

----------


## Olive Yao

.
13 juli 2021

Vladimir Poetin beantwoordde vragen over het artikel Over de historische eenheid van Russen en Oekraners

Question: Mr President, thank you very much for finding an opportunity to answer questions about your well-known article on Ukrainian issues. Here is my first question, if I may. Why did you decide to write this article at this particular time?

President of Russia Vladimir Putin: I decided to prepare this material a while ago, actually. I have been thinking about it for several months now.

The title of this material, or article, is just a convention because it is still a bit more than just an article. It is analytical material based on historical facts, events and historical documents.

Why did I have this idea at all? In our daily lives, we work, bring up our children, go for a hobby. As a rule, we do not think much about the issues in this article. However, the situation required that we look more attentively at the world we live in, who we are, and what relations we have with our closest relatives and neighbours. So, this idea came about in this context.

But why did I start it at this particular time? Because the conditions that are taking shape are fundamentally different from what they were only recently. There is every indication that an anti-Russia agenda is being pursued, and of course, this is bound to be of concern to us.

Yes, of course, every country has the right to choose its own way, no question. But, you know, it is the same as with every person. He is free but there is a well-known formula: the freedom of each person is limited by the freedom of another person. If it contradicts the freedom of another person, it is necessary to consider certain limits and self-restrictions. The same applies to countries. If we see that certain threats are being created, especially in security, we must certainly decide what to do about it. And this is a sincere conversation on all the subjects I just mentioned.

However, there are also certain circumstances that compelled me to present this material today. After all, there are many people in Ukraine, millions of people who want to restore relations with Russia. I am sure there are millions of them. There are also political forces that advocate normalisation in this respect. But, judging by what we see, they are being deprived of any opportunity to implement their political goals. They are simply removed from the political scene through non-systemic, illegal methods. Some are simply killed in the streets, and then after this kind of crime nobody looks for the criminal. Or people are burned alive, like the tragic events in Odessa.

National media are closed and people are put under house arrest, like its happening now with Mr Medvedchuk. Indicatively, the Ukrainian authorities take completely illegal actions that are even outside their competence. In other words, these forces are not given any chance for legal political work. This is another circumstance that I consider to be very important.

And lastly  I would like to return to what I started with  it is essentially important for all of us to understand the current situation based on the historical context of its roots.

Question: Who is your article intended for, first of all, them or us?

Vladimir Putin: I do not divide people into them and us. In the article I also write that we are a common entity, and so it is intended for all of us, including those who live in modern Russia, those who live in modern Ukraine and the sponsors of the current political leadership of Ukraine. They should also know what we are and what we think about each other. I believe that this is important for all of us.

Question: You mentioned one of the time bombs in the Soviet Constitution. Does this mean that there were other time bombs as well? What did you have in mind?

Vladimir Putin: I said frankly in the article that the most dangerous time bomb is the right of the Soviet republics to freely secede from the united country.

I would like to say that when the Soviet Union was born after the First World War, even the Bolshevik leadership was divided on that matter. I did not write about this in detail in my article, because I believe that such details would be superfluous. However, Stalin, who was responsible for this sphere of activities in the Bolshevik party, had major differences with Lenin. Stalin insisted on the principle of autonomisation during the creation of the Soviet Union, believing that all the other Soviet republics that were established in the former empire must be incorporated, yes, incorporated, into the RSFSR.

Lenin had a different perspective. He spoke about the equality of all the republics, which should not be incorporated into the Russian Federation (RSFSR), but should establish new states on equal conditions with it. Stalin described this as national liberalism and openly argued with Lenin.

Incidentally, if we read some documents, we will see that Lenins position was that Stalin was ultimately right, but it was premature to speak about that. And Lenin made concessions to the national republics, as Stalin described this. Stalin himself said that Russian federalism was a period of transition to socialist centrism.

Actually, this is what the Bolsheviks really did, because the Soviet Union, which was formally a federation, or possibly even a confederation if we take into account the right to secede, essentially was an extremely unitary centralised state. The right to secede was, of course, one of the time bombs.

And the second time bomb, which I also mentioned, was the leading role of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, its directing and primary role. Why? Because it turned out that the party was the only thing that kept the entire country together as a single state. As I wrote in the article, as soon as the party started to fall apart from the inside, the whole country shattered.

There were other time bombs as well. Perhaps we will talk about this later on.

Question: You wrote about the anti-Russia project. When did it start and does it only concern Ukraine?

Vladimir Putin: Of course, not. The details are all in there. The project started back in the 17th and 18th centuries in the Polish‒Lithuanian Commonwealth. It was later exploited by the Polish national movement and, before World War I, it was used by the Austro-Hungarian Empire. The goal was quite simple, as I wrote: divide and rule. Before World War I, Russias potential opponents had a simple goal  to just weaken the country. They pursued this target vigorously, promoting the anti-Russia concept and separating part of one nation in order to make the rival weaker. Why the Bolsheviks had to pick up that concept and implement it when building a union, is not historically clear.

Perhaps, at the time it would have been more logical to bring the country together, especially because they believed it was a transition period. But they left it as it was and, unfortunately, the time bombs eventually detonated.

So, it all started a long time ago, during the Middle Ages, and it continues to this very day. They are simply recycling old schemes. History repeats itself.

----------


## Olive Yao

.
Question: Would it be correct to say that the triune people are long gone and will never exist in the future?

Vladimir Putin: No, of course, not. You know, in the Soviet times there were attempts to eradicate religiousness among our people. Did they succeed? When the Great Patriotic War broke out, during his speech on the radio, Vyacheslav Molotov addressed the nation as fellow citizens. But Joseph Stalin, who spoke after we all realised the looming catastrophe of the war started by Nazi Germany, addressed the nation as brothers and sisters. This is what people call each other in church. Later, the patriarchate was restored. Today, the church plays its well-deserved role in society.

It is not gone; the triunity of our people has never been and will never be gone, no matter how hard they try using the same schemes as in the 17th and 18th centuries.

I talked about this with the President of Belarus. He said that when he plays hockey and team members get angry because somebody makes a mistake, in the heat of the moment they shout: Come on, dont you get it? Are you not Russian? Phrases like this one come out without thinking, from the heart. There are millions of people like this in Ukraine, too. So, no, it is not gone and it will never be gone.

Question: Several months ago now, Zelensky made a statement in Russian and noted that everything had already been decided in Ukraine, and that it was going its own way. Do you think that this road will or will not intersect with Russia?

Vladimir Putin: This does not imply our intersecting paths but, rather, interdependent and interwoven destinies of millions of people living in contemporary Ukraine and contemporary Russia. This amounts to the historical and spiritual interweaving of our peoples that took centuries to evolve. What the incumbent authorities are saying has nothing to do with the people. The authorities are talking about their own personal choice. But this does not necessarily mean that this choice is final.

Question: In your article, you say that those who try and use people living on our historical territories against Russia will thus demolish their own country. Who are you referring to?

Vladimir Putin: Going back to your first question as to why this material appeared precisely now, I would address the matter from another angle. This material appeared following the drafting and enactment of the law on indigenous peoples. I will repeat the gist of the matter. The law declares Russian people living on historical Russian territories to be aliens. In effect, the authorities are beginning to expel them from this territory. This is what is happening. So, this was one of the factors that motivated me to write the article.

As to whom all this is addressed to, and what I had in mind when I was talking about what we have just mentioned, I would just like to note one aspect: People living in Ukraine are unlikely to look calmly at incumbent rulers who gain power under certain slogans and who later change their colour just like chameleons and defend entirely different positions. As a rule, they defend the interests of their superiors and those financing their stay in power, rather than the interests of the Ukrainian people.

Question: President Zelensky said that he could discuss this article with you during a face-to-face meeting. While in Berlin, he talked a lot about Nord Stream and the need to discuss the gas transit topic at the upcoming Normandy Summit. What can you say about this?

Vladimir Putin: If they want to have a discussion, I think they should take a break, read the article carefully, analyse it and review some of the archival material. I think this is exactly what they will do and they will find something to talk about. When I say they I mean the political leadership of todays Ukraine. These debates have been going on for a long time now. It is hard to argue with this article because it is honest and it is in fact based on historical documents. They may be subject to different interpretations, it is true. But the basis for the article is historical archives.

What can I say about the gas issue? Russia, Gazprom, we signed a five-year contract to deliver a certain amount of Russian natural gas to our consumers in Europe via Ukraine. The Normandy format and other similar formats are political platforms for discussing the situation in southeastern Ukraine. They have nothing to do with commercial projects like Nord Stream or Nord Stream 2 or the transit of our gas through the territory of Ukraine. Despite all the current difficulties, Russia undertook certain obligations under this contract and will fully meet them.

Question: The Soviet Union included not only Ukraine but also Kazakhstan, Belarus and many other republics. Based on the article, which relationship model do you see as the most sustainable in the future?

Vladimir Putin: It does not only depend on us. On the international stage, building a certain type of relationship even between the closest neighbours is always a compromise. It is not our goal to force anybody into adopting a certain model. We are looking for a compromise.

Here is what I mean: it does not matter to us how a neighbouring state  in this case, Ukraine  will shape its foreign policy and its roadmap. What matters is (and I said the same thing about freedom) that nobody creates problems or threats for us. What we see, however, is that military development of this territory is starting, which is worrying. I have expressed my opinion about this issue multiple times. And I think that our concerns will eventually be heard by those involved. After all, it is not Ukraines doing. It is happening on Ukrainian territory and people are being used. I really do hope that our concerns will be taken seriously.

Regarding other countries, if you are hinting that it discusses the evolution of these republics  this republic in this case, then other republics also evolved in the same manner. Yes, this is so. But I have noted there that contemporary Russia recognises current geopolitical realities. We have recognised current geopolitical realities.

Naturally, we are worried about hypothetical threats. But we maintain allied and friendly relations like with Kazakhstan and many other former Soviet republics, we work with some of them on a bilateral basis in an absolutely friendly manner. We set up economic alliances with some of them. We also set up defensive alliances, including the Collective Security Treaty Organisation, or the Customs Union first and then the Eurasian Economic Union. We are not dragging anyone there. I repeat, we are looking for compromise solutions that create a situation that our partners feel satisfied with. This amounts to a complicated coordination process. But we are patient and search for mutually acceptable solutions that suit all of us. This is an ideal scenario.

See for yourself: The European Union continues to develop, and nobody compares it with the Soviet Union. Although I have already mentioned this, the number of mandatory decisions, passed by the European Parliament, exceeds the number of similar mandatory decisions, passed by the Supreme Soviet (Parliament) of the USSR. Nobody compares them with the Soviet Union. This is voluntary business. We will be completely satisfied if we can maintain friendly and stable relations even in a bilateral format. And we are ready for this, I repeat again, while recognising current geopolitical realities. The situation is even better if we establish relations similar to those we have with Kazakhstan or Belarus, with which we are building a Union State, this is even better. We are also ready for such profound cooperation.

By the way, we are talking here about the Russia-Belarus Union State. This is not a state in the direct sense of the word but, rather, a certain level of integration. If we compare the Russia-Belarus Union State with the European Union, the EU boasts much more profound integration levels. These levels are much deeper. They have a common currency, an extremely powerful customs union, etc. They also have a common space and stipulate visa-free travel. We have so far failed to attain EU levels; at the same time, the EU countries completely retain their sovereignty. Nevertheless, this makes peoples life easier, creates certain conditions for economic development and boosts our common competitiveness. If relations develop in this context, we will, of course, support such relations. We advocate this concept and we will work with all our neighbours and friends in a partner-like manner.

----------


## Olive Yao

.
Vertaling


Onder het Verdrag van Riga van 1921, gesloten tussen de Russische Sovjet Republiek, de Oekraense Sovjet Rebpubliek en Polen, werden de westelijke landen van het voormalige Russische rijk aan Polen afgestaan. In het interbellum voerde de Poolse regering een actief hervestigingsbeleid om de etnische samenstelling van de oostelijke grensgebieden te veranderen  de Poolse naam voor wat nu West-Oekrane, West-Wit-Rusland en delen van Litouwen is. De gebieden werden onderworpen aan harde polonisering, lokale cultuur en tradities werden onderdrukt. Later, tijdens de Tweede Wereldoorlog, gebruikten radicale groepen Oekraense nationalisten dit als voorwendsel voor terreur, niet alleen tegen de Poolse, maar ook tegen de Joodse en Russische bevolking.

(...)

Bedenk dat de VS en EU-landen lang geleden, ruim voor 2014, Oekrane systematisch en consequent hebben aangespoord om de economische samenwerking met Rusland in te perken en te beperken. Wij, als de grootste handels- en economische partner van Oekrane, stelden voor om de opkomende problemen in Oekrane-Rusland-EU-formaat te bespreken. Maar elke keer kregen we te horen dat Rusland er niets mee te maken had en dat de kwestie alleen de EU en Oekrane betrof. In feite westerse landen verwierpen de herhaalde oproepen van Rusland tot dialoog.

(...)

Het bereiken van vrede was de belangrijkste verkiezingsslogan van de zittende president. Hiermee kwam hij aan de macht. De beloften bleken leugens. Er is niets veranderd. En in sommige opzichten is de situatie in Oekrane en rond Donbas zelfs verslechterd.

In het anti-Rusland-project is er geen plaats voor een soeverein Oekrane of voor de politieke krachten die zijn echte onafhankelijkheid proberen te verdedigen. Degenen die praten over verzoening in de Oekranse samenleving, over dialoog, over het vinden van een uitweg uit de huidige impasse, worden bestempeld als 'pro-Russische' agenten.

Nogmaals, voor veel mensen in Oekrane is het anti-Rusland project gewoon onaanvaardbaar. En er zijn miljoenen van zulke mensen. Maar ze mogen hun hoofd niet opheffen. Hun juridische mogelijkheid om hun standpunt te verdedigen is hun feitelijk ontnomen. Ze worden gentimideerd, ondergronds gedreven. Niet alleen worden ze vervolgd voor hun overtuiging, voor het gesproken woord, voor het openlijk uiten van hun standpunt, maar ze worden ook vermoord. Moordenaars blijven in de regel ongestraft.

Tegenwoordig is de "juiste" patriot van Oekrane alleen degene die Rusland haat.

----------


## Olive Yao

.
Commentaar

----------


## Olive Yao

.
21 februari 2022

Redevoering van de President van de Russische Federatie

Kremlin, Moskou

President of Russia Vladimir Putin: 

Citizens of Russia, friends,

My address concerns the events in Ukraine and why this is so important for us, for Russia. Of course, my message is also addressed to our compatriots in Ukraine.

The matter is very serious and needs to be discussed in depth.

The situation in Donbass has reached a critical, acute stage. I am speaking to you directly today not only to explain what is happening but also to inform you of the decisions being made as well as potential further steps.

I would like to emphasise again that Ukraine is not just a neighbouring country for us. It is an inalienable part of our own history, culture and spiritual space. These are our comrades, those dearest to us  not only colleagues, friends and people who once served together, but also relatives, people bound by blood, by family ties.

Since time immemorial, the people living in the south-west of what has historically been Russian land have called themselves Russians and Orthodox Christians. This was the case before the 17th century, when a portion of this territory rejoined the Russian state, and after.

It seems to us that, generally speaking, we all know these facts, that this is common knowledge. Still, it is necessary to say at least a few words about the history of this issue in order to understand what is happening today, to explain the motives behind Russias actions and what we aim to achieve.

So, I will start with the fact that modern Ukraine was entirely created by Russia or, to be more precise, by Bolshevik, Communist Russia. This process started practically right after the 1917 revolution, and Lenin and his associates did it in a way that was extremely harsh on Russia  by separating, severing what is historically Russian land. Nobody asked the millions of people living there what they thought.

Then, both before and after the Great Patriotic War, Stalin incorporated in the USSR and transferred to Ukraine some lands that previously belonged to Poland, Romania and Hungary. In the process, he gave Poland part of what was traditionally German land as compensation, and in 1954, Khrushchev took Crimea away from Russia for some reason and also gave it to Ukraine. In effect, this is how the territory of modern Ukraine was formed.

But now I would like to focus attention on the initial period of the USSRs formation. I believe this is extremely important for us. I will have to approach it from a distance, so to speak.

I will remind you that after the 1917 October Revolution and the subsequent Civil War, the Bolsheviks set about creating a new statehood. They had rather serious disagreements among themselves on this point. In 1922, Stalin occupied the positions of both the General Secretary of the Russian Communist Party (Bolsheviks) and the Peoples Commissar for Ethnic Affairs. He suggested building the country on the principles of autonomisation that is, giving the republics  the future administrative and territorial entities  broad powers upon joining a unified state.

Lenin criticised this plan and suggested making concessions to the nationalists, whom he called independents at that time. Lenins ideas of what amounted in essence to a confederative state arrangement and a slogan about the right of nations to self-determination, up to secession, were laid in the foundation of Soviet statehood. Initially they were confirmed in the Declaration on the Formation of the USSR in 1922, and later on, after Lenins death, were enshrined in the 1924 Soviet Constitution.

This immediately raises many questions. The first is really the main one: why was it necessary to appease the nationalists, to satisfy the ceaselessly growing nationalist ambitions on the outskirts of the former empire? What was the point of transferring to the newly, often arbitrarily formed administrative units  the union republics  vast territories that had nothing to do with them? Let me repeat that these territories were transferred along with the population of what was historically Russia.

Moreover, these administrative units were de facto given the status and form of national state entities. That raises another question: why was it necessary to make such generous gifts, beyond the wildest dreams of the most zealous nationalists and, on top of all that, give the republics the right to secede from the unified state without any conditions?

At first glance, this looks absolutely incomprehensible, even crazy. But only at first glance. There is an explanation. After the revolution, the Bolsheviks main goal was to stay in power at all costs, absolutely at all costs. They did everything for this purpose: accepted the humiliating Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, although the military and economic situation in Kaiser Germany and its allies was dramatic and the outcome of the First World War was a foregone conclusion, and satisfied any demands and wishes of the nationalists within the country.

When it comes to the historical destiny of Russia and its peoples, Lenins principles of state development were not just a mistake; they were worse than a mistake, as the saying goes. This became patently clear after the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991.

Of course, we cannot change past events, but we must at least admit them openly and honestly, without any reservations or politicking. Personally, I can add that no political factors, however impressive or profitable they may seem at any given moment, can or may be used as the fundamental principles of statehood.

I am not trying to put the blame on anyone. The situation in the country at that time, both before and after the Civil War, was extremely complicated; it was critical. The only thing I would like to say today is that this is exactly how it was. It is a historical fact. Actually, as I have already said, Soviet Ukraine is the result of the Bolsheviks policy and can be rightfully called Vladimir Lenins Ukraine. He was its creator and architect. This is fully and comprehensively corroborated by archival documents, including Lenins harsh instructions regarding Donbass, which was actually shoved into Ukraine. And today the grateful progeny has overturned monuments to Lenin in Ukraine. They call it decommunization.

You want decommunization? Very well, this suits us just fine. But why stop halfway? We are ready to show what real decommunizations would mean for Ukraine.

Going back to history, I would like to repeat that the Soviet Union was established in the place of the former Russian Empire in 1922. But practice showed immediately that it was impossible to preserve or govern such a vast and complex territory on the amorphous principles that amounted to confederation. They were far removed from reality and the historical tradition.

It is logical that the Red Terror and a rapid slide into Stalins dictatorship, the domination of the communist ideology and the Communist Partys monopoly on power, nationalisation and the planned economy  all this transformed the formally declared but ineffective principles of government into a mere declaration. In reality, the union republics did not have any sovereign rights, none at all. The practical result was the creation of a tightly centralised and absolutely unitary state.

In fact, what Stalin fully implemented was not Lenins but his own principles of government. But he did not make the relevant amendments to the cornerstone documents, to the Constitution, and he did not formally revise Lenins principles underlying the Soviet Union. From the look of it, there seemed to be no need for that, because everything seemed to be working well in conditions of the totalitarian regime, and outwardly it looked wonderful, attractive and even super-democratic.

And yet, it is a great pity that the fundamental and formally legal foundations of our state were not promptly cleansed of the odious and utopian fantasies inspired by the revolution, which are absolutely destructive for any normal state. As it often happened in our country before, nobody gave any thought to the future.

It seems that the Communist Party leaders were convinced that they had created a solid system of government and that their policies had settled the ethnic issue for good. But falsification, misconception, and tampering with public opinion have a high cost. The virus of nationalist ambitions is still with us, and the mine laid at the initial stage to destroy state immunity to the disease of nationalism was ticking. As I have already said, the mine was the right of secession from the Soviet Union.

In the mid-1980s, the increasing socioeconomic problems and the apparent crisis of the planned economy aggravated the ethnic issue, which essentially was not based on any expectations or unfulfilled dreams of the Soviet peoples but primarily the growing appetites of the local elites.

However, instead of analysing the situation, taking appropriate measures, first of all in the economy, and gradually transforming the political system and government in a well-considered and balanced manner, the Communist Party leadership only engaged in open doubletalk about the revival of the Leninist principle of national self-determination.

Moreover, in the course of power struggle within the Communist Party itself, each of the opposing sides, in a bid to expand its support base, started to thoughtlessly incite and encourage nationalist sentiments, manipulating them and promising their potential supporters whatever they wished. Against the backdrop of the superficial and populist rhetoric about democracy and a bright future based either on a market or a planned economy, but amid a true impoverishment of people and widespread shortages, no one among the powers that be was thinking about the inevitable tragic consequences for the country.

Next, they entirely embarked on the track beaten at the inception of the USSR and pandering to the ambitions of the nationalist elites nurtured within their own party ranks. But in so doing, they forgot that the CPSU no longer had  thank God  the tools for retaining power and the country itself, tools such as state terror and a Stalinist-type dictatorship, and that the notorious guiding role of the party was disappearing without a trace, like a morning mist, right before their eyes.

And then, the September 1989 plenary session of the CPSU Central Committee approved a truly fatal document, the so-called ethnic policy of the party in modern conditions, the CPSU platform. It included the following provisions, I quote: The republics of the USSR shall possess all the rights appropriate to their status as sovereign socialist states.

The next point: The supreme representative bodies of power of the USSR republics can challenge and suspend the operation of the USSR Governments resolutions and directives in their territory.

And finally: Each republic of the USSR shall have citizenship of its own, which shall apply to all of its residents.

Wasnt it clear what these formulas and decisions would lead to?

----------


## Olive Yao

.
Now is not the time or place to go into matters pertaining to state or constitutional law, or define the concept of citizenship. But one may wonder: why was it necessary to rock the country even more in that already complicated situation? The facts remain.

Even two years before the collapse of the USSR, its fate was actually predetermined. It is now that radicals and nationalists, including and primarily those in Ukraine, are taking credit for having gained independence. As we can see, this is absolutely wrong. The disintegration of our united country was brought about by the historic, strategic mistakes on the part of the Bolshevik leaders and the CPSU leadership, mistakes committed at different times in state-building and in economic and ethnic policies. The collapse of the historical Russia known as the USSR is on their conscience.

Despite all these injustices, lies and outright pillage of Russia, it was our people who accepted the new geopolitical reality that took shape after the dissolution of the USSR, and recognised the new independent states. Not only did Russia recognise these countries, but helped its CIS partners, even though it faced a very dire situation itself. This included our Ukrainian colleagues, who turned to us for financial support many times from the very moment they declared independence. Our country provided this assistance while respecting Ukraines dignity and sovereignty.

According to expert assessments, confirmed by a simple calculation of our energy prices, the subsidised loans Russia provided to Ukraine along with economic and trade preferences, the overall benefit for the Ukrainian budget in the period from 1991 to 2013 amounted to $250 billion.

However, there was more to it than that. By the end of 1991, the USSR owed some $100 billion to other countries and international funds. Initially, there was this idea that all former Soviet republics will pay back these loans together, in the spirit of solidarity and proportionally to their economic potential. However, Russia undertook to pay back all Soviet debts and delivered on this promise by completing this process in 2017.

In exchange for that, the newly independent states had to hand over to Russia part of the Soviet foreign assets. An agreement to this effect was reached with Ukraine in December 1994. However, Kiev failed to ratify these agreements and later simply refused to honour them by making demands for a share of the Diamond Treasury, gold reserves, as well as former USSR property and other assets abroad.

Nevertheless, despite all these challenges, Russia always worked with Ukraine in an open and honest manner and, as I have already said, with respect for its interests. We developed our ties in multiple fields. Thus, in 2011, bilateral trade exceeded $50 billion. Let me note that in 2019, that is before the pandemic, Ukraines trade with all EU countries combined was below this indicator.

At the same time, it was striking how the Ukrainian authorities always preferred dealing with Russia in a way that ensured that they enjoy all the rights and privileges while remaining free from any obligations.

The officials in Kiev replaced partnership with a parasitic attitude acting at times in an extremely brash manner. Suffice it to recall the continuous blackmail on energy transits and the fact that they literally stole gas.

I can add that Kiev tried to use dialogue with Russia as a bargaining chip in its relations with the West, using the threat of closer ties with Russia for blackmailing the West to secure preferences by claiming that otherwise Russia would have a bigger influence in Ukraine.

At the same time, the Ukrainian authorities  I would like to emphasise this  began by building their statehood on the negation of everything that united us, trying to distort the mentality and historical memory of millions of people, of entire generations living in Ukraine. It is not surprising that Ukrainian society was faced with the rise of far-right nationalism, which rapidly developed into aggressive Russophobia and neo-Nazism. This resulted in the participation of Ukrainian nationalists and neo-Nazis in the terrorist groups in the North Caucasus and the increasingly loud territorial claims to Russia.

A role in this was played by external forces, which used a ramified network of NGOs and special services to nurture their clients in Ukraine and to bring their representatives to the seats of authority.

It should be noted that Ukraine actually never had stable traditions of real statehood. And, therefore, in 1991 it opted for mindlessly emulating foreign models, which have no relation to history or Ukrainian realities. Political government institutions were readjusted many times to the rapidly growing clans and their self-serving interests, which had nothing to do with the interests of the Ukrainian people.

Essentially, the so-called pro-Western civilisational choice made by the oligarchic Ukrainian authorities was not and is not aimed at creating better conditions in the interests of peoples well-being but at keeping the billions of dollars that the oligarchs have stolen from the Ukrainians and are holding in their accounts in Western banks, while reverently accommodating the geopolitical rivals of Russia.

Some industrial and financial groups and the parties and politicians on their payroll relied on the nationalists and radicals from the very beginning. Others claimed to be in favour of good relations with Russia and cultural and language diversity, coming to power with the help of their citizens who sincerely supported their declared aspirations, including the millions of people in the south-eastern regions. But after getting the positions they coveted, these people immediately betrayed their voters, going back on their election promises and instead steering a policy prompted by the radicals and sometimes even persecuting their former allies  the public organisations that supported bilingualism and cooperation with Russia. These people took advantage of the fact that their voters were mostly law-abiding citizens with moderate views who trusted the authorities, and that, unlike the radicals, they would not act aggressively or make use of illegal instruments.

Meanwhile, the radicals became increasingly brazen in their actions and made more demands every year. They found it easy to force their will on the weak authorities, which were infected with the virus of nationalism and corruption as well and which artfully replaced the real cultural, economic and social interests of the people and Ukraines true sovereignty with various ethnic speculations and formal ethnic attributes.

A stable statehood has never developed in Ukraine; its electoral and other political procedures just serve as a cover, a screen for the redistribution of power and property between various oligarchic clans.

Corruption, which is certainly a challenge and a problem for many countries, including Russia, has gone beyond the usual scope in Ukraine. It has literally permeated and corroded Ukrainian statehood, the entire system, and all branches of power.

Radical nationalists took advantage of the justified public discontent and saddled the Maidan protest, escalating it to a coup d'tat in 2014. They also had direct assistance from foreign states. According to reports, the US Embassy provided $1 million a day to support the so-called protest camp on Independence Square in Kiev. In addition, large amounts were impudently transferred directly to the opposition leaders bank accounts, tens of millions of dollars. But the people who actually suffered, the families of those who died in the clashes provoked in the streets and squares of Kiev and other cities, how much did they get in the end? Better not ask.

The nationalists who have seized power have unleashed a persecution, a real terror campaign against those who opposed their anti-constitutional actions. Politicians, journalists, and public activists were harassed and publicly humiliated. A wave of violence swept Ukrainian cities, including a series of high-profile and unpunished murders. One shudders at the memories of the terrible tragedy in Odessa, where peaceful protesters were brutally murdered, burned alive in the House of Trade Unions. The criminals who committed that atrocity have never been punished, and no one is even looking for them. But we know their names and we will do everything to punish them, find them and bring them to justice.

Maidan did not bring Ukraine any closer to democracy and progress. Having accomplished a coup d'tat, the nationalists and those political forces that supported them eventually led Ukraine into an impasse, pushed the country into the abyss of civil war. Eight years later, the country is split. Ukraine is struggling with an acute socioeconomic crisis.

According to international organisations, in 2019, almost 6 million Ukrainians  I emphasise  about 15 percent, not of the wokrforce, but of the entire population of that country, had to go abroad to find work. Most of them do odd jobs. The following fact is also revealing: since 2020, over 60,000 doctors and other health workers have left the country amid the pandemic.

Since 2014, water bills increased by almost a third, and energy bills grew several times, while the price of gas for households surged several dozen times. Many people simply do not have the money to pay for utilities. They literally struggle to survive.

What happened? Why is this all happening? The answer is obvious. They spent and embezzled the legacy inherited not only from the Soviet era, but also from the Russian Empire. They lost tens, hundreds of thousands of jobs which enabled people to earn a reliable income and generate tax revenue, among other things thanks to close cooperation with Russia. Sectors including machine building, instrument engineering, electronics, ship and aircraft building have been undermined or destroyed altogether. There was a time, however, when not only Ukraine, but the entire Soviet Union took pride in these companies.

In 2021, the Black Sea Shipyard in Nikolayev went out of business. Its first docks date back to Catherine the Great. Antonov, the famous manufacturer, has not made a single commercial aircraft since 2016, while Yuzhmash, a factory specialising in missile and space equipment, is nearly bankrupt. The Kremenchug Steel Plant is in a similar situation. This sad list goes on and on.

As for the gas transportation system, it was built in its entirety by the Soviet Union, and it has now deteriorated to an extent that using it creates major risks and comes at a high cost for the environment.

This situation begs the question: poverty, lack of opportunity, and lost industrial and technological potential  is this the pro-Western civilisational choice they have been using for many years to fool millions of people with promises of heavenly pastures?

It all came down to a Ukrainian economy in tatters and an outright pillage of the countrys citizens, while Ukraine itself was placed under external control, directed not only from the Western capitals, but also on the ground, as the saying goes, through an entire network of foreign advisors, NGOs and other institutions present in Ukraine. They have a direct bearing on all the key appointments and dismissals and on all branches of power at all levels, from the central government down to municipalities, as well as on state-owned companies and corporations, including Naftogaz, Ukrenergo, Ukrainian Railways, Ukroboronprom, Ukrposhta, and the Ukrainian Sea Ports Authority.

There is no independent judiciary in Ukraine. The Kiev authorities, at the Wests demand, delegated the priority right to select members of the supreme judicial bodies, the Council of Justice and the High Qualifications Commission of Judges, to international organisations.

In addition, the United States directly controls the National Agency on Corruption Prevention, the National Anti-Corruption Bureau, the Specialised Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office and the High Anti-Corruption Court. All this is done under the noble pretext of invigorating efforts against corruption. All right, but where are the results? Corruption is flourishing like never before.

----------


## Olive Yao

.
Are the Ukrainian people aware that this is how their country is managed? Do they realise that their country has turned not even into a political or economic protectorate but has been reduced to a colony with a puppet regime? The state was privatised. As a result, the government, which designates itself as the power of patriots no longer acts in a national capacity and consistently pushes Ukraine towards losing its sovereignty.

The policy to root out the Russian language and culture and promote assimilation carries on. The Verkhovna Rada has generated a steady flow of discriminatory bills, and the law on the so-called indigenous people has already come into force. People who identify as Russians and want to preserve their identity, language and culture are getting the signal that they are not wanted in Ukraine.

Under the laws on education and the Ukrainian language as a state language, the Russian language has no place in schools or public spaces, even in ordinary shops. The law on the so-called vetting of officials and purging their ranks created a pathway for dealing with unwanted civil servants.

There are more and more acts enabling the Ukrainian military and law enforcement agencies to crack down on the freedom of speech, dissent, and going after the opposition. The world knows the deplorable practice of imposing unilateral illegitimate sanctions against other countries, foreign individuals and legal entities. Ukraine has outperformed its Western masters by inventing sanctions against its own citizens, companies, television channels, other media outlets and even members of parliament.

Kiev continues to prepare the destruction of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate. This is not an emotional judgement; proof of this can be found in concrete decisions and documents. The Ukrainian authorities have cynically turned the tragedy of the schism into an instrument of state policy. The current authorities do not react to the Ukrainian peoples appeals to abolish the laws that are infringing on believers rights. Moreover, new draft laws directed against the clergy and millions of parishioners of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate have been registered in the Verkhovna Rada.

A few words about Crimea. The people of the peninsula freely made their choice to be with Russia. The Kiev authorities cannot challenge the clearly stated choice of the people, which is why they have opted for aggressive action, for activating extremist cells, including radical Islamist organisations, for sending subversives to stage terrorist attacks at critical infrastructure facilities, and for kidnapping Russian citizens. We have factual proof that such aggressive actions are being taken with support from Western security services.

In March 2021, a new Military Strategy was adopted in Ukraine. This document is almost entirely dedicated to confrontation with Russia and sets the goal of involving foreign states in a conflict with our country. The strategy stipulates the organisation of what can be described as a terrorist underground movement in Russias Crimea and in Donbass. It also sets out the contours of a potential war, which should end, according to the Kiev strategists, with the assistance of the international community on favourable terms for Ukraine, as well as  listen carefully, please  with foreign military support in the geopolitical confrontation with the Russian Federation. In fact, this is nothing other than preparation for hostilities against our country, Russia.

As we know, it has already been stated today that Ukraine intends to create its own nuclear weapons, and this is not just bragging. Ukraine has the nuclear technologies created back in the Soviet times and delivery vehicles for such weapons, including aircraft, as well as the Soviet-designed Tochka-U precision tactical missiles with a range of over 100 kilometres. But they can do more; it is only a matter of time. They have had the groundwork for this since the Soviet era.

In other words, acquiring tactical nuclear weapons will be much easier for Ukraine than for some other states I am not going to mention here, which are conducting such research, especially if Kiev receives foreign technological support. We cannot rule this out either.

If Ukraine acquires weapons of mass destruction, the situation in the world and in Europe will drastically change, especially for us, for Russia. We cannot but react to this real danger, all the more so since, let me repeat, Ukraines Western patrons may help it acquire these weapons to create yet another threat to our country. We are seeing how persistently the Kiev regime is being pumped with arms. Since 2014, the United States alone has spent billions of dollars for this purpose, including supplies of arms and equipment and training of specialists. In the last few months, there has been a constant flow of Western weapons to Ukraine, ostentatiously, with the entire world watching. Foreign advisors supervise the activities of Ukraines armed forces and special services and we are well aware of this.

Over the past few years, military contingents of NATO countries have been almost constantly present on Ukrainian territory under the pretext of exercises. The Ukrainian troop control system has already been integrated into NATO. This means that NATO headquarters can issue direct commands to the Ukrainian armed forces, even to their separate units and squads.

The United States and NATO have started an impudent development of Ukrainian territory as a theatre of potential military operations. Their regular joint exercises are obviously anti-Russian. Last year alone, over 23,000 troops and more than a thousand units of hardware were involved.

A law has already been adopted that allows foreign troops to come to Ukraine in 2022 to take part in multinational drills. Understandably, these are primarily NATO troops. This year, at least ten of these joint drills are planned.

Obviously, such undertakings are designed to be a cover-up for a rapid buildup of the NATO military group on Ukrainian territory. This is all the more so since the network of airfields upgraded with US help in Borispol, Ivano-Frankovsk, Chuguyev and Odessa, to name a few, is capable of transferring army units in a very short time. Ukraines airspace is open to flights by US strategic and reconnaissance aircraft and drones that conduct surveillance over Russian territory.

I will add that the US-built Maritime Operations Centre in Ochakov makes it possible to support activity by NATO warships, including the use of precision weapons, against the Russian Black Sea Fleet and our infrastructure on the entire Black Sea Coast.

At one time, the United States intended to build similar facilities in Crimea as well but the Crimeans and residents of Sevastopol wrecked these plans. We will always remember this.

I would like to repeat that today such a centre has already been deployed in Ochakov. In the 18th century, soldiers of Alexander Suvorov fought for this city. Owing to their courage, it became part of Russia. Also in the 18th century, the lands of the Black Sea littoral, incorporated in Russia as a result of wars with the Ottoman Empire, were given the name of Novorossiya (New Russia). Now attempts are being made to condemn these landmarks of history to oblivion, along with the names of state and military figures of the Russian Empire without whose efforts modern Ukraine would not have many big cities or even access to the Black Sea.

A monument to Alexander Suvorov was recently demolished in Poltava. What is there to say? Are you renouncing your own past? The so-called colonial heritage of the Russian Empire? Well, in this case, be consistent.

Next, notably, Article 17 of the Constitution of Ukraine stipulates that deploying foreign military bases on its territory is illegal. However, as it turns out, this is just a conventionality that can be easily circumvented.

Ukraine is home to NATO training missions which are, in fact, foreign military bases. They just called a base a mission and were done with it.

Kiev has long proclaimed a strategic course on joining NATO. Indeed, each country is entitled to pick its own security system and enter into military alliances. There would be no problem with that, if it were not for one but. International documents expressly stipulate the principle of equal and indivisible security, which includes obligations not to strengthen one's own security at the expense of the security of other states. This is stated in the 1999 OSCE Charter for European Security adopted in Istanbul and the 2010 OSCE Astana Declaration.

In other words, the choice of pathways towards ensuring security should not pose a threat to other states, whereas Ukraine joining NATO is a direct threat to Russia's security.

Let me remind you that at the Bucharest NATO summit held in April 2008, the United States pushed through a decision to the effect that Ukraine and, by the way, Georgia would become NATO members. Many European allies of the United States were well aware of the risks associated with this prospect already then, but were forced to put up with the will of their senior partner. The Americans simply used them to carry out a clearly anti-Russian policy.

A number of NATO member states are still very sceptical about Ukraine joining NATO. We are getting signals from some European capitals telling us not to worry since it will not happen literally overnight. In fact, our US partners are saying the same thing as well. All right, then we respond, if it does not happen tomorrow, then it will happen the day after tomorrow. What does it change from the historical perspective? Nothing at all.

Furthermore, we are aware of the US leaderships position and words that active hostilities in eastern Ukraine do not rule out the possibility of that country joining NATO if it meets NATO criteria and overcomes corruption.

All the while, they are trying to convince us over and over again that NATO is a peace-loving and purely defensive alliance that poses no threat to Russia. Again, they want us to take their word for it. But we are well aware of the real value of these words. In 1990, when German unification was discussed, the United States promised the Soviet leadership that NATO jurisdiction or military presence will not expand one inch to the east and that the unification of Germany will not lead to the spread of NATO's military organisation to the east. This is a quote.

They issued lots of verbal assurances, all of which turned out to be empty phrases. Later, they began to assure us that the accession to NATO by Central and Eastern European countries would only improve relations with Moscow, relieve these countries of the fears steeped in their bitter historical legacy, and even create a belt of countries that are friendly towards Russia.

However, the exact opposite happened. The governments of certain Eastern European countries, speculating on Russophobia, brought their complexes and stereotypes about the Russian threat to the Alliance and insisted on building up the collective defence potentials and deploying them primarily against Russia. Worse still, that happened in the 1990s and the early 2000s when, thanks to our openness and goodwill, relations between Russia and the West had reached a high level.

Russia has fulfilled all of its obligations, including the pullout from Germany, from Central and Eastern Europe, making an immense contribution to overcoming the legacy of the Cold War. We have consistently proposed various cooperation options, including in the NATO-Russia Council and the OSCE formats.

Moreover, I will say something I have never said publicly, I will say it now for the first time. When then outgoing US President Bill Clinton visited Moscow in 2000, I asked him how America would feel about admitting Russia to NATO.

I will not reveal all the details of that conversation, but the reaction to my question was, let us say, quite restrained, and the Americans true attitude to that possibility can actually be seen from their subsequent steps with regard to our country. I am referring to the overt support for terrorists in the North Caucasus, the disregard for our security demands and concerns, NATOs continued expansion, withdrawal from the ABM Treaty, and so on.

----------


## Olive Yao

.
It raises the question: why? What is all this about, what is the purpose? All right, you do not want to see us as friends or allies, but why make us an enemy?

There can be only one answer  this is not about our political regime or anything like that. They just do not need a big and independent country like Russia around. This is the answer to all questions. This is the source of Americas traditional policy towards Russia. Hence the attitude to all our security proposals

Today, one glance at the map is enough to see to what extent Western countries have kept their promise to refrain from NATOs eastward expansion. They just cheated. We have seen five waves of NATO expansion, one after another  Poland, the Czech Republic and Hungary were admitted in 1999; Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia in 2004; Albania and Croatia in 2009; Montenegro in 2017; and North Macedonia in 2020.

As a result, the Alliance, its military infrastructure has reached Russias borders. This is one of the key causes of the European security crisis; it has had the most negative impact on the entire system of international relations and led to the loss of mutual trust.

The situation continues to deteriorate, including in the strategic area. Thus, positioning areas for interceptor missiles are being established in Romania and Poland as part of the US project to create a global missile defence system. It is common knowledge that the launchers deployed there can be used for Tomahawk cruise missiles  offensive strike systems.

In addition, the United States is developing its all-purpose Standard Missile-6, which can provide air and missile defence, as well as strike ground and surface targets. In other words, the allegedly defensive US missile defence system is developing and expanding its new offensive capabilities.

The information we have gives us good reason to believe that Ukraines accession to NATO and the subsequent deployment of NATO facilities has already been decided and is only a matter of time. We clearly understand that given this scenario, the level of military threats to Russia will increase dramatically, several times over. And I would like to emphasise at this point that the risk of a sudden strike at our country will multiply.

I will explain that American strategic planning documents confirm the possibility of a so-called preemptive strike at enemy missile systems. We also know the main adversary of the United States and NATO. It is Russia. NATO documents officially declare our country to be the main threat to Euro-Atlantic security. Ukraine will serve as an advanced bridgehead for such a strike. If our ancestors heard about this, they would probably simply not believe this. We do not want to believe this today either, but it is what it is. I would like people in Russia and Ukraine to understand this.

Many Ukrainian airfields are located not far from our borders. NATOs tactical aviation deployed there, including precision weapon carriers, will be capable of striking at our territory to the depth of the Volgograd-Kazan-Samara-Astrakhan line. The deployment of reconnaissance radars on Ukrainian territory will allow NATO to tightly control Russias airspace up to the Urals.

Finally, after the US destroyed the INF Treaty, the Pentagon has been openly developing many land-based attack weapons, including ballistic missiles that are capable of hitting targets at a distance of up to 5,500 km. If deployed in Ukraine, such systems will be able to hit targets in Russias entire European part. The flying time of Tomahawk cruise missiles to Moscow will be less than 35 minutes; ballistic missiles from Kharkov will take seven to eight minutes; and hypersonic assault weapons, four to five minutes. It is like a knife to the throat. I have no doubt that they hope to carry out these plans, as they did many times in the past, expanding NATO eastward, moving their military infrastructure to Russian borders and fully ignoring our concerns, protests and warnings. Excuse me, but they simply did not care at all about such things and did whatever they deemed necessary.

Of course, they are going to behave in the same way in the future, following a well-known proverb: The dogs bark but the caravan goes on. Let me say right away  we do not accept this behaviour and will never accept it. That said, Russia has always advocated the resolution of the most complicated problems by political and diplomatic means, at the negotiating table.

We are well aware of our enormous responsibility when it comes to regional and global stability. Back in 2008, Russia put forth an initiative to conclude a European Security Treaty under which not a single Euro-Atlantic state or international organisation could strengthen their security at the expense of the security of others. However, our proposal was rejected right off the bat on the pretext that Russia should not be allowed to put limits on NATO activities.

Furthermore, it was made explicitly clear to us that only NATO members can have legally binding security guarantees.

Last December, we handed over to our Western partners a draft treaty between the Russian Federation and the United States of America on security guarantees, as well as a draft agreement on measures to ensure the security of the Russian Federation and NATO member states.

The United States and NATO responded with general statements. There were kernels of rationality in them as well, but they concerned matters of secondary importance and it all looked like an attempt to drag the issue out and to lead the discussion astray.

We responded to this accordingly and pointed out that we were ready to follow the path of negotiations, provided, however, that all issues are considered as a package that includes Russias core proposals which contain three key points. First, to prevent further NATO expansion. Second, to have the Alliance refrain from deploying assault weapon systems on Russian borders. And finally, rolling back the bloc's military capability and infrastructure in Europe to where they were in 1997, when the NATO-Russia Founding Act was signed.

These principled proposals of ours have been ignored. To reiterate, our Western partners have once again vocalised the all-too-familiar formulas that each state is entitled to freely choose ways to ensure its security or to join any military union or alliance. That is, nothing has changed in their stance, and we keep hearing the same old references to NATOs notorious open door policy. Moreover, they are again trying to blackmail us and are threatening us with sanctions, which, by the way, they will introduce no matter what as Russia continues to strengthen its sovereignty and its Armed Forces. To be sure, they will never think twice before coming up with or just fabricating a pretext for yet another sanction attack regardless of the developments in Ukraine. Their one and only goal is to hold back the development of Russia. And they will keep doing so, just as they did before, even without any formal pretext just because we exist and will never compromise our sovereignty, national interests or values.

I would like to be clear and straightforward: in the current circumstances, when our proposals for an equal dialogue on fundamental issues have actually remained unanswered by the United States and NATO, when the level of threats to our country has increased significantly, Russia has every right to respond in order to ensure its security. That is exactly what we will do.

With regard to the state of affairs in Donbass, we see that the ruling Kiev elites never stop publicly making clear their unwillingness to comply with the Minsk Package of Measures to settle the conflict and are not interested in a peaceful settlement. On the contrary, they are trying to orchestrate a blitzkrieg in Donbass as was the case in 2014 and 2015. We all know how these reckless schemes ended.

Not a single day goes by without Donbass communities coming under shelling attacks. The recently formed large military force makes use of attack drones, heavy equipment, missiles, artillery and multiple rocket launchers. The killing of civilians, the blockade, the abuse of people, including children, women and the elderly, continues unabated. As we say, there is no end in sight to this.

Meanwhile, the so-called civilised world, which our Western colleagues proclaimed themselves the only representatives of, prefers not to see this, as if this horror and genocide, which almost 4 million people are facing, do not exist. But they do exist and only because these people did not agree with the West-supported coup in Ukraine in 2014 and opposed the transition towards the Neanderthal and aggressive nationalism and neo-Nazism which have been elevated in Ukraine to the rank of national policy. They are fighting for their elementary right to live on their own land, to speak their own language, and to preserve their culture and traditions.

How long can this tragedy continue? How much longer can one put up with this? Russia has done everything to preserve Ukraines territorial integrity. All these years, it has persistently and patiently pushed for the implementation of UN Security Council Resolution 2202 of February 17, 2015, which consolidated the Minsk Package of Measures of February 12, 2015, to settle the situation in Donbass.

Everything was in vain. Presidents and Rada deputies come and go, but deep down the aggressive and nationalistic regime that seized power in Kiev remains unchanged. It is entirely a product of the 2014 coup, and those who then embarked on the path of violence, bloodshed and lawlessness did not recognise then and do not recognise now any solution to the Donbass issue other than a military one.

In this regard, I consider it necessary to take a long overdue decision and to immediately recognise the independence and sovereignty of the Donetsk People's Republic and the Lugansk People's Republic.

I would like to ask the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation to support this decision and then ratify the Treaty of Friendship and Mutual Assistance with both republics. These two documents will be prepared and signed shortly.

We want those who seized and continue to hold power in Kiev to immediately stop hostilities. Otherwise, the responsibility for the possible continuation of the bloodshed will lie entirely on the conscience of Ukraines ruling regime.

As I announce the decisions taken today, I remain confident in the support of Russias citizens and the countrys patriotic forces.

Thank you.

----------


## Olive Yao

.
Vertaling

De situatie in Donbass heeft een kritieke, acute fase bereikt. Ik spreek vandaag rechtstreeks tot u, niet alleen om uit te leggen wat er gebeurt, maar ook om u te informeren over de beslissingen die worden genomen en over mogelijke verdere stappen.

Ik wil nogmaals benadrukken dat Oekrane voor ons niet alleen een buurland is. Het is een onvervreemdbaar onderdeel van onze eigen geschiedenis, cultuur en spirituele ruimte. Dit zijn onze kameraden, degenen die ons het meest dierbaar zijn  niet alleen collega's, vrienden en mensen die ooit samen hebben gediend, maar ook familieleden, mensen gebonden door bloed, door familiebanden.

()

Desondanks heeft Rusland, ondanks al deze uitdagingen, altijd op een open en eerlijke manier met Oekrane samengewerkt en, zoals ik al zei, met respect voor zijn belangen. We hebben onze banden op meerdere gebieden ontwikkeld. Zo overschreed de bilaterale handel in 2011 $ 50 miljard. Ik merk op dat in 2019, dat wil zeggen vr de pandemie, de handel van Oekrane met alle EU-landen samen onder deze indicator lag.

()

Kiev heeft lang een strategische koers verkondigd om lid te worden van de NAVO. Elk land heeft inderdaad het recht om zijn eigen veiligheidssysteem te kiezen en militaire allianties aan te gaan. Daar zou geen probleem mee zijn, ware het niet dat er n 'maar' was. Internationale documenten stipuleren uitdrukkelijk het principe van gelijke en ondeelbare veiligheid, waaronder verplichtingen om de eigen veiligheid niet te versterken ten koste van de veiligheid van andere staten. Dit staat in het OVSE-handvest voor Europese veiligheid uit 1999, aangenomen in Istanbul, en de OVSE-verklaring van Astana uit 2010.

(...)

() Het roept de vraag op: waarom? Waar gaat dit over, wat is het doel? Ok, je wilt ons niet als vrienden of bondgenoten zijn, maar waarom zou je ons tot vijand maken?

Er kan maar n antwoord zijn: dit gaat niet over ons politieke regime of iets dergelijks. Ze hebben gewoon geen groot en onafhankelijk land als Rusland nodig. Dit is het antwoord op alle vragen. Dit is de bron van het traditionele Amerikaanse beleid ten aanzien van Rusland. Vandaar de houding ten opzichte van al onze beveiligingsvoorstellen

(...)

Hoe lang kan deze tragedie doorgaan? Hoe lang kan een mens dit nog uithouden? Rusland heeft er alles aan gedaan om de territoriale integriteit van Oekrane te behouden. Al die jaren heeft het volhardend en geduldig aangedrongen op de uitvoering van resolutie 2202 van de VN-Veiligheidsraad van 17 februari 2015, die het Minsk-pakket van maatregelen van 12 februari 2015 consolideerde om de situatie in Donbass te regelen.

()

In dit verband acht ik het noodzakelijk een langverwachte beslissing te nemen en de onafhankelijkheid en soevereiniteit van de Volksrepubliek Donetsk en de Volksrepubliek Lugansk onmiddellijk te erkennen.

Ik zou de Federale Vergadering van de Russische Federatie willen vragen dit besluit te steunen en vervolgens het Verdrag van Vriendschap en Wederzijdse Hulp met beide republieken te ratificeren. Deze twee documenten zullen binnenkort worden opgesteld en ondertekend.

We willen dat degenen die de macht hebben gegrepen en nog steeds de macht hebben in Kiev, de vijandelijkheden onmiddellijk stoppen. Anders ligt de verantwoordelijkheid voor de mogelijke voortzetting van het bloedvergieten volledig bij het geweten van het heersende regime in Oekrane.

()

----------


## Olive Yao

.
Commentaar

----------


## Olive Yao

.
24 februari 2022

Redevoering van de President van de Russische Federatie

Kremlin, Moskou

Vladimir Poetin:

Citizens of Russia, friends,

I consider it necessary today to speak again about the tragic events in Donbass and the key aspects of ensuring the security of Russia.

I will begin with what I said in my address on February 21, 2022. I spoke about our biggest concerns and worries, and about the fundamental threats which irresponsible Western politicians created for Russia consistently, rudely and unceremoniously from year to year. I am referring to the eastward expansion of NATO, which is moving its military infrastructure ever closer to the Russian border.

It is a fact that over the past 30 years we have been patiently trying to come to an agreement with the leading NATO countries regarding the principles of equal and indivisible security in Europe. In response to our proposals, we invariably faced either cynical deception and lies or attempts at pressure and blackmail, while the North Atlantic alliance continued to expand despite our protests and concerns. Its military machine is moving and, as I said, is approaching our very border.

Why is this happening? Where did this insolent manner of talking down from the height of their exceptionalism, infallibility and all-permissiveness come from? What is the explanation for this contemptuous and disdainful attitude to our interests and absolutely legitimate demands?

The answer is simple. Everything is clear and obvious. In the late 1980s, the Soviet Union grew weaker and subsequently broke apart. That experience should serve as a good lesson for us, because it has shown us that the paralysis of power and will is the first step towards complete degradation and oblivion. We lost confidence for only one moment, but it was enough to disrupt the balance of forces in the world.

As a result, the old treaties and agreements are no longer effective. Entreaties and requests do not help. Anything that does not suit the dominant state, the powers that be, is denounced as archaic, obsolete and useless. At the same time, everything it regards as useful is presented as the ultimate truth and forced on others regardless of the cost, abusively and by any means available. Those who refuse to comply are subjected to strong-arm tactics.

What I am saying now does not concerns only Russia, and Russia is not the only country that is worried about this. This has to do with the entire system of international relations, and sometimes even US allies. The collapse of the Soviet Union led to a redivision of the world, and the norms of international law that developed by that time  and the most important of them, the fundamental norms that were adopted following WWII and largely formalised its outcome  came in the way of those who declared themselves the winners of the Cold War.

Of course, practice, international relations and the rules regulating them had to take into account the changes that took place in the world and in the balance of forces. However, this should have been done professionally, smoothly, patiently, and with due regard and respect for the interests of all states and ones own responsibility. Instead, we saw a state of euphoria created by the feeling of absolute superiority, a kind of modern absolutism, coupled with the low cultural standards and arrogance of those who formulated and pushed through decisions that suited only themselves. The situation took a different turn.

There are many examples of this. First a bloody military operation was waged against Belgrade, without the UN Security Councils sanction but with combat aircraft and missiles used in the heart of Europe. The bombing of peaceful cities and vital infrastructure went on for several weeks. I have to recall these facts, because some Western colleagues prefer to forget them, and when we mentioned the event, they prefer to avoid speaking about international law, instead emphasising the circumstances which they interpret as they think necessary.

Then came the turn of Iraq, Libya and Syria. The illegal use of military power against Libya and the distortion of all the UN Security Council decisions on Libya ruined the state, created a huge seat of international terrorism, and pushed the country towards a humanitarian catastrophe, into the vortex of a civil war, which has continued there for years. The tragedy, which was created for hundreds of thousands and even millions of people not only in Libya but in the whole region, has led to a large-scale exodus from the Middle East and North Africa to Europe.

A similar fate was also prepared for Syria. The combat operations conducted by the Western coalition in that country without the Syrian governments approval or UN Security Councils sanction can only be defined as aggression and intervention.

But the example that stands apart from the above events is, of course, the invasion of Iraq without any legal grounds. They used the pretext of allegedly reliable information available in the United States about the presence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. To prove that allegation, the US Secretary of State held up a vial with white power, publicly, for the whole world to see, assuring the international community that it was a chemical warfare agent created in Iraq. It later turned out that all of that was a fake and a sham, and that Iraq did not have any chemical weapons. Incredible and shocking but true. We witnessed lies made at the highest state level and voiced from the high UN rostrum. As a result we see a tremendous loss in human life, damage, destruction, and a colossal upsurge of terrorism.

Overall, it appears that nearly everywhere, in many regions of the world where the United States brought its law and order, this created bloody, non-healing wounds and the curse of international terrorism and extremism. I have only mentioned the most glaring but far from only examples of disregard for international law.

This array includes promises not to expand NATO eastwards even by an inch. To reiterate: they have deceived us, or, to put it simply, they have played us. Sure, one often hears that politics is a dirty business. It could be, but it shouldnt be as dirty as it is now, not to such an extent. This type of con-artist behaviour is contrary not only to the principles of international relations but also and above all to the generally accepted norms of morality and ethics. Where is justice and truth here? Just lies and hypocrisy all around.

Incidentally, US politicians, political scientists and journalists write and say that a veritable empire of lies has been created inside the United States in recent years. It is hard to disagree with this  it is really so. But one should not be modest about it: the United States is still a great country and a system-forming power. All its satellites not only humbly and obediently say yes to and parrot it at the slightest pretext but also imitate its behaviour and enthusiastically accept the rules it is offering them. Therefore, one can say with good reason and confidence that the whole so-called Western bloc formed by the United States in its own image and likeness is, in its entirety, the very same empire of lies.

As for our country, after the disintegration of the USSR, given the entire unprecedented openness of the new, modern Russia, its readiness to work honestly with the United States and other Western partners, and its practically unilateral disarmament, they immediately tried to put the final squeeze on us, finish us off, and utterly destroy us. This is how it was in the 1990s and the early 2000s, when the so-called collective West was actively supporting separatism and gangs of mercenaries in southern Russia. What victims, what losses we had to sustain and what trials we had to go through at that time before we broke the back of international terrorism in the Caucasus! We remember this and will never forget.

Properly speaking, the attempts to use us in their own interests never ceased until quite recently: they sought to destroy our traditional values and force on us their false values that would erode us, our people from within, the attitudes they have been aggressively imposing on their countries, attitudes that are directly leading to degradation and degeneration, because they are contrary to human nature. This is not going to happen. No one has ever succeeded in doing this, nor will they succeed now.

Despite all that, in December 2021, we made yet another attempt to reach agreement with the United States and its allies on the principles of European security and NATOs non-expansion. Our efforts were in vain. The United States has not changed its position. It does not believe it necessary to agree with Russia on a matter that is critical for us. The United States is pursuing its own objectives, while neglecting our interests.

Of course, this situation begs a question: what next, what are we to expect? If history is any guide, we know that in 1940 and early 1941 the Soviet Union went to great lengths to prevent war or at least delay its outbreak. To this end, the USSR sought not to provoke the potential aggressor until the very end by refraining or postponing the most urgent and obvious preparations it had to make to defend itself from an imminent attack. When it finally acted, it was too late.

As a result, the country was not prepared to counter the invasion by Nazi Germany, which attacked our Motherland on June 22, 1941, without declaring war. The country stopped the enemy and went on to defeat it, but this came at a tremendous cost. The attempt to appease the aggressor ahead of the Great Patriotic War proved to be a mistake which came at a high cost for our people. In the first months after the hostilities broke out, we lost vast territories of strategic importance, as well as millions of lives. We will not make this mistake the second time. We have no right to do so.

Those who aspire to global dominance have publicly designated Russia as their enemy. They did so with impunity. Make no mistake, they had no reason to act this way. It is true that they have considerable financial, scientific, technological, and military capabilities. We are aware of this and have an objective view of the economic threats we have been hearing, just as our ability to counter this brash and never-ending blackmail. Let me reiterate that we have no illusions in this regard and are extremely realistic in our assessments.

As for military affairs, even after the dissolution of the USSR and losing a considerable part of its capabilities, todays Russia remains one of the most powerful nuclear states. Moreover, it has a certain advantage in several cutting-edge weapons. In this context, there should be no doubt for anyone that any potential aggressor will face defeat and ominous consequences should it directly attack our country.

At the same time, technology, including in the defence sector, is changing rapidly. One day there is one leader, and tomorrow another, but a military presence in territories bordering on Russia, if we permit it to go ahead, will stay for decades to come or maybe forever, creating an ever mounting and totally unacceptable threat for Russia.

----------


## Olive Yao

.
Even now, with NATOs eastward expansion the situation for Russia has been becoming worse and more dangerous by the year. Moreover, these past days NATO leadership has been blunt in its statements that they need to accelerate and step up efforts to bring the alliances infrastructure closer to Russias borders. In other words, they have been toughening their position. We cannot stay idle and passively observe these developments. This would be an absolutely irresponsible thing to do for us.

Any further expansion of the North Atlantic alliances infrastructure or the ongoing efforts to gain a military foothold of the Ukrainian territory are unacceptable for us. Of course, the question is not about NATO itself. It merely serves as a tool of US foreign policy. The problem is that in territories adjacent to Russia, which I have to note is our historical land, a hostile anti-Russia is taking shape. Fully controlled from the outside, it is doing everything to attract NATO armed forces and obtain cutting-edge weapons.

For the United States and its allies, it is a policy of containing Russia, with obvious geopolitical dividends. For our country, it is a matter of life and death, a matter of our historical future as a nation. This is not an exaggeration; this is a fact. It is not only a very real threat to our interests but to the very existence of our state and to its sovereignty. It is the red line which we have spoken about on numerous occasions. They have crossed it.

This brings me to the situation in Donbass. We can see that the forces that staged the coup in Ukraine in 2014 have seized power, are keeping it with the help of ornamental election procedures and have abandoned the path of a peaceful conflict settlement. For eight years, for eight endless years we have been doing everything possible to settle the situation by peaceful political means. Everything was in vain.

As I said in my previous address, you cannot look without compassion at what is happening there. It became impossible to tolerate it. We had to stop that atrocity, that genocide of the millions of people who live there and who pinned their hopes on Russia, on all of us. It is their aspirations, the feelings and pain of these people that were the main motivating force behind our decision to recognise the independence of the Donbass peoples republics.

I would like to additionally emphasise the following. Focused on their own goals, the leading NATO countries are supporting the far-right nationalists and neo-Nazis in Ukraine, those who will never forgive the people of Crimea and Sevastopol for freely making a choice to reunite with Russia.

They will undoubtedly try to bring war to Crimea just as they have done in Donbass, to kill innocent people just as members of the punitive units of Ukrainian nationalists and Hitlers accomplices did during the Great Patriotic War. They have also openly laid claim to several other Russian regions.

If we look at the sequence of events and the incoming reports, the showdown between Russia and these forces cannot be avoided. It is only a matter of time. They are getting ready and waiting for the right moment. Moreover, they went as far as aspire to acquire nuclear weapons. We will not let this happen.

I have already said that Russia accepted the new geopolitical reality after the dissolution of the USSR. We have been treating all new post-Soviet states with respect and will continue to act this way. We respect and will respect their sovereignty, as proven by the assistance we provided to Kazakhstan when it faced tragic events and a challenge in terms of its statehood and integrity. However, Russia cannot feel safe, develop, and exist while facing a permanent threat from the territory of todays Ukraine.

Let me remind you that in 20002005 we used our military to push back against terrorists in the Caucasus and stood up for the integrity of our state. We preserved Russia. In 2014, we supported the people of Crimea and Sevastopol. In 2015, we used our Armed Forces to create a reliable shield that prevented terrorists from Syria from penetrating Russia. This was a matter of defending ourselves. We had no other choice.

The same is happening today. They did not leave us any other option for defending Russia and our people, other than the one we are forced to use today. In these circumstances, we have to take bold and immediate action. The peoples republics of Donbass have asked Russia for help.

In this context, in accordance with Article 51 (Chapter VII) of the UN Charter, with permission of Russias Federation Council, and in execution of the treaties of friendship and mutual assistance with the Donetsk Peoples Republic and the Lugansk Peoples Republic, ratified by the Federal Assembly on February 22, I made a decision to carry out a special military operation.

The purpose of this operation is to protect people who, for eight years now, have been facing humiliation and genocide perpetrated by the Kiev regime. To this end, we will seek to demilitarise and denazify Ukraine, as well as bring to trial those who perpetrated numerous bloody crimes against civilians, including against citizens of the Russian Federation.

It is not our plan to occupy the Ukrainian territory. We do not intend to impose anything on anyone by force. At the same time, we have been hearing an increasing number of statements coming from the West that there is no need any more to abide by the documents setting forth the outcomes of World War II, as signed by the totalitarian Soviet regime. How can we respond to that?

The outcomes of World War II and the sacrifices our people had to make to defeat Nazism are sacred. This does not contradict the high values of human rights and freedoms in the reality that emerged over the post-war decades. This does not mean that nations cannot enjoy the right to self-determination, which is enshrined in Article 1 of the UN Charter.

Let me remind you that the people living in territories which are part of todays Ukraine were not asked how they want to build their lives when the USSR was created or after World War II. Freedom guides our policy, the freedom to choose independently our future and the future of our children. We believe that all the peoples living in todays Ukraine, anyone who want to do this, must be able to enjoy this right to make a free choice.

In this context I would like to address the citizens of Ukraine. In 2014, Russia was obliged to protect the people of Crimea and Sevastopol from those who you yourself call nats. The people of Crimea and Sevastopol made their choice in favour of being with their historical homeland, Russia, and we supported their choice. As I said, we could not act otherwise.

The current events have nothing to do with a desire to infringe on the interests of Ukraine and the Ukrainian people. They are connected with the defending Russia from those who have taken Ukraine hostage and are trying to use it against our country and our people.

I reiterate: we are acting to defend ourselves from the threats created for us and from a worse peril than what is happening now. I am asking you, however hard this may be, to understand this and to work together with us so as to turn this tragic page as soon as possible and to move forward together, without allowing anyone to interfere in our affairs and our relations but developing them independently, so as to create favourable conditions for overcoming all these problems and to strengthen us from within as a single whole, despite the existence of state borders. I believe in this, in our common future.

I would also like to address the military personnel of the Ukrainian Armed Forces.

Comrade officers,

Your fathers, grandfathers and great-grandfathers did not fight the Nazi occupiers and did not defend our common Motherland to allow todays neo-Nazis to seize power in Ukraine. You swore the oath of allegiance to the Ukrainian people and not to the junta, the peoples adversary which is plundering Ukraine and humiliating the Ukrainian people.

I urge you to refuse to carry out their criminal orders. I urge you to immediately lay down arms and go home. I will explain what this means: the military personnel of the Ukrainian army who do this will be able to freely leave the zone of hostilities and return to their families.

I want to emphasise again that all responsibility for the possible bloodshed will lie fully and wholly with the ruling Ukrainian regime.

I would now like to say something very important for those who may be tempted to interfere in these developments from the outside. No matter who tries to stand in our way or all the more so create threats for our country and our people, they must know that Russia will respond immediately, and the consequences will be such as you have never seen in your entire history. No matter how the events unfold, we are ready. All the necessary decisions in this regard have been taken. I hope that my words will be heard.

Citizens of Russia,

The culture and values, experience and traditions of our ancestors invariably provided a powerful underpinning for the wellbeing and the very existence of entire states and nations, their success and viability. Of course, this directly depends on the ability to quickly adapt to constant change, maintain social cohesion, and readiness to consolidate and summon all the available forces in order to move forward.

We always need to be strong, but this strength can take on different forms. The empire of lies, which I mentioned in the beginning of my speech, proceeds in its policy primarily from rough, direct force. This is when our saying on being all brawn and no brains applies.

We all know that having justice and truth on our side is what makes us truly strong. If this is the case, it would be hard to disagree with the fact that it is our strength and our readiness to fight that are the bedrock of independence and sovereignty and provide the necessary foundation for building a reliable future for your home, your family, and your Motherland.

Dear compatriots,

I am certain that devoted soldiers and officers of Russias Armed Forces will perform their duty with professionalism and courage. I have no doubt that the government institutions at all levels and specialists will work effectively to guarantee the stability of our economy, financial system and social wellbeing, and the same applies to corporate executives and the entire business community. I hope that all parliamentary parties and civil society take a consolidated, patriotic position.

At the end of the day, the future of Russia is in the hands of its multi-ethnic people, as has always been the case in our history. This means that the decisions that I made will be executed, that we will achieve the goals we have set, and reliably guarantee the security of our Motherland.

I believe in your support and the invincible force rooted in the love for our Fatherland.

----------


## Olive Yao

.
Vertaling

Ze zullen ongetwijfeld proberen om oorlog naar Krim te brengen, net zoals ze hebben gedaan in Donbass, om onschuldige mensen te doden, net zoals leden van de strafeenheden van Oekraense nationalisten en Hitlers handlangers deden tijdens de Grote Patriottische Oorlog. ()

Als we kijken naar de opeenvolging van gebeurtenissen en de binnenkomende rapporten, kan de confrontatie tussen Rusland en deze troepen niet worden vermeden. Het is slechts een kwestie van tijd. Ze maken zich klaar en wachten op het juiste moment. Bovendien gingen ze zo ver dat ze streefden naar het verwerven van kernwapens. Dit laten we niet gebeuren.

()

In dit verband, in overeenstemming met artikel 51 (hoofdstuk VII) van het VN-Handvest, met toestemming van de Russische Raad van de Federatie, en in uitvoering van de Verdragen van vriendschap en wederzijdse bijstand met de Volksrepubliek Donetsk en de Volksrepubliek Lugansk, geratificeerd door de Federale Vergadering op 22 februari [2022] nam ik een besluit om een speciale militaire operatie uit te voeren.

Het doel van deze operatie is om mensen te beschermen die al acht jaar te maken hebben met vernedering en genocide door het regime van Kiev. Daartoe zullen we proberen Oekrane te demilitariseren en te denazificeren, en degenen die talloze bloedige misdaden tegen burgers hebben begaan, ook tegen burgers van de Russische Federatie, voor de rechter te brengen.

Het is niet ons plan om het Oekraense grondgebied te bezetten. ()

()

() naties [kunnen] het recht op zelfbeschikking genieten, dat is vastgelegd in artikel 1 van het VN-Handvest.

----------


## Olive Yao

.
Commentaar

----------


## Olive Yao

.
16 maart 2022

Bijeenkomst inzake sociaaleconomische steun voor regios

Videoconferentie

President of Russia Vladimir Putin:

Good afternoon, colleagues.

Taking part in our meeting are senior Government officials, plenipotentiary presidential envoys in the federal districts and heads of Russian regions.

We are meeting in a complicate period as our Armed Forces are conducting a special military operation in Ukraine and Donbass. I would like to remind you that at the beginning, on the morning of February 24, I publicly announced the reasons for and the main goal of Russias actions. It is to help our people in Donbass, who have been subjected to real genocide for nearly eight years in the most barbarous ways, that is, through blockade, large-scale punitive operations, terrorist attacks and constant artillery raids. Their only guilt was that they demanded basic human rights: to live according to their forefathers laws and traditions, to speak their native language, and to bring up their children as they want.

During these years, the Kiev authorities have ignored and sabotaged the implementation of the Minsk Package of Measures for a peaceful settlement of the crisis and ultimately late last year openly refused to implement it.

They also started to implement plans to join NATO. Moreover, the Kiev authorities also announced their intention to have nuclear weapons and delivery vehicles. This was a real threat. With foreign technical support, the pro-Nazi Kiev regime would have obtained weapons of mass destruction in the foreseeable future and, of course, would have targeted them against Russia.

There was a network of dozens of laboratories in Ukraine, where military biological programmes were conducted under the guidance and with the financial support of the Pentagon, including experiments with coronavirus strains, anthrax, cholera, African swine fever and other deadly diseases. Frantic attempts are being made to conceal traces of these secret programmes. However, we have grounds to assume that components of biological weapons were being created in direct proximity to Russia on the territory of Ukraine.

Our numerous warnings that such developments posed a direct threat to the security of Russia were rejected with open and cynical arrogance by Ukraine and its US and NATO patrons.

In other words, all our diplomatic efforts were fully in vain. We have been left with no peaceful alternative to settle the problems that developed through no fault of ours. In this situation, we were forced to begin this special military operation.

The movement of Russian forces against Kiev and other Ukrainian cities is not connected with a desire to occupy that country. This is not our goal, as I pointed out openly in my statement on February 24.

As for the combat tactics drafted by the Defence Ministry of Russia and the General Staff, this has fully justified itself. Our fellows  soldiers and officers  are displaying courage and heroism and are doing all they can to avoid civilian losses in Ukrainian cities.

This is what I would like to say for the first time: at the very start of the operation in Donbass, the Kiev authorities were offered opportunities to avoid hostilities, via different channels, to simply withdraw their troops from Donbass as an alternative to bloodshed. They did not want to do this. Well, this was their decision; now they will understand what is happening in reality, on the ground.

The operation is being carried out successfully, in strict conformity with the approved plan.

I must note that, encouraged by the United States and other Western countries, Ukraine was purposefully preparing for a scenario of force, a massacre and an ethnic cleansing in Donbass. A massive onslaught on Donbass and later Crimea was just a matter of time. However, our Armed Forces have shattered these plans.

Kiev was not just preparing for war, for aggression against Russia  it was conducting it. There were endless attempts to stage acts of subversion and organise a terrorist underground in Crimea. Hostilities in Donbass and the shelling of peaceful residential areas have continued all these years. Almost 14,000 civilians, including children have been killed over this time.

As you know, there was a missile strike at the centre of Donetsk on March 14. This was an overt bloody act of terror that took over 20 lives. Shelling has been ongoing during the past few days. They are striking randomly at squares with the fervor of fanatics and the exasperation of the doomed. They are acting like the Nazis did when they tried to drag as many innocent victims as they could to their graves.

But what is shocking in its extreme cynicism is not just Kievs blatant lies and statements that Russia allegedly launched this missile at Donetsk (they have gone as far as this), but the attitude of the so-called civilised world. The European and American press did not even notice this tragedy in Donetsk, as if nothing happened.

This is how they have been hypocritically looking the other way over the past eight years as mothers buried their children in Donbass, as elderly people were killed. This is simply moral degradation, complete de-humanisation.

It was no longer possible to tolerate this outrageous attitude towards the people of Donbass. To put an end to this genocide, Russia recognized the peoples republics of Donbass and signed treaties of friendship and mutual aid with them. Based on these treaties, the republics appealed to Russia for military aid in rebuffing the aggression. We rendered this aid because we simply could not do otherwise. We had no right to act otherwise.

I would like to emphasise this point and draw your attention to it: if our troops had acted only within the people's republics and helped them liberate their territory, it would not have been a final solution, it would not have led to peace and would not have ultimately removed the threat  to our country, this time to Russia. On the contrary, a new frontline would have been extended around Donbass and its borders, and shelling and provocations would have continued. In other words, this armed conflict would have continued indefinitely. It would have been fuelled by the revanchist hysteria of the Kiev regime, as NATO deployed its military infrastructure faster and more aggressively. In this case, we would have been faced with the fact that the attack, the offensive weapons of the alliance were already at our borders.

I will repeat  we had no alternative for self-defence, for ensuring Russia's security, to this special military operation. We will reach the goals we set. We will certainly ensure the security of Russia and our people and will never allow Ukraine to be a bridgehead for aggressive actions against our country.

We remain ready to discuss matters of fundamental importance to Russias future during the talks. This includes Ukraines status as a neutral country, and demilitarisation and denazification. Our country has done everything it could to organise and hold these talks realising that it is important to use every opportunity to save people and their lives.

But time and time again we see that the Kiev regime, which its Western handlers have charged with the task of creating an aggressive anti-Russia stance, does not care about the future of the people of Ukraine. They do not care that people are dying, that hundreds of thousands, or even millions of people had to flee their homes, and that a horrendous humanitarian disaster is unfolding in the cities controlled by the neo-Nazis and armed criminals who were cut loose.

Clearly, Kievs Western patrons are just pushing them to continue the bloodshed. They incessantly supply Kiev with weapons and intelligence, as well as other types of assistance, including military advisers and mercenaries.

They are using economic, financial, trade and other sanctions against Russia as weapons, but these sanctions have backfired in Europe and in the United States where prices of gasoline, energy and food have shot up, and jobs in the industries associated with the Russian market have been cut. So, do not shift the blame on us and do not accuse our country of everything that goes wrong in your countries.

I want ordinary Western people hear me, too. You are being persistently told that your current difficulties are the result of Russias hostile actions and that you have to pay for the efforts to counter the alleged Russian threat from your own pockets. All of that is a lie.

The truth is that the problems faced by millions of people in the West are the result of many years of actions by the ruling elite of your respective countries, their mistakes, and short-sighted policies and ambitions. This elite is not thinking about how to improve the lives of their citizens in Western countries. They are obsessed with their own self-serving interests and super profits.

This can be seen in the data provided by international organisations, which clearly show that social problems, even in the leading Western countries, have exacerbated in recent years, that inequality and the gap between the rich and the poor is widening, and racial and ethnic conflicts are making themselves felt. The myth of the Western welfare society, the so-called golden billion, is crumbling.

To reiterate, the whole planet is now paying for the Wests ambitions and the Wests attempts to maintain its elusive dominance by any means possible.

----------


## Olive Yao

.
Imposing sanctions is the logical continuation and the distillation of the irresponsible and short-sighted policy of the US and EU countries governments and central banks. They themselves have driven up global inflation in recent years, and with their actions caused rising global poverty and greater inequality across the world. The question now arises  who will answer for the millions who will die of hunger in the worlds poorest countries due to growing food shortages?

Let me reiterate, the global economy and global trade as a whole have suffered a major blow, as did trust in the US dollar as the main reserve currency.

The illegitimate freezing of some of the currency reserves of the Bank of Russia marks the end of the reliability of so-called first-class assets. In fact, the US and the EU have defaulted on their obligations to Russia. Now everybody knows that financial reserves can simply be stolen. And many countries in the immediate future may begin  I am sure this is what will happen  to convert their paper and digital assets into real reserves of raw materials, land, food, gold and other real assets which will only result in more shortages in these markets.

Let me add that the seizure of foreign assets and accounts of Russian companies and individuals is also a lesson for domestic businesses that there is nothing as reliable as investing in ones own country. I personally have said that a number of times.

We appreciate the position of those foreign companies who continue working in our country despite the brazen pressure from the US and its vassals. They are sure to find additional opportunities for growth in the future.

We also know those who cowardly betrayed their partners and forgot about their responsibility to employees and customers in Russia, rushing to earn illusory dividends from joining the anti-Russia campaign. However, unlike Western countries, we will respect property rights.

Here is what I would like to point out. We must clearly understand that a new package of sanctions and restrictions would have been imposed on us no matter what. I want to emphasise this. For the West, our military operation in Ukraine is just a pretext for imposing more sanctions on us. Indeed, this time they are concentrated. In the same way, the West used the referendum in Crimea as a pretext, which, by the way, took place on March 16, 2014, eight years ago today, when the residents of Crimea and Sevastopol made the free choice to be one with their historical homeland.

To reiterate, these are just pretexts. The policy of containing and weakening Russia, including through economic isolation, a blockade, is a premeditated, long-term strategy. Western leaders are no longer hiding the fact that the sanctions are not directed against individuals or companies. Their goal is to deliver a blow to our entire economy, our social and cultural sphere, every family, and every Russian citizen.

In fact, the steps designed to make the lives of millions of people worse have all the attributes of an aggression, a war by economic, political, and informational means, and it is of a comprehensive and blatant nature. Again, the Wests top political circles do not even hesitate to talk about it openly.

The verbal tinsel of political correctness, inviolability of private property and freedom of speech was blown off overnight. Even the Olympic principles were trampled upon. They did not hesitate to settle their score through the Paralympic athletes. So much for sport being separate from politics.

In many Western countries, people are subjected to persecution just because they are originally from Russia. They are being denied medical care, their children are expelled from schools, parents are losing their jobs, and Russian music, culture, and literature are being banned. In its attempts to cancel Russia, the West tore off its mask of decency and began to act crudely showing its true colours. One cannot help but remember the anti-Semitic Nazi pogroms in Germany in the 1930s, and then pogroms perpetrated by their henchmen in many European countries that joined the Nazi aggression against our country during the Great Patriotic War.

A massive attack against Russia has also been unleashed in cyberspace. An unprecedented information campaign has been launched through global social networks and all Western media outlets, whose impartiality and independence have proved to be a mere myth. Access to information is being restricted and people are being crammed full of all sorts of fake stories, propaganda, and fabrication, or simply put, snake oil. It even got to the point where American social media companies said straight out that it was possible to post calls for the murder of Russian nationals.

We realise what kind of resources this empire of lies has at its disposal but, all the same, when confronted with truth and justice, it is helpless. Russia will never stop trying to make its position clear to the whole world. And our position is honest and open, and an increasing number of people hear, understand and share it.

I want to be as direct as possible: hostile geopolitical designs lie behind the hypocritical talk and recent actions by the so-called collective West. They have no use  simply no use  for a strong and sovereign Russia, and they will not forgive us for our independent policy or for standing up for our national interests.

We still remember how they supported separatism and terrorism by encouraging terrorists and bandits in the North Caucasus. Just like in the 1990s and the early 2000s, they want to try again to finish us off, to reduce us to nothing by turning us into a weak and dependent country, destroying our territorial integrity and dismembering Russia as they see fit. The failed then and they will fail this time.

Yes, of course, they will back the so-called fifth column, national traitors  those who make money here in our country but live over there, and live not in the geographical sense of the word but in their minds, in their servile mentality.

I do not in the least condemn those who have villas in Miami or the French Riviera, who cannot make do without foie gras, oysters or gender freedom as they call it. That is not the problem, not at all. The problem, again, is that many of these people are, essentially, over there in their minds and not here with our people and with Russia. In their opinion  in their opinion!  it is a sign of belonging to the superior caste, the superior race. People like this would sell their own mothers just to be allowed to sit on the entry bench of the superior caste. They want to be just like them and imitate them in everything. But they forget or just completely fail to see that even if this so-called superior caste needs them, it needs them as expendable raw material to inflict maximum damage on our people.

The collective West is trying to divide our society using, to its own advantage, combat losses and the socioeconomic consequences of the sanctions, and to provoke civil unrest in Russia and use its fifth column in an attempt to achieve this goal. As I mentioned earlier, their goal is to destroy Russia.

But any nation, and even more so the Russian people, will always be able to distinguish true patriots from scum and traitors and will simply spit them out like an insect in their mouth, spit them onto the pavement. I am convinced that a natural and necessary self-detoxification of society like this would strengthen our country, our solidarity and cohesion and our readiness to respond to any challenge.

The so-called collective West and its fifth column are accustomed to measuring everything and everyone by their own standards. They believe that everything is for sale and everything can be bought, and therefore they think we will break down and back off. But they do not know our history and our people well enough.

Indeed, many countries around the world have long put up with living with their backs bent, obsequiously accepting all the decisions that come from their sovereign, looking up to it subserviently. This is how many countries live. Unfortunately, in Europe, as well.

But Russia will never be seen in such a miserable and humiliated situation, and the fight we are waging is the fight for our sovereignty and the future of our country and our children. We will fight for the right to be and remain Russia. The courage and fortitude of our soldiers and officers, the faithful defenders of the Fatherland, should inspire us.

Colleagues,

Clearly, the ongoing developments are drawing a line under the global dominance of Western countries in politics and the economy. Moreover, they call into question the economic model that has been imposed on the developing countries and the entire world in recent decades.

Importantly, the obsession of the United States and its proponents with the sanctions is not shared by the countries that are home to more than half of the global population. These states represent the fastest growing and the most promising portion of the global economy. That includes Russia.

Indeed, it is difficult for us at the moment. Russian financial companies, major enterprises, small and medium-sized businesses are facing unprecedented pressure.

The banking system was the first to come under sanctions, but our banks dealt with this challenge. They are working literally around the clock to make payments and settlements between individual clients and to ensure the functioning of enterprises.

The second wave of sanctions was designed to set off panic in the area of retail. According to estimates, over the past three weeks, additional demand for goods has exceeded one trillion rubles. However, our manufacturers, suppliers, transport and logistics companies did everything humanly possible to avoid major shortages in retail chains.

I would like to thank the business community and the teams at companies, banks and organisations, which are not only responding effectively to sanction-related challenges but are also laying the foundation for the continued sustainable development of our economy. I would like to make a special mention of the Government, the Bank of Russia, regional governors and regional and municipal teams. In the current tough conditions, you are carrying out your responsibilities admirably.

Obviously, the attempts to organise an economic blitzkrieg against Russia, demoralise our society and push us around have failed, and so we are sure to see attempts to bring even greater pressure to bear on our country. But we will overcome these difficulties as well. The Russian economy will adapt to the new realities. We will strengthen our sovereignty in science and technology, allocate additional resources to support agriculture, the processing industry, infrastructure, and housing, and continue developing foreign trade ties to tap into rapidly growing, dynamic international markets.

----------


## Olive Yao

.
Clearly, in the new realities we will have to make deep structural changes in our economy, and I will not pretend that they will be easy or that they will not lead to a temporary increase in inflation and unemployment.

In this situation, our task is to minimise such risks. We must not just meet all the social commitments of the state but also launch new, more effective mechanisms for supporting our people and their incomes.

We will focus on protecting mothers and children and supporting families with children. We have already made a decision  you know about it  to introduce as of April 1 payments for children aged 8 through 16 in low-income families. The size of the payment will range from 50 to 100 percent of the subsistence minimum for every child. Currently the national average is up to 12,300 rubles. Thus, we will have a uniform system of support from when a mother first becomes pregnant until the child turns 17.

I am instructing the Government to oversee the operation of this system so that it quickly detects any changes in the material status of families. That is, it is necessary to make sure families start receiving state support as soon as possible if the parents lost their jobs or faced other difficult circumstances.

I also ask the Government to promptly analyse the efficacy of the measures to support those who have lost their jobs. Such measures must obviously be expanded, through the social contract mechanism, among other.

I am aware that the price hikes are a big blow to peoples incomes, and so we will take action to increase all social payments shortly including benefits and pensions, we will raise the minimum wage and the minimum subsistence level and also the wages of public-sector workers. I ask the Government to calculate the exact parameters for the increases.

To emphasise, even under the current difficult conditions we must reduce poverty and inequality by the end of the year. This issue remains quite solvable even now. I ask the Government and the regions to focus on this task. I will add that we understand that it is not only an economic issue but also one of social justice.

At present, much depends on the lead of the heads of the constituent entities of the Federation and their readiness to assume responsibility. I signed an executive order today on additional powers for heads of regions  they will be authorised to take flexible and responsive decisions to support our citizens, the economy and social policy in light of the situation on the ground. Let me remind you that we streamlined our steps in fighting the coronavirus in exactly this way, making it possible to consider the situation in each region, city and village  and the situation is different everywhere.

I am instructing all the departments of federal bodies in the constituent entities of the Federation to coordinate their work with the regional authorities, and governors must establish operational centres to ensure economic development and to personally lead this work.

What is the priority here?

Private businesses must play the key role in overcoming the current problems as they can quickly rework logistics, find new suppliers and increase output of in-demand products. Supporting employment, incomes and wages and supporting the stable, balanced performance of the economy in general depend on how quickly private businesses will be able to find the right solutions and take them.

That is why we must respond to external pressure with the utmost entrepreneurial freedom and with support for business initiative.

I want the Government, law enforcement agencies and oversight authorities to continue their work on lifting unnecessary administrative and regulatory barriers. Furthermore, it is unacceptable to distract the private sector and regional authorities from addressing the most pressing tasks and burden them with all sorts of inspections and oversight procedures.

The lack of working capital and the unavailability or high cost of loans is among the key problems facing companies now, and the Central Bank was forced to take appropriate measures. In this regard, I am ordering the following steps to be taken.

First, companies that fulfill orders placed by government authorities and companies partly owned by the state should be paid for the delivered goods and services as soon as possible, and reinvest the proceeds into business. In this regard, I propose increasing the amount of advance payments under government contracts. The advance payment must amount to at least a half of the total amount of a contract, and the payment term for the delivered goods and services should be reduced to seven business days. A similar decision must also be made at the level of the constituent entities of the Federation, municipalities and companies with state participation.

Second, it is imperative to improve entrepreneurs ability to raise additional resources from development institutions, by which I mean expanding the Project Financing Factorys activities (it is working well, and we know from practice that its services are in demand), providing resources for business investment plans through the Industry Development Fund (which is one of the really well-performing tools), the Bank for Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises, and also through regional support institutions, including guarantee funds. I hereby instruct the Government to allocate additional funds to the constituent entities of the Federation to fund these regional tools.

I want the Government and our colleagues in the regions to pay attention to the fact that the most important task is to ensure the availability of goods on the consumer market, primarily essential supplies, medications and medical products. Logistical complications and other objective problems that result in price surges must be resolved quickly. At the same time, it is imperative to rule out intervention in price regulation. The increased supply of goods and nothing else should lead to a decrease and stabilisation of prices.

Separately, I would like to address our exporters. Whenever deliveries to international markets do not run smoothly, you should send extra batches of goods to the domestic market rather than reduce your production rates. This should objectively reduce domestic prices, including those of gasoline, diesel, bitumen, metals, and other export goods. I want the Government and the Federal Antimonopoly Service, as well regional authorities, to monitor these markets at all times.

Furthermore, considering the new challenges faced by Russia, we must maintain and expand our long-term development agenda, including the implementation of all planned federal and regional projects. We must make full use of the potential of our budget system as a tool for stimulation.

As we agreed, federal funding for various projects, including construction projects, will be carried out in full. Moreover, in December we decided on allocating additional funds if construction costs went up for objective reasons.

I consider it important to note that there will be no problems with federal budget funding in the current situation. Our economy is generating adequate revenue. This means we will not have to resort to emissions. In simple terms, the Central bank will not have to print money. We have revenue  sound market revenue. The problem is not rooted in money. Let me repeat that we have the resources. The main difficulties are related to the supply of spare parts, technology and construction materials, and the need to organise the work of subcontractors. Therefore, the deadlines and the methods for implementing specific projects and project phases may be subject to change. This will require the smooth operation of government bodies and business representatives and expediting the implementation of import substitution programmes. This is an important point.

In the process, it is also important to simplify the procedure for cooperation between the regions and the federal government bodies and give the regions of the Federation more freedom in using resources and more opportunities for launching new construction projects and programmes.

Additional funding for road construction has already been allocated to the regions. I would like to ask the Government to consider an increase in funding other infrastructure facilities so work can start this year, and the possibility of building up purchases from Russian companies, for instance, with a view to upgrading public transport.

Obviously, this will be a serious additional burden on the budgets of the regions of the Russian Federation. Therefore, as we agreed, we will additionally adjust the subsidies to even out fiscal capacity. We will also use other measures for supporting regional finances. Thus, all payments on budget loans scheduled for this year will be suspended and payments on commercial loans will be replaced with budget loans wherever necessary. I would like to ask the Government to study this issue in detail and dig to the bottom of every case. Only a case-by-case approach will produce the desired effect.

In addition, the Finance Ministry will provide an additional unconditional credit line for every region. It will amount to 10 percent of total revenue with repayment no earlier than the end of this year.

We are going to maintain the same volume of infrastructure budget loans. I am instructing the Government to make arrangements for flexible management of this programme and to take account of the challenges involved in the implementation of the projects that I mentioned earlier. The regions should be able to take swift action on altering the portfolio and the contents of the projects, and focus on the ones that can be implemented as efficiently as possible in the current circumstances. If need be, we will explore the possibility of increasing the volume of infrastructure loans. This is possible and is quite feasible. In general, we will closely monitor regional finances and make additional decisions to support them, if need be.

I would like to emphasise that direct communication between all levels of government and a clear sequence of actions are of paramount importance now. The State Council and its specialised commissions have proved their effectiveness. I want the public administration commission led by Sergei Sobyanin to team up with our colleagues from the Government and to focus on problematic items on the regional agenda, to come up with the best solutions and to scale them to all Russian regions. We have gained extensive experience from combating the pandemic.

Colleagues,

Our economy, the state budget and private sector possess the necessary resources to address long-term tasks. All strategic and national goals that we have set for the period to 2030 must be achieved. The current challenges and the opportunities that they offer should mobilise us  this is what we should set our minds to in order to achieve tangible results in the interests of our people.

Clearly, we will need to fine-tune our programmes, and we welcome the initiatives coming from business circles, academics, and public associations. In this regard, I want the regions to join in organising the forum convened by the Agency for Strategic Initiatives titled, Powerful Ideas for New Times, where every Russian citizen will have a chance to present their proposals and specific projects for advancing their respective cities, regions, and our country as a whole.

To reiterate, the current developments represent a challenge for all of us. I am confident that we will come through with dignity. By working hard and working together, by supporting each other, we will overcome all challenges and emerge even stronger, as has always been the case in the thousand-year history of Russia. That is how I want you to think about this work.

Let us move on to discussing the agenda.

----------


## Olive Yao

.
Vertaling

We blijven bereid om tijdens de besprekingen zaken van fundamenteel belang voor Ruslands toekomst aan de orde te stellen. Dit omvat de status van Oekrane als neutraal land en demilitarisering en denazificatie. Ons land heeft er alles aan gedaan om deze gesprekken te organiseren en te houden, in het besef dat het belangrijk is om elke kans te benutten om mensen en hun leven te redden.

()

Ik wil dat gewone westerse mensen mij ook horen. U wordt voortdurend verteld dat uw huidige moeilijkheden het gevolg zijn van vijandige acties van Rusland en dat u de inspanningen om de vermeende Russische dreiging het hoofd te bieden uit eigen zak moet betalen. Dat is allemaal een leugen.

De waarheid is dat de problemen waarmee miljoenen mensen in het Westen worden geconfronteerd, het resultaat zijn van vele jaren van acties door de heersende elite van jullie respectievelijke landen, hun fouten en kortzichtige beleidsmaatregelen en ambities. Deze elite denkt niet na over hoe ze het leven van hun burgers in westerse landen kunnen verbeteren. Ze zijn geobsedeerd door hun eigen belangen en superwinsten.

(...)

Nogmaals, de hele planeet betaalt nu voor de ambities van het Westen en de pogingen van het Westen om zijn ongrijpbare dominantie op alle mogelijke manieren te behouden.

----------


## Olive Yao

.
Commentaar

----------


## Olive Yao

.
9 mei 2022

Toespraak van de President van Rusland bij de militaire parade

Moskou

President of Russia Vladimir Putin:

Fellow Russian citizens,

Dear veterans,

Comrade soldiers and seamen, sergeants and sergeant majors, midshipmen and warrant officers,

Comrade officers, generals and admirals,

I congratulate you on the Day of Great Victory!

The defence of our Motherland when its destiny was at stake has always been sacred. It was the feeling of true patriotism that Minin and Pozharskys militia stood up for the Fatherland, soldiers went on the offensive at the Borodino Field and fought the enemy outside Moscow and Leningrad, Kiev and Minsk, Stalingrad and Kursk, Sevastopol and Kharkov.

Today, as in the past, you are fighting for our people in Donbass, for the security of our Motherland, for Russia.

May 9, 1945 has been enshrined in world history forever as a triumph of the united Soviet people, its cohesion and spiritual power, an unparalleled feat on the front lines and on the home front.

Victory Day is intimately dear to all of us. There is no family in Russia that was not burnt by the Great Patriotic War. Its memory never fades. On this day, children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren of the heroes march in an endless flow of the Immortal Regiment. They carry photos of their family members, the fallen soldiers who remained young forever, and the veterans who are already gone.

We take pride in the unconquered courageous generation of the victors, we are proud of being their successors, and it is our duty to preserve the memory of those who defeated Nazism and entrusted us with being vigilant and doing everything to thwart the horror of another global war.

Therefore, despite all controversies in international relations, Russia has always advocated the establishment of an equal and indivisible security system which is critically needed for the entire international community.

Last December we proposed signing a treaty on security guarantees. Russia urged the West to hold an honest dialogue in search for meaningful and compromising solutions, and to take account of each others interests. All in vain. NATO countries did not want to heed us, which means they had totally different plans. And we saw it.

Another punitive operation in Donbass, an invasion of our historic lands, including Crimea, was openly in the making. Kiev declared that it could attain nuclear weapons. The NATO bloc launched an active military build-up on the territories adjacent to us.

Thus, an absolutely unacceptable threat to us was steadily being created right on our borders. There was every indication that a clash with neo-Nazis and Banderites backed by the United States and their minions was unavoidable.

Let me repeat, we saw the military infrastructure being built up, hundreds of foreign advisors starting work, and regular supplies of cutting-edge weaponry being delivered from NATO countries. The threat grew every day.

Russia launched a pre-emptive strike at the aggression. It was a forced, timely and the only correct decision. A decision by a sovereign, strong and independent country.

The United States began claiming their exceptionalism, particularly after the collapse of the Soviet Union, thus denigrating not just the entire world but also their satellites, who have to pretend not to see anything, and to obediently put up with it.

But we are a different country. Russia has a different character. We will never give up our love for our Motherland, our faith and traditional values, our ancestors customs and respect for all peoples and cultures.

Meanwhile, the West seems to be set to cancel these millennia-old values. Such moral degradation underlies the cynical falsifications of World War II history, escalating Russophobia, praising traitors, mocking their victims memory and crossing out the courage of those who won the Victory through suffering.

We are aware that US veterans who wanted to come to the parade in Moscow were actually forbidden to do so. But I want them to know: We are proud of your deeds and your contribution to our common Victory.

We honour all soldiers of the allied armies  the Americans, the English, the French, Resistance fighters, brave soldiers and partisans in China  all those who defeated Nazism and militarism.

Comrades,

Donbass militia alongside with the Russian Army are fighting on their land today, where princes Svyatoslav and Vladimir Monomakhs retainers, solders under the command of Rumyantsev and Potemkin, Suvorov and Brusilov crushed their enemies, where Great Patriotic War heroes Nikolai Vatutin, Sidor Kovpak and Lyudmila Pavlichenko stood to the end.

I am addressing our Armed Forces and Donbass militia. You are fighting for our Motherland, its future, so that nobody forgets the lessons of World War II, so that there is no place in the world for torturers, death squads and Nazis.

Today, we bow our heads to the sacred memory of all those who lost their lives in the Great Patriotic War, the memories of the sons, daughters, fathers, mothers, grandfathers, husbands, wives, brothers, sisters, relatives and friends.

We bow our heads to the memory of the Odessa martyrs who were burned alive in the House of Trade Unions in May 2014, to the memory of the old people, women and children of Donbass who were killed in atrocious and barbaric shelling by neo-Nazis. We bow our heads to our fighting comrades who died a brave death in the righteous battle  for Russia.

----------


## Olive Yao

.
I declare a minute of silence.

(A minute of silence.)

The loss of each officer and soldier is painful for all of us and an irretrievable loss for the families and friends. The government, regional authorities, enterprises and public organisations will do everything to wrap such families in care and help them. Special support will be given to the children of the killed and wounded comrades-in-arms. The Presidential Executive Order to this effect was signed today.

I wish a speedy recovery to the wounded soldiers and officers, and I thank doctors, paramedics, nurses and staff of military hospitals for their selfless work. Our deepest gratitude goes to you for saving each life, oftentimes sparing no thought for yourselves under shelling on the frontlines.

Comrades,

Soldiers and officers from many regions of our enormous Motherland, including those who arrived straight from Donbass, from the combat area, are standing now shoulder-to-shoulder here, on Red Square.

We remember how Russias enemies tried to use international terrorist gangs against us, how they tried to seed inter-ethnic and religious strife so as to weaken us from within and divide us. They failed completely.

Today, our warriors of different ethnicities are fighting together, shielding each other from bullets and shrapnel like brothers.

This is where the power of Russia lies, a great invincible power of our united multi-ethnic nation.

You are defending today what your fathers, grandfathers and great-grandfathers fought for. The wellbeing and security of their Motherland was their top priority in life. Loyalty to our Fatherland is the main value and a reliable foundation of Russias independence for us, their successors, too.

Those who crushed Nazism during the Great Patriotic War showed us an example of heroism for all ages. This is the generation of victors, and we will always look up to them.

Glory to our heroic Armed Forces!

For Russia! For Victory!

Hooray!

----------


## Olive Yao

.
Vertaling

Een andere strafoperatie in Donbass, een invasie van onze historische landen, inclusief Krim, was openlijk in de maak. Kiev verklaarde dat het kernwapens zou kunnen verkrijgen. Het NAVO-blok lanceerde een actieve militaire opbouw in de aan ons grenzende gebieden.

Zo ontstond er gestaag een absoluut onaanvaardbare bedreiging voor ons aan onze grenzen. Alles wees erop dat een botsing met neonazi's en Banderieten, gesteund door de Verenigde Staten en hun handlangers, onvermijdelijk was.

Laat me herhalen, we zagen hoe de militaire infrastructuur werd opgebouwd, honderden buitenlandse adviseurs aan het werk gingen en regelmatige leveringen van geavanceerde wapens vanuit NAVO-landen. De dreiging groeide met de dag.

Rusland lanceerde een preventieve aanval tegen de agressie. Het was een gedwongen, tijdige en de enige juiste beslissing. Een besluit van een soeverein, sterk en onafhankelijk land.

----------


## Olive Yao

.
Commentaar

----------


## Olive Yao

.
17 juni 2022

Toespraak voor het St Petersburg Internationale Economische Forum Plenaire Sessie,
Nieuwe kansen in een nieuwe wereld  I

President of Russia Vladimir Putin: 

Thank you very much. President Tokayev, friends and colleagues,

I welcome all participants and guests of the 25th St Petersburg International Economic Forum.

It is taking place at a difficult time for the international community when the economy, markets and the very principles of the global economic system have taken a blow. Many trade, industrial and logistics chains, which were dislocated by the pandemic, have been subjected to new tests. Moreover, such fundamental business notions as business reputation, the inviolability of property and trust in global currencies have been seriously damaged. Regrettably, they have been undermined by our Western partners, who have done this deliberately, for the sake of their ambitions and in order to preserve obsolete geopolitical illusions.

Today, our  when I say our, I mean the Russian leadership  our own view of the global economic situation. I would like to speak in greater depth about the actions Russia is taking in these conditions and how it plans to develop in these dynamically changing circumstances.

When I spoke at the Davos Forum a year and a half ago, I also stressed that the era of a unipolar world order has come to an end. I want to start with this, as there is no way around it. This era has ended despite all the attempts to maintain and preserve it at all costs. Change is a natural process of history, as it is difficult to reconcile the diversity of civilisations and the richness of cultures on the planet with political, economic or other stereotypes  these do not work here, they are imposed by one centre in a rough and no-compromise manner.

The flaw is in the concept itself, as the concept says there is one, albeit strong, power with a limited circle of close allies, or, as they say, countries with granted access, and all business practices and international relations, when it is convenient, are interpreted solely in the interests of this power. They essentially work in one direction in a zero-sum game. A world built on a doctrine of this kind is definitely unstable.

After declaring victory in the Cold War, the United States proclaimed itself to be Gods messenger on Earth, without any obligations and only interests which were declared sacred. They seem to ignore the fact that in the past decades, new powerful and increasingly assertive centres have been formed. Each of them develops its own political system and public institutions according to its own model of economic growth and, naturally, has the right to protect them and to secure national sovereignty.

These are objective processes and genuinely revolutionary tectonic shifts in geopolitics, the global economy and technology, in the entire system of international relations, where the role of dynamic and potentially strong countries and regions is substantially growing. It is no longer possible to ignore their interests.

To reiterate, these changes are fundamental, groundbreaking and rigorous. It would be a mistake to assume that at a time of turbulent change, one can simply sit it out or wait it out until everything gets back on track and becomes what it was before. It will not.

However, the ruling elite of some Western states seem to be harbouring this kind of illusions. They refuse to notice obvious things, stubbornly clinging to the shadows of the past. For example, they seem to believe that the dominance of the West in global politics and the economy is an unchanging, eternal value. Nothing lasts forever.

Our colleagues are not just denying reality. More than that; they are trying to reverse the course of history. They seem to think in terms of the past century. They are still influenced by their own misconceptions about countries outside the so-called golden billion: they consider everything a backwater, or their backyard. They still treat them like colonies, and the people living there, like second-class people, because they consider themselves exceptional. If they are exceptional, that means everyone else is second rate.

Thereby, the irrepressible urge to punish, to economically crush anyone who does not fit with the mainstream, does not want to blindly obey. Moreover, they crudely and shamelessly impose their ethics, their views on culture and ideas about history, sometimes questioning the sovereignty and integrity of states, and threatening their very existence. Suffice it to recall what happened in Yugoslavia, Syria, Libya and Iraq.

If some rebel state cannot be suppressed or pacified, they try to isolate that state, or cancel it, to use their modern term. Everything goes, even sports, the Olympics, bans on culture and art masterpieces just because their creators come from the wrong country.

This is the nature of the current round of Russophobia in the West, and the insane sanctions against Russia. They are crazy and, I would say, thoughtless. They are unprecedented in the number of them or the pace the West churns them out at.

The idea was clear as day  they expected to suddenly and violently crush the Russian economy, to hit Russias industry, finance, and people's living standards by destroying business chains, forcibly recalling Western companies from the Russian market, and freezing Russian assets.

This did not work. Obviously, it did not work out; it did not happen. Russian entrepreneurs and authorities have acted in a collected and professional manner, and Russians have shown solidarity and responsibility.

Step by step, we will normalise the economic situation. We have stabilised the financial markets, the banking system and the trade network. Now we are busy saturating the economy with liquidity and working capital to maintain the stable operation of enterprises and companies, employment and jobs.

The dire forecasts for the prospects of the Russian economy, which were made in early spring, have not materialised. It is clear why this propaganda campaign was fuelled and all the predictions of the dollar at 200 rubles and the collapse of our economy were made. This was and remains an instrument in an information struggle and a factor of psychological influence on Russian society and domestic business circles.

Incidentally, some of our analysts gave in to this external pressure and based their forecasts on the inevitable collapse of the Russian economy and a critical weakening of the national currency  the ruble.

Real life has belied these predictions. However, I would like to emphasise that to continue being successful, we must be explicitly honest and realistic in assessing the situation, be independent in reaching conclusions, and of course, have a can-do spirit, which is very important. We are strong people and can deal with any challenge. Like our predecessors, we can resolve any task. The entire thousand-year history of our country bears this out.

Within just three months of the massive package of sanctions, we have suppressed inflation rate spikes. As you know, after peaking at 17.8 percent, inflation now stands at 16.7 percent and continues dropping. This economic dynamic is being stabilised, and state finances are now sustainable. I will compare this to other regions further on. Yes, even this figure is too much for us  16.7 percent is high inflation. We must and will work on this and, I am sure, we will achieve a positive result.

After the first five months of this year, the federal budget has a surplus of 1.5 trillion rubles and the consolidated budget  a surplus of 3.3 trillion rubles. In May alone, the federal budget surplus reached almost half a trillion rubles, surpassing the figure for May 2021 more than four times over.

Today, our job us to create conditions for building up production and increasing supply in the domestic market, as well as restoring demand and bank financing in the economy commensurately with the growth in supply.

I mentioned that we have taken measures to reestablish the floating assets of companies. In most sectors, businesses have received the right to suspend insurance premiums for the second quarter of the year. Industrial companies have even more opportunities  they will be able to delay them through the third quarter as well. In effect, this is like getting an interest-free loan from the state.

In the future, companies will not have to pay delayed insurance premiums in a single payment. They will be able to pay them in equal installments over 12 months, starting in June next year.

Next. As of May the subsidised mortgage rate has been reduced. It is now 9 percent, while the programme has been extended till the end of the year. As I have mentioned, the programme is aimed at helping Russians improve their housing situation, while supporting the home building industry and related industries that employ millions of people.

Following a spike this spring, interest rates have been gradually coming down, as the Central Bank lowers the key rate. I believe that that this allows the subsidised mortgage rate to be further cut to 7 percent.

What is important here? The programme will last until the end of the year without change. It means that our fellow Russians seeking to improve their living conditions should take advantage of the subsidy before the end of the year.

The lending cap will not change either, at 12 million roubles for Moscow and St Petersburg and 6 million for the rest of Russia.

I should add that we must make long-term loans for businesses more accessible. The focus must shift from budget subsidies for businesses to bank lending as a means to spur business activity.

We need to support this. We will allocate 120 billion rubles from the National Wealth Fund to build up the capacity of the VEB Project Financing Factory. This will provide for additional lending to much-needed initiatives and projects worth around half a trillion roubles.

Colleagues,

Once again, the economic blitzkrieg against Russia was doomed to fail from the beginning. Sanctions as a weapon have proved in recent years to be a double-edged sword damaging their advocates and architects just a much, if not more.

I am not talking about the repercussions we see clearly today. We know that European leaders informally, so to say, furtively, discuss the very concerning possibility of sanctions being levelled not at Russia, but at any undesirable nation, and ultimately anyone including the EU and European companies.

So far this is not the case, but European politicians have already dealt their economies a serious blow all by themselves. We see social and economic problems worsening in Europe, and in the US as well, food, electricity and fuel prices rising, with quality of life in Europe falling and companies losing their market edge.

According to experts, the EUs direct, calculable losses from the sanctions fever could exceed $400 billion this year. This is the price of the decisions that are far removed from reality and contradict common sense.

These outlays fall directly on the shoulders of people and companies in the EU. The inflation rate in some Eurozone countries has exceeded 20 percent. I mentioned inflation in Russia, but the Eurozone countries are not conducting special military operations, yet the inflation rate in some of them has reached 20 percent. Inflation in the United States is also unacceptable, the highest in the past 40 years.

Of course, inflation in Russia is also in the double digits so far. However, we have adjusted social benefits and pensions to inflation, and increased the minimum and subsistence wages, thereby protecting the most vulnerable groups of the population. At the same time, high interest rates have helped people keep their savings in the Russian banking system.

Businesspeople know, of course, that a high key rate clearly slows economic development. But it is a boon for the people in most cases. They have reinvested a substantial amount of money in banks due to higher interest rates.

----------


## Olive Yao

.
This is our main difference from the EU countries, where rising inflation is directly reducing the real incomes of the people and eating up their savings, and the current manifestations of the crisis are affecting, above all, low-income groups.

The growing outlays of European companies and the loss of the Russian market will have lasting negative effects. The obvious result of this will be the loss of global competitiveness and a system-wide decline in the European economies pace of growth for years to come.

Taken together, this will aggravate the deep-seated problems of European societies. Yes, we have many problems as well, yet I have to speak about Europe now because they are pointing the finger at us although they have enough of their own problems. I mentioned this at Davos. A direct result of the European politicians actions and events this year will be the further growth of inequality in these countries, which will, in turn, split their societies still more, and the point at issue is not only the well-being but also the value orientation of various groups in these societies.

Indeed, these differences are being suppressed and swept under the rug. Frankly, the democratic procedures and elections in Europe and the forces that come to power look like a front, because almost identical political parties come and go, while deep down things remain the same. The real interests of people and national businesses are being pushed further and further to the periphery.

Such a disconnect from reality and the demands of society will inevitably lead to a surge in populism and extremist and radical movements, major socioeconomic changes, degradation and a change of elites in the short term. As you can see, traditional parties lose all the time. New entities are coming to the surface, but they have little chance for survival if they are not much different from the existing ones.

The attempts to keep up appearances and the talk about allegedly acceptable costs in the name of pseudo-unity cannot hide the main thing: the European Union has lost its political sovereignty, and its bureaucratic elites are dancing to someone elses tune, doing everything they are told from on high and hurting their own people, economies, and businesses.

There are other critically important matters here. The worsening of the global economic situation is not a recent development. I will now go over things that I believe are extremely important. What is happening now does not stem from what happened during recent months, of course not. Moreover, it is not the result of the special military operation carried out by Russia in Donbass. Saying so is an unconcealed, deliberate distortion of the facts.

Surging inflation in product and commodity markets had become a fact of life long before the events of this year. The world has been driven into this situation, little by little, by many years of irresponsible macroeconomic policies pursued by the G7 countries, including uncontrolled emission and accumulation of unsecured debt. These processes intensified with the onset of the coronavirus pandemic in 2020, when supply and demand for goods and services drastically fell on a global scale.

This begs the question: what does our military operation in Donbass have to do with this? Nothing whatsoever.

Because they could not or would not devise any other recipes, the governments of the leading Western economies simply accelerated their money-printing machines. Such a simple way to make up for unprecedented budget deficits.

I have already cited this figure: over the past two years, the money supply in the United States has grown by more than 38 percent. Previously, a similar rise took decades, but now it grew by 38 percent or 5.9 trillion dollars in two years. By comparison, only a few countries have a bigger gross domestic product.

The EU's money supply has also increased dramatically over this period. It grew by about 20 percent, or 2.5 trillion euros.

Lately, I have been hearing more and more about the so-called  please excuse me, I really would not like to do this here, even mention my own name in this regard, but I cannot help it  we all hear about the so-called Putin inflation in the West. When I see this, I wonder who they expect would buy this nonsense  people who cannot read or write, maybe. Anyone literate enough to read would understand what is actually happening.

Russia, our actions to liberate Donbass have absolutely nothing to do with this. The rising prices, accelerating inflation, shortages of food and fuel, petrol, and problems in the energy sector are the result of system-wide errors the current US administration and European bureaucracy have made in their economic policies. That is where the reasons are, and only there.

I will mention our operation, too: yes, it could have contributed to the trend, but the root cause is precisely this  their erroneous economic policies. In fact, the operation we launched in Donbass is a lifeline they are grabbing at to be able to blame their own miscalculations on others, in this case, on Russia. But everyone who has at least completed primary school would understand the true reasons for today's situation.

So, they printed more money, and then what? Where did all that money go? It was obviously used to pay for goods and services outside Western countries  this is where the newly-printed money flowed. They literally began to clean out, to wipe out global markets. Naturally, no one thought about the interests of other states, including the poorest ones. They were left with scraps, as they say, and even that at exorbitant prices.

While at the end of 2019, imports of goods to the United States amounted to about 250 billion dollars a month, by now, it has grown to 350 billion. It is noteworthy that the growth was 40 percent  exactly in proportion to the unsecured money supply printed in recent years. They printed and distributed money, and used it to wipe out goods from third countries markets.

This is what I would like to add. For a long time, the United States was a big food supplier in the world market. It was proud, and with good reason, of its achievements, its agriculture and farming traditions. By the way, this is an example for many of us, too. But today, Americas role has changed drastically. It has turned from a net exporter of food into a net importer. Loosely speaking, it is printing money and pulling commodity flows its way, buying food products all over the world.

The European Union is building up imports even faster. Obviously, such a sharp increase in demand that is not covered by the supply of goods has triggered a wave of shortages and global inflation. This is where this global inflation originates. In the past couple of years, practically everything  raw materials, consumer goods and particularly food products  has become more expensive all over the world.

Yes, of course, these countries, including the United States continue importing goods, but the balance between exports and imports has been reversed. I believe imports exceed exports by some 17 billion. This is the whole problem.

According to the UN, in February 2022, the food price index was 50 percent higher than in May 2020, while the composite raw materials index has doubled over this period.

Under the cloud of inflation, many developing nations are asking a good question: why exchange goods for dollars and euros that are losing value right before our eyes? The conclusion suggests itself: the economy of mythical entities is inevitably being replaced by the economy of real values and assets.

According to the IMF, global currency reserves are at $7.1 trillion and 2.5 trillion euros now. These reserves are devalued at an annual rate of about 8 percent. Moreover, they can be confiscated or stolen any time if the United States dislikes something in the policy of the states involved. I think this has become a very real threat for many countries that keep their gold and foreign exchange reserves in these currencies.

According to analyst estimates, and this is an objective analysis, a conversion of global reserves will begin just because there is no room for them with such shortages. They will be converted from weakening currencies into real resources like food, energy commodities and other raw materials. Other countries will be doing this, of course. Obviously, this process will further fuel global dollar inflation.

As for Europe, their failed energy policy, blindly staking everything on renewables and spot supplies of natural gas, which have caused energy price increases since the third quarter of last year  again, long before the operation in Donbass  have also exacerbated price hikes. We have absolutely nothing to do with this. It was due to their own actions that prices have gone through the roof, and now they are once again looking for somebody to blame.

Not only did the Wests miscalculations affect the net cost of goods and services but they also resulted in decreased fertiliser production, mainly nitrogen fertilisers made from natural gas. Overall, global fertiliser prices have jumped by over 70 percent from mid-2021 through February 2022.

Unfortunately, there are currently no conditions that can overcome these pricing trends. On the contrary, aggravated by obstacles to the operation of Russian and Belarusian fertiliser producers and disrupted supply logistics, this situation is approaching a deadlock.

It is not difficult to foresee coming developments. A shortage of fertiliser means a lower harvest and a higher risk of an undersupplied global food market. Prices will go even higher, which could lead to hunger in the poorest countries. And it will be fully on the conscience of the US administration and the European bureaucracy.

I want to emphasise once again: this problem did not arise today or in the past three or four months. And certainly, it is not Russias fault as some demagogues try to declare, shifting the responsibility for the current state of affairs in the world economy to our country.

Maybe it would even be nice to hear that we are so powerful and omnipotent that we can blow up inflation in the West, in the United States and Europe, or that we can do things to throw everything into disorder. Maybe it would be nice to feel this power, if only there were truth in it. This situation has been brewing for years, spurred by the short-sighted actions of those who are used to solving their problems at somebody elses expense and who have relied and still rely on the mechanism of financial emission to outbid and draw trade flows, thus escalating deficits and provoking humanitarian disasters in certain regions of the world. I will add that this is essentially the same predatory colonial policy as in the past, but of course in a new iteration, a more subtle and sophisticated edition. You might not even recognise it at first.

The current priority of the international community is to increase food deliveries to the global market, notably, to satisfy the requirements of the countries that need food most of all.

While ensuring its domestic food security and supplying the domestic market, Russia is also able to scale up its food and fertiliser exports. For example, our grain exports in the next season can be increased to 50 million tonnes.

As a priority, we will supply the countries that need food most of all, where the number of starving people could increase, first of all, African countries and the Middle East.

At the same time, there will be problems there, and not through our fault either. Yes, on paper Russian grain, food and fertilisers Incidentally, the Americans have adopted sanctions on our fertilisers, and the Europeans followed suit. Later, the Americans lifted them because they saw what this could lead to. But the Europeans have not backed off. Their bureaucracy is as slow as a flour mill in the 18th century. In other words, everyone knows that they have done a stupid thing, but they find it difficult to retrace their steps for bureaucratic reasons.

----------


## Olive Yao

.
As I have said, Russia is ready to contribute to balancing global markets of agricultural products, and we see that our UN colleagues, who are aware of the scale of the global food problem, are ready for dialogue. We could talk about creating normal logistical, financial and transport conditions for increasing Russian food and fertiliser exports.

As for Ukrainian food supplies to global markets  I have to mention this because of numerous speculations  we are not hindering them. They can do it. We did not mine the Black Sea ports of Ukraine. They can clear the mines and resume food exports. We will ensure the safe navigation of civilian vessels. No problem.

But what are we talking about? According to the US Department of Agriculture, the matter concerns 6 million tonnes of wheat (we estimate it at 5 million tonnes) and 7 million tonnes of maize. This is it, altogether. Since global production of wheat stands at 800 million tonnes, 5 million tonnes make little difference for the global market, as you can see.

Anyway, Ukrainian grain can be exported, and not only via Black Sea ports. Another route is via Belarus, which is, incidentally, the cheapest way. Or via Poland or Romania, whichever you prefer. In fact, there are five or six export routes.

The problem is not with us, the problem is with the adequacy of the people in control in Kiev. They can decide what to do, and, at least in this particular case, they should not take their lead from their foreign bosses, their masters across the ocean.

But there is also the risk that grain will be used as payment for arms deliveries. This would be regrettable.

Friends,

Once again, the world is going through an era of drastic change. International institutions are breaking down and faltering. Security guarantees are being devalued. The West has made a point of refusing to honour its earlier commitments. It has simply been impossible to reach any new agreements with them.

Given these circumstances and against the backdrop of mounting risks and threats, Russia was forced to go ahead with the special military operation. It was a difficult but necessary decision, and we were forced to make it.

This was the decision of a sovereign country, which has еру unconditional right to uphold its security, which is based on the UN Charter. This decision was aimed at protecting our people and the residents of the people's republics of Donbass who for eight long years were subjected to genocide by the Kiev regime and the neo-Nazis who enjoyed the full protection of the West.

The West not only sought to implement an anti-Russia scenario, but also engaged in the active military development of Ukrainian territory, flooding Ukraine with weapons and military advisers. And it continues to do so now. Frankly, no one is paying any attention to the economy or well-being of the people living there, they just do not care about it at all, but they have never spared money to create a NATO foothold in the east that is directed against Russia and to cultivate aggression, hatred and Russophobia.

Today, our soldiers and officers, as well as the Donbass militia, are fighting to protect their people. They are fighting for Russia's future as a large, free and secure multiethnic country that makes its own decisions, determines its own future, relies on its history, culture and traditions, and rejects any and all outside attempts to impose pseudo-values steeped in dehumanisation and moral degradation.

No doubt, our special military operation goals will be fulfilled. The key to this is the courage and heroism of our soldiers, consolidated Russian society, whose support gives strength and confidence to the Russian Army and Navy and a deep understanding of the truth and historical justice of our cause which is to build and strengthen Russia as a strong sovereign power.

My point is that sovereignty cannot be segmented or fragmented in the 21st century. The components of sovereignty are equally important, and they reinvigorate and complement each other.

So, what matters to us is not only the defence of our political sovereignty and national identity, but also strengthening everything that determines our countrys economic, financial, professional and technological independence.

The very structure of Western sanctions rested on the false premise that economically Russia is not sovereign and is critically vulnerable. They got so carried away spreading the myth of Russias backwardness and its weak positions in the global economy and trade that apparently, they started believing it themselves.

While planning their economic blitzkrieg, they did not notice, simply ignored the real facts of how much our country had changed in the past few years.

These changes are the result of our planned efforts to create a sustainable macroeconomic structure, ensure food security, implement import substitution programmes and create our own payment system, to name a few.

Of course, sanction restrictions created many challenges for the country. Some companies continue having problems with spare parts. Our companies have lost access to many technological solutions. Logistics are in disarray.

But, on the other hand, all this opens up new opportunities for us  we often talk about this but it really is so. All this is an impetus to build an economy with full rather than partial technological, production, human and scientific potential and sovereignty.

Naturally, it is impossible to resolve such a comprehensive challenge instantly. It is necessary to continue working systematically with an eye to the future. This is exactly what Russia is doing by implementing its long-term plans for the development of branches of the economy and strengthening the social sphere. The current trials are merely resulting in adjustments and modifications of the plans without changing their strategic orientation.

Today, I would like to talk about the key principles on which our country, our economy will develop.

The first principle is openness. Genuinely sovereign states are always interested in equal partnership and in contributing to global development. On the contrary, weak and dependent countries are usually looking for enemies, fuelling xenophobia or losing the last remnants of their identity and independence, blindly following in the wake of their suzerain.

Russia will never follow the road of self-isolation and autarky although our so-called Western friends are literally dreaming about this. Moreover, we are expanding cooperation with all those who are interested in it, who want to work with us, and will continue to do so. There are many of them. I will not list them at this point. They make up the overwhelming majority of people on Earth. I will not list all these countries now. It is common knowledge.

I will say nothing new when I remind you that everyone who wants to continue working or is working with Russia is subjected to blatant pressure from the United States and Europe; it goes as far as direct threats. However, this kind of blackmail means little when it comes to countries headed by true leaders who know the difference between their own national interests, the interests of their people  and someone elses.

Russia will build up economic cooperation with these states and promote joint projects. At the same time, we will certainly continue to cooperate with Western companies that have remained in the Russian market despite the unprecedented arm-twisting  such companies exist, too.

We believe the development of a convenient and independent payment infrastructure in national currencies is a solid and predictable basis for deepening international cooperation. To help companies from other countries develop logistical and cooperation ties, we are working to improve transport corridors, increase the capacity of railways, transshipment capacity at ports in the Arctic, and in the eastern, southern and other parts of the country, including in the Azov-Black Sea and Caspian basins  they will become the most important section of the North-South Corridor, which will provide stable connectivity with the Middle East and Southern Asia. We expect freight traffic along this route to begin growing steadily in the near future.

But foreign trade is not our only priority. Russia intends to increase scientific, technological, cultural, humanitarian and sports cooperation based on equality and mutual respect between partners. At the same time, our country will strive for responsible leadership in all these areas.

The second principle of our long-term development is a reliance on entrepreneurial freedom. Every private initiative aimed at benefiting Russia should receive maximum support and space for implementation.

The pandemic and the more recent events have confirmed how important flexibility and freedom are in the economy. Russian private businesses  in tough conditions, amid attempts to restrain our development by any means  have proved they can compete in global markets. Private businesses should also be credited for Russias adaptation to rapidly changing external conditions. Russia needs to ensure the dynamic development of the economy  naturally, relying on private business.

We will continue to reduce administrative hurdles. For example, in 20162018, we imposed a moratorium on routine audits of small businesses. Subsequently, it was extended through 2022. In 2020, this moratorium was extended to cover mid-sized companies. Also, the number of unscheduled audits decreased approximately fourfold.

We did not stop at that, and last March, we cancelled routine audits for all entrepreneurs, regardless of the size of their businesses, provided their activities do not put people or the environment at high risk. As a result, the number of routine audits has declined sixfold compared to last year.

Why am I giving so many details? The point is that after the moratorium on audits was imposed, the number of violations by entrepreneurs  this was the result  has not increased, but rather it has gone down. This testifies to the maturity and responsibility of Russian businesses. Of course, they should be offered motivation rather than being forced to observe regulations and requirements.

So, there is every reason to take another radical step forward, that is, to abandon, for good and on a permanent basis, the majority of audits for all Russian businesses, except on risky or potentially dangerous activities. Everyone has long since understood that there was no need to check on everyone without exception. A risk-oriented approach should be at work. I ask the Government to develop the specific parameters of such a reform in the next few months.

----------


## Olive Yao

There is another very sensitive topic for business, which has also become important today for our national security and economic resilience. To reduce and bring to a minimum all sorts of abuse and loopholes to exert pressure on entrepreneurs, we are consistently removing loose regulations from criminal law that are applied to economic crimes.

Last March, a law was signed, under which tax-related criminal cases against entrepreneurs shall only be brought before a court by the tax service  there is no other way. Soon a draft law will be passed on reducing the statute of limitations for tax-related crimes and on rejecting lawsuits to initiate criminal proceedings after tax arrears have been paid off.

Working comprehensively, although prudently, we need to decriminalise a wide range of economic offenses, for instance, those that punish businesses without a licence or accreditation. This is a controversial practice today because our Western partners illegitimately refuse to provide such licenses.

Our own agencies must not single-handedly make our businesses criminally liable for actually doing nothing wrong. The problem is this, and small businesses understand it very well  if a licence has expired, and Western partners refuse to extend it, what are businesses to do, wrap up operations? By no means, let them work. State oversight should continue, but there should be no undue interference in business.

It also makes sense to think about raising the threshold of criminal liability for unpaid customs duties and other such taxes. Additionally, we have not for a long time reconsidered the parameters of the terms large and very large economic loss for the purposes of economic offences despite inflation accruing 50 percent since 2016. The law now fails to reflect the current realities and needs to be corrected.

We need to reconsider the conditions for detaining entrepreneurs and for extending preliminary investigations. It is no secret that these practices have long been used inappropriately.

Businesses have been forced to cease operations or go bankrupt even before the investigation is over. The reputation of the owners and of the brand name suffers as a result, not to mention the direct financial loss, loss of market share and jobs.

I want to ask law enforcement to put an end to these practices. I also ask the Government and the Supreme Court to draft appropriate legislation before October 1 of this year.

In addition, at the Security Council, a special instruction was given to look into criminal cases being opened without later proceeding to court. The number of such cases has grown in recent years. We know the reasons. A case is often opened without sufficient grounds or to put pressure on individuals. We will discuss this in autumn to take legislative action and change the way our law enforcement agencies work.

It goes without saying that regional governments play a major role in creating a modern business environment. As is customary during the St Petersburg Forum, I highlight the regions that have made significant progress in the National Investment Climate Rankings compiled by the Agency for Strategic Initiatives.

There have been changes in the top three. Moscow and Tatarstan have remained at the top and were joined by the Moscow Region which, in a span of one year, went from eighth place to the top three. The leaders of the rankings also include the Tula, Nizhny Novgorod, Tyumen, Novgorod, and Sakhalin regions, St Petersburg and Bashkortostan.

Separately, I would like to highlight the regions that have made the greatest strides such as the Kurgan Region, which moved up 36 spots; the Perm Territory and the Altai Territory, up 26 spots; Ingushetia, up 24 spots; and the Ivanovo Region which moved up 17 spots.

I want to thank and congratulate our colleagues in the regions for their good work.

The federal government and regional and municipal governments should focus on supporting individual business initiatives in small towns and remote rural communities. We are aware of such stories of success. That includes developing popular software and marketing locally produced organic food and environmentally friendly products nationwide using domestic websites.

It is important to create new opportunities, to introduce modern retail formats, including e-commerce platforms, as I mentioned above, and to cut the logistics, transportation and other costs, including by using upgraded Russian Post offices.

It is also important to help small business employees, self-employed individuals and start-up entrepreneurs acquire additional skills and competencies. Please include corresponding measures tailored specifically to small towns and rural and remote areas as a separate line in the national project for promoting small and medium-sized businesses.

Today I would like to address our officials, owners of large companies, our business leaders and executives.

Colleagues, friends,

Real, stable success and a sense of dignity and self-respect only come when you link your future and the future of your children with your Fatherland. We have maintained ties with many people for a long time, and I am aware of the sentiments of many of the heads and owners of our companies. You have told me many times that business is much more than just making a profit, and I fully agree. It is about changing life around you, contributing to the development of your home cities, regions and the country as a whole, which is extremely important for self-fulfilment. There is nothing like serving the people and society. This is the meaning of your life and work.

Recent events have reaffirmed what I have always said: it is much better at home. Those who refused to hear that clear message have lost hundreds of millions, if not billions of dollars in the West, in what looked like a safe haven for their assets.

I would like to once again say the following to our colleagues, those who are both in this audience and those who are not here: please, do not fall into the same trap again. Our country has huge potential, and there are more than enough tasks that need your contribution. Invest here, in the creation of new enterprises and jobs, in the development of the tourism infrastructure, support schools, universities, healthcare and the social sphere, culture and sport. I know that many of you are doing this. I know this, but I wanted to say it again.

This is how the Bakhrushin, Morozov, Shchukin, Ryabushinsky, Akchurin, Galeyev, Apanayev, Matsiyev, Mamontov, Tretyakov, Arsanov, Dadashev and Gadzhiyev families understood their noble mission. Many Russian, Tatar, Buryat, Chechen, Daghestani, Yakutian, Ossetian, Jewish, Armenian and other merchant and entrepreneurial families did not deprive their heirs of their due share, and at the same time they etched their names in the history of our country.

Incidentally, I would like to note once again that it remains to be seen what is more important for potential heirs: money and property or their forefathers good name and service to the country. The latter is something that cannot be squandered or, pardon my language, wasted on drink.

A good name is something that will always belong to your descendants, to future generations. It will always be part of their lives, going from one generation to another, helping them and making them stronger than the money or property they might inherit can make them.

Colleagues,

A responsible and well-balanced macroeconomic policy is the third guiding principle of our long-term development. In fact, this policy has largely enabled us to withstand the unprecedented pressure brought on by sanctions. Let me reiterate that this is an essential policy in the long term, not just for responding to the current challenges. We will not follow in the footsteps of our Western colleagues by replicating their bitter experience setting off an inflation spiral and disrupting their finances.

Our goal is to ensure robust economic growth for years to come, reducing the inflation burden on our people and businesses and achieving the mid- and long-term target inflation rate of four percent. Inflation was one of the first things I mentioned during my remarks, so let me tell you this: we remain committed to this target of a four-percent inflation rate.

I have already instructed the Government to draft proposals regarding the new budget guidelines. They must ensure that our budget policy is predictable and enables us to make the best use of the external economic conditions. Why do we need all this? To put economic growth on a more stable footing, while also delivering on our infrastructure and technological objectives, which provide a foundation for improving the wellbeing of our people.

True, some international reserve currencies have set themselves on a suicidal path lately, which is an obvious fact. In any case, they clearly have suicidal intentions. Of course, using them to sterilise our money supply does not make any sense. Still, the principle of planning ones spending based on how much you earn remains relevant. This is how it works, and we understand this.

Social justice is the fourth principle underpinning our development. There must be a powerful social dimension when it comes to promoting economic growth and business initiatives. This development model must reduce inequality instead of deepening it, unlike what is happening in other countries. To be honest, we have not been at the forefront when it comes to delivering on these objectives. We have yet to resolve many issues and problems in this regard.

Reducing poverty and inequality is all about creating demand for Russian-made products across the country, bridging the gap between regions in terms of their capabilities, and creating new jobs where they are needed the most. These are the core economic development drivers.

Let me emphasise that generating positive momentum in terms of household income growth and poverty reduction are the main performance indicators for government agencies and the state in general. We need to achieve tangible results in this sphere already this year, despite all the objective challenges we face. I have already assigned this task to the Government.

Again, we provide targeted support to the most vulnerable groups  pensioners, families with children, and people in difficult life situations.

Pensions are indexed annually at a rate higher than inflation. This year, they have been raised twice, including by another 10 percent on June 1.

The minimum wage was also increased by 10 percent at the same time, and so was the subsistence minimum  a reference figure used to calculate many social benefits and payments  accordingly, these benefits should also grow, increasing the incomes of about 15 million people.

In recent years, we have built a holistic system to support low-income families with children. Women are entitled to state support from the early stages of pregnancy and until the child reaches the age of 17.

Peoples living standards and prosperity are the most important demographic factors; the current situation is quite challenging due to several negative demographic waves that have recently overlapped. In April, less than a hundred thousand children were born in Russia, almost 13 percent less than in April 2020.

I ask the Government to continue to keep the development of additional support measures for families with children under review. They must be far-reaching and commensurate with the magnitude of the extraordinary demographic challenge we are facing.

Russias future is ensured by families with two, three and more children. Therefore, we need to do more than provide direct financial support  we need to target and direct the healthcare system, education, and all areas that determine the quality of people's lives towards the needs of families with children.

This problem is addressed, among other approaches, by the national social initiatives, which regional teams and the Agency for Strategic Initiatives are implementing together. This autumn, we will assess the results of their work, review and rank the Russian regions by quality of life in order to apply the best experiences and practices as widely as possible throughout the country.

----------


## Olive Yao

.
Prioritising the development of infrastructure is the fifth principle underlying Russias economic policy.

We have scaled up direct budget spending on expanding transport corridors. An ambitious plan for building and repairing the federal and regional motorway core network will be launched next year. At least 85 percent of the roads are to be brought up to code within the next five years.

Infrastructure budget lending is a new tool that is being widely used. The loans are issued for 15 years at a 3 percent APR. As I mentioned before, they are much more popular than we originally thought. The regions have multiple well-thought-out and promising projects that should be launched at the earliest convenience. We will look into how we can use this support measure. We debated this issue last night. What I am saying is that it is a reliable tool.

Upgrading housing and utilities services is a separate matter with a backlog of issues. The industry is chronically underinvested to the tune of 4.5 trillion rubles. Over 40 percent of networks need to be replaced, which accounts for their low efficiency and big losses. About 3 percent of the networks become unusable every year, but no more than 2 percent get replaced, which makes the problem even worse every single year.

I propose consolidating resources and launching a comprehensive programme for upgrading housing and utilities, and synchronizing it with other infrastructure development and housing overhaul plans. The goal is to turn the situation around and to gradually reduce the number of dated networks, just like we are doing by relocating people from structurally unsafe buildings or fixing roads. We will discuss in detail housing and utilities and the construction complex with the governors at a State Council Presidium meeting next week.

On a separate note, I propose increasing resources to fund projects to create a comfortable urban environment in small towns and historical settlements. This programme is working well for us. I propose allocating another 10 billion rubles annually for these purposes in 20232024.

We will allocate additional funds for renovating urban areas in the Far Eastern Federal District. I want the Government to allocate dedicated funds to this end as part of the programmes for infrastructure budget lending and housing and utilities upgrading, as well as other development programmes.

Promoting comprehensive improvements and development for rural areas is a top priority for us. People who live there are feeding the country. We now see that they are also feeding a major part of the world, so they must live in comfort and dignity. In this connection, I am asking the Government to allocate additional funding for the corresponding programme. Export duties on agricultural produce can serve as a source of funding here. This is a permanent source of revenue. Of course, there can be fluctuations, but at least this ensures a constant flow of revenue.

On a separate note, I suggest that we expand the programmes for upgrading and modernising rural cultural centres, as well as regional theatres and museums by allocating six billion rubles for each of these projects in 2023 and 2024.

What I have just said about cultural institutions is something that people are really looking forward to, something they really care about. Let me give you a recent example: during the presentation of the Hero of Labour medals, one of the winners, Vladimir Mikhailov from Yakutia, asked me directly for help with building a cultural centre in his native village. This was during the part of the ceremony where we meet behind closed doors. We will definitely do this. The fact that people are raising this issue at all levels shows that they are really eager to see these projects implemented.

At this point, I would like to make a sidenote on a topic that is especially relevant now, since we are in early summer, when Russians usually take their summer vacations.

Every year, more and more tourists want to visit the most beautiful corners of our country: national parks, wildlife sanctuaries and nature reserves. According to available estimates, this year this tourist flow is expected to exceed 12 million people. It is essential that all government bodies, businesses and tourists are well aware of what they can and cannot do in these territories, where they can build tourism infrastructure, and where such activity is strictly prohibited because it endangers unique and fragile ecosystems.

The draft law governing tourism in special protected territories and regulating this activity in a civilised manner is already in the State Duma.

In this context, I would like to draw your attention to the fact that we must figure out in advance all the relevant estimates and ensure that the decisions are well-balanced. We need to be serious about this.

I would like to place special emphasis on the need to preserve Lake Baikal. In particular, there is a comprehensive development project for the city of Baikalsk, which must become a model of sustainable, eco-sensitive municipal governance.

This is not just about getting rid of the accumulated negative environmental impacts from the Baikalsk Pulp and Paper Mill, but about setting a higher standard of living for the city and transforming it into a signature destination for environmental tourism in Russia. We need to rely on the most cutting-edge technologies and clean energy when carrying out this project.

Overall, we will be developing clean technology to achieve the goals we set in the environmental modernisation of production facilities, and to reduce hazardous emissions, especially in large industrial centres. We will also continue working on closed-loop economy projects, green projects and climate preservation. I spoke about these issues in detail at this forum last year.

Consequently, the sixth cross-cutting development principle that consolidates our work is, in my opinion, achieving genuine technological sovereignty, creating an integral system of economic development that does not depend on foreign institutions when it comes to critically important components. We need to develop all areas of life on a qualitatively new technological level without being simply users of other countries solutions. We must have technological keys to developing next-generation goods and services.

In the past years, we have focused a lot of attention on import substitution, succeeding in a range of industries, including agriculture, pharmaceuticals, medical equipment, defence production and several others.

But I should stress that there is a lot of discussion in our society about import substitution. And it is not a cure-all nor a comprehensive solution. If we only imitate others when trying to replace foreign goods with copies, even if very high-quality ones, we may end up constantly playing catch-up while we should be one step ahead and create our own competitive technologies, goods and services that can become new global standards.

If you remember, Sergei Korolyov did not just copy or locally upgrade captured rocket technology. He focused on the future and proposed a unique plan to develop the R-7 rocket. He paved the path to space for humankind and in fact set a standard for the entire world, for decades ahead.

Proactively  this is how founders of many Soviet research programmes worked at the time. And today, building on that groundwork, our designers continue to make progress and show their worth. It is thanks to them that Russia has supersonic weapons that do not exist in any other country. Rosatom remains the leader in nuclear technology, developing our fleet of nuclear-powered icebreakers. Many Russian AI and Big Data solutions are the best in the world.

To reiterate, technological development is a cross-cutting area that will define the current decade and the entire 21st century. We will review in depth our approaches to building a groundbreaking technology-based economy  a techno economy  at the upcoming Strategic Development Council meeting. There is so much we can discuss. Most importantly, many managerial decisions must be made in the sphere of engineering education and transferring research to the real economy, and the provision of financial resources for fast-growing high-tech companies. We will also discuss the development of cross-cutting technologies and progress of digital transformation projects in individual industries.

To be clear, of course it is impossible to make every product out there, and there is no need for that. However, we need to possess critical technologies in order to be able to move swiftly should we need to start our own production of any product. This is what we did when we quickly started making coronavirus vaccines, and most recently launched the production of many other products and services.

For example, after dishonest KamAZ partners left the Russian market, their place was taken by domestic companies, which are supplying parts for traditional models and even advanced mainline, transport and heavy-duty vehicles.

The Mir card payment system has successfully replaced Visa and MasterCard on the domestic market. It is expanding its geography and gradually gaining international recognition.

The St Petersburg Tractor Plant is another case in point. Its former foreign partner stopped selling engines and providing warranty maintenance. Engine builders from Yaroslavl and Tutayev came to the rescue and started supplying their engines. As a result, the output of agricultural equipment at the St Petersburg Tractor Plant hit a record high in March-April. It did not decrease, but hit an all-time high.

I am sure there will be more positive practices and success stories.

To reiterate, Russia possesses the professional, scientific and technological potential to develop products that enjoy high demand, including household appliances and construction equipment, as well as industrial and service equipment.

Today's task is to scale up the capacities and promptly get the necessary lines up and running. One of the key issues is comfortable work conditions for the businesses as well as the availability of prepared production sites.

----------


## Olive Yao

.
I ask the Government to submit key parameters of the new operating guidelines for industrial clusters by the autumn. What is critical here?

First  financing. The projects launched in these clusters must have a long-term credit resource for up to ten years at an annual interest rate below seven percent in rubles. We have discussed all these issues with our economic agencies as well. Everyone agreed, so we will proceed.

Second  taxation. The clusters must have a low level of relatively permanent taxes including insurance contributions.

Third  supporting production at the early, kick-off stage, forming a package of orders including subsidising the purchases of ready products by such enterprises. This is not an easy issue but I think subsidies may be required. They are needed to ensure the market. We just have to work it out.

Fourth  simplified administration including minimal or no inspections as well as convenient customs monitoring that is not burdensome.

Fifth, and probably the most important  we need to set up mechanisms of guaranteed long-term demand for the new innovative products that are about to enter the market. I remind the Government that such preferential terms and respective industrial clusters must be launched as early as January 1, 2023.

On a related note, I want to say that both new and already operating points of industrial growth must attract small businesses and engage them in their orbit. It is crucial for entrepreneurs, for small entities to see the horizon and grasp their prospects.

Therefore, I ask the Government together with the SME Corporation [Federal Corporation for the Development of Small and Medium Enterprises] and our biggest companies to launch an instrument for long-term contracts between companies with state participation and SMEs. This will ensure demand for the products of such enterprises for years ahead whereas suppliers can confidently undertake commitments to launch a new manufacturing facility or expand an existing one to meet that order.

Let me add that we have substantially shortened the timeframe for building industrial sites and eliminated all the unnecessary burdensome procedures. Still, there is much more we can do here. We have things to work on, and places to go from here. For example, building an industrial facility from the ground up takes anywhere from eighteen months to three years, while the persistently high interest rates make it harder to buy suitable land plots.

Given this, I suggest launching industrial mortgages as a new tool for empowering Russian businesses to quickly start making all the products we need. What I mean are preferential long-term loans at a five-percent interest rate. Companies planning to buy new manufacturing space will be entitled to these loans. I am asking the Government to work out all the details with the Russian banking sector so that the industrial mortgage programme becomes fully operational soon.

Friends,

Changes in the global economy, finances and international relations are unfolding at an ever-growing pace and scale. There is an increasingly pronounced trend in favour of a multipolar growth model in lieu of globalisation. Of course, building and shaping a new world order is no easy task. We will have to confront many challenges, risks, and factors that we can hardly predict or anticipate today.

Still, it is obvious that it is up to the strong sovereign states, those that do not follow a trajectory imposed by others, to set the rules governing the new world order. Only powerful and sovereign states can have their say in this emerging world order. Otherwise, they are doomed to become or remain colonies devoid of any rights.

We need to move forward and change in keeping with the times, while demonstrating our national will and resolve. Russia enters this nascent era as a powerful sovereign nation. We will definitely use the new immense opportunities that are opening up for us in this day and age in order to become even stronger.

Thank you for your attention.

----------


## Olive Yao

.
Vertaling

De sombere prognoses voor de vooruitzichten van de Russische economie, die in het vroege voorjaar werden gemaakt, zijn niet uitgekomen. Het is duidelijk waarom deze propagandacampagne werd aangewakkerd en alle voorspellingen van de dollar op 200 roebel en de ineenstorting van onze economie werden gedaan. Dit was en blijft een instrument in een informatiestrijd en een factor van psychologische invloed op de Russische samenleving en binnenlandse zakenkringen.

(...)

Het werkelijke leven heeft deze voorspellingen gelogenstraft. Ik wil echter benadrukken dat om succesvol te blijven, we expliciet eerlijk en realistisch moeten zijn in het beoordelen van de situatie, onafhankelijk moeten zijn in het trekken van conclusies en natuurlijk een can-do-geest moeten hebben, wat erg belangrijk is. We zijn sterke mensen en kunnen elke uitdaging aan. Net als onze voorgangers kunnen we elke taak oplossen. De hele duizendjarige geschiedenis van ons land bevestigt dit.

(...)

De huidige prioriteit van de internationale gemeenschap is het vergroten van de voedselleveringen aan de wereldmarkt, met name om te voldoen aan de behoeften van de landen die het meest voedsel nodig hebben.

While ensuring its domestic food security and supplying the domestic market, Russia is also able to scale up its food and fertiliser exports. For example, our grain exports in the next season can be increased to 50 million tonnes.

Terwijl het zijn binnenlandse voedselzekerheid waarborgt en de binnenlandse markt bevoorraadt, is Rusland ook in staat om zijn voedsel- en kunstmestexport op te schalen. Zo kan onze graanexport in het komende seizoen worden opgevoerd tot 50 miljoen ton.

Als prioriteit zullen we de landen bevoorraden die het meest voedsel nodig hebben, waar het aantal hongerende mensen zou kunnen toenemen, in de eerste plaats Afrikaanse landen en het Midden-Oosten.

()

Vandaag wil ik het hebben over de belangrijkste principes waarop ons land, onze economie zich zal ontwikkelen.

Het eerste principe is openheid.

(...)

Het tweede principe van onze langetermijnontwikkeling is bouwen op ondernemersvrijheid.

()

Een verantwoord en evenwichtig macro-economisch beleid is het derde uitgangspunt van onze langetermijnontwikkeling.

()

Social justice is the fourth principle underpinning our development. There must be a powerful social dimension when it comes to promoting economic growth and business initiatives. This development model must reduce inequality instead of deepening it, unlike what is happening in other countries. To be honest, we have not been at the forefront when it comes to delivering on these objectives. We have yet to resolve many issues and problems in this regard.

Sociale rechtvaardigheid is het vierde principe dat aan onze ontwikkeling ten grondslag ligt. Er moet een krachtige sociale dimensie zijn als het gaat om het bevorderen van economische groei en bedrijfsinitiatieven. Dit ontwikkelingsmodel moet de ongelijkheid verminderen in plaats van verdiepen, in tegenstelling tot wat in andere landen gebeurt. Om eerlijk te zijn, hebben we niet voorop gelopen als het gaat om het realiseren van deze doelstellingen. Veel kwesties en problemen in dit verband moeten we nog oplossen.

()

Prioriteit geven aan de ontwikkeling van infrastructuur is het vijfde principe dat ten grondslag ligt aan het economische beleid van Rusland.

()

Het zesde transversale ontwikkelingsprincipe dat ons werk consolideert, is dan ook naar mijn mening het bereiken van echte technologische soevereiniteit, het creren van een integraal systeem van economische ontwikkeling dat niet afhankelijk is van buitenlandse instellingen als het gaat om cruciale componenten.

----------


## Olive Yao

.
Commentaar

----------


## Olive Yao

.
20 juli 2022

Toespraak bij het forum _Sterke ideen voor een nieuwe tijd_ georganiseerd door het Bureau voor Strategische Initiatieven

Moskou

President of Russia Vladimir Putin:

Friends,

I would like to begin by saying that I am very happy to be with you today.

Through you, I would like to greet and thank all those who have submitted their proposals to the forum Strong Ideas for a New Time, to thank the team of the Agency for Strategic Initiatives for organising the forum, and to express appreciation for the work of our regions, which have contributed to the implementation of the ideas presented at the first ASI forum, held in late 2020.

It is obvious that there is growing demand for the mechanism proposed by ASI for identifying, selecting and supporting civil projects and initiatives. As we were walking here with Svetlana Chupsheva, she said that, regrettably, an all-embracing and effective mechanism for selecting projects had not yet been created at the state level. But it is good that ASI is doing something like this. We will make increasingly broad use of this practice.

This mechanism is fully consonant with the tasks of our internal development and the time when truly revolutionary transformations are gaining momentum and getting stronger. These enormous changes are irreversible, of course. National and global processes are underway to develop the fundamentals and principles of a harmonious, fairer and more community-focused and safe world order as an alternative to the existing world order, or the unipolar world order in which we lived, and which, because of its nature, is definitely becoming a brake on the development of our civilisation.

The model of total domination by the so-called golden billion is unfair. Why should this golden billion, which is only part of the global population, dominate everyone else and enforce its rules of conduct that are based on the illusion of exceptionalism? It divides the world into first and second-class people and is therefore essentially racist and neo-colonial. The underlying globalist and pseudo-liberal ideology is becoming increasingly more like totalitarianism and is restraining creative endeavour and free historical creation.

One gets the impression that the West is simply unable to offer the world a model for the future of its own. Indeed, it was no accident that the golden billion attained its gold and achieved quite a lot, but it got there not because it implemented certain concepts. It mainly got to where it is by robbing other peoples in Asia and Africa. That is how it was. India was robbed for an extensive period of time. This is why the elite of the golden billion are terrified of other global development centres potentially coming up with their own development alternatives.

No matter how much the West and the supranational elite strive to preserve the existing order, a new era and a new stage in world history are coming. Only genuinely sovereign states are in a position to ensure a high growth dynamic and become a role model for others in terms of standards of living and quality of life, the protection of traditional values and high humanistic ideals, and development models where an individual is not a means, but the ultimate goal.

Sovereignty is about freedom of national development, and thus, the development of every individual. It is about the technological, cultural, intellectual and educational solvency of a state  that is what it is. No doubt, responsible, active and nationally minded and nationally oriented civil society is the most important component of sovereignty.

I am convinced that in order to be strong, independent and competitive, we need to improve the mechanisms for people to participate in the countrys life and to make them more open and fairer. That includes mechanisms for direct democracy and people's involvement in addressing the critical problems facing society and the public.

The way forward is to rely on our peoples creative potential, to team up with you and people like you who are not with us today. How many thousands participated, did you say?

Svetlana Chupsheva: 19,000.

Vladimir Putin: Some 19,000 people took part in the forum. We can achieve the results we are seeking only if we rely on this powerful potential.

I consider your forum a key platform for an open and meaningful dialogue. Moreover, the Agency for Strategic Initiatives has always brought together people of a particular type. Thinking, proactive and goal-oriented people who are willing to make a significant contribution to making Russia a successful, prosperous and comfortable country for the people who strive to achieve self-fulfillment and to live dignified lives.

I am positive that, as professionals, you have ideas about how to improve the state of affairs in technology, education and healthcare and to make things better for our companies, researchers and engineers, and so on. You have meaningful ideas that have been tested. We must work together to bring them to life. Some things have already been done, and I hope we will spend some time discussing them. However, these newly proposed ideas must be implemented as well.

Of course, today we will be able to discuss only some of your ideas and projects. But I want you to know right from the outset that all constructive and sound proposals will be considered. It is imperative to make full use of the mechanisms for implementing the socially significant projects put forward by our citizens, which is being created by the Government, Vnesheconombank  Mr Shuvalov will confirm this  and the Agency for Strategic Initiatives, along with regional involvement.

I would like to emphasise that it is important to do more than organise the training of the teams and fund them accordingly. It is critically important to create, as soon as possible, pilot legal frameworks in specific areas, to test every aspect of the efforts to introduce effective, bold and even out-of-the-box ideas that are ahead of their time and use them as the basis for carrying out systemic changes throughout the country.

This particular approach has made it possible to launch the truly useful projects that were presented at your first forum in November 2020. I will give you a quick example. An initiative that was put forward at the previous forum gave start to pilot operation of autonomous marine vessels, which will be an important step towards developing unmanned vehicles in Russia, using satellite navigation and making advances in AI technology.

The day before yesterday, our colleagues and I discussed in detail the creation of proper conditions for developing and implementing such advanced technologies that enjoy high demand at a meeting of the Council for Strategic Development and National Projects. I am sure that you also have breakthrough ideas that will be implemented. Let us discuss them today.

I will spend a moment discussing public and social projects aimed at saving our nation, demographic development and, of course, the upbringing, as they usually say, of the youth, but I think education is a lifelong process and people should use new knowledge to evolve throughout their lives. So, I believe upbringing has much more to it than the upbringing of the youth.

I would like my colleagues in the Government and the governors to hear me  such sincere initiatives that are often promoted even by small teams of enthusiasts certainly need the interested, weighty support of the managerial teams in the regions, on site, because the experience received in one region is valuable and useful for the entire country. Of course, this is true of the experience is valuable, if is implemented, if it works effectively and brings specific results for the region in question and the country.

Let me recall that at the previous forum, representatives from the Novgorod Region search movement spoke about their efforts to go into schools. A very interesting initiative. As you know, genius lies in simplicity. They go to schools and tell the students about the history of their land by giving examples of their fellow residents, examples of heroism  this is much more interesting and effective than just sitting at a desk in school and thumbing through a textbook even if it is well written by specialists, historians and teachers. This live contact with history, especially if presented professionally, beautifully and creatively, certainly has a much stronger impression on people and affects all their lives.

I would like to emphasise that to move forward into the future we need to remember our great, glorious past, rely on our traditions and be proud of our achievements. And, once again, we must move forward by all means. It is absolutely unacceptable to rest on our laurels, look back to the past and be happy at recalling what our fathers, grandfathers and grandmothers did. No. We must certainly rely on this enormous experience and the achievements of our nation, our peoples  our advantage lies in the multi-ethnic and multi-religious nature of our country  but we must of course look to the future and move only forward.

It is symbolic today, that this forum is taking place at this unique facility. I think all of you are happy to be here, at GES −2. It unites our history, the successes of the domestic engineering school and modern technology. They were used to make this unusual, creative space that reflects the spirit of todays new era.

I am sure this atmosphere will set a good direction for our discussion and motivate us to search for creative, unconventional approaches to resolving the tasks facing our country.

Thank you very much for your attention.

----------


## Olive Yao

.
Vertaling

() de tijd waarin werkelijk revolutionaire transformaties in een stroomversnelling komen en sterker worden. Deze enorme veranderingen zijn natuurlijk onomkeerbaar. Nationale en mondiale processen zijn aan de gang om de fundamenten en principes te ontwikkelen van een harmonieuze, eerlijkere en meer gemeenschapsgerichte en veilige wereldorde als alternatief voor de bestaande wereldorde, of de unipolaire wereldorde waarin we leefden, en die, vanwege zijn aard, zeker een rem wordt op de ontwikkeling van onze beschaving.

Het model van totale overheersing door de zogenaamde gouden miljard is oneerlijk. Waarom zou deze gouden miljard, die slechts een deel van de wereldbevolking is, alle anderen domineren en zijn gedragsregels afdwingen die gebaseerd zijn op de illusie van uitzonderlijkheid? Het verdeelt de wereld in eerste en tweederangs mensen en is daarom in wezen racistisch en neokoloniaal. De onderliggende globalistische en pseudo-liberale ideologie begint steeds meer op totalitarisme te lijken en belemmert creatieve inspanningen en vrije historische creatie.

Je krijgt de indruk dat het Westen gewoonweg niet in staat is de wereld een model voor zijn eigen toekomst te bieden. Het was inderdaad geen toeval dat de gouden miljard aan zijn goud kwam en heel wat bereikte, maar het kwam daar niet omdat het bepaalde concepten implementeerde. Het is vooral gekomen waar het is door andere volkeren in Azi en Afrika te beroven. Zo was het. India werd lange tijd beroofd. Dit is de reden waarom de elite van de gouden miljard bang is dat andere mondiale ontwikkelingscentra mogelijk met hun eigen ontwikkelingsalternatieven komen.

Hoezeer het Westen en de supranationale elite ook streven naar het behoud van de bestaande orde, er komt een nieuw tijdperk en een nieuwe fase in de wereldgeschiedenis.

----------


## Olive Yao

.
Commentaar

----------


## Olive Yao

.
16 augustus 2022

Toespraak voor de deelnemers en gasten bij de Tiende Conferentie van Moskou inzake Internationale Veiligheid

Moskou

President of Russia Vladimir Poetin: 

Ladies and gentlemen,

Esteemed foreign guests,

Let me welcome you to the anniversary 10th Moscow Conference on International Security. Over the past decade, your representative forum has become a significant venue for discussing the most pressing military-political problems.

Today, such an open discussion is particularly pertinent. The situation in the world is changing dynamically and the outlines of a multipolar world order are taking shape. An increasing number of countries and peoples are choosing a path of free and sovereign development based on their own distinct identity, traditions and values.

These objective processes are being opposed by the Western globalist elites, who provoke chaos, fanning long-standing and new conflicts and pursuing the so-called containment policy, which in fact amounts to the subversion of any alternative, sovereign development options. Thus, they are doing all they can to keep hold onto the hegemony and power that are slipping from their hands; they are attempting to retain countries and peoples in the grip of what is essentially a neocolonial order. Their hegemony means stagnation for the rest of the world and for the entire civilisation; it means obscurantism, cancellation of culture, and neoliberal totalitarianism.

They are using all expedients. The United States and its vassals grossly interfere in the internal affairs of sovereign states by staging provocations, organising coups, or inciting civil wars. By threats, blackmail, and pressure, they are trying to force independent states to submit to their will and follow rules that are alien to them. This is being done with just one aim in view, which is to preserve their domination, the centuries-old model that enables them to sponge on everything in the world. But a model of this sort can only be retained by force.

This is why the collective West  the so-called collective West  is deliberately undermining the European security system and knocking together ever new military alliances. NATO is crawling east and building up its military infrastructure. Among other things, it is deploying missile defence systems and enhancing the strike capabilities of its offensive forces. This is hypocritically attributed to the need to strengthen security in Europe, but in fact quite the opposite is taking place. Moreover, the proposals on mutual security measures, which Russia put forward last December, were once again disregarded.

They need conflicts to retain their hegemony. It is for this reason that they have destined the Ukrainian people to being used as cannon fodder. They have implemented the anti-Russia project and connived at the dissemination of the neo-Nazi ideology. They looked the other way when residents of Donbass were killed in their thousands and continued to pour weapons, including heavy weapons, for use by the Kiev regime, something that they persist in doing now.

Under these circumstances, we have taken the decision to conduct a special military operation in Ukraine, a decision which is in full conformity with the Charter of the United Nations. It has been clearly spelled out that the aims of this operation are to ensure the security of Russia and its citizens and protect the residents of Donbass from genocide.

The situation in Ukraine shows that the United States is attempting to draw out this conflict. It acts in the same way elsewhere, fomenting the conflict potential in Asia, Africa, and Latin America. As is common knowledge, the US has recently made another deliberate attempt to fuel the flames and stir up trouble in the Asia-Pacific. The US escapade towards Taiwan is not just a voyage by an irresponsible politician, but part of the purpose-oriented and deliberate US strategy designed to destabilise the situation and sow chaos in the region and the world. It is a brazen demonstration of disrespect for other countries and their own international commitments. We regard this as a thoroughly planned provocation.

It is clear that by taking these actions the Western globalist elites are attempting, among other things, to divert the attention of their own citizens from pressing socioeconomic problems, such as plummeting living standards, unemployment, poverty, and deindustrialisation. They want to shift the blame for their own failures to other countries, namely Russia and China, which are defending their point of view and designing a sovereign development policy without submitting to the diktat of the supranational elites.

We also see that the collective West is striving to expand its bloc-based system to the Asia-Pacific region, like it did with NATO in Europe. To this end, they are creating aggressive military-political unions such as AUKUS and others.

It is obvious that it is only possible to reduce tensions in the world, overcome military-political threats and risks, improve trust between countries and ensure their sustainable development through a radical strengthening of the contemporary system of a multipolar world.

I reiterate that the era of the unipolar world is becoming a thing of the past. No matter how strongly the beneficiaries of the current globalist model cling to the familiar state of affairs, it is doomed. The historic geopolitical changes are going in a totally different direction.

And, of course, your conference is another important proof of the objective processes forming a multipolar world, bringing together representatives from many countries who want to discuss security issues on an equal footing, and conduct a dialogue that takes into account the interests of all parties, without exception.

I want to emphasise that the multipolar world, based on international law and more just relations, opens up new opportunities for counteracting common threats, such as regional conflicts and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, terrorism and cybercrime. All these challenges are global, and therefore it would be impossible to overcome them without combining the efforts and potentials of all states.

As before, Russia will actively and assertively participate in such coordinated joint efforts; together with its allies, partners and fellow thinkers, it will improve the existing mechanisms of international security and create new ones, as well as consistently strengthen the national armed forces and other security structures by providing them with advanced weapons and military equipment. Russia will secure its national interests, as well as the protection of its allies, and take other steps towards building of a more democratic world where the rights of all peoples and cultural and civilisational diversity are guaranteed.

We need to restore respect for international law, for its fundamental norms and principles. And, of course, it is important to promote such universal and commonly acknowledged agencies as the United Nations and other international dialogue platforms. The UN Security Council and the General Assembly, as it was intended initially, are supposed to serve as effective tools to reduce international tensions and prevent conflicts, as well as facilitate the provision of reliable security and wellbeing of countries and peoples.

In conclusion, I want to thank the conference organisers for their major preparatory work and I wish all participants substantial discussions.

I am sure that the forum will continue to make a significant contribution to the strengthening of peace and stability on our planet and facilitate the development of constructive dialogue and partnership.

Thank you for your attention.

----------


## Olive Yao

.
Vertaling

De Verenigde Staten en zijn vazallen mengen zich op grove wijze in de interne aangelegenheden van soevereine staten door provocaties te orkestreren, staatsgrepen te organiseren of burgeroorlogen aan te wakkeren. Door bedreigingen, chantage en druk proberen ze onafhankelijke staten te dwingen zich aan hun wil te onderwerpen en regels te volgen die hen vreemd zijn. Dit wordt gedaan met maar n doel voor ogen, namelijk het behouden van hun dominantie, het eeuwenoude model dat hen in staat stelt om alles in de wereld op te zuigen. Maar een dergelijk model kan alleen met geweld worden vastgehouden.

()

Ik wil benadrukken dat de multipolaire wereld, gebaseerd op internationaal recht en rechtvaardigere betrekkingen, nieuwe kansen biedt voor het tegengaan van gemeenschappelijke dreigingen, zoals regionale conflicten en de verspreiding van massavernietigingswapens, terrorisme en cybercriminaliteit. Al deze uitdagingen zijn mondiaal en daarom zou het onmogelijk zijn om ze te overwinnen zonder de inspanningen en mogelijkheden van alle staten te bundelen.

Zoals voorheen zal Rusland actief en assertief deelnemen aan dergelijke gecordineerde gezamenlijke inspanningen; samen met zijn bondgenoten, partners en mededenkers zal het de bestaande mechanismes van internationale veiligheid verbeteren en nieuwe creren, evenals de nationale strijdkrachten en andere veiligheidsstructuren consequent versterken door hen te voorzien van geavanceerde wapens en militaire uitrusting. Rusland zal zijn nationale belangen veiligstellen, evenals de bescherming van zijn bondgenoten, en andere stappen ondernemen in de richting van de opbouw van een meer democratische wereld waar de rechten van alle volkeren en culturele en beschavingsdiversiteit zijn gegarandeerd.

----------


## Olive Yao

.
Commentaar

----------


## Olive Yao

.
21 september 2022

Toespraak van de President van de Russische Federatie

Moskou, Kremlin

President of Russia Vladimir Poetin:

Friends,

The subject of this address is the situation in Donbass and the course of the special military operation to liberate it from the neo-Nazi regime, which seized power in Ukraine in 2014 as the result of an armed state coup.

Today I am addressing you  all citizens of our country, people of different generations, ages and ethnicities, the people of our great Motherland, all who are united by the great historical Russia, soldiers, officers and volunteers who are fighting on the frontline and doing their combat duty, our brothers and sisters in the Donetsk and Lugansk peoples republics, Kherson and Zaporozhye regions and other areas that have been liberated from the neo-Nazi regime.

The issue concerns the necessary, imperative measures to protect the sovereignty, security and territorial integrity of Russia and support the desire and will of our compatriots to choose their future independently, and the aggressive policy of some Western elites, who are doing their utmost to preserve their domination and with this aim in view are trying to block and suppress any sovereign and independent development centres in order to continue to aggressively force their will and pseudo-values on other countries and nations.

The goal of that part of the West is to weaken, divide and ultimately destroy our country. They are saying openly now that in 1991 they managed to split up the Soviet Union and now is the time to do the same to Russia, which must be divided into numerous regions that would be at deadly feud with each other.

They devised these plans long ago. They encouraged groups of international terrorists in the Caucasus and moved NATOs offensive infrastructure close to our borders. They used indiscriminate Russophobia as a weapon, including by nurturing the hatred of Russia for decades, primarily in Ukraine, which was designed to become an anti-Russia bridgehead. They turned the Ukrainian people into cannon fodder and pushed them into a war with Russia, which they unleashed back in 2014. They used the army against civilians and organised a genocide, blockade and terror against those who refused to recognise the government that was created in Ukraine as the result of a state coup.

After the Kiev regime publicly refused to settle the issue of Donbass peacefully and went as far as to announce its ambition to possess nuclear weapons, it became clear that a new offensive in Donbass  there were two of them before  was inevitable, and that it would be inevitably followed by an attack on Russias Crimea, that is, on Russia.

In this connection, the decision to start a pre-emptive military operation was necessary and the only option. The main goal of this operation, which is to liberate the whole of Donbass, remains unaltered.

The Lugansk Peoples Republic has been liberated from the neo-Nazis almost completely. Fighting in the Donetsk Peoples Republic continues. Over the previous eight years, the Kiev occupation regime created a deeply echeloned line of permanent defences. A head-on attack against them would have led to heavy losses, which is why our units, as well as the forces of the Donbass republics, are acting competently and systematically, using military equipment and saving lives, moving step by step to liberate Donbass, purge cities and towns of the neo-Nazis, and help the people whom the Kiev regime turned into hostages and human shields.

As you know, professional military personnel serving under contract are taking part in the special military operation. Fighting side by side with them are volunteer units  people of different ethnicities, professions and ages who are real patriots. They answered the call of their hearts to rise up in defence of Russia and Donbass.

In this connection, I have already issued instructions for the Government and the Defence Ministry to determine the legal status of volunteers and personnel of the military units of the Donetsk and Lugansk peoples republics. It must be the same as the status of military professionals of the Russian army, including material, medical and social benefits. Special attention must be given to organising the supply of military and other equipment for volunteer units and Donbass peoples militia.

While acting to attain the main goals of defending Donbass in accordance with the plans and decisions of the Defence Ministry and the General Staff, our troops have liberated considerable areas in the Kherson and Zaporozhye regions and a number of other areas. This has created a protracted line of contact that is over 1,000 kilometres long.

This is what I would like to make public for the first time today. After the start of the special military operation, in particular after the Istanbul talks, Kiev representatives voiced quite a positive response to our proposals. These proposals concerned above all ensuring Russias security and interests. But a peaceful settlement obviously did not suit the West, which is why, after certain compromises were coordinated, Kiev was actually ordered to wreck all these agreements.

More weapons were pumped into Ukraine. The Kiev regime brought into play new groups of foreign mercenaries and nationalists, military units trained according to NATO standards and receiving orders from Western advisers.

At the same time, the regime of reprisals throughout Ukraine against their own citizens, established immediately after the armed coup in 2014, was harshly intensified. The policy of intimidation, terror and violence is taking on increasingly mass-scale, horrific and barbaric forms.

I want to stress the following. We know that the majority of people living in the territories liberated from the neo-Nazis, and these are primarily the historical lands of Novorossiya, do not want to live under the yoke of the neo-Nazi regime. People in the Zaporozhye and Kherson regions, in Lugansk and Donetsk saw and are seeing now the atrocities perpetrated by the neo-Nazis in the [Ukrainian-] occupied areas of the Kharkov region. The descendants of Banderites and members of Nazi punitive expeditions are killing, torturing and imprisoning people; they are settling scores, beating up, and committing outrages on peaceful civilians.

There were over 7.5 million people living in the Donetsk and Lugansk peoples republics and in the Zaporozhye and Kherson regions before the outbreak of hostilities. Many of them were forced to become refugees and leave their homes. Those who have stayed  they number about five million  are now exposed to artillery and missile attacks launched by the neo-Nazi militants, who fire at hospitals and schools and stage terrorist attacks against peaceful civilians.

We cannot, we have no moral right to let our kin and kith be torn to pieces by butchers; we cannot but respond to their sincere striving to decide their destiny on their own.

The parliaments of the Donbass peoples republics and the military-civilian administrations of the Kherson and Zaporozhye regions have adopted decisions to hold referendums on the future of their territories and have appealed to Russia to support this.

I would like to emphasise that we will do everything necessary to create safe conditions for these referendums so that people can express their will. And we will support the choice of future made by the majority of people in the Donetsk and Lugansk peoples republics and the Zaporozhye and Kherson regions.

Friends,

Today our armed forces, as I have mentioned, are fighting on the line of contact that is over 1,000 kilometres long, fighting not only against neo-Nazi units but actually the entire military machine of the collective West.

In this situation, I consider it necessary to take the following decision, which is fully adequate to the threats we are facing. More precisely, I find it necessary to support the proposal of the Defence Ministry and the General Staff on partial mobilisation in the Russian Federation to defend our Motherland and its sovereignty and territorial integrity, and to ensure the safety of our people and people in the liberated territories.

As I have said, we are talking about partial mobilisation. In other words, only military reservists, primarily those who served in the armed forces and have specific military occupational specialties and corresponding experience, will be called up.

Before being sent to their units, those called up for active duty will undergo mandatory additional military training based on the experience of the special military operation.

I have already signed Executive Order on partial mobilisation.

In accordance with legislation, the houses of the Federal Assembly  the Federation Council and the State Duma  will be officially notified about this in writing today.

The mobilisation will begin today, September 21. I am instructing the heads of the regions to provide the necessary assistance to the work of military recruitment offices.

I would like to point out that the citizens of Russia called up in accordance with the mobilisation order will have the status, payments and all social benefits of military personnel serving under contract.

Additionally, the Executive Order on partial mobilisation also stipulates additional measures for the fulfilment of the state defence order. The heads of defence industry enterprises will be directly responsible for attaining the goals of increasing the production of weapons and military equipment and using additional production facilities for this purpose. At the same time, the Government must address without any delay all aspects of material, resource and financial support for our defence enterprises.

Friends,

The West has gone too far in its aggressive anti-Russia policy, making endless threats to our country and people. Some irresponsible Western politicians are doing more than just speak about their plans to organise the delivery of long-range offensive weapons to Ukraine, which could be used todeliver strikes at Crimea and other Russian regions.

Such terrorist attacks, including with the use of Western weapons, are being delivered at border areas in the Belgorod and Kursk regions. NATO is conducting reconnaissance through Russias southern regions in real time and with the use of modern systems, aircraft, vessels, satellites and strategic drones.

Washington, London and Brussels are openly encouraging Kiev to move the hostilities to our territory. They openly say that Russia must be defeated on the battlefield by any means, and subsequently deprived of political, economic, cultural and any other sovereignty and ransacked.

They have even resorted to the nuclear blackmail. I am referring not only to the Western-encouraged shelling of the Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant, which poses a threat of a nuclear disaster, but also to the statements made by some high-ranking representatives of the leading NATO countries on the possibility and admissibility of using weapons of mass destruction  nuclear weapons  against Russia.

I would like to remind those who make such statements regarding Russia that our country has different types of weapons as well, and some of them are more modern than the weapons NATO countries have. In the event of a threat to the territorial integrity of our country and to defend Russia and our people, we will certainly make use of all weapon systems available tous. This is not a bluff.

The citizens of Russia can rest assured that the territorial integrity of our Motherland, our independence and freedom will be defended  I repeat  by all the systems available to us. Those who are using nuclear blackmail against us should know that the wind rose can turn around.

It is our historical tradition and the destiny of our nation to stop those who are keen on global domination and threaten to split up and enslave our Motherland. Rest assured that we will do it this time as well.

I believe in your support.

----------


## Olive Yao

.
Vertaling

----------


## Olive Yao

.
Commentaar

----------


## Olive Yao

.
30 september 2022

Rede bij Ondertekening van de Akkoorden van Toelating van Volksrepubliek Donetsk, Volksrepubliek Lugansk, de Zaporizhia Regio en de Kherson Regio tot Rusland

Georgievsky Zaal, Kremlin, Moskou

Vladimir Putin: 

Dear citizens of Russia, citizens of the Donetsk and Lugansk People's Republics, residents of the Zaporozhye and Kherson regions, deputies of the State Duma, and senators of the Russian Federation!

You know, referendums were held in the Donetsk and Lugansk People's Republics, Zaporozhye and Kherson regions. Their results have been summed up, the results are known. People made their choice, a clear choice.

Today we are signing agreements on the admission of the Donetsk People's Republic, the Luhansk People's Republic, the Zaporizhia Region and the Kherson Region to Russia. I am sure that the Federal Assembly will support the constitutional laws on the adoption and formation in Russia of four new regions, four new subjects of the Russian Federation, because this is the will of millions of people.

(Applause.)

And this, of course, is their right, their inalienable right, which is enshrined in the first article of the UN Charter, which directly speaks of the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples.

I repeat: this is an inalienable right of people, it is based on historical unity, in the name of which the generations of our ancestors won, those who from the origins of Ancient Russia for centuries created and defended Russia. Here, in Novorossia, Rumyantsev, Suvorov and Ushakov fought, Catherine II and Potemkin founded new cities. Here our grandfathers and great-grandfathers stood to death during the Great Patriotic War.

We will always remember the heroes of the Russian spring, those who did not come to terms with the neo-Nazi coup in Ukraine in 2014, all those who died for the right to speak their native language, preserve their culture, traditions, faith, for the right to live. These are the warriors of Donbass, the martyrs of the "Odessa Khatyn", the victims of inhuman terrorist attacks staged by the Kyiv regime. These are volunteers and militias, these are civilians, children, women, old people, Russians, Ukrainians, people of various nationalities. This is the real people's leader of Donetsk Alexander Zakharchenko, these are military commanders Arsen Pavlov and Vladimir Zhoga, Olga Kochura and Alexei Mozgovoy, this is the prosecutor of the Luhansk Republic Sergey Gorenko. This is paratrooper Nurmagomed Gadzhimagomedov and all our soldiers and officers who died the death of the brave during a special military operation. They are heroes. (Applause.)Heroes of Great Russia. And I ask you to honor their memory with a moment of silence.

(Moment of silence.)

Thank you.

Behind the choice of millions of residents in the Donetsk and Luhansk People's Republics, in the Zaporozhye and Kherson regions is our common destiny and a thousand-year history. People passed on this spiritual connection to their children and grandchildren. Despite all the trials, they carried through the years love for Russia. And no one can destroy this feeling in us. That is why both the older generations and the youth, those who were born after the tragedy of the collapse of the Soviet Union, voted for our unity, for our common future.

In 1991, in Belovezhskaya Pushcha, without asking the will of ordinary citizens, representatives of the then party elites decided to collapse the USSR, and people suddenly found themselves cut off from their homeland. This tore apart, dismembered our people's community, turned into a national catastrophe. As once after the revolution the borders of the union republics were cut behind the scenes, so the last leaders of the Soviet Union, contrary to the direct expression of the will of the majority of the people in the 1991 referendum, ruined our great country, simply put the people before the fact.

I admit that they did not even fully understand what they were doing and what consequences this would inevitably lead to in the end. But it doesn't matter anymore. There is no Soviet Union, the past cannot be returned. Yes, and Russia today does not need it anymore, we are not striving for this. But there is nothing stronger than the determination of millions of people who, by their culture, faith, traditions, language, consider themselves part of Russia, whose ancestors lived in a single state for centuries. There is nothing stronger than the determination of these people to return to their true, historical Fatherland.

For a long eight years, people in the Donbass were subjected to genocide, shelling and blockade, and in Kherson and Zaporozhye they tried to criminally cultivate hatred for Russia, for everything Russian. Now, already during the referendums, the Kyiv regime threatened with violence, death to school teachers, women who worked in election commissions, intimidated millions of people who came to express their will with repressions. But the unbroken people of Donbass, Zaporozhye and Kherson had their say.

I want the Kyiv authorities and their real masters in the West to hear me, so that everyone remembers this: people living in Lugansk and Donetsk, Kherson and Zaporozhye become our citizens forever. (Applause.)

We call on the Kyiv regime to immediately cease fire, all hostilities, the war that it unleashed back in 2014, and return to the negotiating table. We are ready for this, it has been said more than once. But we will not discuss the choice of the people in Donetsk, Lugansk, Zaporozhye and Kherson, it has been made, Russia will not betray it. (Applause.) And today's Kiev authorities should treat this free will of the people with respect, and nothing else. This is the only way to peace.

We will protect our land with all the forces and means at our disposal and will do everything to ensure the safe life of our people. This is the great liberation mission of our people.

We will definitely rebuild destroyed cities and towns, housing, schools, hospitals, theaters and museums, restore and develop industrial enterprises, factories, infrastructure, social security, pensions, healthcare and education systems.

Of course, we will work on improving the level of security. Together we will make sure that citizens in the new regions feel the support of the entire people of Russia, the entire country, all the republics, all the territories and regions of our vast Motherland. (Applause.)

Dear friends, colleagues!

Today I want to address the soldiers and officers who are participating in a special military operation, the soldiers of Donbass and Novorossia, those who, after the decree on partial mobilization, join the ranks of the Armed Forces, fulfilling their patriotic duty, who, at the call of their hearts, come to the military registration and enlistment offices. I would like to turn to their parents, wives, and children, to tell them what our people are fighting for, what enemy is opposing us, who is throwing the world into new wars and crises, extracting their bloody profit from this tragedy.

Our compatriots, our brothers and sisters in Ukraine - the native part of our united people - saw with their own eyes what the ruling circles of the so-called West are preparing for all mankind. Here they, in fact, just threw off their masks, showed their true insides.

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the West decided that the world, all of us, would forever have to put up with its dictates. Then, in 1991, the West expected that Russia would not recover from such shocks and would fall apart on its own. Yes, it almost happened - we remember the 90s, the terrible 90s, hungry, cold and hopeless. But Russia resisted, revived, strengthened, again took its rightful place in the world.

At the same time, the West has been looking all this time and continues to look for a new chance to hit us, weaken and destroy Russia, which they have always dreamed of, split our state, pit peoples against each other, doom them to poverty and extinction. They are simply haunted by the fact that there is such a great, huge country in the world with its territory, natural wealth, resources, with a people who do not know how and will never live according to someone else's orders.

The West is ready to step over everything in order to preserve the neo-colonial system that allows it to parasitize, in fact, to plunder the world at the expense of the power of the dollar and technological dictates, to collect real tribute from humanity, to extract the main source of unearned prosperity, the rent of the hegemon. The maintenance of this rent is their key, genuine and absolutely self-serving motive. That is why total desovereignization is in their interests. Hence their aggression towards independent states, towards traditional values and original cultures, attempts to undermine international and integration processes beyond their control, new world currencies and centers of technological development. It is critical for them that all countries surrender their sovereignty to the United States.

The ruling elites of some states voluntarily agree to do this, voluntarily agree to become vassals; others are bribed, intimidated. And if it doesnt work out, they destroy entire states, leaving behind humanitarian catastrophes, disasters, ruins, millions of ruined, mangled human destinies, terrorist enclaves, social disaster zones, protectorates, colonies and semi-colonies. They don't care as long as they get their own benefit.

I want to emphasize once again: it is precisely in greed, in the intention to preserve its unlimited power, that there are the real reasons for the hybrid war that the collective West is waging against Russia. They do not wish us freedom, but they want to see us as a colony. They do not want equal cooperation, but robbery. They want to see us not as a free society, but as a crowd of soulless slaves.

For them, a direct threat is our thought and philosophy, and therefore they encroach on our philosophers. Our culture and art are a danger to them, so they are trying to ban them. Our development and prosperity is also a threat to them - competition is growing. They don't need Russia at all, we need it. (Applause.)

I would like to remind you that the claims to world domination in the past have been shattered more than once by the courage and resilience of our people. Russia will always be Russia. We will continue to defend both our values and our Motherland.

The West is counting on impunity, on getting away with everything. In fact, everything has gotten away with it so far. Agreements in the field of strategic security go to the wastebasket; agreements reached at the highest political level are declared false; firm promises not to expand NATO to the east, as soon as our former leaders bought into them, turned into a dirty deceit; treaties on anti-missile defense and intermediate- and shorter-range missiles have been unilaterally broken under far-fetched pretexts.

All we hear from all sides is that the West stands for order based on rules. Where did they come from? Who even saw these rules? Who agreed? Listen, this is just some kind of nonsense, sheer deception, double or already triple standards! It's just designed for fools.

Russia is a great millennial power, a country-civilization, and will not live by such rigged, false rules. 

(Applause.)

----------


## Olive Yao

.
It is the so-called West that has trampled on the principle of the inviolability of borders, and now it decides at its own discretion who has the right to self-determination and who does not, who is not worthy of it. Why they decide so, who gave them such a right is not clear. To themselves.

That is why the choice of people in the Crimea, in Sevastopol, in Donetsk, Lugansk, Zaporozhye and Kherson causes wild anger in them. This West has no moral right to evaluate it, even to stutter about the freedom of democracy. No, and never has been!

Western elites deny not only national sovereignty and international law. Their hegemony has a pronounced character of totalitarianism, despotism and apartheid. They brazenly divide the world into their vassals, into the so-called civilized countries and into all the rest, who, according to the plan of today's Western racists, should add to the list of barbarians and savages. False labels - "rogue country", "authoritarian regime" - are already ready, they stigmatize entire peoples and states, and there is nothing new in this. There is nothing new in this: the Western elites are what they were, and have remained so - colonialist. They discriminate, divide peoples into the first and other grades.

We have never accepted and will never accept such political nationalism and racism. And what, if not racism, is Russophobia, which is now spreading all over the world? What, if not racism, is the peremptory conviction of the West that its civilization, neoliberal culture is an indisputable model for the whole world? "He who is not with us is against us." It even sounds strange.

Even the repentance for their own historical crimes is being shifted by the Western elites to everyone else, demanding both the citizens of their countries and other peoples to confess for what they have nothing to do with at all, for example, for the period of colonial conquests.

It is worth reminding the West that it began its colonial policy back in the Middle Ages, and then followed the global slave trade, the genocide of Indian tribes in America, the plunder of India, Africa, the wars of England and France against China, as a result of which it was forced to open its ports for trade opium. What they did was put entire nations on drugs, purposefully exterminated entire ethnic groups for the sake of land and resources, staged a real hunt for people like animals. This is contrary to the very nature of man, truth, freedom and justice.

And we - we are proud that in the 20th century it was our country that led the anti-colonial movement, which opened up opportunities for many peoples of the world to develop in order to reduce poverty and inequality, to overcome hunger and disease.

I emphasize that one of the reasons for the centuries-old Russophobia, the undisguised malice of these Western elites towards Russia is precisely that we did not allow ourselves to be robbed during the period of colonial conquests, we forced the Europeans to trade for mutual benefit. This was achieved by creating a strong centralized state in Russia, which developed and strengthened itself on the great moral values of Orthodoxy, Islam, Judaism and Buddhism, on Russian culture and the Russian word open to all.

It is known that plans for interventions in Russia were repeatedly made, they tried to use the Time of Troubles at the beginning of the 17th century, and the period of upheavals after 1917 failed. The West nevertheless managed to seize the wealth of Russia at the end of the 20th century, when the state was destroyed. Then we were called both friends and partners, but in fact they treated us like a colony - trillions of dollars were siphoned out of the country under a variety of schemes. We all remember everything, we have not forgotten anything.

And these days, people in Donetsk and Luhansk, in Kherson and Zaporizhia have spoken out in favor of restoring our historical unity. Thank you! (Applause.)

Western countries have been repeating for centuries that they bring freedom and democracy to other peoples. Everything is exactly the opposite: instead of democracy - suppression and exploitation; instead of freedom - enslavement and violence. The entire unipolar world order is inherently anti-democratic and not free, it is deceitful and hypocritical through and through.

The United States is the only country in the world to use nuclear weapons twice, destroying the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. By the way, they set a precedent.

Let me also remind you that the United States, together with the British, turned Dresden, Hamburg, Cologne and many other German cities into ruins without any military necessity during World War II. And this was done defiantly, without any, I repeat, military necessity. There was only one goal: just as in the case of the nuclear bombings in Japan, to intimidate both our country and the whole world.

The United States left a terrible mark on the memory of the peoples of Korea and Vietnam with barbaric "carpet" bombing, the use of napalm and chemical weapons.

Until now, they actually occupy Germany, Japan, the Republic of Korea and other countries, and at the same time cynically call them equal allies. Listen, I wonder what kind of alliance is this? The whole world knows that the leaders of these countries are being watched, the first persons of these states are being installed listening devices not only in office, but also in residential premises. This is a real shame. A shame both for those who do this and for those who, like a slave, silently and meekly swallow this rudeness.

They call orders and rude, insulting shouts at the address of their vassals Euro-Atlantic solidarity, the development of biological weapons, experiments on living people, including in Ukraine, noble medical research.

It is with their destructive policy, wars, and robbery that they provoked today's colossal surge in migration flows. Millions of people suffer deprivation, abuse, die by the thousands, trying to get to the same Europe.

Now they are exporting bread from Ukraine. Where is he going under the pretext of "providing food security for the world's poorest countries"? Where is it going? Everything goes to the same European countries. There, five percent only went to the poorest countries in the world. Again, another swindle and outright deception.

The American elite, in fact, uses the tragedy of these people to weaken their competitors, to destroy nation states. This also applies to Europe, this also applies to the identity of France, Italy, Spain and other countries with a long history.

Washington is demanding more and more sanctions against Russia, and most European politicians meekly agree with this. They clearly understand that the United States, pushing through the EU's complete renunciation of Russian energy carriers and other resources, is practically leading to the de-industrialization of Europe, to completely taking over the European market - they understand everything, these elites are European, they understand everything, but prefer to serve the interests of others. This is no longer servility, but a direct betrayal of their peoples. But God bless them, that's their business.

But sanctions are not enough for the Anglo-Saxons, they switched to sabotage - unbelievable, but true - having organized explosions on the international gas pipelines of the Nord Stream, which run along the bottom of the Baltic Sea, they actually began to destroy the pan-European energy infrastructure. It is clear to everyone who benefits from this. Whoever benefits, he did, of course.

The US dictate is based on brute force, on fist law. Sometimes beautifully wrapped, sometimes without any wrapper, but the essence is the same - fist law. Hence the deployment and maintenance of hundreds of military bases in all corners of the world, the expansion of NATO, attempts to put together new military alliances such as AUKUS and the like. Active work is also underway to create a military-political link between Washington-Seoul-Tokyo. All those states that possess or seek to possess genuine strategic sovereignty and are capable of challenging Western hegemony are automatically included in the category of enemies.

It is on these principles that the US and NATO military doctrines are built, requiring nothing less than total domination. The Western elites present their neo-colonial plans in the same hypocritical way, even with a pretense of peacefulness, they talk about some kind of containment, and such a crafty word wanders from one strategy to another, but, in fact, means only one thing: undermining any sovereign centers of development.

We have already heard about the containment of Russia, China, Iran. I believe that other countries of Asia, Latin America, Africa, the Middle East, as well as current partners and allies of the United States, are next in line. We know that whatever they dont like, they also impose sanctions against their allies  first against one bank, then against another; now against one company, now against another. This is the same practice, and will expand. They target everyone, including our closest neighbors - the CIS countries.

At the same time, the West has clearly and has long been wishful thinking. So, starting a sanctions blitzkrieg against Russia, they believed that they would once again be able to build the whole world on their command. But, as it turned out, such a rosy prospect excites far from everyone - perhaps complete political masochists and admirers of other non-traditional forms of international relations. Most states refuse to salute, and choose a reasonable path of cooperation with Russia.

The West clearly did not expect such recalcitrance from them. They just got used to acting according to a template, to take everything impudently, blackmail, bribery, intimidation, and convince themselves that these methods will work forever, as if they were ossified and frozen in the past.

Such self-confidence is a direct product not only of the notorious concept of one's own exclusivity - although this, of course, is simply surprising - but also of a real hunger for information in the West. They drowned the truth in an ocean of myths, illusions and fakes, using extremely aggressive propaganda, lying recklessly, like Goebbels. The more incredible the lie, the faster they will believe in it - that's how they act, according to this principle.

But people cannot be fed with printed dollars and euros. It is impossible to feed with these pieces of paper, and it is impossible to heat a home with the virtual, inflated capitalization of Western social networks. All this is important, what Im talking about, but what was just said is no less important: you cant feed anyone with paper money - you need food, and you wont warm anyone with these inflated capitalizations either - energy carriers are needed.

Therefore, politicians in the same Europe have to convince their fellow citizens to eat less, wash less often, and dress warmer at home. And those who begin to ask fair questions actually, why is that so?  are immediately declared enemies, extremists and radicals. They switch arrows to Russia, they say: here, they say, who is the source of all your troubles. They lie again.

What do I want to emphasize? There is every reason to believe that the Western elites are not going to look for constructive ways out of the global food and energy crisis, which arose through their fault, precisely through their fault, as a result of their many years of policy long before our special military operation in Ukraine, in the Donbass. They do not intend to solve the problems of injustice and inequality. There is a fear that they are ready to use other, familiar to them, recipes.

----------


## Olive Yao

.
And here it is worth recalling that the West emerged from the contradictions of the early 20th century through the First World War. The profits from the Second World War allowed the United States to finally overcome the consequences of the Great Depression and become the largest economy in the world, to impose on the planet the power of the dollar as a global reserve currency. And the overdue crisis of the 80s - and in the 80s of the last century the crisis also aggravated - the West largely overcame by appropriating the legacy and resources of the Soviet Union that was collapsing and collapsed in the end. It is a fact.

Now, in order to extricate themselves from another tangle of contradictions, they need to break Russia and other states that choose the sovereign path of development at all costs in order to plunder other people's wealth even more and at this expense to close, plug their holes. If this does not happen, I do not rule out that they will try to completely bring the system to a collapse, on which everything can be blamed, or, God forbid, decide to use the well-known formula the war will write everything off.

Russia understands its responsibility to the world community and will do everything to bring such hotheads to their senses.

It is clear that the current neo-colonial model is ultimately doomed. But I repeat that her real owners will cling to her to the end. They simply have nothing to offer the world, except for the preservation of the same system of robberies and racketeering.

In fact, they spit on the natural right of billions of people, most of humanity, to freedom and justice, to determine their own future on their own. Now they have completely moved to a radical denial of moral norms, religion, and family.

Let's answer some very simple questions for ourselves. I now want to return to what I said, I want to address all the citizens of the country - not only to those colleagues who are in the hall - to all the citizens of Russia: do we want to have, here, in our country, in Russia, instead of mom and dad there was parent number one, number two, number three - are they completely crazy already there? Do we really want perversions that lead to degradation and extinction to be imposed on children in our schools from the primary grades? To be drummed into them that there are supposedly other genders besides women and men, and to be offered a sex change operation? Do we want all this for our country and our children? For us, all this is unacceptable, we have a different, our own future.

I repeat, the dictatorship of the Western elites is directed against all societies, including the peoples of the Western countries themselves. This is a challenge for everyone. Such a complete denial of man, the overthrow of faith and traditional values, the suppression of freedom acquires the features of a "reverse religion" - outright Satanism. In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus Christ, denouncing the false prophets, says: By their fruits you will know them. And these poisonous fruits are already obvious to people - not only in our country, in all countries, including for many people and in the West itself.

The world has entered a period of revolutionary transformations, they are of a fundamental nature. New development centers are being formed, they represent the majority - the majority! - of the world community and are ready not only to declare their interests, but also to protect them, and see multipolarity as an opportunity to strengthen their sovereignty, and therefore to gain true freedom, a historical perspective, their right to independent, creative, original development, to a harmonious process.

All over the world, including in Europe and the United States, as I said, we have many like-minded people, and we feel, we see their support. A liberation, anti-colonial movement against unipolar hegemony is already developing within the most diverse countries and societies. His subjectivity will only grow. It is this force that will determine the future geopolitical reality.

Dear friends!

Today we are fighting for a just and free path, first of all for ourselves, for Russia, for diktat, despotism to remain forever in the past. I am convinced that countries and peoples understand that a policy based on the exclusivity of anyone, on the suppression of other cultures and peoples, is inherently criminal, that we must turn this shameful page. The collapse of Western hegemony that has begun is irreversible. And I repeat again: it will not be the same as before.

The battlefield to which fate and history have called us is the battlefield for our people, for great historical Russia. (Applause.) For a great historical Russia, for future generations, for our children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren. We must protect them from enslavement, from monstrous experiments that are aimed at crippling their minds and souls.

Today we are fighting so that it would never occur to anyone that Russia, our people, our language, our culture can be taken and erased from history. Today, we need the consolidation of the entire society, and such cohesion can only be based on sovereignty, freedom, creation, and justice. Our values are humanity, mercy and compassion.

And I want to conclude my speech with the words of a true patriot Ivan Alexandrovich Ilyin: If I consider Russia my Motherland, then this means that I love in Russian, contemplate and think, sing and speak Russian; that I believe in the spiritual strength of the Russian people. His spirit is my spirit; his fate is my fate; his suffering is my grief; its flowering is my joy.

Behind these words is a great spiritual choice, which for more than a thousand years of Russian statehood was followed by many generations of our ancestors. Today we are making this choice, the citizens of the Donetsk and Lugansk People's Republics, the residents of Zaporozhye and Kherson regions have made this choice. They made the choice to be with their people, to be with the Motherland, to live its destiny, to win together with it.

Behind us is the truth, behind us is Russia!

(Applause.)

----------


## Olive Yao

.
Vertaling

Het is de moeite waard om het Westen eraan te herinneren dat het zijn koloniale beleid in de Middeleeuwen begon, en daarna volgde de wereldwijde slavenhandel, de genocide van indianenstammen in Amerika, de plundering van India, Afrika, de oorlogen van Engeland en Frankrijk tegen China, waarna het gedwongen werd zijn havens open te stellen voor de handel in opium. Wat ze deden was hele naties aan de drugs zetten, doelbewust hele etnische groepen uitroeien omwille van land en hulpbronnen, en een echte jacht op mensen als dieren organiseerden. Dit is in strijd met de aard van de mens, waarheid, vrijheid en rechtvaardigheid.

()

Westerse landen herhalen al eeuwenlang dat ze vrijheid en democratie brengen voor andere volkeren. Alles is precies het tegenovergestelde: in plaats van democratie  onderdrukking en uitbuiting; in plaats van vrijheid  slavernij en geweld. De hele unipolaire wereldorde is inherent antidemocratisch en niet vrij, ze is door en door bedrieglijk en hypocriet.

(...)

Het Westen is bereid om over alles heen te stappen om het neokoloniale systeem in stand te houden dat het mogelijk maakt om te parasiteren, in feite om de wereld te plunderen op kosten van de macht van de dollar en technocratische dictaten, om echte financile afdracht van de mensheid te incasseren, om de belangrijkste bron van onverdiende welvaart, de winst van de hegemon, eruit te halen. Het handhaven van deze winst is hun belangrijkste, oprechte en absoluut egostische motief. Daarom is totale opheffing van soevereinitiet in hun belang. Vandaar hun agressie tegen onafhankelijke staten, ()

()

De heersende elites van sommige staten stemmen er vrijwillig mee in om dit te doen, gaan vrijwillig akkoord om vazallen te worden; anderen worden omgekocht, gentimideerd. En als het niet lukt, vernietigen ze hele staten en laten ze humanitaire rampen, rampen, runes, miljoenen verwoeste, verminkte menselijke lotsbestemmingen, terroristische enclaves, sociale rampgebieden, protectoraten, kolonin en semi-kolonies achter. Het maakt ze niet uit, zolang ze maar hun eigen voordeel krijgen.

()

----------


## Olive Yao

.
Commentaar

----------


## Rob Gosseling

.
*Rede*

Om een mens te beoordelen is het belangrijker te kijken naar zijn daden dan te luisteren naar diens lange preken over het gedrag van anderen. Poetin praat graag over anderen in een poging daarmee zijn eigen misdaden te relativeren, af te zwakken of aan het zicht te onttrekken. De gruwelijke feiten spreken voor zich. Al heeft Poetin eventueel gelijk over anderen, daarmee worden zijn eigen gruwelijkheden niet minder erg. De geweldadige inval in een souvereine staat blijft fout, welk argument Poetin ook bedenkt om dat te legitimeren. Poetin is een psychopaat en met zijn geweldadige optreden en verleden niet in de positie om een moreel oordeel te vellen over andere landen en personen.

Dat gezegd hebbende vind ik nog steeds dat de explosieve groei van de NATO in oostelijke richting fout was en heeft bijgedragen of wellicht zelfs de hoofdoorzaak was van dit conflict. Dit alles legimiteert echter niet de geweldadige inval en bezetting van een souvereine staat. 

En nog dit. Poetin heeft werkelijk niets op met socialisme, democratie, mensenrechten, de rechten van lhbt, etc. Dus een toontje lager zingen in zijn redevoeringen is wel op zijn plaats.

Als ik naar die zelfverzekerde media smoel van Poetin kijk zie ik eerder iemand vol onzekerheid achter een masker. Die zelfverzekerde blik is denk ik schijn. Immers de lange betogen verraden eerder innerlijke onzekerheid over het eigen imago. Waarom moet je zo lang kletsen als je denkt dat je gelijk hebt? Poetin is onzeker en dat is in de realiteit van dit conflict en politiiek isolement terecht. Ieder willekeurig moment kan er een aanslag op hem gepleegd worden. Hij kan niemand vertrouwen omdat hij zelf een systeem van wantrouwen en controle om zich heen heeft gebouwd. Hij weet dat mensen uit angst ja zeggen en misschien nee denken. Dt is de realiteit waar de despoot dagelijks en op iedere plek mee moet dealen.


.

----------


## Olive Yao

.



> *Rede*
> 
> Om een mens te beoordelen is het belangrijker te kijken naar zijn daden dan te luisteren naar diens lange preken over het gedrag van anderen. Poetin praat graag over anderen in een poging daarmee zijn eigen misdaden te relativeren, af te zwakken of aan het zicht te onttrekken. De gruwelijke feiten spreken voor zich. Al heeft Poetin eventueel gelijk over anderen, daarmee worden zijn eigen gruwelijkheden niet minder erg. De geweldadige inval in een souvereine staat blijft fout, welk argument Poetin ook bedenkt om dat te legitimeren. Poetin is een psychopaat en met zijn geweldadige optreden en verleden niet in de positie om een moreel oordeel te vellen over andere landen en personen.
> 
> Dat gezegd hebbende vind ik nog steeds dat de explosieve groei van de NATO in oostelijke richting fout was en heeft bijgedragen of wellicht zelfs de hoofdoorzaak was van dit conflict. Dit alles legimiteert echter niet de geweldadige inval en bezetting van een souvereine staat. 
> 
> En nog dit. Poetin heeft werkelijk niets op met socialisme, democratie, mensenrechten, de rechten van lhbt, etc. Dus een toontje lager zingen in zijn redevoeringen is wel op zijn plaats.
> 
> Als ik naar die zelfverzekerde media smoel van Poetin kijk zie ik eerder iemand vol onzekerheid achter een masker. Die zelfverzekerde blik is denk ik schijn. Immers de lange betogen verraden eerder innerlijke onzekerheid over het eigen imago. Waarom moet je zo lang kletsen als je denkt dat je gelijk hebt? Poetin is onzeker en dat is in de realiteit van dit conflict en politiiek isolement terecht. Ieder willekeurig moment kan er een aanslag op hem gepleegd worden. Hij kan niemand vertrouwen omdat hij zelf een systeem van wantrouwen en controle om zich heen heeft gebouwd. Hij weet dat mensen uit angst ja zeggen en misschien nee denken. Dt is de realiteit waar de despoot dagelijks en op iedere plek mee moet dealen.


 :chinees:  Poetins redevoeringen

Ik ben er benieuwd naar en heb ze deels gelezen. Wil wel eens weten wat die man nu precies gezegd heeft.

Andere lezers hebben er door deze service ook gemakkelijk toegang toe en kunnen ze lezen. Ik beoog nog wel meer passages in het nederlands te vertalen. Ook jij, Rob, bent nu misschien een van de zeldzame nederlanders die text van Poetin zelf gelezen hebben.

 :chinees:  Kwaadspreken over Poetin

Al 15 jaar wordt er kwaadgesproken over Poetin, vooral vanuit de VS. Daarbij wordt naar zijn redevoeringen verwezen  met name die uit 2005 en 2007, het essay uit 2021 en de toespraken van 21 en 24 februari 2022.

Maar daar mogen we niet op af gaan. Politici, beleidsmakers, opiniemakers en _mainstream_ media uit de VS, Canada, Engeland, de EU en EU lidstaten en Oekrane zijn hierover onbetrouwbaar. 

We dienen zelf na te gaan of wat er over Poetin  en hier, over zijn redevoeringen  gezegd wordt klopt. Heeft Poetin dat inderdaad gezegd? In welke context?

Twee forumleden (nu afwezig) deden mee aan die kwaadsprekerij. Poetin heeft dit of dat gezegd. Maar die forumleden weten vast niet waar dat in een redevoering staat. Ze hebben nog nooit een woord van Poetin gelezen. Ze praten alleen na.

Wat Poetin hierover zegt waardeer ik meer dan wat politici van de VS, Engeland, de EU en EU lidstaten, Canada en Oekrane zeggen.

 :chinees:  Oekrane nazis

Over Canada gesproken, weet je trouwens dat Canadas vice-minister president C. Freeland een kleindochter van de oekranse nazi Michael Chomiak is? Er zijn veel oekraners in Canada, waaronder met connecties met oekranse nazis en met corrupte functionarissen, en dat verklaart mede waarom Canada in het afgelopen decennium heeft meegeholpen ze te bewapenen.

n. b. Deze Chrystia Freeland is dezelfde die jaren geleden 'ging huilen' toen het waalse parlement de supranationale economische quasi-grondwet _ceta_ afwees. ceta dient mede om import van vuile fossiele brandstoffen uit Canada in de EU te verzekeren. Fossiele brandstoffen spelen ook een hoofdrol bij de Oekrane-oorlog.

 :chinees:  Geen woorden maar daden

Je hebt natuurlijk gelijk dat het gaat om iemands daden, meer dan woorden. In daden is Poetin volgens mij zeker niet de grootste misdadiger en zijn politici uit bovengenoemde landen misdadiger.

----------


## Olive Yao

.
27 oktober 2022

Valdai International Discussion Club meeting

Vladimir Poetin:

The theme of this year's forum is A Post-Hegemonic World: Justice and Security for Everyone. The four day-long meeting brought together 111 experts, politicians, diplomats and economists from Russia and 40 foreign countries, including Afghanistan, Brazil, China, Egypt, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Iran, Kazakhstan, South Africa, Turkiye, the United States, and Uzbekistan, to name a few.

Ladies and gentlemen, friends,

I had a chance to get a sense of what you discussed here during the last few days. It was an interesting and substantive discussion. I hope you do not regret coming to Russia and communicating with each other.

I am happy to see you all.

We have used the Valdai Club platform to discuss, more than once, the major and serious shifts that have already taken place and are taking place around the world, the risks posed by the degradation of global institutions, the erosion of collective security principles and the substitution of rules for international law. I was tempted to say we are clear about who came up with these rules, but, perhaps, that would not be an accurate statement. We have no idea whatsoever who made these rules up, what these rules are based on, or what is contained inside these rules.

It looks like we are witnessing an attempt to enforce just one rule whereby those in power  we were talking about power, and I am now talking about global power  could live without following any rules at all and could get away with anything. These are the rules that we hear them constantly, as people say, harping on, that is, talking about them incessantly.

The Valdai discussions are important because a variety of assessments and forecasts can be heard here. Life always shows how accurate they were, since life is the sternest and the most objective teacher. So, life shows how accurate our previous years projections were.

Alas, events continue to follow a negative scenario, which we have discussed more than once during our previous meetings. Moreover, they have morphed into a major system-wide crisis that impacted, in addition to the military-political sphere, the economic and humanitarian spheres as well.

The so-called West which is, of course, a theoretical construct since it is not united and clearly is a highly complex conglomerate, but I will still say that the West has taken a number of steps in recent years and especially in recent months that are designed to escalate the situation. As a matter of fact, they always seek to aggravate matters, which is nothing new, either. This includes the stoking of war in Ukraine, the provocations around Taiwan, and the destabilisation of the global food and energy markets. To be sure, the latter was, of course, not done on purpose, there is no doubt about it. The destabilisation of the energy market resulted from a number of systemic missteps made by the Western authorities that I mentioned above. As we can see now, the situation was further aggravated by the destruction of the pan-European gas pipelines. This is something otherworldly altogether, but we are nevertheless witnessing these sad developments.

Global power is exactly what the so-called West has at stake in its game. But this game is certainly dangerous, bloody and, I would say, dirty. It denies the sovereignty of countries and peoples, their identity and uniqueness, and tramples upon other states interests. In any case, even if denial is not in the words used, they are doing it in real life. No one, except those who create these rules I have mentioned is entitled to retain their identity: everyone else must comply with these rules.

In this regard, let me remind you of Russia's proposals to our Western partners to build confidence and a collective security system. They were once again tossed in December 2021.

However, sitting things out can hardly work in the modern world. He who sows thewind will reap the whirlwind, as the saying goes. The crisis has indeed taken on a global dimension and has impacted everyone. There can be no illusions about this.

Humankind is at a fork in the road: either keep accumulating problems and eventually get crushed under their weight, or work together to find solutions  even imperfect ones, as long as they work  that can make our world a more stable and*safer place.

You know, I have always believed in the power of common sense. Therefore, I am convinced that sooner or later both the new centres of the multipolar international order and the West will have to start a dialogue on an equal footing about a common future for us all, and the sooner the better, of course. In this regard, I will highlight some of the most important aspects for all of us.

Current developments have overshadowed environmental issues. Strange as it may seem, this is what I would like to speak about first today. Climate change no longer tops the agenda. But that fundamental challenge has not gone away, it is still with us, and it is growing.

The loss of biodiversity is one of the most dangerous consequences of disrupting the environmental balance. This brings me to the key point all of us have gathered here for. Is it not equally important to maintain cultural, social, political and civilisational diversity?

At the same time, the smoothing out and erasure of all and any differences is essentially what the modern West is all about. What stands behind this? First of all, it is the decaying creative potential of the West and a desire to restrain and block the free development of other civilisations.

There is also an openly mercantile interest, of course. By imposing their values, consumption habits and standardisation on others, our opponents  I will be careful with words are trying to expand markets for their products. The goal on this track is, ultimately, very primitive. It is notable that the West proclaims the universal value of its culture and worldview. Even if they do not say so openly, which they actually often do, they behave as if this is so, that it is a fact of life, and the policy they pursue is designed to show that these values must be unconditionally accepted by all other members of the international community.

I would like to quote from Alexander Solzhenitsyns famous Harvard Commencement Address delivered in 1978. He said that typical of the West is a continuous blindness of superiority and it continues to this day  which upholds the belief that vast regions everywhere on our planet should develop and mature to the level of present-day Western systems. He said this in 1978. Nothing has changed.

Over the nearly 50 years since then, the blindness about which Solzhenitsyn spoke and which is openly racist and neocolonial, has acquired especially distorted forms, in particular, after the emergence of the so-called unipolar world. What am I referring to? Belief in ones infallibility is very dangerous; it is only one step away from the desire of the infallible to destroy those they do not like, or as they say, to cancel them. Just think about the meaning of this word.

Even at the very peak of the Cold War, the peak of the confrontation of the two systems, ideologies and military rivalry, it did not occur to anyone to deny the very existence of the culture, art, and science of other peoples, their opponents. It did not even occur to anyone. Yes, certain restrictions were imposed on contacts in education, science, culture, and, unfortunately, sports. But nonetheless, both the Soviet and American leaders understood that it was necessary to treat the humanitarian area tactfully, studying and respecting your rival, and sometimes even borrowing from them in order to retain a foundation for sound, productive relations at least for the future.

And what is happening now? At one time, the Nazis reached the point of burning books, and now the Western guardians of liberalism and progress have reached the point of banning Dostoyevsky and Tchaikovsky. The so-called cancel culture and in reality  as we said many times  the real cancellation of culture is eradicating everything that is alive and creative and stifles free thought in all areas, be it economics, politics or culture.

Today, liberal ideology itself has changed beyond recognition. If initially, classic liberalism was understood to mean the freedom of every person to do and say as they pleased, in the 20th century the liberals started saying that the so-called open society had enemies and that the freedom of these enemies could and should be restricted if not cancelled. It has reached the absurd point where any alternative opinion is declared subversive propaganda and a threat to democracy.

Whatever comes from Russia is all branded as Kremlin intrigues. But look at yourselves. Are we really so all-powerful? Any criticism of our opponents  any  is perceived as Kremlin intrigues, the hand of the Kremlin. This is insane. What have you sunk to? Use your brain, at least, say something more interesting, lay out your viewpoint conceptually. You cannot blame everything on the Kremlins scheming.

Fyodor Dostoyevsky prophetically foretold all this back in the 19th century. One of the characters of his novel Demons, the nihilist Shigalev, described the bright future he imagined in the following way: Emerging from boundless freedom, I conclude with boundless despotism. This is what our Western opponents have come to. Another character of the novel, Pyotr Verkhovensky echoes him, talking about the need for universal treason, reporting and spying, and claiming that society does not need talents or greater abilities: Ciceros tongue is cut out, Copernicus has his eyes gouged out and Shakespeare is stoned. This is what our Western opponents are arriving at. What is this if not Western cancel culture?

These were great thinkers and, frankly, I am grateful to my aides for finding these quotes.

What can one say to this? History will certainly put everything in its place and will know whom to cancel, and it will definitely not be the greatest works of universally recognised geniuses of world culture, but those who have for some reason decided that they have the right to use world culture as they see fit. Their self-regard really knows no bounds. No one will even remember their names in a few years. But Dostoevsky will live on, as will Tchaikovsky, Pushkin, no matter how much they would have liked theopposite.

Standardisation, financial and technological monopoly, the erasure of all differences is what underlies the Western model of globalisation, which is neocolonial in nature. Their goal was clear  to establish the unconditional dominance of the West in the global economy and politics. To do that, the West put at its service the entire planets natural and financial resources, as well as all intellectual, human and economic capabilities, while alleging it was a natural feature of the so-called new global interdependence.

Here I would like to recall another Russian philosopher, Alexander Zinoviev, whose birth centenary we will celebrate on October 29. More than 20 years ago, he said that Western civilisation needed the entire planet as a medium of existence and all the resources of humanity to survive at the level it had reached. That is what they want, that is exactly how it is.

Moreover, the West initially secured itself a huge head start in that system because it had developed the principles and mechanisms  the same as todays rules they keep talking about, which remain an incomprehensible black hole because no one really knows what they are. But as soon as non-western countries began to derive some benefits from globalisation, above all, the large nations in Asia, the West immediately changed or fully abolished many of those rules. And the so-called sacred principles of free trade, economic openness, equal competition, even property rights were suddenly forgotten, completely. They change the rules on the go, on the spot wherever they see an opportunity for themselves.

----------


## Olive Yao

.
Here is another example of the substitution of concepts and meanings. For many years, Western ideologists and politicians have been telling the world there was no alternative to democracy. Admittedly, they meant the Western-style, the so-called liberal model of democracy. They arrogantly rejected all other variants and forms of government by the people and, I want to emphasise this, did so contemptuously and disdainfully. This manner has been taking shape since colonial times, as if everyone were second-rate, while they were exceptional. It has been going on for centuries and continues to this day.

So currently, an overwhelming majority of the international community is demanding democracy in international affairs and rejecting all forms of authoritarian dictate by individual countries or groups of countries. What is this if not the direct application of democratic principles to international relations?

What stance has the civilised West adopted? If you are democrats, you are supposed to welcome the natural desire for freedom expressed by billions of people, but no. The West is calling it undermining the liberal rules-based order. It is resorting to economic and trade wars, sanctions, boycotts and colour revolutions, and preparing and carrying out all sorts of coups.

One of them led to tragic consequences in Ukraine in 2014. They supported it and even specified the amount of money they had spent on this coup. They have the cheek to act as they please and have no scruples about anything they do. They killed Soleimani, an Iranian general. You can think whatever you want about Soleimani, but he was a foreign state official. They killed him in a third country and assumed responsibility. What is that supposed to mean, for crying out loud? What kind of world are we living in?

As is customary, Washington continues to refer to the current international order as liberal American-style, but in fact, this notorious order is multiplying chaos every day and, I might even add, is becoming increasingly intolerant even towards the Western countries and their attempts to act independently. Everything is nipped in the bud, and they do not even hesitate to impose sanctions on their allies, who lower their heads in acquiescence.

For example, the Hungarian MPs July proposals to codify the commitment to European Christian values and culture in the Treaty on European Union were taken not even as an affront, but as an outright and hostile act of sabotage. What is that? What does it mean? Indeed, some people may like it, some not.

Over a thousand years, Russia has developed a unique culture of interaction between all world religions. There is no need to cancel anything, be it Christian values, Islamic values or Jewish values. We have other world religions as well. All you need to do is respect each other. In a number of our regions  I just know this firsthand  people celebrate Christian, Islamic, Buddhist and Jewish holidays together, and they enjoy doing so as they congratulate each other and are happy for each other.

But not here. Why not? At least, they could discuss it. Amazing.

Without exaggeration, this is not even a systemic, but a doctrinal crisis of the neoliberal American-style model of international order. They have no ideas for progress and positive development. They simply have nothing to offer the world, except perpetuating their dominance.

I am convinced that real democracy in a multipolar world is primarily about the ability of any nation  I emphasise  any society or any civilisation to follow its own path and organise its own socio-political system. If the United States or the EU countries enjoy this right, then the countries of Asia, the Islamic states, the monarchies of the Persian Gulf, and countries on other continents certainly have this right as well. Of course, our country, Russia, also has this right, and no one will ever be able to tell our people what kind of society we should be building and what principles should underlie it.

A direct threat to the political, economic and ideological monopoly of the West lies in the fact that the world can come up with alternative social models that are more effective; I want to emphasise this, more effective today, brighter and more appealing than the ones that currently exist. These models will definitely come about. This is inevitable. By the way, US political scientists and analysts also write about this. Truthfully, their government is not listening to what they say, although it cannot avoid seeing these concepts in political science magazines and mentioned in discussions.

Development should rely on a dialogue between civilisations and spiritual and moral values. Indeed, understanding what humans and their nature are all about varies across civilisations, but this difference is often superficial, and everyone recognises the ultimate dignity and spiritual essence of people. A common foundation on which we can and must build our future is critically important.

Here is something I would like to emphasise. Traditional values are not a rigid set of postulates that everyone must adhere to, of course not. The difference from the so-called neo-liberal values is that they are unique in each particular instance, because they stem from the traditions of a particular society, its culture and historical background. This is why traditional values cannot be imposed on anyone. They must simply be respected and everything that every nation has been choosing for itself over centuries must he handled with care.

This is how we understand traditional values, and the majority of humanity share and accept our approach. This is understandable, because the traditional societies of the East, Latin America, Africa, and Eurasia form the basis of world civilisation.

Respect for the ways and customs of peoples and civilisations is in everyones interest. In fact, this is also in the interest of the West, which is quickly becoming a minority in the international arena as it loses its dominance. Of course, the Western minoritys right to its own cultural identity  I want to emphasise this  must be ensured and respected, but, importantly, on an equal footing with the rights of every other nation.

If the Western elites believe they can have their people and their societies embrace what I believe are strange and trendy ideas like dozens of genders or gay pride parades, so be it. Let them do as they please. But they certainly have no right to tell others to follow in their steps.

We see the complicated demographic, political and social processes taking place in Western countries. This is, of course, their own business. Russia does not interfere in such matters and has no intention of doing so. Unlike the West, we mind our own business. But we are hoping that pragmatism will triumph and Russias dialogue with the genuine, traditional West, as well as with other coequal development centres, will become a major contribution to the construction of a multipolar world order.

I will add that multipolarity is a real and, actually, the only chance for Europe to restore its political and economic identity. To tell the truth  and this idea is expressed explicitly in Europe today  Europes legal capacity is very limited. I tried to put it mildly not to offend anyone.

The world is diverse by nature and Western attempts to squeeze everyone into the same pattern are clearly doomed. Nothing will come out of them.

The conceited aspiration to achieve global supremacy and, essentially, to dictate or preserve leadership by dictate is really reducing the international prestige of the leaders of the Western world, including the United States, and increasing mistrust in their ability to negotiate in general. They say one thing today and another tomorrow; they sign documents and renounce them, they do what they want. There is no stability in anything. How documents are signed, what was discussed, what can we hope for  all this is completely unclear.

Previously, only a few countries dared argue with America and it looked almost sensational, whereas now it has become routine for all manner of states to reject Washingtons unfounded demands despite its continued attempts to exert pressure on everyone. This is a mistaken policy that leads nowhere. But let them, this is also their choice.

I am convinced that the nations of the world will not shut their eyes to a policy of coercion that has discredited itself. Every time the West will have to pay a higher price for its attempts to preserve its hegemony. If I were a Western elite, I would seriously ponder this prospect. As I said, some political scientists and politicians in the United States are already thinking about it.

In the current conditions of intense conflict, I will be direct about certain things. As an independent and distinctive civilization, Russia has never considered and does not consider itself an enemy of the West. Americophobia, Anglophobia, Francophobia, and Germanophobia are the same forms of racism as Russophobia or anti-Semitism, and, incidentally, xenophobia in all its guises.

It is simply necessary to understand clearly that, as I have already said before, two Wests  at least two and maybe more but two at least  the West of traditional, primarily Christian values, freedom, patriotism, great culture and now Islamic values as well  a substantial part of the population in many Western countries follows Islam. This West is close to us in something. We share with it common, even ancient roots. But there is also a different West  aggressive, cosmopolitan, and neocolonial. It is acting as a tool of neoliberal elites. Naturally, Russia will never reconcile itself to the dictates of this West.

In 2000, after I was elected President, I will always remember what I faced: I will remember the price we paid for destroying the den of terrorism in the North Caucasus, which the West almost openly supported at the time. We are all adults here; most of you present in this hall understand what I am talking about. We know that this is exactly what happened in practice: financial, political and information support. We have all lived through it.

What is more, not only did the West actively support terrorists on Russian territory, but in many ways it nurtured this threat. We know this. Nevertheless, after the situation had stabilised, when the main terrorist gangs had been defeated, including thanks to the bravery of the Chechen people, we decided not to turn back, not to play the offended, but to move forward, to build relations even with those who actually acted against us, to establish and develop relations with all who wanted them, based on mutual benefit and respect for one another.

We thought it was in everyones interest. Russia, thank God, had survived all the difficulties of that time, stood firm, grew stronger, was able to cope with internal and external terrorism, its economy was preserved, it began to develop, and its defence capability began to improve. We tried to build up relations with the leading countries of the West and with NATO. The message was the same: let us stop being enemies, let us live together as friends, let us engage in dialogue, let us build trust, and, hence, peace. We were absolutely sincere, I want to emphasise that. We clearly understood the complexity of this rapprochement, but we agreed to it.

What did we get in response? In short, we got a no in all the main areas of possible cooperation. We received an ever-increasing pressure on us and hotbeds of tension near our borders. And what, may I ask, is the purpose of this pressure? What is it? Is it just to practice? Of course not. The goal was to make Russia more vulnerable. The purpose is to turn Russia into a tool to achieve their own geopolitical goals.

----------


## Olive Yao

.
As a matter of fact, this is a universal rule: they try to turn everyone into a tool, in order to use these tools for their own purposes. And those who do not yield to this pressure, who do not want to be such a tool are sanctioned: all sorts of economic restrictions are carried out against them and in relation of them, coups are prepared or where possible carried out and so on. And in the end, if nothing a all can be done, the aim is the same: to destroy them, to wipe them off the political map. But it has not and will never be possible to draft and implement such a scenario with respect to Russia.

What else can I add? Russia is not challenging the Western elites. Russia is simply upholding its right to exist and to develop freely. Importantly, we will not become a new hegemon ourselves. Russia is not suggesting replacing a unipolar world with a bipolar, tripolar or other dominating order, or replacing Western domination with domination from the East, North or South. This would inevitably lead to another impasse.

At this point, I would like to cite the words of the great Russian philosopher Nikolai Danilevsky. He believed that progress did not consist of everyone going in the same direction, as some of our opponents seem to want. This would only result in progress coming to a halt, Danilevsky said. Progress lies in walking the field that represents humanitys historical activity, walking in all directions, he said, adding that no civilisation can take pride in being the height of development.

I am convinced that dictatorship can only be countered through free development of countries and peoples; the degradation of the individual can be set off by the love of a person as a creator; primitive simplification and prohibition can be replaced with the flourishing complexity of culture and tradition.

The significance of todays historical moment lies in the opportunities for everyones democratic and distinct development path, which is opening up before all civilisations, states and integration associations. We believe above all that the new world order must be based on law and right, and must be free, distinctive and fair.

The world economy and trade also need to become fairer and more open. Russia considers the creation of new international financial platforms inevitable; this includes international transactions. These platforms should be above national jurisdictions. They should be secure, depoliticized and automated and should not depend on any single control centre. Is it possible to do this or not? Of course it is possible. This will require a lot of effort. Many countries will have to pool their efforts, but it is possible.

This rules out the possibility of abuse in a new global financial infrastructure. It would make it possible to conduct effective, beneficial and secure international transactions without the dollar or any of the so-called reserve currencies. This is all the more important, now that the dollar is being used as a weapon; the United States, and the West in general, have discredited the institution of international financial reserves. First, they devalued it with inflation in the dollar and euro zones and then they took our gold-and-currency reserves.

The transition to transactions in national currencies will quickly gain momentum. This is inevitable. Of course, it depends on the status of the issuers of these currencies and the state of their economies, but they will be growing stronger, and these transactions are bound to gradually prevail over the others. Such is the logic of a sovereign economic and financial policy in a multipolar world.

Furthermore, new global development centres are already using unmatched technology and research in various fields and can successfully compete with Western transnational companies in many areas.

Clearly, we have a common and very pragmatic interest in free and open scientific and technological exchange. United, we stand to win more than if we act separately. The majority should benefit from these exchanges, not individual super-rich corporations.

How are things going today? If the West is selling medicines or crop seeds to other countries, it tells them to kill their national pharmaceutical industries and selection. In fact, it all comes down to this: its machine tool and equipment supplies destroy the local engineering industry. I realised this back when I served as Prime Minister. Once you open your market to a certain product group, the local manufacturer instantly goes belly up and it is almost impossible for him to raise his head. Thats how they build relationships. Thats how they take over markets and resources, and countries lose their technological and scientific potential. This is not progress; it is enslavement and reducing economies to primitive levels.

Technological development should not increase global inequality, but rather reduce it. This is how Russia has traditionally implemented its foreign technology policy. For example, when we build nuclear power plants in other countries, we create competence centres and train local personnel. We create an industry. We dont just build a plant, we create an entire industry. In fact, we give other countries a chance to break new ground in their scientific and technological development, reduce inequality, and bring their energy sector to new levels of efficiency and environmental friendliness.

Let me emphasise again that sovereignty and a unique path of development in no way mean isolation or autarky. On the contrary, they are about energetic and mutually beneficial cooperation based on the principles of fairness and equality.

If liberal globalisation is about depersonalising and imposing the Western model on the entire world, integration is, in contrast, about tapping the potential of each civilisation for everyone to benefit. If globalism is dictate  which is what it comes down to eventually,  integration is a team effort to develop common strategies that everyone can benefit from.

In this regard, Russia believes it is important to make wider use of mechanisms for creating large spaces that rely on interaction between neighbouring countries, whose economies and social systems, as well as resource bases and infrastructure, complement each other. In fact, these large spaces form the economic basis of a multipolar world order. Their dialogue gives rise to genuine unity in humanity, which is much more complex, unique and multidimensional than the simplistic ideas professed by some Western masterminds.

Unity among humankind cannot be created by issuing commands such as do as I do or be like us. It is created with consideration for everyones opinion and with a careful approach to the identity of every society and every nation. This is the principle that can underlie long-term cooperation in a multipolar world.

In this regard, it may be worth revising the structure of the United Nations, including its Security Council, to better reflect the worlds diversity. After all, much more will depend on Asia, Africa, and Latin America in tomorrows world than is commonly believed today, and this increase in their influence is undoubtedly a positive development.

Let me recall that the Western civilisation is not the only one even in our common Eurasian space. Moreover, the majority of the population is concentrated in the east of Eurasia, where the centres of the oldest human civilisations emerged.

The value and importance of Eurasia lies in the fact that it represents a self-sufficient complex possessing huge resources of all kinds and tremendous opportunities. The more we work on increasing the connectivity of Eurasia and creating new ways and forms of cooperation, the more impressive achievements we make.

The successful performance of the Eurasian Economic Union, the fast growth of the authority and prestige of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, the large-scale One Belt, One Road initiatives, plans for multilateral cooperation in building the North-South transport corridor and many other projects, are the beginning of a new era, new stage in the development of Eurasia. I am confident of this. Integration projects there do not contradict but supplement each other  of course, if they are carried out by neighbouring countries in their own interests rather than introduced by outside forces with the aim of splitting the Eurasian space and turning it into a zone of bloc confrontation.

Europe, the Western extremity of the Greater Eurasia could also become its natural part. But many of its leaders are hampered by the conviction that the Europeans are superior to others, that it is beneath them to take part as equals in undertakings with others. This arrogance prevents them from seeing that they have themselves become a foreign periphery and actually turned into vassals, often without the right to vote.

Colleagues,

The collapse of the Soviet Union upset the equilibrium of the geopolitical forces. The West felt as a winner and declared a unipolar world arrangement, in which only its will, culture and interests had the right to exist.

Now this historical period of boundless Western domination in world affairs is coming to an end. The unipolar world is being relegated into the past. We are at a historical crossroads. We are in for probably the most dangerous, unpredictable and at the same time most important decade since the end of World War II. The West is unable to rule humanity single-handedly and the majority of nations no longer want to put up with this. This is the main contradiction of the new era. To cite a classic, this is a revolutionary situation to some extent  the elites cannot and the people do not want to live like that any longer.

This state of affairs is fraught with global conflicts or a whole chain of conflicts, which poses a threat to humanity, including the West itself. Todays main historical task is to resolve this contradiction in a way that is constructive and positive.

The change of eras is a painful albeit natural and inevitable process. A future world arrangement is taking shape before our eyes. In this world arrangement, we must listen to everyone, consider every opinion, every nation, society, culture and every system of world outlooks, ideas and religious concepts, without imposing a single truth on anyone. Only on this foundation, understanding our responsibility for the destinies of nations and our planet, shall we create a symphony of human civilisation.

At this point, I would like to finish my remarks with expressing gratitude for the patience that you displayed while listening to them.

Thank you very much.


[Hierna volgt een lang vraaggesprek tussen aanwezigen en Poetin]

----------


## Olive Yao

.
Vertaling

(...)

De huidige ontwikkelingen hebben de milieuproblematiek overschaduwd. Hoe vreemd het ook mag lijken, dit is waar ik het vandaag als eerste over wil hebben. Klimaatverandering staat niet langer bovenaan de agenda. Maar die fundamentele uitdaging is niet verdwenen, het is nog steeds bij ons en het groeit.

()

Ik zou graag willen citeren uit Alexander Solzjenitsyns beroemde Harvard Commencement Address, gehouden in 1978. Hij zei dat typerend voor het Westen een voortdurende blindheid van superioriteit is  en dat gaat door tot op de dag van vandaag  wat het geloof bevestigt dat uitgestrekte regio's overal op onze planeet zich moeten ontwikkelen en volwassen worden tot het niveau van de huidige westerse systemen. Hij zei dit in 1978. Er is niets veranderd.

()

Alles wat uit Rusland komt, wordt allemaal gebrandmerkt als 'Kremlin-intriges'. Maar kijk naar jezelf. Zijn we echt zo almachtig? Elke kritiek op onze tegenstanders  welke dan ook  wordt gezien als Kremlin-intriges, de hand van het Kremlin. Dit is krankzinnig. Waartoe ben je gezonken? Gebruik tenminste je hersens, zeg iets interessants, leg je standpunt conceptueel uit. Je kunt niet plannen van het Kremlin de schuld van alles geven.

()

Een directe bedreiging voor het politieke, economische en ideologische monopolie van het Westen ligt in het feit dat de wereld met alternatieve sociale modellen kan komen die effectiever zijn; ik wil dit benadrukken, heden ten dage effectiever, helderder en aantrekkelijker dan de huidige. Deze modellen gaan er zeker komen. Dit is onvermijdelijk. Overigens schrijven ook Amerikaanse politicologen en analisten hierover. Hun regeringen luisteren werkelijk niet naar wat ze zeggen, hoewel ze niet kunnen voorkomen dat deze concepten in politicologische tijdschriften worden gezien en in discussies worden besproken.

()

Vroeger durfden maar een paar landen met Amerika in discussie te gaan en zag dat er bijna sensationeel uit, terwijl het nu routine is geworden voor allerlei staten om de ongegronde eisen van Washington af te wijzen, ondanks zijn voortdurende pogingen om iedereen onder druk te zetten. Dit is een verkeerd beleid dat nergens toe leidt. Maar laat ze, ook dit is hun keuze.

()

We dachten dat het in ieders belang was. Rusland had, godzijdank, alle moeilijkheden van die tijd overleefd, stond standvastig, werd sterker, was in staat het hoofd te bieden aan intern en extern terrorisme, zijn economie bleef behouden, het begon zich te ontwikkelen en zijn defensievermogen begon te verbeteren. We probeerden relaties op te bouwen met de leidende landen van het Westen en met de NAVO. De boodschap was dezelfde: laten we ophouden vijanden te zijn, laten we samenleven als vrienden, laten we de dialoog aangaan, laten we vertrouwen opbouwen, en dus vrede. We waren absoluut oprecht, dat wil ik benadrukken. We begrepen duidelijk de complexiteit van deze toenadering, maar we stemden ermee in.

Wat kregen we als antwoord? In het kort, we kregen een "nee" op alle belangrijke gebieden van mogelijke samenwerking. We kregen een steeds toenemende druk op ons en broeinesten van spanning nabij onze grenzen. En wat, mag ik vragen, is het doel van deze druk? Wat is het? Is het alleen om te oefenen? Natuurlijk niet. Het doel was om Rusland kwetsbaarder te maken. Het doel is om van Rusland een instrument te maken om hun eigen geopolitieke doelen te bereiken.

In feite is dit een universele regel: ze proberen van iedereen een insttrument te maken, om deze instrumenten voor hun eigen doeleinden te gebruiken. En degenen die niet zwichten voor deze druk, die niet zo'n instrument willen zijn, worden gesanctioneerd: tegen hen en met betrekking tot hen worden allerlei economische restricties uitgevoerd, staatsgrepen worden voorbereid of waar mogelijk uitgevoerd enzovoort. En als er uiteindelijk niets aan gedaan kan worden, is het doel hetzelfde: ze vernietigen, ze van de politieke kaart vegen. Maar het is en zal nooit mogelijk zijn om een dergelijk scenario met betrekking tot Rusland op te stellen en uit te voeren.

()

Nu komt er een einde aan deze historische periode van grenzeloze westerse overheersing in wereldaangelegenheden. De unipolaire wereld wordt naar het verleden verbannen. We staan op een historisch kruispunt. We staan voor waarschijnlijk het meest gevaarlijke, onvoorspelbare en tegelijkertijd belangrijkste decennium sinds het einde van de Tweede Wereldoorlog. Het Westen is niet in staat om de mensheid in zijn eentje te regeren en de meerderheid van de naties wil dit niet langer accepteren. Dit is de belangrijkste tegenstelling van het nieuwe tijdperk. Om een klassieker te noemen: dit is tot op zekere hoogte een revolutionaire situatie  de elites kunnen en willen niet langer zo leven.

()

De verandering van tijdperken is een pijnlijk, zij het natuurlijk en onvermijdelijk proces. Een toekomstig wereldarrangement krijgt voor onze ogen vorm. In deze wereldordening moeten we naar iedereen luisteren, elke mening, elke natie, samenleving, cultuur en elk systeem van wereldbeschouwingen, ideen en religieuze concepten overwegen, zonder iemand ook maar n waarheid op te leggen. Alleen op deze basis, met begrip voor onze verantwoordelijkheid voor het lot van naties en onze planeet, zullen we een symfonie van menselijke beschaving creren.

()

----------


## Olive Yao

.
Commentaar

----------

