Putin Interview by Pavel Zarubin

After Putin’s meeting with scientists which followed the Plenary Session of the Future Technologies Forum, he sat down with Rossiya1’s well known reporter Pavel Zarubin for an interview. Putin’s day of science included an earlier tour of

the Center for Diagnostics and Telemedicine Technologies:

The Moscow Reference Center for Radiology is the first in Russia and one of the world's largest teleradiology centers, is a structural Unit of the Center for Diagnostics and Telemedicine of the Department of Health of the city of Moscow. The facility employs about 400 radiologists who process about 130 thousand pictures per week. Such a centralized model has been operating in the capital since 2020 and has made it possible to Reduce the time it takes to describe studies by a factor of 16.

The dialogue with the scientists was likely long and involved but the transcript was only the few paragraphs you read below:

Vladimir Putin: Dear colleagues, good afternoon!

Let me address you this way. You had a lot of opportunities and time to talk among yourselves, discuss current problems in the industry and in Russia, and in general talk about how it is developing in the world.

I am very happy to see you all. I am sure that our meeting will be useful. In any case, it would be extremely important for me to hear your opinion on the trends in the development of medicine, what we need to do in Russia in addition to what is being done by the authorities and the Government of the Russian Federation in this important area for any state.

I hope that you were interested in the discussion that took place recently in communication with colleagues. And let me express the hope that we will continue to cooperate. I mean the state, the medical community, our largest medical and scientific centers, and our colleagues and friends who have maintained relations with us for a long time, and now they do, and intend to do so in the future. I am now addressing those who work outside of the Russian Federation.

That's probably all I'd like to say at the beginning.

I’m hoping the transcript will be expanded overnight so more of what is certain to be an important discussion based on those recently held can be further observed. Now for the interview. All emphasis mine as usual:

Pavel Zarubin: Mr President, your interview with Tucker Carlson has already received a billion views. There are many different positive reviews. But it is clear what comments come from Western leaders. For example, the British Prime Minister and the German Chancellor called, and I will quote: "Your attempt to explain the reason for the start of the special operation and justify it with the threat of a NATO attack on Russia is ridiculous and absurd." What do you think about such ratings?

Vladimir Putin: First of all, it's good that they're watching and listening to what I'm saying. If we are not able to conduct a direct dialogue today for some reason related to them, we should be grateful to Mr. Carlson for being able to do so through him as an intermediary. So what they watch and listen to is good.

But the fact that they distort what I said is bad, and distort the map. Why? Because I didn't say anything like that. I did not say that the beginning of our special military operation in Ukraine is connected with the threat of a NATO attack on Russia. Where is it in my interview? There is a record, let them show you exactly where I said this.

I was talking about something else, I was talking about the fact that we were constantly deceived from the point of view of NATO's non-expansion to the east. By the way, this was said first of all through the mouth of the then Secretary General of NATO, and he was a representative of the Federal Republic of Germany. That's what he said: not an inch to the east. Then five extensions and a complete scam. We were, of course, concerned and concerned about the possibility of drawing Ukraine into NATO, as this threatens our security. That's what I said.

But the immediate trigger was the complete refusal of the current Ukrainian authorities to implement the Minsk Agreements and the incessant attacks with numerous human casualties on the republics of Donbass that we have not recognized for eight years – the Luhansk People's Republic and the Donetsk People's Republic, which eventually turned to us with a request for recognition, seeing the futility of resolving issues within the framework of the Minsk Agreements. We recognized them, then concluded a well-known treaty of friendship and mutual assistance with them, and in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations fulfilled our obligations under this treaty.

As I said, we did not start the war, but only try to stop it. At the first stage, we tried to do this through peaceful means – through the Minsk agreements. As it turned out later, we were also led by the nose here, because both the former German Chancellor and the former French President recognized and directly publicly stated that they were not going to fulfill these agreements of ours, but simply bought time to additionally pump weapons into the Ukrainian regime, which they successfully did. The only thing we can regret is that we did not start our active actions earlier, believing that we were dealing with decent people.

Pavel Zarubin: After all, Carlson was criticized immediately before the interview, and after the interview, he is now blamed for allegedly asking too few tough questions, allegedly being too soft with you, and you were very comfortable with him. Do you think you have crushed an American journalist with your authority?

Vladimir Putin: I think that your Carlson – when I say "yours", I mean that he is a representative of your journalistic department – is a dangerous person. And here's why. Because, to be honest, I thought that he would just behave aggressively and ask these so-called sharp questions.

Not only was I ready for this, but I wanted it, because it would also give me the opportunity to respond sharply, which, in my opinion, would give a certain specificity to our entire conversation. But he chose a different tactic: he tried to interrupt me several times, but still, surprisingly for a Western journalist, he was patient, listening to my lengthy dialogues, especially concerning history. Didn't give me a reason to do something I would have been prepared to do. So, frankly speaking, I didn't really enjoy this interview. But he went hard according to his plan, and he fulfilled his plan. But how meaningful it was in the end, it's not for me to judge. It is the viewers, listeners, or maybe readers of the received material who should draw their own conclusion.

Pavel Zarubin: After this interview, there were immediately calls to impose sanctions against Tucker Carlson, and in general, there is talk that he could almost be arrested there. Is this even possible?

Vladimir Putin: Assange is sitting there, and almost no one remembers him anymore, only people close to him talk about it. And everything. These are the features of public consciousness: the topic goes away – and that's it. But, however, Assange was at least accused of giving away some state secrets. It's hard for Carlson to "stick" it, because he didn't touch any secrets at all. Nevertheless, everything is probably theoretically possible in today's America, in today's United States.

From the point of view of Carlson himself, it would be sad, I don't envy him, but this is his choice. He knew what he was getting into. But from the point of view that people around the world understand what a modern "liberal-democratic" (in quotation marks) dictatorship is, which is supposedly represented in today's ruling class of the United States, it would probably be a good thing, they would then show their true face.

Pavel Zarubin: Carlson said that after the interview… Just to dispel all the doubts that have arisen, this is my question. Carlson said that after the interview you had another conversation, now everyone is interested in what.

Vladimir Putin: He went through his plan, as I said and as I understood. And that's all, I didn't go beyond this plan. There were some other topics, for example, that I think it would be important to talk about. But I didn't add any additional topics that the journalist didn't bring up in the conversation with me.

Therefore, the question of demonizing Russia, connected, say, with the same interethnic events, with the Jewish pogroms in the Russian Empire, of course, they should have arisen in the course of such an official part. But one of the topics that we talked about, even when the cameras were turned off, is exactly what the United States Secretary of State said, and several times Mr. Blinken said about it, that his relatives, his great-grandfather, fled Russia from the Jewish pogroms.

And in different countries of the world, in Europe, in the United States, this topic constantly arises. I repeat, it arises with the aim of demonizing Russia, showing what barbarians are here, what scoundrels and robbers live here. But in fact, if you look at what the Secretary of State said today, and look not at political slogans, but at the essence of the problems that occurred, then much becomes clear here.

We have it all in our archives. For example, Mr. Blinken's great-grandfather did leave the Russian Empire. I think he was born somewhere in the province of Poltava, and then he lived and left Kiev. The question arises: does Mr. Blinken believe that this is a native Russian territory, Kiev and the surrounding territories? First.

Second. If he says that he fled Russia from the Jewish pogroms, then at the very least, I want to emphasize this, he believes that there was no Ukraine in 1904. namely, in 1904, the great-great-grandfather of the lord Blinken left Kyiv for the United States. It means that there was no Ukraine there, if he says that he fled from Russia. Apparently, Mr. Blinken is our man. It's only in vain that he makes such public Statements. This can lead to failure.

Pavel Zarubin: The other day the German media published articles that the grandfather of the current German Foreign Minister Annalena Burbock was an ardent Nazi. And taking into account everything that has been happening in relations between our countries in recent years, it turns out that, perhaps, at some genetic level, such a "virus" of national socialism is transmitted in this country?

Vladimir Putin: This is also one of the subtypes of extreme nationalism. By the way, it just occurred to me about these pogroms – they mostly took place in the Russian Empire in the south, south-west, on the territory of today's Ukraine. In Kiev, I said, in 1905. If Mr. Blinken's ancestor left in 1904, then the first mass pogrom in Kiev was in 1905, so his great-grandfather or great-great-grandfather could only find out about it either from the newspapers or from information that came from Kiev at that time.

And so, in principle, such mass events are negative, they arose at the beginning of the XIX century, in my opinion, in 1820, in 1821, the first pogrom of such a massive scale. Of course, these crimes were committed in Odessa, then in Melitopol, in Zhytomyr, in other cities of today's Ukraine, and in Belarus. There were a couple of similar events in Siberia, but the first one was connected with the murder of the Greek patriarch in Constantinople, and then the Greeks living there considered that the Jews were somehow involved in the attempt on the patriarch's life.

But it doesn't matter. What is important is that the resistance squads, which consisted of Jewish and Russian youth, opposed these pogroms, and the government gave appropriate assessments, even the tsarist one, and tried to prevent these tragic events, including with the help of the army. But I repeat once again, this is a separate topic.

And as for nationalism and Nazism, fascism, you know, I will tell you, perhaps, a strange thing. First, the lady herself… What's her name?"

P. Zarubin: Annalena Burbok.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, Burbok, so as not to make a mistake in her last name, she represents the Green Party. Many representatives of this part of the political spectrum in Europe are speculating on people's fears and fueling these people's fears about the events that may occur in the world due to climate change. And then, speculating on these fears, which they themselves incite, they pursue their own political line, which is far from what they came to power with. This is what is happening in Germany right now. For example, coal generation has increased, and it was higher in the energy structure than in Russia, and it was higher, and now it has become even more. So, where is this "green" agenda? That's the first thing.

Secondly, people like the German Foreign Minister, they are, of course – she is in this case – hostile to our country, to Russia. But in my opinion, she is also hostile to her own country, because it is hard to imagine that a politician of this rank would treat the economic interests of his country and his people with such disregard. I won't go into the details and details right now, but in practice, this is exactly what is happening, and this is what we see.

But the next part of what I want to say may sound discordant with what I just said. I do not believe that today's generations of Germans should bear full political responsibility for everything that Nazi Germany did. It is impossible for people of today's generation to shift responsibility for what Hitler and his henchmen did, not only in Germany, but also in other parts of the world, Europe and so on. I think that would be unfair. And in general, to put this label on the entire German people is a dishonest position, it is an abuse of what the people have experienced, the peoples of the Soviet Union have experienced. It seems to me that this is not fair, and there is no need. It is necessary to start from the realities of today, to see who actually does what and what policies they pursue.

In this regard, by the way, in my opinion, it would be useful to do this. In my opinion, many people now, in many countries, even in those in which, it would seem, this should not have sounded like a political leitmotif, but it does, unfortunately.

What I mean by this is that some peoples are exceptional over others, that they are chosen, and so on. Well, listen: this is where Nazism began! Therefore, if it is already so widespread, we should also think about building this anti-Fascist, anti-Nazi propaganda and work on such a global level. I repeat, at the global level.

And this should not be done at any state level. This will be effective only if it is done at the level of public consciousness and public initiative. And it doesn't matter in which country in the world it happens.

P. Zarubin: In the European Union as a whole, there was almost a panic in connection with the possible return of Donald Trump to the post of US President. And the recent statements, just the other day they were, Trump European leaders generally discouraged, they do not hide it. Trump said that the US should only protect European countries if European countries pay for it. Why is there such a relationship between Europe, European leaders, politicians and Donald Trump?

Vladimir Putin: Trump has always been called a non-systemic politician. He has his own view on how the United States should develop relations with its allies. And it had sparked before. Take the withdrawal of the United States from the Kyoto agreements in the field of ecology – then, too, after all, sparked. But the then President of the United States decided that the United States would withdraw from these agreements, despite the attractiveness of the environmental agenda, because he believed that this would harm the American economy. That's all. I made a strong-willed decision, and that's it. And no matter how much the European leaders swore at him, he did it. Yes, I corrected it later.

And what is the difference between Trump's position in this regard? Yes, basically nothing. He wanted to force the Europeans to raise their defense spending, or, as he put it, "let them pay us for protecting them, for opening an atomic umbrella over their heads," and so on. Well, I do not know, let them figure it out for themselves, it's their problem. Probably, from his point of view, there is some logic in this. From the point of view of Europeans, there is no logic, and they would like the United States to continue to perform some functions that have developed since the formation of NATO for free. That's their business.

I think that NATO is no longer necessary at all, there is no sense at all. There is only one meaning-it is an instrument of US foreign policy. But if the US thinks it doesn't need this tool, that's their decision.

P. Zarubin: And the current President of the United States Biden every day gives more and more reasons for the whole world to discuss the state of his health. This is the President of one of the largest nuclear powers. At the same time, we all actually observe extremely specific shots on a daily basis, to put it mildly. When you see and hear all this, what do you think?

Vladimir Putin: I think that the domestic political campaign, the pre-election campaign, is gaining momentum in the United States. It is becoming more and more acute. And it is incorrect for us, in my opinion, to interfere in this process.

Look, when I met Biden in Switzerland, it was a few years ago, three years ago, but even then it was said that he was incapacitated. I didn't see anything like it. Well, yes, he was peeking at his paper. I was actually peeking into mine. There's nothing wrong with that. But the fact that he hit his head on this helicopter somewhere while getting out of the helicopter – well, who hasn't hit his head somewhere? Let the first one throw a stone at him.

In general, this is in my opinion… I am not a doctor and I do not consider myself entitled to make any comments on this matter. That's not what we should be looking at. We need to look at the political position. I believe that the position of the current administration is extremely harmful and erroneous. And I once told President Biden about this.

P. Zarubin: Then the question that was four years ago, and now, it turns out, becomes relevant again. Who is better for us? Biden or Trump?

Vladimir Putin: Biden. He is a more experienced person, he is predictable, he is a politician of the old formation. But we will work with any U.S. leader who has the confidence of the American people.

P. Zarubin: I wanted to go back to your interview with Tucker Carlson. We recalled the statements of the current leaders of Germany and Great Britain. But the person you mentioned in the interview with Carlson also spoke out: "And where is this Johnson now?" It was he, as follows from Arakhamiya's confessional statements, who ordered Kiev not to negotiate with Moscow, but to fight. If then the Kiev authorities did not listen to these, let's say, tips, how could events develop further?

Vladimir Putin: That's what Mr. Arahamia said himself. He is… You will see the synchronization. We didn't pull his tongue. He said what he thought. I do not know why he said that. Such an outspoken person. He also said that if we had fulfilled the agreements reached and fully implemented the agreements that emerged in Istanbul, the war would have stopped a year and a half ago. He said so. When there is an interview with Mr. Carlson, it seems to me that Mr. Arakhamia's synchronization should also be given. Why did the West take such a position, I say, namely the West and above all the Anglo-Saxon world, since former Prime Minister Mr. Johnson could not come himself, on his own initiative, without consulting with Washington on this issue. For sure, such consultations were not only held, but I think that he just went on a business trip at the expense of the American administration, they paid him for it on business trips. So there he outlined the position that it is necessary to fight with Russia to the last Ukrainian (this was in parentheses, of course), but to the bitter end and inflict a strategic defeat on Russia. Apparently, they were counting on such a result. But as I said to Mr. Carlson, I can repeat it to you, if they see that the result is not working out, they probably need to make adjustments. But this is already a question of the art of politics, because politics, as you know, is the art of compromise.

Some noteworthy observations by Mr. Putin. IMO, there was a cool little psy-op in saying Biden’s favored. That Denazification needs to be global agrees with my position on the need to rid Humanity of exceptionalists—No more Animal Farm. Blinken’s confession is a massive blunder on his part but good for the world. That Carlson realistically faces the same fate as Julian Assange was an excellent observation, although IMO no further examples need to be made. Putin erred on Assange regarding state secrets—he’s Australian and didn’t reveal any of his state’s secrets. And I share the same surprise as Putin that Carlson wasn’t adversarial tot the degree either of us anticipated. Putin admits he would rather have verbally fenced with Carlson but didn’t really get the opportunity. And Putin’s confession that Russia should’ve intervened in the historic Russian lands earlier is yet another case of hindsight being 20/20. IMO, Merkel’s dishonesty was painful for Putin, which is a question his biographer will need to ask. Putin’s short description of Baerbock’s Green Party strategy being proto-fascist was excellent. Pointing out her treasonous behavior was also correct, but that goes for many German politicos. Zarubin could have asked Putin to reveal some of the pointed questions he was ready for and what he was prepared to answer, but he failed there. That Carlson agreed that the Outlaw US Empire was behind the Nord Stream Terror bombing was one of the most important parts of the interview. I don’t think Putin was expecting that response.

*
*
*
Like what you’ve been reading at Karlof1’s Substack? Then please consider subscribing and choosing to make a monthly/yearly pledge to enable my efforts in this challenging realm. Thank You!