Vladimir Putin answered Russian journalists’ questions following his visit to China to take part in the BRICS Summit.
September 5, 2017
Vladimir Putin summed up the results of the BRICS Summit and his talks with foreign leaders on the Summit’s sidelines, and shared his perspective on pressing international issues.
* * *
Transcript of the news conference for Russian journalists
President of Russia Vladimir Putin: Let us start with your questions, please.
Question: The BRICS Summit has just closed. As we all know, BRICS countries account for 31 percent of the global GDP.
Could you share your perspective on the future of this association in the follow-up to the discussions at the Summit? What are its main outcomes and what are Russia’s priorities regarding BRICS?
Vladimir Putin: Let me remind you that BRICS emerged at Russia’s initiative back in 2005 when we first brought to the same table representatives of the People’s Republic of China, India and Russia. This is how three countries started working together, and later expanded to five countries.
There is no doubt that BRICS has great prospects. At its core is the convergence of interests in a number of areas, not some kind of ideological principles.
This primarily has to do with economic structure and our common commitment to make the global economy more fair and noble, so to speak.
Overall, we succeeded in coordinating our positions on a number of major, fundamental issues over the past years.
You may have noticed that BRICS countries regularly meet not only at specialised summits like the one here in the People’s Republic of China, but also on the sidelines of various international events before the start of those events. For example, BRICS leaders regularly meet ahead of G20 meetings.
Please note that the new Development Bank has been established and is already functioning. You must have also noted (I mentioned this at the expanded meeting and at the Business Council meeting) that Russia is already receiving funding for three projects.
One has to do with water purification systems in the Volga basin, another with the development of Russia’s judicial system, primarily new buildings, facilities and the informatisation of the judicial system of Russia. There are other interesting projects, not as large perhaps, but still important for our country.
These are just the first steps. The pool of reserve currencies is beginning to work. We promote contacts between business leaders. The Business Council grows more active, and Russian initiatives are gaining support among others.
You may have heard about women’s entrepreneurship as well. In my opinion, this is an important thing – the right thing. Almost all countries make efforts to support women’s entrepreneurship.
There are other important, interesting and promising undertakings. I am confident that this association will work effectively in the future.
The Chinese Presidency has managed to preserve all that has been built up so far, including our joint work in Russia, in Ufa, and create new impulses.
This was a successful summit, including the involvement of the ‘outreach’ countries’ leaders – those states that represent emerging markets from various regions of the world.
I would like to congratulate our Chinese friends on the absolute success of this major international event.
Question: Mr President, you have had an extensive bilateral agenda on the sidelines of the summit. You met with the President of Egypt, with many other leaders.
Can you please tell us more about the meetings? For example, have you discussed the restoration of air transportation with the President of Egypt? Have you accepted his invitation to visit Egypt and participate in the signing of the nuclear power plant contract?
Also, you have had two telephone conversations, with the Prime Minister of Japan and the President of South Korea. Can you please give us more details?
Vladimir Putin: If I talk in detail about all these meetings and telephone conversations, we will not have enough time. You have seen these bilateral meetings.
This visit began with a bilateral meeting with the Chairman of the People’s Republic of China – basically, that was part of a separate working visit.
As for the BRICS countries, I had meetings with the Prime Minister of India and the President of South Africa. Those primarily dealt with bilateral relations. With each of these countries, we have an extensive agenda, including very diverse economic ties.
Regarding the countries invited to this year’s BRICS summit within the outreach format, a meeting was held with Thailand’s Prime Minister. This is a fast-growing economy and we are expanding our economic interaction with this country. As you may know, we have doubled the purchase of natural rubber and increased the purchase of vegetables and fruit by 30–40 percent. We are interested in supplying our products, including high technology ones, to Thailand’s markets. That is what we discussed.
As for Mexico, we have our interest there too, direct interests of our companies. Lukoil, for instance, is going to implement four projects in the Gulf of Mexico, three of them with French partners, and one on its own.
We are also doing well on the Mexican market selling the Superjet-100 aircraft.
Speaking of Egypt, you know about our far-reaching historical ties and relations. The relations between Russia and Egypt are on the rise. President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi extended an invitation to visit his country, and I will be happy to do so at the right time.
Speaking of air transportation services, we would like to resume flights to Egypt in full. But we agreed that the work of our relevant special services and transport agencies responsible for flight safety should continue, and we must be absolutely sure that the safety of our citizens is guaranteed.
We see that our Egyptian friends are doing their best to ensure this safety. Relevant agencies are interacting with each other and working out some issues. I expect us to solve this task shortly.
Regarding telephone conversations, both of them – with Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and the President of the Republic of Korea – were focused on North Korea’s nuclear tests.
We have agreed to continue discussing this matter when we meet in person. Tomorrow, both the South Korean President and the Japanese Prime Minister will arrive in Vladivostok for the Eastern Economic Forum, and we will talk about this more.
Question: One of the top news stories these days is the US decision to shut down several Russian diplomatic facilities, which in essence amounts to another instance of seizing diplomatic property.
The Russian Foreign Ministry has used the words “seizure” and “searches”. You have not said anything on this matter so far. Will you comment on it now? Will Russia respond to all this? If so, what response would it be?
Vladimir Putin: The thing is that we have agreed with our partners that Russia and the United States should have parity in terms of personnel or diplomats in their missions in each other’s country. I believe there were 1,300 American diplomats working in Russia and 455 Russian diplomats in the United States. We have balanced the figure.
I would like you to take note of the fact that this figure, 455 Russian diplomats working in the United States, also includes (provisionally) the 155 Russians working at the United Nations. Strictly speaking, they are not diplomats accredited at the US Department of State but diplomats working at an international organisation.
When the United States wanted the UN to be headquartered in New York, it pledged to properly ensure its operation. So strictly speaking, the number of American diplomats in Moscow should be not 455 but 155 fewer, if we are talking about parity.
So, we reserve the right to take a new decision on the number of American diplomats in Moscow. We will not do this immediately but will see how things develop.
The Americans had the right to reduce the number of our diplomatic offices. It is another matter altogether that they have done this in way that was absolutely uncivil. This does not do reflect well on our American partners.
It is difficult to talk to people who confuse Austria and Australia. But there is nothing we can do about this; this is the level of political culture among part of the American establishment.
As for the American people, America is truly a great nation if the Americans can put up with so many politically uncivilised people.
Question: Mr President, you have already mentioned that you touched upon the issue of the DPRK when you spoke to the Prime Minister of Japan and the President of South Korea…
Vladimir Putin: Excuse me, but, with regard to the buildings and structures, this is unprecedented. As a graduate of the St Petersburg University law department, I, or any other lawyer for that matter, can tell you that property rights consist of three elements: the right to own, use, and dispose of such property.
The United States stripped Russia of the right to use our property, which is a clear violation of Russia’s property rights. So, to begin with, I will ask our Foreign Ministry to file a lawsuit. We will see how effectively the much-lauded American judicial system works.
Question: Returning to the DPRK, what is your position? It looks like neither talks (the diplomatic process), nor threats, nor sanctions work. How can the DPRK situation be resolved?
Vladimir Putin: This is the simplest question today.
I discussed this with my colleagues in private, but I do not think there is any need to conceal anything here. I will repeat what I said in private and official conversations, and, in fact, what everyone should be aware of and anyone with common sense should understand.
Everyone remembers well what happened to Iraq and Saddam Hussein. Hussein abandoned the production of weapons of mass destruction. Nonetheless, under the pretext of searching for these weapons, Saddam Hussein himself and his family were killed during the well-known military operation.
Even children died back then. His grandson, I believe, was shot to death. The country was destroyed, and Saddam Hussein was hanged. Listen, everyone is aware of it and everyone remembers it. North Koreans are also aware of it and remember it. Do you think that following the adoption of some sanctions, North Korea will abandon its course on creating weapons of mass destruction?
Russia condemns these exercises on the part of North Korea. We believe they are provocative in nature. However, we cannot forget about what I just said about Iraq, and what happened later in Libya. Certainly, the North Koreans will not forget it.
Sanctions of any kind are useless and ineffective in this case. As I said to one of my colleagues yesterday, they will eat grass, but they will not abandon this programme unless they feel safe.
What can ensure security? The restoration of international law. We need to advance towards dialogue between all parties concerned. It is important for all participants in this process, including North Korea, not to have any thoughts about the threat of being destroyed; on the contrary, all sides to the conflict should cooperate.
In this environment, in this situation, whipping up military hysteria is absolutely pointless; it is a dead end. Besides, North Korea has not only medium-range missiles and nuclear weapons, we know they have that, but they also have long-range artillery and multiple rocket launchers with a range of up to 60 kilometres.
It is pointless to use missile defence systems against these weapons. There are no weapons in the world that can counteract long-range artillery or multiple rocket launchers. And they can be located in such a way that they are virtually impossible to find.
In this context, military hysteria will do no good, but may lead to a global, planet-wide disaster and enormous casualties.
Diplomacy is the only way to solve the North Korean nuclear problem.
Question: My question is also related to North Korea. The US has declared that it wants to toughen sanctions and urged Russia to join them. How can such statements be evaluated given the renowned sanctions law where Russia is put on the same list as North Korea and Iran?
Vladimir Putin: True, it does not make sense to put us on the list alongside North Korea and then ask us to help with sanctions against it. But it is being done by people who confuse Austria and Australia and then ask their President to persuade Russia to toughen sanctions.
But that is not the point, we are not going to pout, hold a grudge or laugh at anyone. Our position on this issue, as well as on all other issues, is based on principles.
The point is not that we have been put on the same list with North Korea, which is absolutely absurd. I already said why I think (and our Foreign Ministry spoke about that too) that sanctions have reached their limit and are completely ineffective.
There is also the humanitarian side to this issue. No matter which option we choose to influence North Korea, its leaders will not change their policy, whereas the suffering of millions could increase many times over.
Regarding Russia, there is nothing to say here. Absolutely nothing, because our trade is almost zero. I asked the Energy Minister, who told me that we only send them 40,000 tonnes of oil and petrochemicals per quarter.
As a reminder, Russia exports over 400 million tonnes of oil and petrochemicals to the global market, so 40,000 tonnes a quarter is as good as nothing. Moreover, none of our large vertically integrated companies exports anything to North Korea. This is the first thing I wanted to say.
The second issue concerns the North Korean workforce. Indeed, we have some 30,000 North Korean workers in Russia. Is this a lot? No, this is perishably few. Should we leave these people without a means of subsistence? Besides, the Russian Far East needs more hands. Therefore, there is nothing to talk about. As the Foreign Ministry has said, the usefulness of sanctions has been exhausted.
Of course, we are willing to discuss details, but we need to consider them first. We will work on this. We are cooperating with all those involved in this process. Actually, Russia co-authored a relevant resolution, at least it became a co-author during the debates on this resolution, which has been adopted and came into force. We are complying with this resolution in full.
Question: I have a question about eastern Ukraine. Kiev has recently started promoting the idea of deploying UN peacekeepers there. Poroshenko speaks about this often, and there is even a plan according to which the idea should be taken to the UN General Assembly, which opens soon, if Russia blocks it at the Security Council. What do you think about this idea? Is it practicable, would it help?
Vladimir Putin: This is impossible to do via the General Assembly, because UN peacekeepers cannot function other than pursuant to Security Council resolutions. But that is not the point.
You are saying that someone wants to push something through. In fact, I do not see anything wrong with that. I have already said many times that I support the idea of arming the OSCE mission, but the OSCE itself refuses to arm its field personnel, since it has neither the relevant people nor the experience of such work.
In this context, I believe that the presence of UN peacekeepers, not even peacekeepers, but those who provide security for the OSCE mission, is quite appropriate and I do not see anything wrong with that; on the contrary, I believe that this would help resolve the situation in southeastern Ukraine. Of course, we can talk only about ensuring the security of the OSCE staff. This is my first point.
The second point is that, in this regard, these forces should be located on the demarcation line only and on no other territories.
Thirdly, this issue should be resolved only after disengaging the parties and removing the heavy equipment. This cannot be resolved without direct contact with representatives of the self-proclaimed Donetsk People’s Republic and Lugansk People’s Republic.
I believe that if all this is done, it would definitely benefit resolving the situation in southeastern Ukraine. We will consider this as instructions to the Foreign Ministry to submit a relevant resolution to the Security Council.
Question: Continuing the theme of Ukraine. Recently, more reports have been coming from Washington regarding discussions to provide lethal weapons to Ukraine. How serious do you think this is? If, indeed, such a decision is made, what consequences might it have?
Vladimir Putin: It is the sovereign decision of the United States whom to sell arms to or whom to supply them to free of charge. They decide what countries will be recipients of such aid. We are unable to influence this process in any way. However, there are general international rules and approaches: the supply of weapons to a conflict zone is not conducive to peace, but only aggravates the situation.
If this happens in this situation, the action, or the decision, will not change the situation fundamentally. It will not affect the situation in any way for that matter. But the number of victims could, of course, increase. I want to underscore this to make it clear for everyone: nothing will change. The number of victims may increase, which is unfortunate.
There is one more thing that those who have such ideas should pay attention to: the self-proclaimed republics have enough weapons, including those seized from the opposing side, nationalist battalions, and so on.
If American weapons start coming to the conflict zone, it is difficult to say how the proclaimed republics would react to it. They may dispatch their weapons to other conflict zones that are sensitive to those who create problems for them.
Question: Good afternoon, Mr President. The Syrian army, with the support of the Russian Air Force, has nearly succeeded in pushing ISIS militants out of the city of Deir ez-Zor. Does the new stage on the Syrian map mean now that the ISIS threat in that country has passed and will not return and that the most difficult times for Syrians are over? And what should the Syrians do in the near future?
Vladimir Putin: As for terrorism in general, it is a complex global problem. It concerns not only Syria, but also many other countries in the region, and not only that region. The main problem in this regard is that the radical groups are reenergised constantly due to poverty and a low level of education, which are a breeding ground for radicalism and terrorism.
That is why we meet at events such as BRICS and G20 summits to address these global challenges by eliminating the root causes of the threat of growing terrorism and radicalism.
As for Syria and military operations, yes, the situation there has turned around for government troops. You know that the territory controlled by the government troops has increased several-fold in the past year and a half or two, and this process is gaining momentum.
Can we say that we have done away with ISIS, Jabhat al-Nusra and other terrorist groups forever? It is probably too early to say so, but it is obvious that the situation is changing drastically in Syria.
I hope that our partners will bring the operation in Iraq to an end. Deir ez-Zor is, in fact, a military rather than a political stronghold of the radical opposition – radical in the worst sense of the word, ISIS opposition.
Once the operation in Deir ez-Zor is completed, it will mean that the terrorists have been dealt a very serious defeat, and the government forces and Assad’s government have gained undeniable advantages.
It will be necessary to take the next step in strengthening the ceasefire regime, strengthening the de-escalation zones and establishing a political process. Alongside the political process, it will be necessary to restore the economy and the social sphere. That is an enormous job, and without the help of the international community, it will be difficult for the Syrian authorities to tackle these challenges.
By the way, we also spoke about this during the talks at this summit, on the sidelines and at bilateral meetings. Practically all my colleagues agree with this and are ready to contribute to improving the humanitarian situation in Syria.
Question: Over to Russia, if you please. You have not yet given an assessment of the situation concerning film director Serebrennikov…
Vladimir Putin: We have many directors; I cannot do it for each one.
Question: He is now under house arrest.
Public opinion has split: some say that everyone is equal in the eyes of the investigation; others, on the contrary, see this as pressure on culture and mention Mikhalkov, another director that receives government funding but faces no charges. In this regard, it would be interesting to know your opinion of the situation.
Vladimir Putin: Look, in culture, just like in other areas, the expenditure of public funds is constantly monitored by law enforcement agencies. As far as I remember, maybe things have already changed, the deputy director of the Hermitage museum is under investigation, and so is the Deputy Minister of Culture. So what, now everyone needs to be released because they work in culture? This would seem strange.
Serebrennikov received state funding. This suggests he did not face any censorship, or pressure, anything, I mean, the government would have simply not given him money, and that would be that, if they wanted to limit his creativity. What does creative activity have to do with this anyway?
Yes, I know, attitudes differ to various people’s work; Serebrennikov’s work is no exception. This is simply a matter of taste: some like it, others do not. But if the government finances something, it means the attitude is at least neutral, and the funding helps the artist create, work, that is all.
The only thing the investigation wants to know is that budget funds are disposed of legitimately. This is a lot of money. If you look at the funding, it is some 300 million from the federal government, and around 700 million from the Moscow government over a period of two or three years, a total close to one billion. This is a lot of money.
And if we look at our other directors, our cultural workers, like Mikhalkov whom they mention, if the investigative bodies, the supervising bodies find that the recipient of funds is violating the existing legislation, they will face the same kind of investigation and prosecution.
As for Mikhalkov, there have not been any complaints yet, despite the fact that the monitoring agencies are working to track down all the funds received from the treasury by all cultural projects. There are regular inspections. If they spot anything to incriminate Mikhalkov, he will be inspected. So far, this is simply not the case though.
As for Serebrennikov, the authorities have no problems with him except one: compliance with the law in the use of government money. That is all. Even though he is under house arrest, this does not yet mean he is guilty.
Whether he is guilty or not only the court can decide. I hope that the investigative bodies will work quickly and finish their work as soon as possible. What will happen next – we will see.
Question: Good afternoon, Mr President. In May of this year, also in China, I asked you if the time was right to announce if you would run for President next year. You said “No” then. Four months have passed. Is the time right now to say “Yes”?
Vladimir Putin: Look, I have said this many times and I can say it again – what I will say now is very important.
As soon as an election campaign begins in Russia, everyone stops working. I have first-hand experience with this. Everyone starts thinking about what would happen after the elections, which jobs would go to whom, and so on.
People must do their job now, without relaxing attention to the job at hand even for a minute. Therefore, I am sure that those who plan to take part in the next presidential election in Russia will announce their decision within the time stipulated by the law.
Question: Since we are in China, I would like to ask about China’s mega project, the new Silk Road, at least its railway component, because it has a motorway and marine components as well.
All countries, in Europe and even across the ocean, would like to join this project. It is unclear how the route will be laid, where the railway line will leave China, and whether it will run across Russia, across Azerbaijan and Turkey, or across Belarus. Most importantly, it looks as if our Chinese partners are not eager to build the line across Russia.
Vladimir Putin: No, you are wrong. Both Russian and Chinese agencies and companies concerned, as well as partners from other countries, are analysing this matter.
You have said that the project also includes the motorway and marine components, which is true. Look, the road across Kazakhstan is almost finished. We need to accelerate our part of the work. Also, a road is being built from China.
As for railway routes, there are several options for China, and it can choose the route via Kazakhstan and then go southeast towards Iran, or possibly continue it across Russia.
As you know, China plans to contribute to the construction of a fast train line from Moscow to Kazan. We discussed the possibility of building a high-speed passenger and freight railway line across Russia during the Chinese President’s previous visit to Russia.
If we implement this project, trains will be able to move along this route at some 200 kilometres per hour. Freight trains will be a bit slower, but cargos will be delivered from Asia, or more precisely China, to, say, Germany within three of four days.
These projects are very interesting and promising, but we need to work on them some more. There is nothing in this that should be kept secret from the general public, but we do need additional expert analysis and feasibility studies.
As you may know, we are actively discussing the possibility of cooperation on the Northern Sea Route. This is fully in keeping with our common programmes; there are no contradictions whatsoever. We are also considering and implementing several other routes, for example, the North-South route.
The Prime Minister of India and I have announced that the first container loads from Mumbai have reached St Petersburg via Iran and Azerbaijan, and returned. We test all options in practice. We are working on them on a daily basis. We will see which is more effective during the preliminary trial runs and will choose the best options.
Question: Excuse me, I have yet another question about the presidential election. It is not about your candidacy but about other potential candidates. It is rumoured that there might be a female candidate.
Vladimir Putin: Never heard about this.
Question: Some say it could be Ksenia Sobchak.
Vladimir Putin: Good luck to her.
Question: It is a fact that her father has done a great deal for you and that you are grateful to him for what he did. What would you say if Ksenia ran for president? Or do you think that there are better female candidates, such as [Elvira] Nabiullina or [Tatyana] Golikova?
Vladimir Putin: It is not for me to decide who would be a better President for the Russian people. The choice is ultimately made through elections. But the law allows anyone to stand for office if done in accordance with and within the framework of the law. Ksenia Sobchak is no exception to this rule.
I have always respected her father, and I still respect him. I believe that he was an outstanding figure in modern Russian history. This is no exaggeration. I am being completely honest about this. He was also a perfectly decent person who played a big role in my life.
But such personal considerations carry no weight when it comes to presidential elections. Everything will depend on Ksenia’s platform, if she decides to run, and on how she will organise her election campaign. Her success or defeat will depend on this.
As for her plans to run for president, I have never heard about them. I am sure that there can be, and definitely will be, other candidates.
Question: There is a large and high profile case underway in Russia, Rosneft versus Sistema. Rosneft claims that Sistema has as good as stolen assets and money by withdrawing them from Bashneft. Do you support this view?
Has either company, the defendant or the plaintiff, turned to you for a consultation on this matter? Do you think their dispute can be settled out of court? Those who represent Sistema say that this conflict is worsening the investment climate in Russia. We would like to hear your opinion.
Vladimir Putin: I have held discussions on this issue both with Rosneft and with Sistema CEOs – Sechin and Yevtushenkov. I heard what they had to say on this matter.
I think it would be inappropriate for me to indicate my position on this matter publicly, but I do hope that it will be settled out of court. I believe that this would benefit both companies and the Russian economy as a whole.
I cannot be perfectly sure what turn this case will take because I have never issued any direct instructions and believe that it would be counterproductive to do so.
All the best and thank you.
Russia drafts UNSC resolution on deploying UN peacekeepers to eastern Ukraine https://t.co/bGmPaJm1kK pic.twitter.com/I4vs7v8UPp
— RT (@RT_com) September 5, 2017
thanks for posting
most important news from Vladivostok
Two shocking statements from Putin I got out of this,
“If American weapons start coming to the conflict zone, it is difficult to say how the proclaimed republics would react to it. They may dispatch their weapons to other conflict zones that are sensitive to those who create problems for them.”
“On dealing with part of US political establishment: It is difficult to talk to people who confuse Austria and Australia.”
regarding east ukraine and increase – supply of arms there by usa, Kiev is vastly over exaggerating the military establishment of Donbass to support this
“The “Ukrainian Crisis Media Center” has published the results of another sensational study conducted by this organization on money from the US Embassy in Ukraine and other “charity” funds of the West.”
Zakharchenko is happy to go along with VVP proposals, particularly as offensive action by ukraine forces continues , and another supposed ceasefire fails.
Quoting the President, “It is difficult to talk to people who confuse Austria and Australia. But there is nothing we can do about this; this is the level of political culture among part of the American establishment. As for the American people, America is truly a great nation if the Americans can put up with so many politically uncivilised people.”
Wow! That’s a dig. Many would have had a chuckle at that. There is more than a little truth in the Austria/Australia barb. On the other hand, it is very serious that the President had to make comments like these. It shows just how severe the loss of prestige and respect for the USA government around the world really is- a self-generated loss at that. More seriously it says the USA government is irrational and dishonourable. It is being said openly and publically at the highest level. It will not be only the President speaking like this now. This is a signal. A point in the public dialogue has been crossed. Respect has been lost and it is not coming back. Legitimacy is next on the line now.
Quoting the President, “So, to begin with, I will ask our Foreign Ministry to file a lawsuit. We will see how effectively the much-lauded American judicial system works.”
This is another dig but it contains something that will hurt bad. The action puts the US judicial system and its interests to the test. A choice must be made. Do they apply justice and law or do they comply with political masters? Should the first option be taken, then the Executive and Legislative branches of the US Government are publically and officially admonished as law breakers. That would be serious. Should the second option be taken, then the judicial system is revealed as corrupt for all the world to see. That would be even more serious. Internationally, as well as domestically, this accelerates loss of legitimacy.
Quoting, “So strictly speaking, the number of American diplomats in Moscow should be not 455 but 155 fewer, if we are talking about parity.”
A warning that there is a lot more that can happen in this space. He is warning the US. Is this is really the path they wish to continue heading down? They probably will, but it is not going to be cost free. A continued weakening and violation of the international system of diplomacy is going to hurt the US govt far more than the Russian in the long run. For a start, other nations with diplomatic missions in the US will have to be concerned about what is going on with this matter. People will begin to ask whether it is possible to have a secure diplomatic mission in the USA and, if not, whether it is possible to practice diplomacy with the USA government. Can there be enough trust for that? Should the investment to do so be continued to be made? You cannot underestimate the seriousness of this.
Quoting, “If American weapons start coming to the conflict zone, it is difficult to say how the proclaimed republics would react to it. They may dispatch their weapons to other conflict zones that are sensitive to those who create problems for them.”
Now THAT is a warning. Make a list. Let’s see. Beginning with the “A”s. A is for Afghanistan… Continue the list. There are so many candidates. Goodness, gracious! Weapons turning up in all sorts of places and causing all sorts of difficulties. Where do they come from? Don’t know. Not from Russia. See, there is a plausible deniability. Here is a tactic being turned against those who have previously employed same. This is a big warning in big bold capital letters. See, a lot of servicemen coming home in body-bags from military adventures won’t go down well in the USA, especially not in the heartlands where the bulk of volunteers come from.
I have not seen this level of stern warning before in my time. The war is on. It is still able to be dialled back, but the end-game is very close if a dial-back does not occur.
Anyone note what Sept 5 is in history?
Russo-Japan War I FEB8/1904- SEP5/1905:
President Theodore Roosevelt of the United States served as mediator at the peace conference, which was held at Portsmouth, N.H., U.S. (Aug. 9-Sept. 5, 1905). In the resulting Treaty of Portsmouth, Japan gained control of the Liaotung Peninsula (and Port Arthur) and the South Manchurian railroad (which led to Port Arthur), as well as half of Sakhalin Island. Russia agreed to evacuate southern Manchuria, which was restored to China, and Japan’s control of Korea was recognized…
OK, it’s also the day the 535 traitors return to “work” on the hill;
Sadly, there are questions and answers left out of the transcript from the video.
One having to do with Myanmar and Kadyrov’s statements and another having to do with possible impeachment facing Trump.
The Q&A translation is there but not the transcription.
Noted this article this morning-speculation at this point but it could indicate that the thuggishness could really be driven by property theft:
Did anyone notice that the press questions were all ones that a President “should” be asked . I didn’t see a single “gotta” question.Minus the Myanmar/Kadyrov question ,”of course” from a Western news agency. But even that one was “mild” by Western standards. No shouting to ask questions. No obvious disrespect shown by the reporters.No looking for ways to “expose” something in the President’s words.In other words ,what a “real” press conference is for.
Which highlights even more the disgraceful media circus of press conferences we see in the West. And nowhere more so than in the US.Is it because the Russians set strict guidelines on the decorum demanded for these occasions? I suspect it is. And its something that the US should implement as well. We might “actually” hear about important issues then. Instead of Russiagate,whose hired or fired in the White House,what the length of the First Lady’s shoe heels are today. Whether the President is showing the accepted amount of sympathy over weather disaster victims,etc,etc,etc. All very important issues I’m sure ,for a “reality TV” show.They wouldn’t standout at all on “Jerry Springer”. But of zero importance for a President to comment on. And an absolute disgrace for “supposed” journalists to be asking.
Putin must have had a funny movie night last weekend:
Dumb And Dumber | Austria vs Australia
Listen and read these wise words from President Putin and let them sink into your minds:
“Everyone remembers well what happened to Iraq and Saddam Hussein. Hussein abandoned the production of weapons of mass destruction. Nonetheless, under the pretext of searching for these weapons, Saddam Hussein himself and his family were killed during the well-known military operation”.
“Even children died back then. His grandson, I believe, was shot to death. The country was destroyed, and Saddam Hussein was hanged. Listen, everyone is aware of it and everyone remembers it. North Koreans are also aware of it and remember it. Do you think that following the adoption of some sanctions, North Korea will abandon its course on creating weapons of mass destruction?”
“However, we cannot forget about what I just said about Iraq, and what happened later in Libya. Certainly, the North Koreans will not forget it.”
“Sanctions of any kind are useless and ineffective in this case. As I said to one of my colleagues yesterday, they will eat grass, but they will not abandon this programme unless they feel safe.”
The conclusions that must be drawn are the following:
1. Anyone in his right mind knows that the North Koreans have no choice than to nuclear arm themselves for protection.
2. Russia and China cannot protect any nation against the Western-Zionist alliance, because they are not willing to go to war for any allies or countries.
3. North Korea must as soon as possible guarantee that they have the capabilities of making an attack on North Korea extremely costly to the US or to its vassal Asian Pacific states.
North Koreans must do everything in their power to acquire as much nukes and capabilities to punish and physically and economically destroy as much nations as they can in the event of an attack on their homeland…….Its all or nothing.
They cannot and will not allow another complete and utter devastating US massacre on their country without taking as much US allies as they can down with them.
The North Koreans have to make sure that the American generals think a million times before they give the orders (and their advice) to execute a strike on North Korea, while at them same time trying as much as they can to humiliate the Americans, by taunting them and ridiculing them.
It is a two fold strategy:
1. Deterrence and 2. humiliating and destroying America’s image of invincibility…..hopefully setting a precedence for other nations to follow suit.
Absolutely well played by the North Koreans…..
@ Harry Red
Well put HR! I have read many justifications for the North Korean weapons development where the stress is on legitimate self-defence against an ogre state. But humiliating the Ogre is the icing and cherry on the cake. Brilliant
And the lesson to the world is: if you want to defend yourself against the Ogre develop your own nuclear weapons. If “impoverished backward” NK can do it, so can you.
Predictable and understandable strategy by DPRK (exactly as President Putin identifies). And don’t forget the DPRK are still at war with the USA and they know full well what occurred to others elsewhere in the world not so long ago (again, exactly as President Putin identifies).
It must also be remembered that the DPRK regime is a brutal horror show. Further, that nuclear weapons are an obscene immorality. They are designed to kill on a vast scale and they are not intended to spare non-combatants. These fiendish devices truly are one of the greatest barbarities of governments.
There is a saying that the possession of large standing armies necessarily leads to their eventual use (that is, sooner or later they go to war). It is a similar deal with nuclear weapons, possession eventually leads to use. The more governments that have them, the more likely it is that one or more will use them.
1. The US is single handily responsible for triggering the nuclear arms race and is the first and only nation on Earth to have used them on an adversary.
2. For any nation on Earth to guarantee its independence from the US-Western-Zionist alliance, they will need a substantial nuclear weapons capability to at least be able to destroy a significant amount of nations who are allied with the Western-Zionist alliance within their region. This is in the event of them being attacked by the Western-Zionist alliance.
Whether they are a horror show or not is irrelevant from a strategical point of view.
3. Or they will need to be able to significantly destroy US interests in their region, disrupting the global economy.
It is the basic requirement for independence from this alliance……even a 3 year old child can understand this.
You want to be independent ?? …..Arm yourself with enough deterrence in the form of Nuclear weapons capabilities.
You do not care or want to be independent ?? ……you will survive, but under complete or partial servitude to the Western-Zionist alliance.
“……you will survive, but under complete or partial servitude to the Western-Zionist alliance.”
this is a fallacy –
no vassal state will survive either because her people will be made transgender neutral
and die off / be replaced while their culture gets erased.
welcome to the western-zionist shopping mall.
re VVP plan peacekeepers Donbass
“September 6, 2017, the Donetsk People’s Republic
On peacekeepers in Donbass
Eva Merkuryeva, independent journalist from Donetsk
Ukraine, certainly, can only see one and only one version of the introduction of a UN peacekeeping force in Donbass conflict settlement. (President Putin said yesterday at the BRICS summit that Russia is not against the deployment of UN peacekeeping troops on the demarcation line in Donbass to guarantee safety of the OSCE Monitoring Mission – Truth about the Situation in Ukraine). The regime wants to deploy it along the border, in order for the camarilla of butchers to plan and carry out an operation similar to Storm that took place in Serbian Krajina. Not accidentally Croats [military experts] have been frequenting Kiev recently.
Ukraine does not want any peacekeepers on the demarcation line, wouldn’t give them time of a day. Inasmuch as the peacekeeping corps means quitting the shelling, withdrawal of armaments deep into the rear and other unpleasant for the Ukrainian side actions. The Right Sector members and other radicals would rebel – they will have nothing to occupy themselves with in conditions of the “peaceful peace” that would not resemble the victory they so much wish.
Too many actors in Ukraine are ears deep in the war – they receive all kinds of benefits from it – thus, they cannot agree to just stop if like that. Besides, no Ukrainian official has any idea about some kind of negotiations with Donbass.
Poroshenko is hurt: Putin did not give him a chance to stage another “peaceful peace” performance at the UN session and cherish the dream of conferring all the responsibility on the peacekeepers. His plan got nipped in the bud.
It will be interesting to watch the developments at the UN Security Council meeting. Ukraine that has been advocating the deployment of peacekeepers for three years, is now strongly against the idea. It wants another kind of peacekeepers, not on Putin’s suggestion, deployed along the different border – with Russia, not with the Republics, as peacekeeping force on the demarcation line will destroy the entire Ukrainian portrayal of the events. Especially if it consists of, say, Belorussians, Kazakhs or Chinese – it will be an epic betrayal!
Thus, the UN will face a serious problem – they will have to react to the resolution put forward by Lavrov. We are witnessing the fiasco of Poroshenko’s peacekeepers plan. He will have to invent another pretext for visiting New York.”