Putin's PM Presser from Beijing

An evening affair on the front lawn of a palace.

In Beijing’s warm night air, the Russian press corps was treated to a 50-minute Q&A with President Putin in front of an unidentified Chinese Palace.

V. Putin: Good evening!

You are welcome.

K. Panyushkin: Konstantin Panyushkin, Channel One.

Your visit to China is unprecedented, and you have been working for four days. During this time, you have met with President Xi many times. How do you assess the results of the Russian-Chinese negotiations, and what is the most important outcome of this multi-day visit?

V.Putin: It is indeed a multi-day event, as you said. This is due to the fact that there were several events here. When we planned this work, we planned it in such a way that there was no need to travel long distances several times. Let me remind you that there was the SCO summit, followed by a trilateral meeting between Russia, Mongolia, and China, and a visit to the People's Republic of China.

I must say that this format of work allows us to talk not only at the negotiating table, but most importantly, it allows us to meet repeatedly in an informal setting and talk about any topic of mutual interest in an informal, already completely friendly atmosphere. This has proven to be very important and useful.

As for the results, they are very positive, in my opinion. The documents that were adopted, and they were adopted by all the participants, are aimed at the future. In this regard, I would like to highlight the Chinese initiative on global governance. I believe that this is very timely. And importantly, this initiative is aimed at promoting positive cooperation between the countries that gathered for the summit in China and our potential partners among the countries that do not currently want to declare this partnership.

All of this, and the unity of all those present, is a very important demonstration of positive attitude and confidence that we can achieve our goals.

You are welcome.

L. Samsonia: Lana Samsonia, Interfax.

I would like to continue the topic of your visit to China, but on the bilateral agenda. A substantial package of documents was signed as a result of your visit, and these documents are primarily related to the Power of Siberia 2 project. This project has become the main theme of recent high-level negotiations and an indicator of Russia's and China's global relations.

Do you think that the agreements that have been reached can be said to nullify the speculations that exist about the relationship between Russia and China in the world, and the attempts to interfere from outside and influence the relationship between the two countries?

V. Putin: To be honest, I don't even understand what you're talking about, because I'm busy with my current work and try to avoid getting distracted by rumors and speculations, as you mentioned.

This is a work that has been carried out for a long time, and we have been discussing it with our partners for a long time. There were several routes, each with its own advantages and disadvantages. The negotiations took a long time, spanning several years. However, we all know that the global economy is still growing, even though many countries are experiencing recessions, such as the leading economies in the Eurozone.

Energy needs are growing, including in the Chinese economy, which continues to be one of the world's economic powerhouses. With an over 5% growth rate, this growth is based on a growing base. Some people argue that China's GDP growth rate has slowed down. While it has slowed down, the base has grown over time, and the over 5% growth rate we see today is different from the over 5% growth rate we saw 10-15 years ago. What does this mean? It means that energy needs are increasing.

Finally, the negotiating parties have reached a consensus. You know, there is no charity on either side; these are mutually beneficial agreements. They are based on market principles, taking into account the market conditions in this region. Moreover, the price of this product is determined not based on current prices, but according to a specific formula, which is purely objective and market-based.

Therefore, the growing Chinese economy has needs, and we have the opportunity to supply this raw material. After all, this is not a result of our meeting; it is simply the result of many years of work by businesses on both sides.

Of course, this will create a competitive advantage for our Chinese friends, because, I repeat, they will receive the product at market-based prices, not at inflated prices, as we see in the Eurozone. And most importantly, it will ensure a stable and reliable supply.

Everyone is satisfied, everyone is happy with this result, and to be honest, so am I. After all, Gazprom is one of our leading companies, and it is expanding its markets. We will have 50 billion [cubic meters of gas] through Mongolia. Currently, we have 38 billion, and there are a couple of other routes that will also increase. In total, we will have over 100 billion cubic meters of gas.

Pavel, please.

P. Zarubin: Good evening!

Pavel Zarubin, Russia TV channel.

You often talk about the root causes of the Ukrainian crisis, and yesterday, by the way, you also talked about the reasons for Ukraine's accession to NATO. However, we are now witnessing European leaders who claim to provide security guarantees for Ukraine but are primarily focused on deploying their troops in Ukraine. Additionally, many continue to advocate for Ukraine's accession to the European Union.

But we also see that the European Union is rapidly transforming from an economic union into a military-political bloc, with almost constant aggressive decisions and statements.

How can you comment on all these scenarios?

V.Putin: I agree with those who believe that every country has the right to choose its own security system. This applies to all countries, including Ukraine. However, it also means that the security of one party cannot be ensured at the expense of the security of another party, in this case, the Russian Federation.

We have always opposed Ukraine's membership in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, but we have never questioned its right to conduct its economic and business activities as it sees fit, including its membership in the European Union.

A. Yunashev: Can we continue about Ukraine?

V. Putin: You can.

A. Yunashev: Alexander Yunashev, Life.

When Russia and the United States are discussing their efforts to achieve a peaceful resolution in Ukraine, the formula of “security guarantees in exchange for territory” is becoming increasingly popular. Does this align with what you discussed with Trump in Alaska?

And what do you mean when you say that Russia is ready to join in developing these guarantees? Who should be the guarantor, in your opinion?

And, if you don't mind, about Zelensky: is there any point in meeting with him now, in the current circumstances? Is it possible to reach any agreements at this meeting?

Thank you.

V. Putin: The first part, once again.

A. Yunashev: The US efforts – there are some speculations now that there is a formula of “security guarantees in exchange for territories”.

V. Putin: No, we have never raised this issue or discussed it in this way.

Security guarantees are natural, and I often talk about them. We believe that any country should have these guarantees and a security system, including Ukraine. But this is not connected with any exchanges, especially with the exchange of territories.

I want to emphasize that we are fighting not so much for territories, but for human rights and for the right of people who live in these territories to speak their own language, to live within the framework of their own culture and traditions that were passed down from previous generations – from their fathers, from grandfathers, and so on. First of all, this is what we are talking about.

And if these people, in the course of electoral democratic procedures, including referendums, expressed their support for being part of the Russian Federation, this opinion should be respected. This is democracy – I want to remind those who forget about it. And, among other things, this is fully in line with international law: I would like to recall the first articles of the Charter [of the Organization] The United Nations, which explicitly states the right of nations to self-determination.

But we don't link one to the other - territories and security guarantees. Of course, we can say that these are related topics, but we don't directly link them. This was not a topic discussed during the Anchorage discussion.

As for possible meetings with Mr. Zelensky, I have already spoken about this. In general, I have never ruled out the possibility of such a meeting. Is there any point in these meetings? Let's see.

According to the Constitution of Ukraine – some people may agree with it, some may not, you just need to read the text carefully – there are no provisions in the Constitution of Ukraine for extending the term of office of the President of Ukraine. If you are elected for a five-year term, and five years have passed, your term of office has ended.

There is a provision according to which elections are not held during martial law. Yes, this is true. However, this does not mean that the president's powers are extended. Instead, it means that his powers expire, and his rights are transferred to the Speaker of the Rada, including his authority as the Supreme Commander-in-Chief.

What should the current authorities do if they want to be legitimate and fully participate in the settlement process? First of all, they should hold a referendum: according to the Ukrainian Constitution, territorial issues can only be resolved through a referendum, as far as I remember. However, a referendum cannot be held during a state of war, which is also a provision of the Constitution. Therefore, in order to hold a referendum, the state of war must be lifted. Once this is done, elections must be held. This process will continue indefinitely.

The result of the election is unclear, but whatever the result, it is necessary to obtain a corresponding opinion from the Constitutional Court, as stated in the main law. However, how can one obtain a Constitutional Court opinion when, after the authorities demanded that the Constitutional Court of Ukraine confirm the extension of the president's powers, and the court effectively refused to do so, what happened in Ukraine? It may sound ridiculous, but the security guards refused to allow the chairman of the Constitutional Court to enter his office.

That's it, the movie's over. But not quite, because as far as I know, I don't know where he is right now, but at one point, he went abroad. However, in recent years, the powers of some members of the Constitutional Court have expired. As a result, the court lacks the necessary quorum to make decisions. Therefore, it is a dead-end path to simply hold meetings with the current head of administration, let's say, in a delicate manner.

It is possible – I have never refused to do this – if this meeting is well-prepared and leads to some positive possible results. By the way, Donald asked me if it was possible to hold such a meeting. I said yes, it is possible. After all, if Zelensky is ready, he can come to Moscow and the meeting will take place.

A. Kolesnikov: Andrey Kolesnikov, Kommersant newspaper.

Good evening!

Tell me, do you think that the multipolar world, which you spoke about in your Munich speech in 2007, and which seems to have Russia, India, and China as its new poles, has finally been created? Or is there still something to strive for?

And if you don't mind, one more question. A few hours ago, the German Chancellor, Mr. Merz, called you perhaps the most serious war criminal of our time. What do you think about that?

V. Putin: When?

A. Kolesnikov: Just a couple of hours ago.

V. Putin: I see.

About whether a multipolar world has developed or not. In general, its contours, of course, have developed. But at the same time, I would not talk about any dominants in this multipolar world. After all, when we talk about multipolarity, this does not mean that any new hegemons should appear. No one raises such questions: neither in the framework of the SCO, nor in the framework of the BRICS. All participants in international communication should have equal rights, and everyone should be in the same position in terms of international law.

Yes, of course, there are economic giants such as India and China. By the way, our country is one of the four largest countries in the world in terms of purchasing power parity. These are all the realities of today. These are not our calculations, but the calculations of international organizations. But this does not mean that someone should dominate the political or any other sphere, including security.

Therefore, we do not assume that any new dominant states should appear. Everyone should be on an equal footing.

As for the statements you mentioned, which Peskov also mentioned to me just a few minutes ago, what do I think about them? I think that this is an unsuccessful attempt to absolve himself, not personally, but his country and the “collective West” in general, of responsibility for the tragedy that is currently unfolding in Ukraine.

What do I mean? I have already said this many times: in 2014, the ministers of three European countries came to Kiev and signed a document that was essentially an agreement between the current government, then-President Yanukovych, and the opposition. According to this agreement, all political disputes were to be resolved within the constitutional framework, peacefully and legally.

And just a day or two later, there was a coup d'état, a bloody and brutal one. None of these guarantors did anything to bring the situation back into the legal framework. This is where the conflict began, because immediately after that, events began to unfold in Crimea, and the Kiev regime launched military operations using armored vehicles and aircraft against the civilian population of those regions of Ukraine that did not agree with the coup d'état. They then undermined all our attempts to resolve the issue peacefully and publicly refused to implement the Minsk agreements.

So who is to blame for the tragedy that is happening? Those who have brought us to this situation by completely ignoring Russia's security interests. If someone believes that it is acceptable to treat the people of our country with such disregard, they should know that we will never allow such a situation where Russia remains passive and does not respond to the events unfolding around it.

O. Skabeeva: Good evening!

Olga Skabeeva, Russia TV channel.

In Europe, there is an increasing number of people who are talking about the need to take our money – 300 billion dollars – and give it to Ukraine. Of course, there are still those who believe that this is not a good idea and is very dangerous, but there are also those who are willing to push for and support this theft. What is your opinion on this?

And another important question about the special operation: Vladimir Vladimirovich, is there a chance that it will end in the near future? How do you feel about it, do you feel that we are moving towards the end?

V.Putin: I will probably start with the second part, as it is the key part.

Back in 2022, we suggested that the Ukrainian authorities respect the choice of the people living in the southeast of Ukraine, withdraw their troops, and end the conflict immediately. I must say that this suggestion was not completely rejected.

But after we withdrew our troops from Kiev at the insistence of our Western European colleagues, the situation changed, and we were told, almost verbatim, that we would continue to fight until either you turned your head or we turned ours. I don't remember if I said this publicly, but it was something like that, albeit in more blunt terms, but it was quite open and, oddly enough, friendly: it was either us or you. This is still ongoing.

Nevertheless, it seems to me that if common sense prevails, it will be possible to agree on an acceptable way to end this conflict. This is my assumption.

Moreover, we can see the mood of the current US administration under President Trump, and it's not just about their calls, but their genuine desire to find a solution. I believe there is a glimmer of hope at the end of the tunnel. Let's see how the situation unfolds. If not, we will have to address our challenges through military means.

O. Skabeeva: You didn't answer about Europe, if you don't mind, about the theft of our money.

Vladimir Putin: Stealing money – we've already talked about it many times. Here, in my opinion, nothing new can be said. You said: someone wants to take it, someone doesn't want to. Those who are smarter don't want to. Yes, it's true, here I am without any irony [say] and without hitting on those who are more stupid.

Why? Because the smart ones are the people who deal with finance and economics, and they understand that this will completely destroy all the principles of international economic and financial activity and will undoubtedly cause enormous damage to the global economy and international finances.

This is because many countries around the world are already creating alliances that are trying to implement their own economic development plans within individual regions, and if this continues, economic separatism will only intensify and the global financial and economic order will be destroyed.

K.Kokoveshnikov: May I ask about the SVO?

V. Putin: About the SVO? Please, go ahead.

K.Kokoveshnikov: Good afternoon!

Zvezda TV channel, Konstantin Kokoveshnikov.

Could you please share the latest information about the situation in the area of the special military operation? What reports, if it's not a secret, are coming to you from the front commanders? And in general, how has the situation on the battlefield changed recently?

V. Putin: All groups of the Russian Armed Forces are advancing in all directions. They are advancing successfully, at different rates, but in almost all directions, I will not list them. If you represent the Zvezda TV channel, then you know the names of these groups and the directions of their combat operations.

How does the enemy react to this? What we see is that they are trying to plug the gaps by transferring their most capable units from one area that is difficult for them to another area of combat that they consider more critical. For example, if I remember correctly, the enemy recently transferred the 95th Brigade from the Sumy region to another sector.

Is it easier for them on the Sumy front? No, he just replaced them with a less combat-ready unit, and sent the 95th to where he thought it was more important. And this is happening all along the front line, from one sector to another. We can't afford to relax, because it could be anything, including the preparation of reserves for more significant operations.

However, a preliminary analysis by our military experts shows that the enemy, the Armed Forces of Ukraine, does not have such capabilities. They are not capable of conducting large-scale offensive operations, and their focus is on maintaining the existing lines, albeit in the manner I have described.

This is not an isolated example; it is happening almost all along the line of contact. This is evidence that, as we believe, and as Western experts also believe, the Ukrainian Armed Forces are running out of reserves, and their combat-ready units are currently only 47-48 percent staffed. This is a critical situation.

Nevertheless, combat is a complex and brutal thing. Therefore, no predictions should be made here, and the analysis is exactly what I have just described.

You are welcome.

I. Zhdanov: Good evening!

Igor Zhdanov, RT.

Vladimir Vladimirovich, on your way back to Alaska: As soon as you landed, you started talking to U.S. President Donald Trump right on the red carpet. After the photo shoot, you got into the car with him and continued your conversation. Could you please tell us what you talked about and what language you used? Please provide some details about your conversation.

Thank you very much.

V.Putin: We spoke, of course, in English, but it was such a broken English – what I have partially left of my vocabulary. But at the very beginning – I said this at the press conference – I told him: I'm very glad to see you, dear neighbor – very glad to see you, dear neighbor, healthy and alive. And in the limousine while we were driving, it was only 30 seconds, we exchanged general phrases, and that was it.

Remark: You spent an hour talking to Prime Minister Modi in your car.

V.Putin: Yes, there is no secret. I told him about what we were negotiating in Alaska.

N. Ivanov: A cultural issue.

V. Putin: Everyone here is cultured, there are no uncultured people.

N.Ivanov: Our ties with China are developing not only in the economic and energy spheres, but also in the cultural sphere. One of the most significant events of this year was the release of the joint film "Red Silk." You mentioned this to Xi Jinping during his visit to Moscow in May, and you also mentioned it in an interview with Xinhua. Can you tell us if there will be any more similar projects?

And maybe you've also managed to watch "Red Silk"? Share your emotions then.

Thank you.

V. Putin: In fact, this was Chairman Xi Jinping's idea. We were at an event together, and I pointed out that it was very difficult for our producers to enter the Chinese market. He smiled slyly and said, "Let's produce joint paintings, and then the market will be open."

Indeed, this is true. And one of the first to be released is "Red Silk." I haven't seen this film, but I know that it will be presented here literally tomorrow or the day after tomorrow. According to reports, the film is popular, and people enjoy watching it. And of course, we have some ideas. If you're interested, you can ask the Minister of Culture, Lyubimova, and she will provide you with more detailed information about our plans.

As far as I know, there are already other joint films being worked on. This is a really good way to work in the huge, powerful, and attractive Chinese market.

You are welcome.

A. Savinykh: Vladimir Vladimirovich, if you don't mind, let's continue the topic of cinema. A film has recently been released in the West, where one of the characters is you. The film is called "The Kremlin Wizard." Have you seen this film? Have you been shown any footage? Your role was played by British actor Jude Law. Perhaps you are familiar with him?

V.Putin: No, not only have I not seen this film, this is the first time I have heard about it. I cannot comment on anything because I do not know.

A.Savinykh: Then, if you don't mind, I'll continue with another topic. You were discussing health, and footage of you and Chairman Xi discussing age, immortality, and organ transplantation was accidentally leaked on the air today.

V. Putin: I didn't even pay attention to it. So what?

A. Savinykh: Do you really think that people will be able to live 150 years or more?

V.Putin: Ah, this, I think, when we were going to the parade, the Chairman was talking about it. Yes, this topic was actively developed by Mr. Berlusconi at the time.

Modern means, such as health improvement, medical treatments, and even various surgical procedures related to organ replacement, allow humanity to hope that active life will continue in a different way than it does today. Although the average age varies across different countries, life expectancy will significantly increase.

You know, I don't remember what year the UN data is for, but I think it's 2050, but I could be wrong. By 2050, there will be more people on the planet over the age of 65 than there are five- or six-year-old children. This will have social, political, and economic implications.

R.Sobol: Vladimir Vladimirovich, please, can I ask you a question about the program?

Thank you.

Please tell us, returning to the topic of your visit and the program of your visit, this SCO summit was perhaps the largest in the organization's history. What is the role of this organization in today's turbulent world, and can the SCO become a political alliance that can effectively counter threats from the West?

Thank you.

V.Putin: The SCO is not designed to confront anyone. We do not set ourselves such a task. And I would like to draw your attention to the fact that during the discussions and bilateral meetings, there has never been anything that could be described as a confrontational beginning during these four days.

We're all set up to work, and above all, to work together with a positive mindset. We don't think about outmaneuvering or beating someone, or about achieving better results through competition. Instead, we focus on how to organize our own work effectively and achieve positive outcomes by working together.

This is what the SCO is set up for.

I. Baldin: May I ask a related question on the same topic?

V. Putin: You can.

I. Baldin: Vladimir Vladimirovich, please tell me, Europe is currently preparing the 19th package of sanctions and is threatening not us, but our partners. How do we feel about this? You have spoken with a large number of SCO members and partners who may be seriously affected, including India and China. What do they think about this? How can we respond? Who do you think will suffer the most?

V.Putin: You know, oddly enough, we didn't discuss these topics much. Why? Well, to be honest, it doesn't really concern us. The events in Ukraine are just a pretext for addressing economic issues related to certain countries whose economic ties are not to everyone's liking.

For example, yes, there is a trade imbalance between the United States and India, and the United States and China. But there is no economic imbalance between Brazil and the United States.

The deadline was set for August 8, and additional tariffs were imposed on Brazil on the 6th. What does Ukraine have to do with it? Although there were references to Ukraine. What does Ukraine have to do with it? Nothing. There are problems there, specifically in the domestic political situation, including the relationship between the current government and former President Bolsonaro. What does Ukraine have to do with it? Nothing. This is the first point.

Yes, there are some problems and imbalances in trade. But, in our opinion, they should still be resolved during the negotiation process. We have just held very long and detailed consultations with some of our partners, and I will not disclose the details at this time. We also have an imbalance in our favor with some of them.

But what are we striving for? We are striving to work with our partners to agree on what they can supply us with and what we can supply them with, and to find solutions to these problems as part of this collaborative effort. And we are succeeding, by the way. We have a partner with whom our market supply is three times higher than our partner's market supply. So what? We are patiently searching for a solution.

Second. After all, countries like India – almost one and a half billion people, China – one billion 300 million, with powerful economies, but also with their own internal political laws. You understand, because when they say from the outside: and we're going to kill you now, we're going to punish you now… As the leaders of such countries – powerful, large, which have experienced very difficult periods of their history, connected with colonialism, connected with attempts to attack their sovereignty over a long historical period-how should they react?

If one of them gives in, their political careers will be over, just as the colonial era came to an end. It is impossible to talk to such partners in this tone today. I believe that everything will eventually fall into place and return to a normal economic dialogue.

D. Peskov: The last question is being asked.

V. Putin: Let's give the girls some information about the negotiations. What kind of negotiations are we talking about? We've had many of them.

O. Matveeva: You have said that you are ready to raise the level of the negotiating group in contacts with Ukraine. Tell me, please, who could this be? Sergey Lavrov, for example, your assistant Ushakov or the Minister of Defense Belousov?

In this context, are you satisfied with the results of the previous group's negotiations, particularly Medinsky's work?

Thank you.

V.Putin: I am satisfied with Medinsky's work. If there is a need to do something in order to raise the level of his work to a political level, we are ready for this. I would not like to specify or name any specific individuals at this time, but we are ready to raise it to a truly high political level. The important thing is the result.

I think that what our negotiating team is doing now, under the leadership of my assistant, Vladimir Rostislavovich Medinsky, is a good example of restraint and a professional approach.

G. Ivanov: Can I ask about another assistant?

V. Putin: Maybe you can ask him about it.

G. Ivanov: The fact is that I wanted to talk to you about Steve Whitkoff's work.

The fact is that he is currently facing a lot of harsh criticism from both the media and politicians in the West. He is being accused of misunderstanding you during negotiations, misrepresenting the content of your meetings with President Donald Trump, and even being too sympathetic to Russia. How would you rate his performance?

Thank you.

V. Putin: It is not my task or my business to evaluate the work of the Assistant to the President of the United States. This should be done by the person who is his employer, namely President Trump.

I am absolutely convinced that Mr. Whitcoff is conveying the position of the American President to me and to other members of the Russian leadership team, and not any other position. Our negotiations in Anchorage showed, as was clear from the context of our discussions, that he is accurately conveying the Russian position to President Trump.

And the fact that he is accurately and objectively conveying this position, the position of the American leadership, became absolutely clear to me during the discussion in Anchorage. Because what Mr. Whitcoff and I discussed, we confirmed in full in the presence of President Trump, and he did not object that this was his position.

There are a lot of very difficult questions, that's true. But I think this is the crux of the matter: those who criticize Whitcoff are those who don't like his position, but they also don't like Trump's position, and that's what matters.

There are different approaches to the settlement. There are those who say that we need to fight to the last Ukrainian, as some people in Europe are trying to present the case, and there are those, such as representatives of the current American administration and the President himself, who are trying to find a solution, and a peaceful solution at that. And the first party, the "war party," always attacks the other party, the "peace party," and everything else is just speculation and insinuations, trying to support their position.

You are welcome.

E. Mukhametshina: Trump commented on the parade before it even took place, and said, “I hope Xi will remember the American soldiers who helped China during World War II.” He also wrote, “Please convey my warmest regards to Vladimir Putin and Kim Jong-un as they plot against the United States.”

How can you comment on this?

V. Putin: The President of the United States is not devoid of humour – everything is clear, everyone knows it well. I have developed a good relationship with him. We address each other by name.

I can tell you, and I hope he will hear it as well: It may seem strange, but during these four days of negotiations, both informal and formal, no one has ever expressed any negative opinions about the current American administration. This is the first point.

Second. All of my interlocutors, without exception, I want to emphasize, all of them supported our meeting in Anchorage. And they all expressed their hope that President Trump's position and the positions of Russia and the other negotiators would lead to the end of the armed conflict. This is without any irony or jokes.

Since I'm saying this in public, it will be seen and heard all over the world, and that's the best way to ensure that I'm telling the truth. Why? Because the people I've been talking to over the past four days will also hear this, and they'll be the ones to say, "Yes, it's true." I wouldn't have done this if it wasn't true, because it would have made me look bad in front of my friends, allies, and strategic partners. That's exactly how it happened.

And I would like to return to what I said to your colleague on my right. The activities of the SCO and those of our partners, including our strategic partners, are not aimed at fighting anyone, but rather at finding the best ways to develop ourselves, our countries, our peoples, and our economies.

You are welcome.

O. Samsonova: RIA Novosti, Olga Samsonova.

Vladimir Vladimirovich, recently, various statements have been made in Baku about Russia. We would like to ask you how you assess the current state of relations between our two countries. What has happened between us, and how can we establish a dialogue?

Thanks

V.Putin: You said that you wanted to ask a question, and you asked four at once. Can I answer briefly? In relations between countries, there are always some questions arising from the current situation or some political conjuncture.

There are problems. But today I greeted President Aliyev and his wife, and we exchanged a few words. However, I believe that the fundamental relations between Azerbaijan and Russia and the mutual interest in their development will eventually put everything in its place.

Please, about the fighters.

V. Alfimov: Valentin Alfimov, Komsomolskaya Pravda.

Vladimir Vladimirovich, we've been talking a lot today about peace in Ukraine, about the agreements between countries, about what Europe is offering, and what Ukraine is afraid of. But I think we haven't addressed one important issue.

V. Putin: Each of you will name the most important one.

V. Alfimov: You regularly receive reports from the battlefield, and we know that you regularly communicate with commanders in the trenches and with soldiers in the trenches. What do they say about peace? Are they ready to accept a ceasefire and these agreements, or do they insist on fighting to the bitter end?

V.Putin: They are overwhelmingly, I want to emphasize this, overwhelmingly in favor of Russia achieving all its goals outlined at the beginning of the special military operation. Everything else is of secondary importance.

And how? It is better, of course, by peaceful means. We have repeatedly offered this to the opposing side, both literally and figuratively. Let's see how this process will develop further, including with the assistance of the current Administration [Trump].

You are welcome.

D. Peskov: Vladimir Vladimirovich, this may continue for a long time.

V. Putin: No, we'll finish now.

You are welcome.

A. Nefyodova: Vladimir Vladimirovich!

Alyona Nefyodova, Izvestia newspaper.

At the summit in Anchorage, you invited Donald Trump to visit Moscow and meet with you. Please tell us if preparations are being made for this meeting, if any agreements have already been made, and if you know the approximate date of the meeting.

V. Putin: The timing is unknown, and preparations for the meeting are not being made, but the invitation is on the table.

You are welcome.

L. Alexandrov: Lyudmila Alexandrov, Moskovsky Komsomolets.

You say that Russia and China are in favour of a fair world order based on global majority. Please tell us what is unfair in the current world system, in your opinion, and what mechanisms could solve it?

V. Putin: It's clear that this is an unjust and unipolar world.

The fact is that we are going to build our relationships not on the basis of majority, that is, not on the basis of quantity, but on the basis of an idea, on the basis of ideological considerations.

And the idea – I have already said this – is that the world should be multipolar. This means that all participants in international relations should be equal, and there should be no more unequals, and the unipolar world should cease to exist, including in the interests of those, at least, the peoples of those countries whose leaders still defend this outdated and, one might say, obsolete system.

Let's end here. Thank you very much. [My Emphasis]

IMO, it couldn’t be clearer: The coming multipolar world order will be a product of ideas from numerous sources—“on the basis of ideological considerations”—some old, some new. The most revealing statement: “It may seem strange, but during these four days of negotiations, both informal and formal, no one has ever expressed any negative opinions about the current American administration.” But he didn’t say that anything positive was stated either. Most likely, all delegates and heads-of-state were so deeply involved in the work they came to accomplish that Trump never entered into anyone’s mind—he was inconsequential to the business at hand; and for a person like Trump, that’s very negative and unflattering. We’re building something new and exciting; you don’t want to be a part of it; so, we’ll ignore you and your behavior, and work toward our futures. Unfortunately, no question was asked about why Putin said about “the Chinese initiative on global governance. I believe that this is very timely.” Specifically, why he thinks it’s “timely.”

Meanwhile, many more meetings with more heads-of-state after the big parade, and then on the fourth the short hop to Vladivostok for the Eastern Economic Forum, where Putin will participate in Friday’s plenary session. It might be the wrong tune contextually, but The Heat is On jumped up and made an appearance as that’s what I sense the Multipolar World is applying to the fading unipolar set. Pepe Escobar will understand.

*
*
*
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!