Website of the President of Russia: Photos: Media Events

Results of the Year with Vladimir Putin

2025-12-23T20:05:21+04:00

Vladimir Putin answered questions from journalists and the people of Russia in a live broadcast.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Good afternoon.

We are broadcasting live from Moscow.

We, Pavel Zarubin…

Pavel Zarubin: … and Yekaterina Berezovskaya…

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: … welcome all our viewers from Gostiny Dvor.

Pavel Zarubin: The President will be joining us in just a few minutes. Of course, we are all looking forward to this, since we all have so many questions. Yekaterina and I are well aware of the fact that we received tens of thousands, even millions of questions from our television audience. At the same time, we don’t yet know what questions matter most to you, journalists from the leading media outlets. Right now, you have a unique opportunity.

We can see that you are recording everything, but may I ask you to stop just for a moment, and listen to us?

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Colleagues, we can see that you have already taken your seats. Now, it’s time to put your phones aside, even if you are using them to record us or your colleagues around you or scrolling through the news to learn about the latest developments, as we journalists so often do. The main news messages will be coming very soon, just be patient. They will come from our studio when the President joins us. For now, we have a few minutes to talk to each other.

As Pavel has said, we are working live, and the entire country can see and hear you.

Colleagues, do not be shy, since you have a unique opportunity to ask your question.

Please, introduce yourself. Which media outlet do you represent?

Remark: When I looked into your big, beautiful eyes, I knew that you would turn to me. This was inevitable. After all, I am from Belarus.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Belarus. What is on the minds of people in Belarus? What is your question about?

Remark: First and foremost, the development of our shared home, the Union State, is what matters for Belarus, along with the threats we have had to counter together with Russia.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Thank you very much.

Indeed, we are about to begin the media event of the year. This is reflected in every detail. We have representatives of regional media outlets, as well as our foreign colleagues, and guests from the Union State. There are all kinds of people in this hall. This will be a true question-and-answer marathon.

Pavel Zarubin: The hall is divided into sections, and I should mention that from here, from the central podium, we have a perfect view of everyone. So when you raise your hand to ask a question, the President will see you.

I’ll start with this sector, and I can’t move past the front row. We have some very young journalists here. How old are you?

Remark: Hello! I’m 13.

Pavel Zarubin: Where are you from, and what media do you represent?

Remark: We’re from Moscow, representing a youth media, Detskaya Redaktsiya (the Children’s Editorial Board).

Pavel Zarubin: A journalist at 13, and right in the front row. What is your question? If it’s not a secret, of course.

Remark: We would like to know how the President receives the valuable information as to what our people really need.

Pavel Zarubin: Well, over these past few weeks we have all been receiving a great deal of valuable information and we continue to do so today. So I would say this array of information is already valuable.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Absolutely. Pavel, you know, my main question for our colleagues is this: how do you actually capture the President’s attention? We know there is going to be a real battle for Vladimir Putin’s focus today. You and I have seen this before – we know how the atmosphere in the hall is about to heat up.

I will now turn to a young lady wearing a kokoshnik. Earlier this year, the President noted that the kokoshnik is no joke – it’s more than just a symbol of our traditional costume. What would you like to ask? Where are you from? Please, introduce yourself.

Yulia Korotkova: Good afternoon. My name is Yulia Korotkova. I am a presenter with the Volga and Volga-24 NNTV channels from the Nizhny Novgorod Region. And this outfit isn’t just about beauty – it represents our region. The red colour, the kudrina pattern, the Khokhloma style.

My question touches on more than just our artistic craft; it is also about the ban on vaping. It is a very serious issue.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: It is a highly relevant topic, too. These questions have been coming up, and I’m sure they will be addressed here today.

Pavel, let’s continue meeting our colleagues.

What does your sign say here?

Remark: This word, “ychchuu,” is from the Yakut language, meaning “cold.” It signals our question to the President about energy prices – a critical issue for us. This is especially important considering that in the Arctic and the North, the so called Far Eastern allowance (a bonus to the salary) is being applied, but its application is somewhat limited. We absolutely want to raise this issue.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Thank you very much.

I should note that everyone now has small placards. The situation is quite different from several years ago.

Pavel Zarubin: That’s right. In previous years, people didn’t just come with placards – you could say they arrived with full-scale banners. They practically staged demonstrations. These banners were so large that they blocked the cameras, interfered with the broadcast image, and even obstructed the journalists themselves. After that, there were understandable requests for more restraint and for placards to be limited to A4 size. Still, as we know, our people are endlessly inventive.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Pavel, look, here it’s not even a placard, yet the subject of the question is clear. But still…

Remark: The word “Astrakhan” is written on a figurine of a Caspian roach. Our question concerns the development of the North–South international transport corridor and the problem of the shallowing of the Volga, which impacts not only the population but also the natural environment, in particular aquatic biological resources.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Colleagues, I would like to draw your attention to how many regional journalists are present here today. In a sense, each of you serves as a conduit to your region. You are not simply members of the press – you will genuinely guide us and voice the specific concerns of the people in each of your regions.

Pavel Zarubin: We really shouldn’t have moved on from this area. I see a young lady here with Labubu dolls. Is that right? I have to admit, I’m not entirely familiar. Who is depicted here and why?

Regina Orekhova: Even I’m not sure of the correct term. We brought them with us. Regina Orekhova, Channel 360. These Labubus became a real sensation – in a good way – at the St Petersburg International Economic Forum, almost attaining symbolic status. We came up with a trend for early 2025: pairing them with the faces of our politicians.

Pavel Zarubin: And who do you have there?

Regina Orekhova: Elvira Nabiullina, Sergei Lavrov – do you recognise them? Mikhail Mishustin. And an exclusive item: Donald Trump. As you might guess, my question will be about international politics. I hope to catch the attention of the President or Dmitry Peskov. By the way, there’s also a figurine with Mr Peskov’s face.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: So, it could just as well have been a question about import substitution.

Let’s give the floor to the Amur Region. What question are you going to ask President Putin?

Irina Batina: Good afternoon. My name is Irina Batina. I represent the Amur Region Television, Blagoveshchensk.

We have come here to invite the President to a unique international event, held on the ice of the Amur River. Blagoveshchensk is the only regional capital located directly on the state border.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: That sounds more like an invitation than a question.

Irina Batina: Yes, it’s an invitation. We’ve handed over our symbols – a panda and a brown bear. We hope they will reach our President.

As for our question, we would like to ask if visa-free travel for Russians to China and for the citizens of China to visit us in Blagoveshchensk, will be promoted. It’s an incredible feeling when you have one foot in Russia and the other in China. We invite our President to experience it for himself.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Thank you very much.

Pavel, what’s happening in your sector?

Pavel Zarubin: I simply can’t walk past the only journalist here who is a Hero of Russia – Yevgeny Poddubny.

Good afternoon, Yevgeny. This applause is for you. I know you always have many questions. What do you want to ask today?

Yevgeny Poddubny: Of course, I have a question, but I don’t want to give it all away. I’ll just say that it concerns hundreds of thousands of people across the country, including those in frontline regions where fighting is underway. That’s why it’s especially important for me to ask it.

Pavel Zarubin: Do your best, keep raising your hand.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Colleagues, we’ve just taken our viewers on a virtual tour of the hall, introducing our regional journalists and luminaries. I’d like to give the floor to Anton Vernitsky.

Anton, what are you doing?

Anton Vernitsky: You won’t believe it, but I’m streaming for our channel.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Just like that?

Anton Vernitsky: Yes, I’m doing two jobs at once, running two live broadcasts simultaneously.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: That’s impressive. How many major events like the annual news conference have you attended? What was it like in the past, and what is it like now, this Results of the Year with Vladimir Putin event?

Anton Vernitsky: Yes, I was just thinking about that. The first large news conference for regional and foreign journalists was held in 2001. It was really something new. The first time it was held was in 2001. As for how many I have attended, the answer is 22. That’s a lot –I might even be a record holder. Somebody asked me today: “Can we talk or take a photo with you? You were one of the first to attend this event.”

Actually, there are many such people, like Alexander Gamov from Komsomolskaya Pravda. I know that he’s in the hall today; we were just talking about it.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: There he is – Alexander is waving to you, over there, closer to Pavel.

Anton Vernitsky: You know, we look forward to this news conference every year because we always hear something new. This time, I’ve taken a strategic position – right in the centre.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Absolutely.

Anton Vernitsky: I really hope I will get a chance to ask my question.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: It really is a long-anticipated event, and our programme, Results of the Year with Vladimir Putin, will begin in just a few minutes.

Colleagues, I would like to emphasise that we are already live on air, and that the entire country can see and hear you. We always have a huge audience since viewers take a lot of interest in events of this kind. There are likely tens of millions of people watching this broadcast.

Pavel Zarubin: Of course, we received many serious questions. It goes without saying that you contributed the bulk of the serious questions. That said, there were all kinds of questions. Here is what I noted. For example, there was a question on when we will have a banknote with an image of the Oreshnik missile? This is what our viewers want to know. “Who does the President find harder to communicate with when making important decisions: his opponents, allies or himself?” There was also a question on who is better, Messi or Ronaldo – it also came from a children’s editorial board, it seems. Here is another question for Vladimir Putin: Would you like your knowledge to be digitised and used by artificial intelligence in the future?

Still, we have no doubt that today you will be asking the very best questions.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: I am sure that these will be the best questions. I would like to draw the attention of our colleagues to this young man with a placard that reads, “I want to get married.” And over there is a young lady, as my colleagues tell me, with poster saying, “I want a husband.” Why are you sitting so far apart from each other? Where is the young lady who wants to get married? Here she is.

Pavel Zarubin: They should be sitting together, it seems.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: May I ask you to introduce yourself. Demographics is, of course, a very important topic. I assume that is what your question is about.

Remark: Yes, I want to ask a question about demographics, especially since I know whom I want to marry. We’ve been together for eight years now. We met in school. I’m from Yekaterinburg – in fact, from Pavel’s home region. I work at the same TV channel, Channel 4. Overall, I very much hope that this wonderful placard will help me attract the President’s attention.

Pavel Zarubin: I didn’t put off my marriage for such a long time.

Deputy Chief of Staff of the Presidential Executive Office – Presidential Press Secretary Dmitry Peskov: Friends,

We are delighted to see all of you here. In just a few minutes the President will be joining us, and we will start the Results of the Year with Vladimir Putin programme.

Let me remind you that this is a hybrid format, combining the annual news conference with the Direct Line with the head of state. Having this direct engagement is something unique for the entire world. Over the past two weeks, we have received almost three million messages from the people. This is why we will be switching back and forth between questions from the people – the ones we received and which were selected by the moderators and the President himself, and the questions from journalists. As usual, I will ask you to raise your hand. Please, try to be as brief as possible when asking your questions. The briefer you make your question, the more of your colleagues will be able to ask their question as well.

Let me remind you that everything said during the Direct Line and the news conference undergoes extensive scrutiny and serves as a basis for drafting a list of presidential instructions. This will be the case this time too. And the Russian Popular Front will work throughout the year to make sure that no request we receive from the people is left unanswered, to review all of them and offer the needed assistance. Municipal, regional and federal government agencies contribute to these efforts.

I would like to ask you to mute your phones so that they do not distract us. The President will be joining us very shortly. Let us stay focused. We will be starting soon.

Thank you.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Yes, thank you, Mr Peskov.

But I would like to quote the President, who once said that “every rule and every law become outdated already in the course of its development and adoption. Only direct communication with people <…> helps the state steer its policy <…> in the right direction.” Perhaps this is the primary purpose of this programme: direct communication and the opportunity to keep one’s finger on the pulse of current events.

Pavel Zarubin: Yekaterina, it has happened in the past that new laws were adopted or amendments were made to existing laws following direct lines. It’s very likely that we will see the same happen today.

The Popular Front has once again offered enormous support with processing questions. Both volunteers and veterans of the special military operation have been taking calls. By the way, when the questions first started coming in, I asked the Director of the Popular Front: “You have received an immense number of questions. What are you going to do with them? Will you forward them to the same institutions that gave people the runaround before?” “No,” he answered, “We will take charge of following through on the most urgent matters.” And this is exactly what happened – right up until we went on air.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: That’s right. As a matter of fact, we also have a virtual assistant called GigaChat. But I’ve been told we are ready to start. Here we go.

President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin.

We will be accepting questions and inquiries until the end of this live programme. As always, there are several options: you can call 8 (800) 200 4040, send an SMS or MMS message to 0 4040, or submit your question via VK, Odnoklassniki, moskva-putinu.ru, or the MAX chat bot. By the way, we are using MAX for the first time this year and it’s been incredibly popular. As for the number of questions, by this very moment we have received over 2.5 million.

Pavel Zarubin: We are about to start asking the President questions. Just a few more things.

Yekaterina and I have reviewed tens of thousands of your questions. They have come from across Russia and beyond. Of course, these two million questions come from different people, although they often concern similar issues. We have grouped them into topics that are truly relevant to millions of people. And we all know which topic concerns the public most of all.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Mr President, numerous questions are coming in regarding social policy, yet the main inquiries concern war and peace.

You have made it clear on several occasions that we are ready for peace negotiations; however, at the same time, we are satisfied with the dynamics on the frontlines. So, what is it to be – war or peace? What path guarantees the attainment of the goals of the special military operation? What is the situation on the negotiation track, given Vladimir Zelensky’s statement in Berlin that Ukraine is not ready to discuss the territorial issue?

President of Russia Vladimir Putin: So far we really do not see such readiness.

Let me remind you how it all began. It began with the 2014 coup d’état in Ukraine and the deception over the potential resolution of all issues through the Minsk agreements. In 2022, when everything had already reached a breaking point, when the Kiev regime unleashed war in southeastern Ukraine, we made it clear to them: listen, we will have no choice but to recognise those unrecognised republics. It would be preferable if you simply let the people live peacefully as they wish, without your coups, without Russophobia and so on – just withdraw your troops from those territories, and that is all.

They did not accept that, even then. Following the negotiations in Istanbul, they first agreed, virtually initialled [the agreements], and then reneged, discarding all these arrangements. Today, they are essentially refusing to end this conflict by peaceful means. Nevertheless, we perceive and are aware of certain signals, including from the Kiev regime, indicating that they are prepared to engage in some form of dialogue.

The only point I wish to convey, and we have always stated this, is that we are ready and willing to conclude this conflict by peaceful means, based on the principles I outlined in June of last year at the Russian Foreign Ministry, provided that the root causes that led to this crisis are eliminated.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Mr President, the situation on the frontlines changes daily; we have seen, time and again, and know, that you always keep your finger on the pulse, personally engaging with commanders and our fighters. Yet, I repeat, the situation changes every day, and our forces are advancing confidently and daringly.

As Supreme Commander-in-Chief, how do you assess the situation at the moment?

Vladimir Putin: I have just received another report from the Chief of the General Staff.

In general, here’s what I would like to say. Basically, ever since our forces drove the enemy from the Kursk Region, the strategic initiative has been firmly in the hands of the Russian Armed Forces. What does this mean? It means that our forces are advancing along the entire line of contact, faster in some areas, a little slower in others, but in all directions. The adversary is being pushed back.

The key thing, and we started with that when we said that we had offered the Kiev regime to withdraw their troops from the territory of the then-unrecognised republics that did not want to live under the pressure of nationalists: the Kiev regime had already constructed, over the course of a decade, a fortified area in the Slavyansk–Kramatorsk–Konstantinovka agglomeration – this is their principal fortified area.

Let’s begin there. What’s the situation? Just recently, the Chief of the General Staff, the group commander, and local commanders, including the brigade commander who was in my office, reported the capture of Seversk. This is a key town that provides a staging point for an advance towards one of the main fortified areas in this urban area – Slavyansk.

Meanwhile, a little further south, our units are also conducting active and successful operations in the southern Liman sector. Our troops are already inside the city of Krasny Liman, engaged in street fighting. I expect it to fall very shortly. We currently control roughly half the city, and the advance will press southward, towards Slavyansk.

As I mentioned, this urban area also includes Konstantinovka. Fighting is ongoing there as well, and we hold over 50 percent of the city. I have no doubt our forces will secure that area too.

The capture of Krasnoarmeysk was a particularly significant development. It opens up several opportunities… The high command has yet to finalise the exact axis of advance, but it provides an excellent springboard for future offensive operations.

Just to the north-northeast, the city of Dimitrov – another critical locality and strategic foothold – is now completely encircled. I believe our troops already control about half of it. The enemy has not been given orders to surrender and is attempting to break out in small groups.

They have made attempts to retake at least a portion of Krasnoarmeysk, but without success. They are sustaining heavy losses there and have made no headway.

Separately, our Vostok Group of Forces is advancing rapidly through the Zaporozhye Region, liberating one community after another. As you know, combat is currently taking place in Gulyaipole. The city is divided by the river, with the main part on the right bank. Our troops have crossed that water obstacle, entered the city, and now control approximately 50 percent of it. However, not all of our forces are committed to this urban fight; a significant portion continues to advance from east to west, systematically clearing settlements across the region.

In addition, we are establishing security zones. On the Sumy axis, the city of Volchansk has been taken. And in the Kharkov Region, as is widely known, the city of Kupyansk came under our control several weeks ago. Our forces are consolidating their hold there. They are not yet pushing west because they have a critical prior task: eliminating the enemy grouping on the left bank of the Oskol River and securing the key rail junction of Kupyansk-Uzlovoy. The encircled force in that pocket is substantial – about 15 battalions, as I’ve said, roughly 3,500 personnel. They, too, have not received orders to lay down their arms. Their position is practically hopeless, as they are tightly surrounded by our Armed Forces.

Once that operation is concluded – and it will be – our units will then redirect westward. I am confident, absolutely confident, that before the year’s end, we will see further significant successes by our Armed Forces all along the line of contact.

Pavel Zarubin: What is the situation in Seversk? Why was it so difficult to seize that city?

Vladimir Putin: You probably saw and heard the reports from the Chief of the General Staff, the commanders of the group of forces and the army, as well as the commander of the brigade that was fighting there. I asked him: “How do you assess the situation in Seversk? Are you safely controlling the city?” He replied: “Mr President, we are already moving west. My brigade has advanced about 1.5 to 2 kilometres in the western direction, and we keep moving.”

You also probably remember that part of our meeting when an assault group reported live about capturing Seversk right from the city. You may recall that at the end of that report, I asked them to quickly change their position. Yesterday – I think it was yesterday – at the Defence Ministry [Board] meeting, after the meeting, the Defence Ministry Board meeting, I presented decorations – yes, I think it was yesterday or the day before – to our men who liberated Seversk.

After that, I returned to the Kremlin and asked the commander of that assault group to come to the Kremlin too. I wanted to talk with him about current matters. I sometimes do that when there is such a possibility. He arrived while I was discussing preparations for today’s event with my colleagues. He entered the Security Council room where we were meeting. I asked him: “Please, say a few words so that my colleagues know what the situation in Seversk is now, and what it was like.” And he started talking right there and then, reporting briefly.

When he left the room, my colleagues asked: “Can we invite him to the Direct Line?” I replied: “I don’t know, you’ll have to ask him if he has time for that. His leave is very short.” They called him, and he agreed to come.

Here he is, Naran Ochir-Goryayev. (Applause.)

Dmitry Peskov: Give him the microphone, please.

Vladimir Putin: Naran, please sit down. Have I told everything correctly?

Naran Ochir-Goryayev: Yes, sir.

Vladimir Putin: If anyone has any questions about the current situation in Seversk and what the fighting there was like, you can ask them now. That will be the best way.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Colleagues, let’s welcome our Hero of Russia, who is with us today. (Applause.)

Pavel Zarubin: Naran, we saw you during that videoconference – you were the one in the helmet – but we don’t know you. Can you tell us about yourself? Where are you from? How long have you been participating in the special military operation? Where did you start?

Naran Ochir-Goryayev: I’m from Kalmykia. I joined the fighting at Soledar, starting as a rank-and-file assault soldier and rising to assault company commander.

Vladimir Putin: Naran is too modest. He started as a driver, and now he is an assault company commander with over 80 subordinates. He has been awarded the title of Hero of Russia for his service. (Applause.)

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Naran, we, and I think the journalists here all saw your video conference with Mr President. When you spoke, the connection was unstable, which is understandable given the conditions [on the front line]. But now that we have an opportunity to talk to you directly, could you please share the details of that brilliant operation to liberate Seversk, or at least as many as possible. How did you liberate the city? What was it like? And how did your men, your subordinates act in that situation?

Vladimir Putin: Let me ask the questions I posed to Naran when he entered the Security Council hall. I asked, “Mr Ochir-Goryayev, what was the most challenging aspect of capturing Seversk?”

Naran Ochir-Goryayev: The most difficult part was reaching Seversk undetected, as the terrain was open with minimal natural cover. Therefore, we decided to advance in small, covert groups. This task was accomplished. We gathered under the enemy’s nose and, once assembled, we waited for the order to begin the assault.

Pavel Zarubin: There were also many civilians remaining in the city. How did the Armed Forces of Ukraine treat these people?

Naran Ochir-Goryayev: The civilians were under constant…

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: In fear, of course, under the direst conditions.

Naran Ochir-Goryayev: They were constantly under enemy pressure. Once we liberated our designated zone in Seversk, we began engaging with the civilians. As they retreated, the Armed Forces of Ukraine, much like the Nazis, shot civilians who refused to leave with them.

Pavel Zarubin: So, these were unarmed civilians, and they were shot simply for staying behind?

Naran Ochir-Goryayev: Yes, precisely because they stayed.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: When our troops arrived, when you entered, how did the people react? What did they say?

Naran Ochir-Goryayev: When we arrived, the people were in a dire state – physically and morally broken. When they first saw us, they were overjoyed, truly overjoyed. They had even been secretly listening to Russian radio, awaiting our arrival. They were immensely relieved.

Vladimir Putin: Mr Ochir-Goryayev, you mentioned that the AFU executed civilians as they retreated. But you also explicitly stated that primarily young people were targeted, correct?

Naran Ochir-Goryayev: Yes, young people. Particularly those aged 30 to 40 were taken out and executed without trial or investigation.

Pavel Zarubin: Everyone indiscriminately?

Naran Ochir-Goryayev: Yes, everyone.

Pavel Zarubin: How do you assess the current situation on this sector of the front?

Naran Ochir-Goryayev: The situation is stable. As the President noted, we have advanced beyond Seversk.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Mr Ochir-Goryayev, looking at you and listening to you, I must say again that our fighters are true heroes, real men. Thank you for your service. I’d like to ask, what is the morale of your troops?

Naran Ochir-Goryayev: Our lads are determined. We are acting methodically and consciously, upholding the course set by the Supreme Commander-in-Chief. The objectives of the special military operation will be achieved.

Pavel Zarubin: Mr Ochir-Goryayev, how many personnel are under your command? And, if possible, what losses have you sustained?

Naran Ochir-Goryayev: My assault group consists of 157 people. For the capture of the community, as I mentioned earlier, 24 teams totalling 84 personnel were deployed. Losses were minimal due to our small-group tactics. During the capture, four personnel were lost.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Out of 157?

Naran Ochir-Goryayev: Out of 84.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Out of 84.

Naran Ochir-Goryayev: Those directly involved in the assault operations.

Pavel Zarubin: Let us once again welcome and thank the Hero of Russia.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Thank you very much.

Pavel Zarubin: Given all this, I have to ask: a week ago, [Vladimir] Zelensky supposedly filmed a video in front of the Kupyansk stele. But many people quickly called it a fake, pointing to various inconsistencies as proof. If it really is staged, why would he resort to a forgery of this scale at such a critical time?

Vladimir Putin: I don’t know; I don’t follow that. He’s an actor – a talented one, I’ll say that without irony. We remember him from his old films. So, it’s not exactly out of character. They say the actual stele looks completely different now.

But that’s not even the main point. That stele is about a kilometre from the city proper. If Kupyansk is really under their control, why linger on the doorstep? Why not simply enter?

Meanwhile, some female bloggers actually managed to slip in there. Thankfully, they came out unharmed.

Let me tell you, the skies there are simply swarming with drones, like flies, from both sides. You can’t just take a stroll into Kupyansk.

The time will come when our forces will complete their mission to eliminate the encircled group on the river’s east bank, they will turn west, and it will happen pretty soon. They will take it all back. It’s just a matter of time. There are no problems here.

As for these staged stunts, or their desperate attempts to regain lost ground, like what they’re trying now near Krasnoarmeysk, they’re failing there, too. Their bigger problem is this: due to the active and effective operations of our troops, it seems the enemy has exhausted its strategic reserves. They’ve suffered very serious losses; there are practically none left. This, I hope, is a significant factor that should encourage the Ukrainian regime in Kiev to resolve all disputes and end this conflict by peaceful means. Their reserves are practically gone.

Pavel Zarubin: I think everyone watching, and everyone here, understands that war places a heavy burden on any economy. Yet, European “swine underlings,” as you recently called them, continue doing everything in their power to, as they say, ruin the Russian economy.

Under such difficult conditions, can we even speak of further economic growth? Are we seeing growth in some sectors but not others? And if so, which ones?

Vladimir Putin: You know, I usually bring a spreadsheet to every Direct Line. This is nothing confidential – it’s open data on the performance of the Russian economy over the past year. Our GDP growth is 1 percent; however, if we take the previous three years – this sort of review is also meaningful –, the overall growth has been 9.7 percent. Meanwhile, the Eurozone has shown 3.1 percent.

As for the 1 percent growth this year and the economic growth rate in general, they are the result of deliberate actions by the Government, the Central Bank and the country’s leadership to target inflation. I should note that overall, we have been able to handle this task because the goal was set to lower the inflation rate to at least 6 percent. We can see now that by the end of the year, the inflation rate will fall even further, to around 5.7–5.8 percent. Slowing economic growth was a deliberate step to maintain the quality of the economy and the macroeconomic indicators.

What else is happening? Industrial production has grown by 1 percent while the processing industry is up 3.1 percent. Agricultural production has increased by 3.3 percent.

Housing construction is an important area. Millions of square metres have been built. Last year, the total was 107.8 million square metres. This year, output is slightly lower although still considerable, around 103˗105 million.

We have managed to maintain good real wage growth. The rates are not as high as last year, but in my opinion, they provide a solid real wage. Adjusted for inflation, real wages have increased by 4.5 percent.

Unfortunately, it must be admitted frankly that, over the same period, labour productivity growth has been rather modest, only 1.1 percent. Of course, we should make effort to improve this ratio in favour of higher labour productivity.

Last year, the unemployment rate was at a historic low of 2.5 percent. This year, it has fallen further to 2.2 percent. Overall, these are excellent indicators.

The Central Bank’s international reserves are also growing. I spoke with Ms Nabiullina yesterday: as of a few days ago, the reserves amounted to $741.5 billion if we use the US dollar equivalent.

The federal budget deficit stands at 2.6 percent. We expect it to fall to 1.6 percent next year and 1.5 percent within the next three years. This is a good indicator, considering that the national debt remains very low, one of the lowest among developed economies. We estimated yesterday that the national debt currently stands at 17.7 percent and is not expected to rise above 20 percent in the next three years.

So, these are the indicators. The principal thing is that… What is the principal thing? Most importantly, we have managed to balance the budget – and credit is due to the Government for performing significant work. The quality of this balancing is at the level of 2021. This is a very important indicator of stability of the economy and the financial system of our country.

It means that we will be able to fully solve the issues regarding the social obligations towards the population, handle the development issues under our national projects, achieve technological development goals and, certainly, meet the needs of the Armed Forces. All this put together indicates that the economy and the financial system are stable and fully under the control of the Government and the Central Bank.

Pavel Zarubin: People in the audience are eager to ask their questions.

Mr Peskov, over to you.

Dmitry Peskov: Let me remind you that we are working in a hybrid format, since this is both a Direct Line and the annual news conference. I suggest we now turn to journalists so that they can ask their questions.

We can start from the central section, perhaps. I can see someone with a ‘Siberia’ placard. Why not start with Siberia then? Go ahead, please.

Ivan Dvoynichnikov: Good afternoon, Mr President.

Ivan Dvoynichnikov, Gorodskaya Volna [City Wave] radio station, Novosibirsk.

Everyone knows Novosibirsk for its Academic Town. In recent years, and with your support, by the way, we have been building the Siberian Circular Photon Source, or SKIF. What makes this device even more unique is that it will open new research horizons not only for our country, but for the entire world too.

The researchers managed to build it without using any foreign parts or materials, all while facing sanctions and having to navigate a very complex economic environment. This unit is expected to be launched next year.

What is my question? My question is whether it is possible and what can be done to retain young researchers?

We will be launching the SKIF next year and are looking forward to seeing you at its opening ceremony.

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Thank you for raising this topic. This is excellent news and very welcome for everyone involved in this process.

What do I mean? This topic came up during a meeting of the Presidential Council for Science, which took place in 2018, I think, and Novosibirsk served as its venue. It was then that our colleagues from the Siberian Branch of the Academy of Sciences – the Institute of Nuclear Physics – raised this issue and talked about the need to create the SKIF, this system, an accelerator.

It is true that sanctions-related issues caused some delays, but we managed to complete the project and finish the job. This is a great achievement. I would like to congratulate everyone who was involved in this process and who will be operating and using this unit in the future. It is an unquestionable success.

We already had a similar unit here in Moscow, at the Kurchatov Institute. It is an older generation unit that requires quite a few upgrades, and there are plans to make these improvements. At the same time, similar systems with the same equipment will be installed in Vladivostok and other cities. We have them in Gatchina and other locations as well. We will work to make this happen.

As for the SKIF, this is a great success story, indeed. Why? Because it makes it possible to conduct not only basic but also applied research. This is instrumental since it offers an opportunity to work on pharmaceuticals, new materials, etc.

How do we keep young specialists in the country? We’ve built a comprehensive system, and overall, it’s working. But what’s the key? We have to develop the laboratory infrastructure. True scientists are driven by their work; for them, that passion can be the most important thing. But other factors matter, too: salary, housing and quality of life. We’re implementing all of this step by step. That’s the purpose of our entire grant system, including the “megagrants.”

In fact, the recipients of those megagrants – top-tier scientists, both Russian and international, who have worked under these programmes – raised this very point with us at a meeting. They said it plainly: you must create the conditions for young specialists to stay. You have to offer them a clear horizon, so they can see the scope of their research, ensuring that funding isn’t just for six months or a couple of years, but for a longer cycle – five years and beyond. We’ve done that as well, and it helps retain talent. It does.

Moreover, many are coming back. I’ve spoken with such specialists myself. Young people who used to work abroad are now returning to Russia. Ironically, our so-called Western colleagues are actively helping us with this. When asked why they returned, they say, first, because research facilities and opportunities are being created here. But one of the main reasons is: “We’re concerned for our children. The idea of sending them to the local schools there is out of the question.”

Well, thank God, the protection of traditional values is part of our agenda. People appreciate that, and together with other aspects, it leads them to come home. There are many such people, and their number is growing.

We will, of course, continue working in all these areas.

Ivan Dvoynichnikov: Will you come visit?

Vladimir Putin: I will certainly try, thank you very much.

Dmitry Peskov: Let’s take a couple more questions from the audience.

I see one of the long-standing members of the Kremlin press pool. Please give Alexander Gamov the microphone. Alexander, if you have a question – you raised your hand very timidly.

Alexander Gamov: Of course I do. Thank you very much.

Alexander Gamov, Komsomolskaya Pravda radio, news website, and newspaper.

Mr President, this year, Komsomolskaya Pravda is celebrating the 100th anniversary of its first issue. You awarded us the Order of Honour. Thank you very much for this high recognition. I simply haven’t had an opportunity to thank you yet.

I wanted to remind you that you held your very first Direct Line conference at our offices, on February 9, 2000, if you recall.

I would like to frame my question in Komsomolskaya Pravda’s frontline-reporting style. I wanted to ask you about the Time of the Heroes programme, its development and progress. You initiated it. Have you been following the way people who benefited from this programme have been doing their job, those you have assigned to high government posts? To what extent has this system proven its worth in general? How long will this programme last? What new appointments can we expect?

Thank you very much.

Vladimir Putin: First, I suggest that we remember those who took part in the Great Patriotic War. The people who fought on the frontlines of the Great Patriotic War came back and achieved outstanding results in research, art and education.

You know, when I was a university student, there were Great Patriotic War veterans among the faculty members who taught me. We treated them with great respect. Some of them had suffered very serious wounds. There was one professor who lost his leg and had to use a prosthetic, but he was absolutely brilliant in his subject. We all remember him with a sense of deep gratitude for the knowledge he shared with us.

There was also Nikulin, and so many other people of science who reached a very high level of excellence and contributed to the development of our Motherland.

Why can’t our fighters, participants in the special military operation, do the same? We have Naran Ochir-Goryayev sitting here. You know, I did not recognise him at first since we are in a big room. There is a microphone, and the cameras are rolling. But these people have a lot behind their belts. When he walked into the Security Council hall in the Kremlin, I told him: “Naran, tell us what is going on there, please.” And everyone could not believe what they heard during his report. Here, he keeps a low profile, but why am I saying this? These people have a lot of positive potential.

Of course, there were doubts at the outset. Fighting is one thing, while heading a team or an entire sector, standing at the helm of a major corporation or even regions, or ministries, is another. It goes without saying that this requires skill and talent.

Look, we have hundreds of thousands of men fighting over there, and not all of them aspire to pursue a civilian career. In fact, this is not what many of them are after. However, for those who do want to move in this direction and have the potential, the necessary level of education and experience, or are ready to get the necessary credentials, the state must do everything to offer opportunities to people who have proven they are ready to assert the interests of their Motherland without sparing themselves.

I think I have already mentioned how this whole idea occurred to me. There was a meeting with young people, including students. I was listening to them as they elaborated on their thoughts and proposals, the goals they set for themselves, and what they thought were important national goals in general – it was during this conversation that it occurred to me that we had to bring together these people and help them achieve more and move forward. With them, the destiny of our country is in safe hands.

Of course, they need training. This much is obvious. Hence the programme. I would like to thank the heads of the regions for scaling and spreading this programme at the regional level. It does work, you know. I am very glad for the graduates of the first enrolment campaign. The second enrolment wave has been completed, and training is underway. Many graduates have already become governors, deputy ministers, or work for our companies. Several people work for the Presidential Executive Office. They are doing great.

It is clear that there can be some challenges here and there. It may well be that some of them decide to choose a different area. However, the programme has been effective and is delivering tangible results.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Mr President, colleagues, if I may, I have news that is important for our country, breaking news. It has been reported that Brussels’ attempts to seize our asset have failed.

How can you comment on that?

Pavel Zarubin: They have not stolen them yet, but they keep trying.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: But they have not succeeded so far.

Vladimir Putin: Pavel, stealing is not the right word. Stealing is a covert theft of property. But they are doing this openly. Therefore, it is robbery.

Why aren’t they succeeding? Because the consequences will be grave for the robbers. What does this mean? First, it is difficult to accomplish. They have not said that they will rob and seize. One of their ideas is to issue a reparation loan secured by our assets.

What does issuing a loan mean? It means consequences for the budgets of every country involved; this will increase the budgetary debt of each country. If a country issues a loan secured by our gold and currency assets, this must be reflected in its budget. Take France, whose state debt has reached 120 percent [of GDP]. Our state debt is 17.7 percent, and theirs is 120 percent. It is true that our budget deficit is 2.6 percent, but it will go down to 1.6 percent next year, while France’s budget deficit is 6 percent. The new obligations will have to be added to the budget. I believe they are having big problems with next year’s budget. All this is the reason why it is difficult to take decisions related to the robbery of someone else's assets.

But there will be graver consequences for those who might endeavour that. This will not just be a blow to their image, but this will subvert all the confidence in the euro area, since many countries store their foreign reserves in the eurozone. Not only Russia does that, but also those who have free reserves, primarily oil-producing countries. They will look at what is happening – they are already doing so, and they will have suspicions, doubts and fears. What if the same happens to them?

It is only difficult the first time, and then you can do the same under different pretexts. Today, they don’t like our special military operation and the fight against neo-Nazism in Ukraine. Later, they could be displeased with some country’s policy towards the LGBTQ community. There are very many strict laws in Muslim countries that protect our common traditional values. We don’t have such laws, but they do. This could be used as a pretext for seizing sovereign assets, sovereign resources and money. And why not? Or they can find some other pretext.

Apart from image-related losses, there will be direct financial losses related to the contemporary financial architecture. That is why it is so difficult to accomplish. And the main thing is no matter what they steal, sooner or later they will have to give it back.

Besides, we will protect our interests. How? Most importantly, we will go to courts to protect our interests. We will do our utmost to find a jurisdiction that will be independent from the political context.

Dmitry Peskov: Let’s give the floor to the audience.

Vladimir Putin: Yes. Road of Life – please go ahead.

Darya Shuchalina: Good afternoon, Mr President.

Darya Shuchalina, Komi Republic. I represent the Komiinform news agency and I’m a member of the Civic Chamber of our region.

You are aware that a significant part of the Komi Republic and the neighbouring Nenets Autonomous Area are cut off from the mainland, as they lack year-round road connections to central Russia. The road from Moscow ends within our republic, and beyond that, there is no route further north.

At the same time, there is a popular motorway: Syktyvkar – Ukhta – Usinsk – Pechora – Naryan-Mar. This spans over a thousand kilometres, 869 of which lie within our republic. The route ensures year-round northern deliveries, connects residential communities and, most importantly, guarantees safe travel for northern residents.

However, Mr President, to be perfectly honest, much of the road is in a deplorable state. It is clear that the Komi Republic alone cannot possibly maintain and repair a road of federal significance. Moreover, Komi has virtually no federal motorways, unlike other regions in the European part of Russia.

In this regard, Mr President, I have a proposal for you. Is it possible to transfer our Road of Life – the only route serving the North – to federal ownership? This would stabilise northern deliveries for a vast population, ensure connectivity with central Russia, and provide a new impetus for the northern regions.

Also, while I have the opportunity, I would like to invite you to visit the Komi Republic. We have two significant anniversaries approaching: in 2029, the city of Ukhta, the birthplace of Russia’s first oil, will celebrate its 100^th anniversary. Today, it is the largest centre of the oil and gas industry in the northwest. And in 2030, thanks to the executive order you signed, our capital, Syktyvkar, will mark its 250^th anniversary. Your visit would be a historic event for our republic.

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Thank you very much for the invitation.

Regarding the road, this is a known issue, and we are aware of this problem.

Indeed, the solution lies in transferring all sections of this route to the federal level, as the federation faces the task of bringing our federal motorways up to the established standards. This task has been largely accomplished for federal motorways. The focus now is on developing and bringing regional roads up to standard.

Several key issues are at play here – northern deliveries and road safety, I agree. But I can’t promise that construction will begin tomorrow. You understand, we must calculate everything, review the plans for developing the country’s backbone road network – we have such a concept. I will definitely discuss this with the Government, and we will respond – we will certainly respond.

Thank you for the invitation.

Dmitry Peskov: Let’s continue and take a question from the audience.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: The direct line is a combined format. We’ll have to share the territory.

Dmitry Peskov: That’s right. Journalists are also very enthusiastic.

Let’s continue. Channel One, third row. Our military correspondents.

Amir Yusupov: Good afternoon, Mr President. My name is Amir Yusupov. I’m a military correspondent from Channel One. I have three questions but I’ll try to be brief.

My first question is from our drone operators at the front. Of course, they expressed their gratitude for the current attack drone supplies, especially the fibre-optic UAVs that can stop entire columns. Knyaz Vandal Novgorodsky is really something.

However, we have very few large hexacopters like Baba-Yaga – the types that are extensively used by the Ukrainian army. We need them to deliver food supplies and munitions to battlefield positions. You yourself said today that the whole sky is filled with drones, and even carrying a bottle of water to the first line is almost an impossible task. The guys really need these drones.

My second question is also from the operators. Once I was sitting in the trenches with a guy, and he said: “I’m going to be a father. I’ll go home then.” I asked him: “Will you miss the front?” He said: “Of course.” I was surprised when he said he would miss operating drones. We have a great number of drone operators that is growing all the time, and they want to do it as a civilian job. Are there any prospects for unmanned civil aviation? Will this experience be useful in peacetime?

And the last question is from me personally. Since the first days of the special military operation, we have worked with the famous Veterans Brigade. They are famous for their underground operations in Avdeyevka, Dzerzhinsk and Sudzha. Their most recent operation received worldwide coverage. But despite their achievements and daily hard work on the ground, this brigade is simply called a voluntary unit in many Defence Ministry reports. I would like to ask you to confer the honorary title of a guards brigade on the Veterans Brigade.

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: I will start with your last question. Of course, the Veterans Brigade deserves the highest praise. They are truly heroic individuals, and it goes beyond that. You know, it is not easy to risk your life and climb into a pipeline. They prepared every operation competently, meticulously and thoroughly. They conducted serious groundwork to figure out approaches, entrances, exits and supply routes. This is extremely hard professional work. They are heroic troopers, and that is a fact. There is no doubt that this brigade deserves the highest praise and the guards title. I agree with you. This is the first point.

Now, regarding your first question on UAVs. It is true that there is a shortage of heavy drones. The Defence Ministry and the Ministry of Industry are working on improvements. This task will be solved.

I want to acknowledge the Minister of Defence, who is personally in charge of UAV supplies and has done a great deal. It is thanks to his efforts, among other things, that the availability of UAVs has changed drastically. The troops at the contact line have noted this. I think you are well aware of this. We will continue to support our modern-day Kulibins. There is an entire system of grants and other support in place. We will keep going.

I would like to express my gratitude to our citizens and our entrepreneurs. In addition to everything else they are doing, our people have raised 83 billion rubles, which have been used for a number of purposes but mostly for drones.

It should be said – and I think there is nothing to be shy of here – that we are the indisputable leader in terms of the number of drones. We are still short of heavy drones like the adversary’s Baba-Yaga, but with respect to the number of drones, we are ahead of our adversary in almost all the segments of the frontline. It is a fact, although we may be short of some specific types in some segments.

As for civilian goods and proof of our leadership, it can only be proved if the goods we have started producing because we need them for our combat operations are also applied and improved in the civilian sphere, following which they are used to build up and strengthen national defences. We will certainly do this. We have started doing this, and we will continue to do this.

I am talking about everything you are well aware of, such as the use of drones to deliver all kinds of stuff, including mail, food, and medicines. This is not only true for fixed-wing drones or small air-based copters. The matter concerns all types of drones, including unmanned ground vehicles and crewless boats. This field is developing at a good pace, and we will continue to do this in the future as well.

Speaking about those who fought and want to continue fighting, I would like to share some information with you. The situation is somewhat specific. What does this mean? We continue to recruit personnel for our Armed Forces, and this process is progressing at a good pace and in accordance with plans. Many of our men, real men, voluntarily enlist in the Armed Forces and voluntarily protect the interests of the Motherland and our people.

Naran has told us about how the Ukrainian military maltreat civilians. He did not say this now, but he mentioned it when we talked in the Kremlin: “When we saw what they did to civilians, we couldn’t wait to get our hands on them.” Did you say this, Naran? “We are ready to keep fighting to finish off that viper.” Do you understand? When they saw what was done to people, to civilians… Grannies were shot and killed by drones… He is a modest man, and it is probably the first time he is in the same room with so many people, but he said this to me.

So, over 400,000 people signed up in the outgoing year, 406,000 or 410,000, but the number of those who want to serve in the new branch we have recently created, the Unmanned Systems Troops, is so large that the Defence Ministry had to announce a competition. It is remarkable that some very young people, students at various universities, are taking an academic leave to sign up for service on the frontline. Above all, they want to take part in combat activity as drone operators.

I can understand the man you have talked with. Here is what I will tell you. Even those who come home on leave sometimes continue to take part in combat operations. Modern technologies have made this possible.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: This is very important – continuing the subject we have just touched upon, regarding our fighters… You yourself, Mr President, have said that supporting our soldiers is not a trend but the state’s tribute to its defenders. And that is indeed the case.

Here is a very important observation related to preparations for today’s programme. Pavel and I have reviewed an enormous number of appeals. As confirmed by GigaChat, this year the number of appeals from servicemen, their family members, and the fighters themselves is lower than last year or, say, the year before. Work is underway, and a great deal is being done – this work is being carried out by the Popular Front, the Ministry of Defence, and the Defenders of the Fatherland Foundation. Problems remain, related to delays, payment issues, and searching for those missing in action. But again, I’d like to reiterate: much is being done, and it is being done literally within days.

Let me give a few examples. Alexei Gushchin from the Oryol Region wrote to our programme. Two years ago, he was seriously wounded and could not receive the payment of 3 million rubles he was entitled to. As it turned out, not all the documents had arrived from his military unit. The Popular Front got involved in resolving the issue, the payment was processed, and the money should reach him any day now.

There was an appeal from Lyudmila Orlova from Beloretsk, the mother of a fallen hero. Her son died last year and was posthumously awarded the Medal For Courage, but the medal itself could not be handed over to her. Volunteers looked into the matter. The award was found and has now been presented to the hero’s mother.

What do these stories have in common? They remained unresolved for a year or longer, and people did not receive what they were due. The professionals stepped in and, most importantly, deeply caring individuals who genuinely engaged with the problem and resolved it literally within days.

Pavel Zarubin: Just two days ago, at the Ministry of Defence Board meeting, you said that there is still work to be done in this respect. Naturally, while preparing for today’s programme, we repeatedly saw evidence of this.

Now, let’s watch a video message from Kristina Grebe from Novosibirsk. We know her situation is also under control, but we also know that there are many such stories.

Kristina Grebe: Good afternoon.

My name is Kristina Grebe. I am the widow of a serviceman who was killed in the special military operation zone. We live in the city of Novosibirsk. We have two children, six and four years old. Here is my question. To this day, we have not received the survivor’s pension, nor do we have the certificates confirming the status of family members of the deceased, which grant entitlement to certain benefits.

My husband died in January 2024. On December 10, 2024, I received the death certificate based on [Government Resolution] PP-1421. We are now approaching the end of 2025, and there is still no pension. My question is this: can the processing time for such applications – for the survivor pension and the issuance of certificates for family members of the deceased – be shortened?

Vladimir Putin: First of all, Miss Grebe, I want to apologise to you for the sluggishness on the part of the services in charge of these matters. I apologise.

Rest assured, your case is going to be resolved quickly. But the problem is there. I recently met with Anna Tsivileva, who currently also serves as Deputy Minister of Defence, and she briefed me on the work of the Defenders of the Fatherland Foundation. She told me that, unfortunately, normal cooperation still hasn’t been established between the Ministry of Defence and the Government’s social affairs bloc.

The issues are largely bureaucratic: documents get lost, passed down from one department to another, decisions are delayed, and so on. We will work on that to expedite everything. I will definitely keep track of all that personally.

The way forward is clear. We simply need to act faster and more efficiently, so that people, especially those in situations like yours, with two children, don’t face unnecessary hardship.

However, there’s another, widely discussed problem that’s also evident from the questions coming in through various channels. Mr Peskov handed me a large folder of such questions and requests, which I reviewed. It concerns the search for missing persons. This is an extremely urgent matter.

In Kristina Grebe’s specific case, I hope the problems she is facing will now be resolved quickly and without delay. But the issue of missing persons is particularly acute.

I should note that the Ministry of Defence has taken specific steps in this area that are yielding results. First, a coordination centre, a central coordinating body, for the search for missing servicemen has been created.

Second, dedicated departments have been set up within the groups of forces and at the local level, and a separate registry has been created. If we compare the situation at the start of the year and at this time, the number of missing servicemen has been reduced by 50 percent; compared to the beginning of the year, it’s a 3-fold change. That is a significant improvement. This work must and will continue and improve. Our objective is to minimise such cases, ultimately bringing them down to zero.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: The issue of missing persons is really important indeed. I know that many journalists, including some of our colleagues here, have relatives who participated in the special military operation and are missing. This problem is very real. I think everyone present would support a request for you to issue an instruction ensuring that all such inquiries from soldiers’ families receive special attention and are never disregarded. And, as we have said, it’s crucial to remember both the missing and those who have been taken prisoners.

Vladimir Putin: Such instructions have already been issued. In fact, I have just outlined the steps the Ministry of Defence is taking in this regard.

Dmitry Peskov: I suggest that we turn to the people in this room and invite them to ask a few questions. I can see Mir television company. Can you hand over the microphone to the lady in red?

Elina Dashkuyeva: Thank you.

Mr President, good afternoon. Hello to my colleagues too.

I am Elina Dashkuyeva, Mir International Television Company.

Phone scams remain an issue these days. Have the measures adopted by the state been effective? Do you have any information on whether the number of people suffering from this kind of fraud has declined?

Thank you very much.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, I do have this information. The measures have proved to be effective. Much will have to be done, of course, in this regard. There was a seven-percent decline in the number of crimes of this kind, according to the Interior Ministry, while the damage decreased by 33 percent. Overall, this was quite a positive result.

There is, however, one thing I wanted to point out. I would like to address the citizens of the country. Fraud is still very much an issue. And the more sophisticated our devices are getting, the more sophisticated our life is becoming, the more sophisticated tools scammers use in turn to defraud the citizens. This is why, regardless of the voice you hear, which is especially dangerous considering what artificial intelligence can do, if someone starts talking to you about money, about property, just put down the phone, put down the phone right away! You should not say anything.

If this is about banks and the like, there are people to talk to, people you know. You can get things done by visiting the bank in person. This is the best way.

I advise you against discussing any matters dealing with money or property with anyone.

Dmitry Peskov: Thank you.

Staying in this room, I would like to once again ask journalists to be as concise as possible.

Vladimir Putin: I see a young man holding the Children’s Newsdesk poster. How can we fail to recognise him? Go ahead, please.

Maxim Zakharov: Good afternoon, Mr President.

My name is Maxim Zakharov, I am 13 years old, and I am a correspondent with the Children’s Newsdesk.

Here is my question. You have said recently that you sometimes drive around Moscow incognito. In addition, when we hear you at various meetings or even now, you are very well informed. Here is my question: How do you get to know the most important things, what people really need?

Vladimir Putin: I did not exactly say that I drive around Moscow incognito – that does happen, but very rarely. What I meant is that sometimes I drive without a traffic police escort. Most of the time, that is how it is.

These trips aren’t meaningless; even from the car window, it is interesting to see more than just the road I take between the official residence and Moscow. And when I drive through different parts of the city, it is also quite interesting to observe what is happening around.

As for obtaining reliable information on current events, meetings like this probably provide the best sociological snapshot. How many people are we talking about – two million?

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Two and a half.

Vladimir Putin: 2.5 million.

Pavel Zarubin: 2.7 million.

Vladimir Putin: Can you imagine, Maxim? Two and a half million people reached out through the Direct Line.

Of course, it is impossible to process and respond to all of this during our current session. But since these 2.5 million inquiries reflect people’s most pressing concerns, they will be addressed, in part, with the help of artificial intelligence. My, shall we say, loyal colleagues from the Popular Front will be working on this throughout the year. This provides the most powerful sociological snapshot of both the state of society and the issues that matter most to people. That’s the first point.

Second, of course, intelligence and law enforcement agencies provide various types of information. I try to use it not in a generalised form, but in its original context, so to speak. Meeting with people directly – whether with servicemen from the front, workers, or during trips across the country – is extremely important. Direct communication sparks a certain energy; you immediately begin to sense people’s mood, their needs, and their aspirations.

And, of course, we cannot overlook sociological surveys. I understand that people have different views of them, but it is important to remember that these are primarily professional tools. Average figures can sometimes irritate people because they do not always reflect personal experience. Nevertheless, they are valuable and essential for understanding broader trends and dynamics in the country.

Taken together, these various sources provide a fairly objective picture of what is happening.

Dmitry Peskov: Let’s take a few more questions from the audience.

Yakutia, please.

Oleg Kolesov: Good afternoon, Mr President. Oleg Kolesov, Sakha National Broadcasting Company. We represent the coldest part of the world, Yakutia. Right now, the temperature is −50 degrees. As you know, in a harsh climate, people especially value warmth and unity.

You have declared 2026 the Year of Russian Peoples’ Unity. We all know that the special military operation is where this unity is manifested most clearly. As a military correspondent, I know first-hand that our troops are fighting for the Motherland shoulder to shoulder, regardless of their ethnicity or faith. They wear chevrons that say “I am Russian. God is with us,” regardless of their ethnic background.

What chevron would you wear in the Year of Peoples’ Unity?

Continuing on the theme of unity in culture, a unique Arctic Centre of Epic Literature and Arts will open in Yakutia next year, along with a new building for the Higher School of Music. Both are being built at your instruction. We would like to invite you to attend their opening ceremonies.

Yakutia is also known for its film industry. We are working on a film about Hero of Russia Andrei Grigoryev, callsign Tuta. We hope you will support the production and distribution of this film.

What measures will be taken to support Russia’s ethnic groups in the Year of Peoples’ Unity? Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: With regard to supporting ethnic groups, we have a targeted policy of supporting the cultures and languages of Russia’s peoples – in schools, in the media, and in literature.

You have just mentioned various initiatives in Yakutia. The people of Yakutia are very talented. It is no coincidence that this music school is opening there. I often recall my first trip, when I visited a similar music school, which has since expanded, where children from towns and villages, no matter how small, across the republic could enjoy creative activities. The film industry in Yakutia is also thriving. In fact, Yakutia itself is on the rise and growing rapidly. The republic is also sending military personnel to the line of contact who possess exceptional capabilities – perhaps unmatched anywhere in the world.

The film you mentioned will certainly receive support with distribution and so on.

As for the Year of Russian Peoples’ Unity in general, I think we are doing the right thing, especially now during the special military operation, because when a country faces challenges, it closes ranks.

You put it perfectly, and it’s true. What difference does it make to people under fire what faith they belong to? Naran understands this very well, doesn’t he? What does it matter? There’s a joke for such situations: if God exists – and I have no doubt that He does – then He surely doesn’t know that people on earth have divided themselves into different churches. What unites us are our shared values. Those are what matter most – values that are traditional for all the peoples of the Russian Federation. And now, during the special military operation, this is becoming especially evident, prominent, and clear. We see it plainly.

This just reminded me of something. We were discussing the reports on the capture of Seversk. You may recall that the commander of one of the brigades was in my office. After the briefing, the videoconference ended, and I began talking with him about the situation in his sector of the front, and about certain welfare issues affecting the soldiers. Suddenly he said to me, “You know, I feel guilty.” I asked, “Why?” He said, “I’m here, while my comrade, the commander of a neighbouring brigade fighting alongside me, is there. We’re discussing basic supplies and state decorations, but believe me, he is just as good and worthy as I am.” I asked, “Who is he?” “He’s from Daghestan,” he said, “a representative of a small ethnic group there. But he is a true warrior, a Russian patriot, and an excellent commander.” I said, “I know. But you can’t all leave the front. You are here now because the group commander decided so; he sent you. Someone has to hold the front. Tell you what – let’s try calling him.”

I went to the phone and, through military channels, located this second brigade commander right at his forward command post. I spoke with him briefly, then handed the phone to the brigade commander who was in my office. And here is what was so remarkable. It’s a common way for men to address each other, but when it comes from real officers, frontline fighters, it carries a special weight. He took the phone and said, “Hello, brother!” In that moment, it was incredibly powerful. This is where the unity of the peoples of the Russian Federation truly manifests itself. And we will strengthen this unity further. We will do everything to foster and cement it.

Thank you for your question.

Dmitry Peskov: Let’s have one more question from the audience before we return to our moderators. I see a sector that has been idling – the man in a blue jacket in the first row. Please introduce yourself.

Vladimir Seroukhov: Good afternoon. My name is Vladimir Seroukhov, the RBC radio and television channel. There will be many changes in the tax sphere next year. It is clear that their goal is to generate additional revenue for the budget. What financial effect do you expect to see? And will there be any relaxations once this goal is achieved? Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, this is a difficult issue. It was discussed for a long time within the Government and the Presidential Executive Office. Ultimately, as I have pointed out, it was decided that the best and most honest and transparent way to address our problems, including in the financial sphere, is to raise the VAT rate. Is this what you were referring to? The goal is simple, as I said in my opening remarks: to balance the budget. Overall, we have achieved this, as I have said, including thanks to that decision.

Of course, certain issues remain, and the Government must take them into account. We have talked about them many times. When the tax burden grows, when taxes are increased, this creates a temptation to evade taxes. Our task has been and remains to eliminate the shadow economy, to prevent businesses from going into the shadows and evading taxes. This is a challenging task. We must create conditions in which higher taxes do exist only on paper but actually translate into budget revenues.

I have taken your hint about this being permanent. No, of course it won’t. Our ultimate goal is to reduce the tax burden in the future, and the Government is acting with this goal in mind. I pin my hopes on this as well.

Pavel Zarubin: This year we have received an exceptionally large number of questions from self-employed people and private entrepreneurs. There are millions of them across the country, and tax changes are therefore a matter of concern for a huge number of people.

We have received a MAX message from Denis Maksimov from Lyubertsy. Let’s try to connect with him by video, if this is technically possible.

Mr Maksimov, can you hear us? Ask your question.

Vladimir Putin: Excuse me for a moment. (Writes down a question from a text message.) “When will government agencies start regulating fish prices to make them affordable for the people?”

You know, government regulation of prices in the market is a complicated and very dangerous matter, because products tend to disappear as soon as we start regulating prices and issuing plans. That is what usually happens in a market economy.

On the other hand, regulation is necessary in some spheres, such as essential medicines. There is a price ceiling beyond which prices must not be raised. But applying such a measure to ordinary consumer goods is extremely complicated.

That said, there is one thing you are right about: our people don’t eat enough fish. There are established norms for fish consumption, and we are still below them.

I believe we should find a different solution. We must improve logistics to ensure that fish products from the Far East can reach European Russia as cheaply as possible. We must improve transport links. We should also discuss taxation in this sector. We must create conditions for the construction of fishing vessels, and so on. There are many issues that should bring about the desired result.

Pavel Zarubin: A video call, right?

Vladimir Putin: Yes, please.

Pavel Zarubin: Mr Maksimov, if you can hear us, please go ahead with your question.

Denis Maksimov: Good afternoon, Mr President.

My name is Denis Maksimov, and I’m from Kraskovo in the Lyubertsy District. We run a small family business, a bakery. For about eight years, we have been operating under the convenient patent tax system. Starting next year, however, we will be required to pay income tax and VAT. This means we will need to hire a professional accountant, which will result in additional expenses for us.

We fully understand that the country is in a difficult situation at the moment and that raising taxes is necessary. However, in my view, it would be far more effective for both the state and individual entrepreneurs if the cost of patents was simply increased – two, three, four, or even five times – depending on turnover, for example. As things stand, the situation is tough, and honestly, we don’t look to the future with much optimism. Many businesses may close or move underground.

Could you please advise us on how to navigate this situation, given the drastic changes to tax legislation?

Vladimir Putin: Mr Maksimov, is that your bakery in the background?

Denis Maksimov: Yes.

Vladimir Putin: Mashenka. And who is it named after, with such a lovely name, Mashenka?

Denis Maksimov: My eldest daughter.

Vladimir Putin: You make delicious buns? What do you have there?

Denis Maksimov: I hope they are delicious.

Vladimir Putin: Mr Maksimov, regarding your question, here’s the background. Initially, various measures were introduced to support individual entrepreneurs and small businesses. More recently, however, the Government has identified problems, particularly in trade, both among individual entrepreneurs and small businesses. These measures and business formats have sometimes been used for the uncontrolled import of “grey” and “black” goods. That’s where the problem arose. But this does not mean that production businesses should face difficulties. I will certainly bring this matter to the attention of the Government and the relevant agencies.

Regarding accounting, I would note that you do not necessarily need to incur significant additional expenses to set up an accounting department. Many major financial institutions now offer a range of banking and accounting services. You could, for example, consult Sberbank – they should be able to help you organise this work without seriously disrupting your business or creating a heavy financial burden.

But you are absolutely right on one point: production business must not suffer because of the transition to a new tax system. I assure you that this issue will be brought to the Government’s attention.

In any case, I wish every success to you, your [bakery] Mashenka, your daughter, and your business with such a sweet name. I sincerely wish you all the best!

Perhaps you could even send me some of your tasty stuff?

Denis Maksimov: With pleasure.

Vladimir Putin: And I, for my part, will work with the Government to support your business and others like it.

Thank you very much.

Denis Maksimov: Thank you.

Pavel Zarubin: Incidentally, there was a news alert just now saying that the Central Bank has revised its key interest rate down to 16 percent. We are getting there.

Vladimir Putin: You know, the Central Bank, of course, is under constant pressure. The high interest rate is a very controversial matter. The difference between it and the inflation rate… By the end of the year, as I have said, inflation will be under six percent at 5.7˗5.8 percent, or maybe 5.6 percent, while the interest rate remains unchanged at 16 percent. Experts expected a cut of up to one percentage point.

According to the law, the Bank of Russia is an independent institution, so I try not to interfere with its decisions and to shield it from any outside influence or pressure. Overall, the Bank of Russia has not only succeeded in delivering on its mandate, but has been quite diligent and responsible in this regard.

In late 2024 and at the beginning of this year, we had conversations with the Central Bank Governor, with senior Government officials and the cabinet’s economic block, saying that we had to make a decision on targeting inflation and to do everything to ensure that the Russian economy and the macroeconomic situation are sustainable and robust and that the national economy remains on a solid footing. The fact that there is this gap between the inflation rate and the key interest rate offers the Central Bank’s critics an angle of attack.

What is the problem here? In fact, there are quite a few challenges, and one of them, as I have already said, or as I will say, if I have not mentioned this until this point, is the slowing investment activity. It decreased by 3.1 percent in the first three quarters. But what matters for the Central Bank is not this substantial decline but the fact that lending remains quite high. The number of issued loans has not been decreasing all that much. It did decline, but only marginally. This compels the Bank of Russia to exercise extreme caution in order to avert any inflation spikes so that it does not have to make any moves in the opposite direction. These back-and-forth oscillations are the worst thing you can imagine. The Bank of Russia is seeking to ensure stability in this regard, which is important, of course. We cannot agree more.

Is a cut of half a percentage point enough? I will not share any assessments at this point, leaving it up to experts. We have many prominent specialists – let them draw the corresponding conclusions. There will also be a response from the real economy. I can even anticipate how they will respond. That said, we have yet to see what comes of it all.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Mr President, official inflation is one thing, but the so-called perceived inflation is somewhat different. We receive a substantial amount of correspondence about this. We also do our own shopping and see how everything is getting more expensive. What can be said? You often refer to it as the “ballpark figure” – approximately six percent. Indeed, people write complaining that everything is getting more expensive, and prices are growing like mad.

Pavel Zarubin: Maxim Volkov from Chapayevsk in the Samara Region: “Why has everything become so expensive? Even the price of chicken has almost doubled. I am a father of three. I work, making 50,000 rubles, but even so, I cannot meet their needs or feed them properly.”

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Or take these various appeals, for example. Here is one from the Rostov Region – clearly written by a child, as it states they are under 18: “Hello! Why are the prices for food and buns in the canteen going up, while my parents’ salaries aren’t?”

Vladimir Putin: I have already mentioned that when people see average indicators, these average figures often raise questions, because as a rule, they do not match what a person encounters in daily life.

For instance, we say inflation will come down. That means prices will go down, and it will be at about 5.7–5.8 percent. However, food inflation, especially in certain categories, may be higher – and it is higher – and this depends on the food basket a person uses. If that food basket consists largely of protein products like chicken, then naturally, this impacts the family budget. There is certainly nothing good about that.

At the same time, I would note that last year, or the year before, we were critically assessing the actions of our colleagues in the Government when the price of eggs suddenly spiked. Now, prices are not just falling – they have dropped by over ten percent, almost 16 percent. These are also important factors. Nevertheless, without any doubt, we must closely monitor the situation in every segment and across every demographic group.

As for families with children: the family must be at the centre of everything here, and we are striving for that. I would like to emphasise that additional measures to support families with children will come into effect from January 1 next year. For example, out of the 13 percent personal income tax paid, in families with modest incomes – less than one and a half times the subsistence minimum per person – seven percent, that is, the larger part, will be returned to the family. I hope this will be a real way to support families with children. By the way, if a family’s income, correct me if I’m wrong, is below one and a half times the subsistence minimum, then additional support equivalent to one subsistence minimum is provided for each child.

I am not even mentioning other components of support for families with children. Naturally, this is not enough. We all realise, of course, that this is not enough. But what is to be done? First, we will continue to refine this system of family support, because state policy, both at the federal and regional levels, should revolve around this.

Second, we will, of course, strive to increase salary levels, to ensure that incomes, especially for families with children, do not fall. When labour incomes rise, the state must under no circumstances reduce these support measures, which, unfortunately, is what happens now. This is a well-known problem: a family with children receives certain benefits and support, then their earnings rise, and the state cuts back the benefits it had been providing. Therefore, when earnings rise, the family’s total income, including benefits, must not decrease.

I return to this issue once again and ask the Government to pay the closest attention to it. It makes no sense to do otherwise, because the budget gains nothing from it – it cannot gain – and we only discourage people from working.

Dmitry Peskov: Let’s return to the audience for a few more questions. We haven’t covered that sector yet. I see Tyumen. Tyumen, please pass the microphone.

Kristina Smirnova: Good afternoon, everyone. Kristina Smirnova, Tyumen Time television channel, Tyumen.

I have a question about the unusual object, 3I/ATLAS, that’s currently approaching. According to forecasts, later today, on December 19, this object – which some speculate is a spacecraft with an engine and others say is simply a comet – will make its closest approach to Earth. My question is: what are the intelligence services and Roscosmos telling you? Are there any genuine signs of the object’s artificial origin? As far-fetched as it may sound, there are a lot of theories circulating. And while we in Tyumen – Russia’s thermal capital – are ready to welcome any guests, if they are guests from space, we’d like to be prepared.

Secondly, is the date of our news conference today connected to this forecast? This is the first time we’re holding our year-end review on a Friday. Thank you.

Pavel Zarubin: Mr President, they’re actually asking you here to wink if you know that aliens exist, but it’s classified. That’s what it says. Go on, wink if you know.

Vladimir Putin: Kristina, is that your name? I’ll tell you, but this must stay strictly between us. It’s classified information. It’s our secret weapon, but we will only use it as a last resort. Because we are, in principle, against the placement of weapons in space.

But in all seriousness, it is a comet. Our scientists understand what’s happening with it. Moreover, this comet is of extragalactic origin, so it behaves differently from comets within our own galaxy. It has a different composition, and as it approaches the Sun, slightly different processes occur on its surface and within its dust tail, which makes certain aspects appear unusual. But it’s quite large, somewhere between 2 and 6 kilometres, I believe. Just consider this: the Moon is about 400,000 kilometres away. The object you’re asking about is hundreds of millions of kilometres away. I don’t believe it poses any threat to us. We’ll send it on its way to Jupiter. Early next year, it will leave the Solar System entirely.

Dmitry Peskov: Thank you. Let’s continue.

Pavel Zarubin: So, no winking then.

Vladimir Putin: I’ll wink just for you.

Now, let’s turn to Belarus. Please.

Viktoria Senkevich: Thank you very much, Mr President, for this opportunity. Viktoria Senkevich, Channel One News, Belteleradiocompany.

Belarus and Russia have synchronised their policies so well that we are also holding a major event these days, the All-Belarusian People’s Assembly. Our President says: “Belarus and Russia must be together.” You must have heard this. Let’s also build a bridge together, Belarus and Russia. It is not the first time we have done this. We actually rely on Russia’s strength. Oreshnik is to be put on combat alert in Belarus these days. Thank you for bringing tactical nuclear weapons back to us. For some reason, not everybody likes our union. It is odd. One day Lithuania closes its border, another day Poland. One day they are planning to build a training ground, another day they are planning to steal or, as you say, rob us of our property. Belarus has been affected by this, too. My question is, what do you think about the actions of these “European swine underlings”? Thank you for the new diplomatic term. How will Russia respond to threats at the western borders of our shared home, the Union State?

Vladimir Putin: As for the term, I blurted it out when I was talking to a military audience. I did not mean anybody specific. In fact, I never engage in ad hominem attacks. It is not something I ever do. I was talking about a group of people in general, “an indefinite number of persons,” as lawyers say. And some of them may be long gone or irrelevant. It is ancient history. But it is unimportant. What is important is our relations.

I watched the Belarusian President’s remarks at the National Assembly yesterday. I must congratulate him: it was a very emotional, memorable and substantive address. I want to thank him for his review of Russia-Belarus relations in their current state.

As concerns security, we deal with these issues both on a bilateral basis and within the CSTO. You have mentioned Oreshnik. Alexander Lukashenko spoke yesterday about the deployment of Russian tactical nuclear weapons in Belarus. We hold regular military exercise and have created a grouping of forces. Our defence ministries maintain very close cooperation. The security of the Union State is in safe hands of our military and it will be guaranteed, there is no doubt.

Dmitry Peskov: Since we already had Belarus, I think that we can invite our guests from NBC to ask their question.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, please.

Dmitry Peskov: Pass the microphone, please.

Keir Simmons: Keir Simmons from NBC News.

Mr President, I want to ask you about relations with President Trump and the United States.

President Trump has a peace deal on the table. Ukraine is offering enormous compromises, yet you continue to talk of war.

Mr President, if you reject President Trump’s peace offer, will you be responsible for the deaths of Ukrainians and Russians in 2026?

Vladimir Putin: We do not believe that we bear any responsibility for human casualties because we were not the ones who started this war. It followed a government coup in Ukraine – the unconstitutional government coup in 2014, followed by the effort by the leaders of the Kiev regime to unleash combat operations against their own people in southeastern Ukraine.

We refrained from recognising the Donetsk and Lugansk people’s republics as independent states for quite a long time. But when we got misled and the other side failed to fulfil the Minsk Agreements, we had no other option left than to use our armed forces for putting an end to the war unleashed by the Kiev regime with the support of Western countries.

President Trump has been serious about ending this conflict. He said that he was absolutely sincere in his efforts. Moreover, during the meeting with Trump in Anchorage, we coordinated and came really close to accepting President Trump’s proposals.

Therefore, it would be totally wrong and groundless to claim that we reject something.

During preliminary meetings in Moscow, some proposals were made to us, and we were asked to make certain accommodations. When I arrived in Anchorage, I said that those would be difficult decisions for us, but we are still in agreement with this trade-off proposed to us.

So saying that we reject anything is inappropriate and groundless. The ball is entirely in the court of our Western “opponents,” so to speak, primarily the chiefs of the Kiev regime and, most importantly, their European sponsors. We are ready for talks, and we are ready to conclude the conflict by peaceful means.

Dmitry Peskov: Let’s take a couple more questions from the audience. Let’s continue.

Thank you very much, thank you.

Let’s go to Belgorod, please.

Anna Rudchenko: Good afternoon, Mr President.

Vladimir Putin: Good afternoon.

Anna Rudchenko: My name is Anna Rudchenko, Belgorod State Television and Radio Company.

First, I have to say we would be delighted if you could find an opportunity to visit us. We will always welcome you.

Vladimir Putin: Thank you.

Anna Rudchenko: Today, in frontline regions like Belgorod, reliable communication is one of the most urgent and painful issues. It’s essential for attack alerts and drone warnings. It allows children to continue their education remotely. And for some, it’s a lifeline. Children with diabetes have glucose sensors connected to smartphones so parents can monitor their levels. Without mobile internet, that system glitches.

We urge you to instruct the Government to add diabetic services to the Ministry of Digital Development’s ‘whitelists,’ so that they function without interruption, like the Gosuslugi portal, even when mobile access is restricted.

And one more point. Thanks to your decision, residents of border areas are receiving federal compensation for homes lost to shelling by the Ukrainian Armed Forces. Thank you very much for that.

But previously, also thanks to your decision, compensation was also provided for the second lost property. That support has now been discontinued. We ask for your help in resolving this compensation issue.

Vladimir Putin: One moment, please. Could you clarify the second part again?

Anna Rudchenko: It’s about a second home. Some people lost both their parents’ house and their own. There aren’t many such families, but they are suffering. People are relocating from unsafe areas, taking on mortgages, and the state compensation isn’t enough. We ask for your help in restoring compensation for the second lost property.

Thank you so much.

Vladimir Putin: Let’s start with where you ended. I give you my word, we will certainly review these cases.

You know, similar issues constantly arise in emergency situations – after fires, floods, accidents. Here, the circumstances are even more severe. In principle, such matters have been addressed in disaster relief efforts before. They can be resolved here as well, and we will do so. That’s the first point.

Second, regarding services: for children’s schooling, for monitoring diabetic sensors, and so on. As I understand, the issue isn’t access to the medication itself, but the ability to monitor whether it’s being taken on time. Is that correct?

Anna Rudchenko: When the internet is down, the sensors don’t transmit data.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, yes, I understand. Without a connection, it’s impossible for parents to monitor their child’s condition. And here, of course, we have to weigh this against the necessary security restrictions, which serve to minimise the risk of air and drone strikes. Because if the servers for these services are located abroad, then, regrettable as it is, it makes target acquisition easier for the enemy. That’s the reality we are facing today.

But there are two ways to resolve this problem: first, to migrate to domestic software and hardware platforms, which many services are already using. And second, we can work with foreign manufacturers operating here to negotiate transferring these specific services to servers within the Russian Federation. In any case, work must be done on both fronts.

Anna Rudchenko: Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Please, hold back your placards. Thank you for displaying this humble attitude.

Zeljko Sain: Good afternoon,

My name is Zeljko Sain, and I work for Politika, a Serbian newspaper. Thank you for offering me an opportunity to ask a question. My Russian is not very good – sorry for that, but I think you understand me.

You have embarked on an effort to bring relations between the Russian Federation and the United States back to normal. If we take a general view of the latest developments, we will see that Russian companies operating in Serbia, including NIS, are facing sanctions. What would be your comment in this regard, and what can the people of Serbia expect?

I have another question [about the meeting with Donald Trump in Alaska, a new security framework and Russia-NATO cooperation].

Can we expect any future cooperation so that we can live normal lives without wars? I hope that next year, when we meet again, we will be talking about peace, not war.

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Thank you for your question.

We also want to live in peace free from any military conflicts next year. Let me reiterate that this is what we really want. We strive to resolve all disputes through negotiations.

Of course, and I think you will agree with us on this point, we must address the root causes of the conflict so that nothing of this kind happens again, so that the peace is lasting and durable. This is what we will seek to achieve.

As for our cooperation with NATO, there used to be a time when we worked with them. It was not a matter of cooperation, but a question of NATO membership, first for the Soviet Union, and later for the Russian Federation. However, in both cases we realised that no one wanted this to happen, and the promises they had given us about refraining from expanding NATO were being ignored. Once again, we were misled with NATO expanding its ranks in several waves. Of course, this effort to move military infrastructure closer to our borders could not fail to cause us concern and still causes serious misgivings.

Of course, against this backdrop, devising a new security framework for Europe is quite timely. There was a time before the dissolution of the Soviet Union when there were smart people in Europe, including the leaders of Germany’s SDP. Take Egon Bahr. An accomplished politician, he went as far as suggest establishing a new security system in Europe without expanding NATO. Instead, it would have included the United States, Eastern European countries and Russia in order to ensure inclusivity without placing anyone in a tight spot.

We are not making any extraordinary requirements. We are not denying any given country the right to choose the way it wants to defend itself, but the way it does it should not pose a threat to anyone, including Russia.

We do not ask for anything that has not been declared before. All we do is insist on having our Western partners fulfil the pledges and obligations they had assumed. After all, they defrauded us, while we want to build a reliable security framework in Europe.

As for NIS, you were right to describe this as a challenge. Unfortunately, the sanctions pressure is still there despite the effort to create an illusion that they want to improve our relations. This is part of power politics, which applies to Gazprom Neft, among others. It owns NIS and has invested generously in this company. This investment has already exceeded US$3 billion, which helped turn NIS into an advanced and effective enterprise. It is the main contributor to Serbian budget.

We know what is happening in this context. Russia signed an intergovernmental agreement with Serbia regarding any restrictions against this private entity. Of course, we expect our friendly Serbian leaders to take this into account and deliver on their commitments. Otherwise, this puts into question the possibility of investing in this economy. What are the safeguards if even an intergovernmental agreement fails to deliver? That said, we do have a sense of how and in what direction we can move forward together. There is an ongoing dialogue in Serbia with our friends there on this topic. We hope to be able to find a suitable solution.

Pavel Zarubin: I would like to revisit the issue you have already partly addressed, but if possible, to revisit it once again, because there are numerous appeals regarding the fairness of child benefit calculations. Moreover, it is large families who reach out most often. Parents work hard, doing their best for their children, but as soon as such a family finds itself just 100 rubles above the so-called eligibility criteria, they cease to qualify for support or benefits.

Let’s try to call Gulnara Bayazitova via video link – she also sent us this question. Gulnara, if you can hear us, please go ahead with your question.

Gulnara Bayazitova: Good afternoon, Mr President. And happy upcoming New Year to you!

This is the village of Abalak in the Tyumen Region. My husband and I work in the public sector: I’m a preschool teacher assistant with a salary of 27,000 rubles, and my husband is a driver earning 50,000 to 80,000 rubles, commuting to work in the city. We have six children and are expecting another baby.

We participate in all competitions, all events – we’re an active family, each of us – the children, me, my husband – has a golden GTO [Ready for Labour and Defence] badge. But I’ve been a mother of many children for 11 years, and in all that time, I’ve only once met the criteria for receiving benefits. Last month, we were 100 rubles over the threshold, and in November, it was 259 rubles. Because of this, as a large family, we get no benefits at all: no transport passes, no school meals, no summer camps – nothing is available to us as a large family, not even subsidies for utility bills – nothing.

We’d like some support – because, truly, six children is a lot. We both work, we work very, very hard, taking on extra jobs, keeping a small homestead, raising chickens. We’d just like a little more help from the state.

Vladimir Putin: Yes. Gulnara, I’ve broadly touched on this issue earlier while responding to similar questions. I completely agree with you. You’ve just said that when you work harder and your earnings increase, state support immediately shrinks – the assistance you received when your earnings were lower is abruptly reduced. It ends up making work seem pointless – it discourages people from working.

But I think this is a mistake on the part of the Government. I strongly believe the Ministry of Finance and the entire Government leadership will hear what we’re discussing now. There is simply no saving to be made here, and attempting to generate revenue at the expense of large families is immoral. I agree with you. My colleagues will certainly look into this, and I hope the matter will be resolved.

I want you and all other citizens who struggle with paying utility bills to know that the general approach is that if utility bill payments exceed 22 percent of a family’s aggregate income, the state is under obligation to step in and cover everything above the 22-percent mark. I’m not sure whether you are aware of this. Are you?

Gulnara Bayazitova: Yes, I am aware of all the benefits.

Vladimir Putin: Use them.

Gulnara Bayazitova: But everyone is looking at income.

Vladimir Putin: Yes. In some regions… Moscow is a relatively rich region. Here in Moscow, as far as I know, help from the regional authorities starts not at 22 percent, but at ten percent. Regional authorities must continue this work, and the federal government should not forget about it either.

Our entire policy is built around supporting families with children. I ask the regional authorities, our colleagues in the regions to always keep this in mind. Anything the state plans to do – and I have said that many times – must first be assessed in terms of how it will affect the lives and incomes of families with children.

With regard to your most important question about state support measures getting cut when income increases – we will do everything to resolve it.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Mr President, I have something to add to this on behalf of working mothers. I think Gulnara can hear us and will hear my question as well.

In our country, child allowances are paid until the child is 18 months old. Many mothers wrote to us saying that at this age, children are not admitted to kindergartens, many are not ready to let their children attend nurseries, and nurseries are often not even available, so they ask to extend allowances until the child is three years old.

Such requests abound. Here is one from the Stavropol Territory, “Why is this allowance paid only until the child is 18 months old? A mother remains on maternity leave until the child is three. There are no nurseries where we live,” Yulia Petkova explains. “Most kindergartens accept children from the age of three, and once your child is admitted you start getting one sick leave after another,” this mother accurately notes. “Employer will not tolerate such employees, and will fire them, Please extend eligibility for child allowances until the age of three.” We have been flooded by such requests.

Vladimir Putin: The appeals are well grounded, and you’ve framed the question correctly. Allowances are paid until the child is 18 months old, but they are not paid from 18 months to three years of age. We need to be frank and honest about this: it’s purely a matter of budget constraints. There are no other explanations, that’s the only reason.

However, the Government will, of course, have to consider how to resolve this issue comprehensively.

Now, regarding nurseries, kindergartens, and letting mothers return to work – that is yet another way of resolving this issue. And here, too, not all the problems have been solved. We have accomplished a great deal in renovating schools through a very extensive programme. A programme for renovating kindergartens is currently underway. And I would like my colleagues in the regions to take note: when tackling kindergarten renovations, it would be sensible to address the creation of nurseries at the same institutions. That is the first point.

Secondly – also seemingly simple but requiring additional attention and, of course, funding – is the need to extend the daily hours a child can spend in a kindergarten or nursery. For example, not just until 6 pm, but longer.

This, in turn, will require increasing the number of teachers and caregivers. That means recruiting more staff and creating additional positions in these institutions. This is the direction we must take.

And, of course, the Government must examine how to close this support gap for children between 18 months and three years old.

Overall, we do have a fairly well-structured system of support for motherhood, childhood, and families with children. For instance, motherhood benefits are provided continuously from pregnancy until the child turns 18. Furthermore, if a child continues full-time education after turning 18, the benefit support for the family is extended until they reach the age of 23.

Large families also require special attention. For example, the status of Mother Heroine has been elevated. A holder of the Mother Heroine title now receives the same range of benefits as a Hero of Labour. That is the first part. Another one has to do with the pension calculations. Previously, women with large families could receive pension points for having three children, that is, only the first three children were taken into account.

A new decision has been made and is coming into force: now, when calculating pensions, pension points will be added not just for the first three children, but for all subsequent children as well. That is a positive step. I hope this measure will also be effective, but the Government, and the state as a whole, must, of course, continue to develop and implement a system of support measures for families with children.

Dmitry Peskov: Let’s now take a couple of questions from the audience. We have already been working for two hours without noticing.

Vladimir Putin: We’ve got Kazan here. Let’s go to Kazan. You wanted to ask something about Islam, didn’t you ?

Artur Khalilullov: Mr President, good afternoon.

Vladimir Putin: Isänmesez! [“Hello” in Tatar.]

Artur Khalilullov: Thank you very much for the opportunity to ask a question. Artur Khalilullov, Tatar-Inform, Kazan. In 2026, as you probably know, Kazan will be the cultural capital of the Islamic world. This decision was made at the Conference of Ministers of Culture of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) member states. Generally speaking, we know that Russia has been consistently improving relations with the Islamic world and the Global South in recent years. Rustam Minnikhanov in Tatarstan, and the republic in general, are also actively promoting this agenda alongside the Russian Foreign Ministry, as well as within the framework of the Russia – Islamic World strategic vision group.

I have two questions. In your view, what should be the key priorities in Russia’s mutual relations with the Islamic world? And my second question: Can it be said that Muslims around the world look to Kazan, Tatarstan, and Russia and see this model as an example of what Islam should be in the modern world? Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: The Islamic world is very diverse, just like the Christian world – we both know this well. But I am confident that the example set by Tatarstan is undoubtedly highly positive.

Many of my colleagues from countries with predominantly Muslim populations have noted this and are looking at the positive experience of coexistence among people of different ethnicities and religions, which Tatarstan demonstrates.

I would like to congratulate everyone – this all began with Tatarstan’s first leader, and now Rustam Minnikhanov is actively continuing this work. It is no coincidence, I think, that the capital of Tatarstan has been chosen as the host for major future international events under the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation. Russia is an observer state there. By the way, I was the one who initiated Russia’s observer status. I once reached out to my colleagues so that Russia could become an observer in the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation.

You know, this was done with great enthusiasm by all our friends and colleagues, representatives of Islamic countries. I watched with delight as this happened. It was very gratifying for me. This was a very, very long time ago, but it was absolutely the right decision on our part. More than 10 percent of our population are Muslims. This is also… But I will not – alright, I will not go into what the Patriarch told me on this subject. In general, our Orthodoxy is Eastern Christianity, and in terms of all our major traditional values, we are fully aligned.

What is being done in Tatarstan across these domains – spiritual, educational, academic… The establishment of an academy in Tatarstan is a very important decision, especially considering that we must train Islamic scholars within our own territory. Moreover, the same developments are taking place in Bashkortostan. Just as we have supported, we intend to continue supporting all traditional religions in the Russian Federation.

Artur Khalilullov: One more question, Mr President. We also have the annual KazanForum, and this platform grows year by year. I would like to know if you plan to attend the KazanForum this year.

Thank you very much.

Vladimir Putin: You know, we have divided responsibilities among colleagues: I usually attend the Far Eastern Forum or the one in St Petersburg, while the Prime Minister attends the forum in Sochi – so as not to gather the same people repeatedly but to involve representatives from different levels of government. Nevertheless, this forum is very important, and we will certainly support it, as it is another thread connecting us with our friends and allies in the Arab world and the Islamic world as a whole – and, without exaggeration, with the Global South.

Dmitry Peskov: Thank you.

(Addressing Artur Khalilullov.) You ended up asking three questions, you know. Friends, let’s respect one another.

Our guests from China, Xinhua, please.

Liu Kai: Good afternoon, Mr President,

My name is Liu Kai, and I represent Xinhua News Agency.

As you have repeatedly stated, China-Russia relations are at their highest point ever. This year alone, you and President Xi Jinping have met twice, and next year, we will celebrate two major milestones: the 30^th anniversary of the strategic partnership and cooperation between China and Russia, and the 25^th anniversary of the signing of the Treaty of Good-Neighbourliness, Friendship, and Cooperation.

My question is: How do you assess the achievements of China-Russia strategic cooperation over the past 30 years, and how do you see its development over the next three decades?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: First, I would say that I consider President Xi Jinping to be a reliable friend, a stable partner – my reliable friend and stable partner – and Russia’s ally. This is the most crucial foundation for the development of Russia-China relations; they are progressing steadily.

Obviously, the agreements you mentioned as well as the efforts to maintain the strategic partnership are indeed significant, yet the most essential aspect is the practical cooperation between us – the actual, hands-on collaboration across all sectors.

As we have already mentioned, the figures on trade differ slightly between China and Russia, but the total turnover is somewhere between US$240 and US$250 billion. This is lower than the total trade between the EU and China, but when it comes to country-to-country cooperation, Russia ranks first among European states.

China’s overall trade with the EU stands at some US$700 billion, while the turnover with Russia is around US$240 to US$250 billion. But once again, in terms of bilateral cooperation, Russia ranks first among the European nations. Of course, globally, China’s trade with the United States, Japan, and South Korea is larger – but in Europe, Russia takes the top spot for country-to-country cooperation.

These relations continue to grow and expand into a wide range of areas. I am particularly pleased to see progress in high-tech manufacturing, science, education, humanitarian exchange, and space exploration. Our cooperation in these fields reflects the strong level of trust between our nations. We also cooperate in the military sphere, conducting regular joint military exercises and patrols involving strategic aviation, naval forces, and ground troops.

All of this underscores that Russia-China relations are a significant factor driving global stability, as I have stated on many occasions before and would like to emphasise once again. On the international stage, our foreign ministries are in constant contact, coordinating our agendas.

So, I am hopeful that we will further develop relations with our Chinese friends in this manner for the short and long term.

Dmitry Peskov: Let us take another question from the audience.

Yevgenia Volgina: I am Yevgenia Volgina, a host at the Govorit Moskva (Moscow Speaking) radio station.

I have a question regarding demographics in general.

You have repeatedly stated that the birth rate in the country is declining, despite ongoing regular financial support measures such as benefits, payments, incentives, and other forms of assistance. At the same time, there is currently a relatively small generation of women of childbearing age, and demographers are debating when the population decline will reverse.

Meanwhile, many young people are primarily focused on building a career and creating a financial safety cushion, while some are simply afraid to have children.

This leads directly to two questions.

First, what additional financial incentives do you view as new measures that might be introduced to encourage young people to start families and have children?

Second, perhaps now is the time to speak with young people about how important it is to stop postponing family life, and encourage them instead to have children and not be afraid? In other words, to take a value-based approach.

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: This is an issue faced by all post-industrial countries – virtually all major economies. The same trend is occurring everywhere, and in certain states the situation is truly alarming. For example, in Japan the birth rate is 0.8, while in South Korea it is 0.7. To clarify, the birth rate refers to the average number of children per woman of childbearing age.

In our country, this figure has also declined slightly and now stands around 1.4, whereas we need to reach at least two. This is an extremely challenging task. Naturally, a great deal depends on the financial situation of families. A family should not experience a drop in income when a child is born; this is a very important factor. For that reason, I will not go over the efforts that are already underway; there is a wide scope of measures in place. As I mentioned earlier, benefits are provided starting from pregnancy and continuing until the child turns 18. Additional support has been introduced in certain regions; a couple of years ago we allocated 75 billion rubles to assist the territories where fertility rates require special attention, and so on. I have mentioned raising the status of mothers with many children, called Mother Heroine in Russia, among other initiatives. There is support for family mortgages, and we still need to continue working on the six-percent mortgage programme. We have discussed – and will continue to do – every possible effort to encourage young people to start families and have children as early as possible.

This is indeed a very delicate process, but everyone is aware of it. Young people, and particularly women, first seek to obtain education, then uplevel it, take their first career steps, and by the time they do all that, they already turn 30 and only just have their first child. After that, they often lack the strength or energy for a second child, and so on. Naturally, it needs to become trendy, so that people see and feel the joy of motherhood and the joy of fatherhood.

I want to get back to Naran Ochir-Goryaev again: he has been taking part [in the special military operation] for four years now and has four children. You know, everyone learns primarily from their own experience, even though there are constant calls to learn from the experience of others – we keep saying this in every field and in life in general, but still people usually learn from their own experience; only after they have to grapple with something really concrete, they actually start reflecting and drawing conclusions, thinking if they should have done this or that differently.

I am recalling something now, and I believe I have even spoken about it publicly before. At my most recent meeting with large families, there was a woman whose family had, I think, nine or ten children. She said something very kind and truly wonderful, words that have stayed with me. She said: “You know, we now have ten children, but every time a new child was born even when we already had five or six, we immediately thought, ‘How did we ever live without you?’” This kind of reflection captures a person’s state of mind, their attitude towards their children, and their understanding of their own happiness in being a mother or a father. Translating this feeling to others is not an easy task. But it is something we all must do.

I am addressing this audience, your colleagues, representatives of the media, and cultural figures because they are all talented people. They create good films, stage performances, write books, and see their works brought to the stage. I ask you, please, to always keep this in mind and to frame everything you talk about, write about, and show in a way that promotes fatherhood and childhood.

The material aspect is essential – but what matters even more is a person’s state of mind as well as their understanding of simple human happiness.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Mr President, there is an interesting story related to this. A young lady has turned to us. She is choosing self-fulfilment while being afraid of missing the ideal age for becoming a mother because she is a med student. And as we know, a new measure has been adopted this year, requiring med students to work off their state-funded residency. This requirement applies directly to her.

I suggest listening to a video message. But overall, there are many such messages, with young people still not fully aware of the way their lives would be organised.

Vladimir Putin: Excuse me for interrupting. When you asked your question, I noted that there is one positive aspect for us. Positive demographic trends have emerged in 25 regions of the Russian Federation, which indicates that our colleagues at the local level, in the regions, are making substantial progress in case they focus on this issue. This is particularly true for demography, a challenging but crucial area for our country. So, 25 regions of Russia are already showing positive demographic trends.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Let us now watch the video message.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, please, go ahead.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Here is Alina Gamazina from Kemerovo.

Vladimir Putin: Please, go ahead.

Alina Gamazina: Good afternoon, Mr President,

I am a fifth-year medical student at Kemerovo University, enrolled in a targeted programme. I am prepared to work in my region following graduation. However, I am facing a dilemma: my mandatory years of work will fall between the ages of 27 and 31, which is the perfect time for having children and starting a family. Unfortunately, my schedule, workload, and the low salaries for young professionals make this very tough. I would like to ask whether there are any special conditions in place or planned that would allow combining work with motherhood, without penalties or disruptions to my work experience? Perhaps there is financial or housing support for young medical professionals? Because, in the current situation, we either lose young professionals to other regions, or we face demographic challenges. How can the state help us achieve both goals of having children and working under a targeted programme?

Vladimir Putin: As regards support for young families with children, we have already discussed this a few times; there is a wide range of measures in place to support families with children.

But when you say that you are in your fifth year and needing to fulfill a service commitment, it is all very clear. I am not sure if it is simple, but at least it is understandable. What is clear is that when someone enters medical residency, starting from March 1 of the following year, a procedure is established: following residency, if they are studying under a state-funded scholarship, they are required to work as a doctor for a certain period in the area where they are assigned.

This period varies depending on the location: in rural areas, it will be shorter, while in larger cities, it will be longer. But it is the individual’s choice: they sign a contract for state-funded education, and then they are obligated to work off the residency they received with state funding. If they do not want to do so, they do not have to sign the contract – and in that case, they can study on a paid basis. Incidentally, in this scenario, a young person can take out an education loan and repay it later, once they have finished their studies and during their professional career.

As for medical students, we are not talking about a mandatory work period after graduation or assignment to a specific city or region. No, this is about the requirement that anyone who has completed or is completing their medical education must work in their specialty for a set period of time in a medical institution that follows the compulsory health insurance regulations. It is about working in their field, regardless of the place of work. I do not think this requirement is excessive.

As for starting a family and having children, that is always a personal choice. You need to assess your circumstances and make your own decision.

But, as I have already mentioned, I do not believe that getting further, additional education, building a career, or reaching a certain income level should be the reasons to delay marriage or delay having children.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: An important clarification here is that this specifically refers to certification for the title of [medical] doctor.

Vladimir Putin: It does. A person graduates from university, and they are not assigned to a remote city, town, or village. They simply need to work in their field at an institution that is covered by the compulsory health insurance system. That is all.

We remember how, in Soviet times, everyone was required to go wherever the state decided. That is no longer the case. Even the proposals and decisions that have been made are quite soft, almost advisory in nature.

Perhaps it would be better if we reach a point where this would not be necessary at all. Obviously, the young lady who asked the question is right. What needs to be done? We need to improve living conditions and resolve housing issues. Overall, the state is doing its best to follow this path. This includes support programmes like Rural Paramedic, Rural Teacher and other. We will, of course, continue and improve these forms of support.

Pavel Zarubin: Students at teacher training colleges are also wondering whether they will face mandatory work assignments later on.

Vladimir Putin: This decision has caused quite a stir. It does not yet apply to students at teacher training colleges, and I believe it is not necessary at this point.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: The floor goes to Dmitry Peskov.

Dmitry Peskov: Let us work with the audience.

I can see Yevgeny Poddubny, also a Hero of Russia, and a military correspondent.

Yevgeny Poddubny: Good afternoon, Mr Putin.

Vladimir Putin: Good afternoon.

Yevgeny Poddubny: I have a question that I believe concerns many people in the regions that have a lot of problems – I mean frontline regions such as Donbass, first of all. The issue of water supply is extremely acute there and has been discussed for many years.

The current situation is such that not only in Donetsk, but also in other cities of Donbass – Gorlovka, Makeyevka, Debaltsevo, and virtually every city in the region – water is supplied irregularly, once every two to four days, and its quality is poor. Residents living above the fifth or sixth floor often receive no water at all due to insufficient pressure.

Strictly speaking, this water blockade is man-made, and we are well aware of it. Its primary cause is the actions of our adversary. However, residents of the Donetsk People’s Republic and the Lugansk People’s Republic have been dealing with this issue for many years. Will it take a long time to fix, or is it still impossible to give a clear answer? Thank you very much.

Vladimir Putin: Yevgeny, you know very well where this problem originates. The main water intake facilities and the core water supply system are located beyond Slavyansk, in the territory that, unfortunately, remains under enemy control. Under the old system, this issue can be fully resolved only when this territory comes under the control of our Armed Forces.

That said, this is not the only solution; there are other opportunities, as you are certainly aware: constructing water pipelines, searching for water in territories under our control, drilling wells, and so on. One water pipeline has already been built, and the construction of another one is currently under consideration.

A key issue inherited from the past is the level of water loss. Until recently, losses in the existing pipeline systems reached 68 percent. While this figure has been reduced, it still stands at around 50 percent. I have discussed these issues repeatedly with government members as well as with regional authorities. However, addressing water losses means bringing the entire water pipeline system, which was neglected for decades and is now in a state of disrepair, back up to standard. Restoring this system and reducing water losses to a minimum, or ideally to zero, would require funding comparable, according to experts’ reports, to the cost of building another major water pipeline.

But I want us to be heard. Please note that we know about this issue. We are aware of how acute and painful it is for people, and we will make every effort to promptly resolve it.

Dmitry Peskov: Thank you. One more question. I can see BBC, UK. Your question, please.

Steven Rosenberg: Thank you very much. Steven Rosenberg, BBC News.

I have a question about the future – the future of Russia. What future are you planning and building for your country and your people? In this future, will any public disagreement with the official line be punishable by law, as it is now? Will the search for enemies, both external and internal, intensify? Will mobile internet shutdowns become increasingly common across the country? Will there be further special military operations, or will Russia choose a different path?

I remember you saying that our future is in our hands – that is, in the hands of everyone. But essentially, almost all power in Russia is in your hands, which means that, to a large extent, its future is also in your hands. So, what will it be like? What lies ahead? Will it be the continuation of what we are seeing now?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: What will Russia’s future be? Will actions or people who disagree with the authorities be punishable by law, as you put it? You are probably referring to our well-known and frequently criticised law on foreign agents.

Colleague, I would like to point out that this is not our invention. Such laws were adopted in a number of Western countries, including the United States, back in the 1930s. Moreover, all these laws, including the American one, are significantly harsher. They envisage criminal liability, including imprisonment, for political activity funded from abroad.

We have nothing of the kind. Our law requires only one thing: if you are engaged in political activity, you must disclose your sources of funding. There is no repression and no criminal prosecution for this.

Furthermore, if a person ceases political activity or refuses foreign funding for such activities, they are removed from these lists. There are many such examples.

Pavel Zarubin: There is another question: what will happen next with the BBC? There is a multi-billion-dollar lawsuit from the US President against the BBC.

Vladimir Putin: That is their family business; let them sort it out themselves. I do not want to add fuel to the fire or dwell on that topic.

Although, of course, it is an issue of false reporting and manipulation. That is obvious. I believe President Trump is right. But that is not the point here.

You also asked whether there will be new special military operations. There will be none if we are treated with respect and if our interests are taken into account, just as we have consistently tried to take yours into account. But you deceived us, for example, with NATO’s eastward expansion. We were told there NATO would not expand “one inch eastward” – that is a direct quote. And what happened? As they say it here, they simply deceived us and disregarded our security interests.

You – well, of course not you personally, but Western politicians – created the current situation with their own hands and continue to escalate it. They constantly talk about preparing for war with Russia. You have lived here for years, as far as I know. I think even those who speak about war with Russia understand [the absurdity of] this. Are we planning to attack Europe or something? What kind of nonsense is that?

This is being done for internal political reasons in order to create an image of an enemy. And an image of an enemy, Russia in this case, is being deliberately constructed in order to conceal the mistakes that many Western governments have consistently made over the years, both in economy and social policy.

Where is the “green agenda” when coal mines are being reopened? Nuclear power plants were shut down, and now they are being reactivated. Mistake after mistake – yet all of this is being covered up by portraying Russia as a malicious external threat and diverting public attention away from internal failures, shifting it toward the outside world.

Your questions basically follow the same logic. You said that all power is concentrated in my hands. True, there is power vested in the President of the Russian Federation. But the scope and extent of that power are clearly defined and enshrined in the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the fundamental law of our country. For instance, when legislative decisions are made, I do indeed sign laws, as is the case in any country. I cannot recall the exact share in percent, but a significant portion of these laws is initiated by deputies of the State Duma or by members of the upper chamber of parliament, the Federation Council. These are objective facts. Obviously, the President of Russia enjoys extensive powers; but I believe that, under current conditions, a presidential form of government is justified for our country.

I would like to conclude on a different note. We are ready to work with you – with Great Britain, with Europe as a whole, and with the United States – but solely on the basis of equality and mutual respect.

If we ultimately reach such an understanding, everyone will benefit.

I recall a conversation I attended back in 1993, where Helmut Kohl, former Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany, spoke. He said that if Europe wishes to remain an independent centre of civilisation, its future must inevitably be with Russia. We naturally complement one another; together, we could work, develop, and prosper. Without this, Europe would eventually vanish.

Consider this: despite the fact that Russia’s economic growth rate has slowed to around one percent amidst our efforts to curb inflation, Russia still ranks fourth globally in terms of purchasing power parity after China, the United States, and India. Russia is followed by Japan and Germany. The United Kingdom, which you represent, unfortunately ranks only seventh, eighth, or ninth – most likely seventh or eighth, I believe.

If Russia and European nations were to unite their efforts, our combined GDP in terms of purchasing power parity would exceed that of the United States. This is obviously a theoretical calculation. But the underlying reality is clear: by pooling and complementing our capabilities, we would achieve prosperity rather than confrontation. It is not Russia that is fighting you. It is you who are fighting us, through Ukrainian nationalists.

We are ready to stop these hostilities immediately, provided that Russia’s mid- and long-term security interests are guaranteed. And we are ready to cooperate.

Pavel Zarubin: On the whole – and I believe the audience will agree with me – in recent years, we have seen so many statements and actions from European politicians that are simply mind-boggling.

Why do you think we see such rampant support for the Kiev regime in all aspects? Human rights no longer seem to matter and no one speaks about European values anymore – there is just unbridled backing, and, apparently, they are even ready to start confrontation with the President of the United States.

Vladimir Putin: Why is such a policy being pursued – rampant, as you put it? I have just tried to explain this when answering a question from your colleague from BBC. First, they are using this policy to cover up their own mistakes: in foreign policy, economy, finance, and other areas. That is what I believe is happening.

Second, they have gotten themselves into a rut, as we say when talking about bad roads. Once you are stuck in a rut, it is very hard to turn left or right.

As for conflicts with the President of the United States, there is nothing unexpected or surprising here. Why should it surprise anyone? It is all quite clear to me, and I believe it is clear to any observer, even a non-expert. European political elites supported the Democratic Party and Ms Harris in the US presidential election, and they did so quite openly, if not brazenly.

There were once allegations that Russia had intervened in the US presidential election to support Donald Trump. Nothing was ever confirmed; all investigations launched by Congress came to nothing. There was no cooperation and no Russian interference. Yet, European political elites did interfere – and they did so directly. It was obvious, visible, and blatant. Even now, it seems to me that they are counting on a shift in the political landscape after the US congressional midterm elections next autumn. They hope this will bring back their traditional allies, allowing them to exert greater pressure on President Trump. That is why they are acting the way they are, anticipating a change in the US political balance ahead of those elections.

As for certain individuals, they are indeed behaving very aggressively and, in my view, even unprofessionally.

Regarding these aggressive statements – you know, I look at them, and I am surprised too. For instance, I personally know the current NATO Secretary General, Mr Rutte. He is the former Prime Minister of the Netherlands. I once visited the country and spoke with him. He is an intelligent man, and he was a competent, strategically minded, and efficient prime minister. The Dutch economy is in good shape, and this is partly due to his efforts. And what nonsense is he talking now? I just want to ask him: what are you saying about a war with Russia? “We must prepare for war with Russia.” They want to prepare for a war with Russia. But can you even read? Just read the new US National Security Strategy. It says that the United States – let me emphasise – is the key player in NATO. The United States established NATO; it is NATO’s main sponsor. All the main resources come from the US: funding, military technology, weapons, ammunition. That is the foundation of the Alliance.

And yet the new National Security Strategy does not list Russia as an enemy or a target. Nevertheless, the NATO Secretary General is preparing for war with us. How does that make sense? Can you even read? How can NATO aim to go to war with Russia if the Alliance’s leading power does not regard us as an adversary or an enemy?

It seems that the level of professional competence in this position is inadequate. One needs to pay closer attention to their responsibilities and the events unfolding. This applies not only to the NATO Secretary General but to many other Western leaders as well.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Mr President, we have been live for almost three hours now, and we have received three million requests.

Vladimir Putin: Do you want to process all three million?

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: We are striving to do so. And, as is traditional for the final conference of the year, we have a huge number of questions concern housing.

Vladimir Putin: Please go ahead.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: People are sending requests to expand the use of family mortgages for existing housing. Let me remind you that such a programme is already in place.

Vladimir Putin: Family mortgages?

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Yes, family mortgages, but for existing housing.

Vladimir Putin: I understand.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Such a programme does exist; it involves nearly 900 cities, but there are limitations, and they are critical for young families and those with many children. Essentially, they have to move to places where there are new buildings. In many towns and villages, there simply are none.

Let us watch a video message from Yekaterina Yerastova from the Tomsk Region.

Yekaterina Yerastova: Good afternoon, Mr President,

We are a large family from the town of Strezhevoy. We have three children. We would like to use the Family Mortgage programme, but there are no new buildings in our town, and none are being constructed. Those that exist, with apartments suitable for our family, are more than 20 years old. So, we would like to ask you to expand family mortgages to families like ours and to towns like ours.

Thank you very much.

Vladimir Putin: Is there no such option in your city? Do we have a direct connection?

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: No, this is a recording. This is the town of Strezhevoy, Tomsk Region.

Vladimir Putin: What is the name of the town?

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Strezhevoy. A town of oil workers.

Vladimir Putin: And the region?

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Tomsk.

Vladimir Putin: The Tomsk Region.

Look, this decision – are they listening now?

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: I believe Yekaterina is definitely watching.

Vladimir Putin: The decision has been made. In the regions where no or very little construction is underway to build new housing, family mortgages can be used to purchase housing on the secondary market. Of course, this raises a number of questions and challenges related to construction quality as well as the condition of the buildings being purchased. While a mortgage is being repaid, the housing itself may deteriorate, so people should always be very careful when choosing a property.

You have mentioned that nearly 900 cities are included – around 880, if I remember correctly. If your city is not on this list, we will add it. I would also like to note that just yesterday I discussed this issue with my colleagues in the Government who are responsible for housing construction and support for families with children. When these measures were initially adopted, they were intended to support both families and the construction sector. Why was it so difficult to allow purchases on the secondary market? With new housing, everything is clear as family mortgages stimulate construction activity. But even in the current conditions in locations that permit purchases on the secondary housing market, many questions persist. The key task is ensuring that this particular support measure is aimed primarily at supporting families, and not merely at supporting the construction industry. There are plenty of issues, and the Government will work to address them. As regards your city, if it is not yet on the list, we will make sure it gets included.

Pavel Zarubin: In previous years, we all remember how our direct lines were constantly flooded with questions from defrauded homebuyers. To prevent this, the escrow account mechanism was finally introduced – meaning a developer only gets paid once the building is actually completed and commissioned. But now we are seeing a surprising new problem. There are numerous cases where developers have already taken the money from these protected accounts but still have not handed over the keys. Here’s just one example.

Video question: Good afternoon. I bought a flat in Vsevolozhsk, Leningrad Region, but I still haven’t received it because the developer keeps moving the deadlines. The original deadline was September 30, 2025. Then in July, I was notified that my block of flats is scheduled for commissioning in December 2025 due to technical connection problems. Yet, on August 21, my escrow account was debited, and that very evening I got a notification that my block of flats was officially completed and ready to be commissioned. Right now, I know there’s still no heating in the building, and only one window ever has a light on – so it’s not clear any work is happening at all. Then, on October 30, I was notified that my flat’s handover is now postponed again until April. I’m asking you to look into this. I believe it is fraud: no flat and no money.

Pavel Zarubin: And here is another important point. One of the few ways a buyer can pressure a developer is to demand penalty fees for delays. But another problem has come to light. Since the pandemic, developers have been shielded from these penalties by a moratorium. It was introduced during the pandemic to support the construction industry, and it has been extended several times since. People are now asking: will it be extended again?

Vladimir Putin: Yes, this problem is well-known. Indeed, the decision to introduce this moratorium to support the construction sector during the COVID-19 pandemic was taken, and it is still in place with respect to penalties until the end of this year. I think this is sufficient, and I would ask the Government not to extend any moratoriums of this kind. Flats should be handed over on time.

There are, of course, legitimate questions and problems that can cause delays – I was discussing some with my colleagues just yesterday. In some contracts, for instance, the flat is supposed to be furnished. But there is no furniture, other things are missing.

In this specific case, the woman mentions problems with utility connections and other issues. But the moratorium on penalties needs to end, and I ask the Government to end it.

More broadly, we absolutely must establish a system-wide approach to ensure developers fulfil their obligations. We introduced escrow accounts to protect citizens, and now we need to revisit that mechanism to close these loopholes. We will go back and do exactly that.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Another problem we have highlighted is again with protracted construction projects – this time concerning sports facilities. There are similar complaints here as well: everything is almost finished, but they just won’t open.

Residents of the town of Abaza in Khakassia say the local ice arena is not complete. They write that parents, trying to speed things up, even helped dig the foundation pit themselves. But now the construction is frozen.

In the village of Dzhabyk, Chelyabinsk Region, the walls and roof of a sports and fitness centre are up, but the work has stalled.

Vladimir Putin: There is not much to add here.

For several years now, while the Government has been working hard, and it is hard work, to balance the budget, we have been saying the same thing: we must. If projects are not finished, we cannot start new ones. We need to complete the construction we have begun, not leave it hanging. It is the same story every time. Please pass…

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Absolutely.

Vladimir Putin: Please pass that information on – we will look into it.

Ah, I cannot help but notice the ‘I want to get married’ sign back there. Something else is coming up, I see.

Kirill Bazhanov: Mr President, good afternoon. Kirill Bazhanov, Regional Television, Channel 4, Yekaterinburg.

Vladimir Putin: Look at you, already dressed as if you are on your way to the wedding.

Kirill Bazhanov: Yes, exactly. And the sign is no accident. I know my girlfriend is watching the direct line conference right now. Olga, will you marry me? Well, since the proposal is happening here, Mr President, we would be honoured to have you at our wedding.

Now for my question. The sign is here for a reason. I will not ask about utilities or anything else – my question is about support measures for young families. My new fiancée and I have been together for eight years. I come from a priest’s family. We both really want children, but the reality is, I do not see how we can afford them. For example, if I were to take out a mortgage on a one-bedroom flat in Yekaterinburg now, I would be paying 50,000 rubles a month for 30 years.

Mr President, is there any way to help young people so that this money does not just go to the banks, but is instead invested in our future, in our children? As a 23-year-old, I can tell you for sure that this would be the most important incentive to improve the birth rate.

Thank you very much.

Vladimir Putin: I should point out – you have been with your fiancée for eight years, and you are 23, so you started dating at 15. Well done. That’s good.

In the Caucasus, among the peoples of the Caucasus, there is a very good tradition: they marry their children at a fairly young age. It is truly the right thing to do. We should follow their example. How do I know? Ramzan Kadyrov has a large family, many children, and they marry quite young. He told me, “This is our tradition in the Caucasus.” It’s really quite admirable.

In your case, as I have already mentioned, an entire support system for families with children has been created, including assistance for student families and others. I will not list all these measures now, as that would take too much time. However, it has already been said that you can wait indefinitely for the perfect moment: for your financial situation to improve, for your education to be completed, and so on. Yet it is better not to postpone having a child. This is part of life, and we must live our lives as they are. Procreation – especially since you are probably a believer – is perhaps a person’s divine mission. Therefore, of course, we will continue these support measures. Despite certain tensions related to the need to balance the budget, we have nevertheless preserved mortgage programmes.

Moreover, there are regions where mortgage rates are only two percent, not six. You can take out a mortgage there – because, in fact, home is where your heart is, and even a hut is heaven. It will not be a hut; it will be an apartment, but in regions where the mortgage rate is only two percent rather than six.

We need to review all support measures for young families. I believe all these issues can be resolved.

What does your fiancée do?

Kirill Bazhanov: She is a third-year student in the psychology department at Moscow State University, and I am graduating this year from the journalism department at Ural Federal University.

Vladimir Putin: You see, I have already said that there are measures to support student families. You should look into what they include. But overall, I agree with you: when young people think that they first need to buy this and that, secure housing, and resolve countless everyday issues, it can feel overwhelming. Still, it is better not to delay such fundamental decisions as starting a family and having a child.

Dmitry Peskov: I see the Zvezda TV Channel over there. Can we give the floor to Zvezda, Mr President?

Vladimir Putin: Please.

Konstantin Kokoveshnikov: Good afternoon.

Zvezda TV, Konstantin Kokoveshnikov.

You have already spoken about attempts to undermine the Russian economy, but I cannot help asking about the strikes carried out by Ukrainian drones and unmanned naval vessels, and about this issue in a broader context.

There is a growing impression that, in addition to targeting critical infrastructure inside Russia, attempts are being made to strike at Russian exports, particularly the supplies of Russian energy resources abroad. Some heads of state have already expressed concern about this, including Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Sitting next to me is a young woman from Rostov-on-Don, and I cannot help recalling that just two days ago, a Ukrainian strike killed two crew members on board a civilian vessel in the port of Rostov. Prior to that, the Ukrainian regime targeted four tankers in the Black Sea.

Will Russia respond to this, and if so, how? What might Russia’s response be in the event of a possible blockade of the Kaliningrad Region, should such an idea occur to someone in Europe?

Vladimir Putin: Let us start with the final part of your question. I hope that this does not happen. If threats of this kind are created for us, we will eliminate them. Everyone must understand this clearly and be fully aware that actions of this nature would lead to an escalation of the conflict unprecedented to date, pushing it to an entirely different level and expanding it, potentially to a large-scale armed conflict. This must be fully understood by all.

As for strikes against our civilian infrastructure, you, as a representative of what is effectively a military media outlet, Zvezda, are well aware that our forces respond to this on a regular basis, delivering retaliatory strikes whose scale, power and precision are simply incomparable with what the Kiev regime is doing. However, anything that causes damage to civilian infrastructure and non-combatants, that is, people who have no involvement in hostilities, is, of course, deserving the strongest condemnation. There will always be a response from our side.

Pavel Zarubin: News is coming in right now that one more of our tankers has been attacked in the Mediterranean Sea.

Vladimir Putin: This is being done, among other things, for a utilitarian purpose: to drive up insurance premiums. Ultimately, this will not lead to the expected result, will not disrupt any supplies, and will only create additional threats. Response from our side will certainly follow.

Question: Good afternoon, Mr President.

Thank you very much for the opportunity to ask a question.

First of all, let me convey warm greetings to you from the people of my entire republic – and from your home region, Pavel – and thank you for the attention to our region.

My question is partly related to this topic as well. A Russian–Tajikistani industrial park is currently being created in Tajikistan, with Bashkortostan acting as the Russian operator of this project. My question is: in which other friendly countries could similar parks be created? Where else could the experience of my home region, Bashkortostan, be useful?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: We have been working for several years on creating a similar structure in Egypt, in the Nile region. It is a very promising site. The Government, the Ministry of Industry, and our Egyptian friends are giving it serious attention. I believe this project would bring significant economic benefits to both Russia and Egypt.

We are also considering launching similar projects in several other partner countries, and your experience will certainly be in demand. To be honest, I am not fully aware of the current progress of the industrial park project in Tajikistan, but I have no doubt that Bashkortostan, with its strong technological and industrial base, will play an important role and achieve all of its objectives. If necessary, I ask the federal Government to provide you with support. Thank you very much.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Mr President, back to the audience?

Vladimir Putin: I have one big request: if we start making noise from all sides, we will have to stop, because it will be impossible to work and communicate.

(Inscription on a journalist’s sign.) Kokoshnik? Let us see what this kokoshnik is like. It is a headdress that young women usually wear.

Remark: Good afternoon, Mr President. Good afternoon, colleagues.

To be honest, I am nervous. I was looking forward to asking you a question.

Vladimir Putin: There is young men with a sign saying “Kokoshnik,” and you are wearing one and you have stood up, so please, go head.

Remark: Women first, as they say.

Vladimir Putin: Yes.

Question: Mr President, my question follows up on the question posed by my 13-year-old colleague sitting in the front row who asked you about you driving around Moscow without flashing lights or any identifying signs.

Do you think Moscow has become more beautiful? What about the roads? Have they become less congested? After all, a huge number of motorways have been built in Moscow; you and I opened the Moscow High-Speed Diametre and launched Prospekt Bagrationa. Do you think the roads are less congested now? Fewer traffic jams? That is my first question.

Second, what are looking at on the car market? Are we going to switch to domestically produced vehicles because of higher disposal fees? I have been saving up for five years to buy a foreign-made car. I checked on December 1, and foreign-made vehicles were gone, because they are so expensive now. I will now have to save up for the next five or six years. Please tell me whether a domestically produced vehicle is a good choice. You have driven a Lada. Or, perhaps Moskvich is a better choice?

Vladimir Putin: You know, let’s start with the disposal fee. We need to be straight about the issue. Higher disposal fee means higher car prices. We are talking about fairly expensive cars with, I believe, 160-horsepower engines.

Without a doubt, the Government understands this; this move affects people with at least average incomes, or even those with good incomes relative to the overall situation, primarily in major cities. It is clear, and again, it must be stated directly that this move is about the Finance Ministry’s attempt to raise extra revenue for the noble goal of technological advancement.

Of course, this move indirectly supports the domestic auto industry as well, and you stated it clearly: it has become a bit expensive, so shouldn’t I consider buying a domestically produced car? Of course, I would be remiss not to tell you to buy a domestic car. It would be strange if I told you to buy a car made outside Russia.

I hope that this measure will not be permanent, and our people will eventually have an expanded choice of cars: either as incomes rise or as this fiscal burden is reduced.

Question: Has Moscow traffic become less congested?

Vladimir Putin: What can I say? We are all proud of Moscow. Sergei Sobyanin has accomplished a lot.

Moscow is a vast urban and economic centre… Look, 12 million people live here, plus three million people come to Moscow to work every day. That is almost 15 million people in Moscow every day.

Transport issues are addressed systemically. This concerns public transport, primarily the metro, and road construction, interchanges, and overpasses. Sobyanin’s team is generally succeeding in solving these matters.

To reiterate, issues abound. When I drive around Moscow… I said that I drive without a motorcade, but that does not mean I do not use flashing lights. Occasionally, the driver turns them off, and we merge with the traffic. Of course, before and after the work hours, the traffic is very heavy, especially in downtown Moscow.

This means that we can’t rest on our laurels. Much has been accomplished, but we must keep an eye on this matter at all times.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Mr President, we have already spoken today about problems faced by people with diabetes. Due to disruptions in communication services, it has become virtually impossible for them to monitor blood sugar levels using specialised mobile applications.

However, there is another serious aspect to this issue: people cannot obtain subsidised medications. We are receiving a large number of messages about this problem, and it affects more than just diabetics.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, yes, yes, I have seen similar questions.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Exactly. And this is only a small portion of what has been submitted. People suffering from a wide range of conditions are writing to us: cancer patients, people with kidney failure, epilepsy, hypertension. The list goes on.

Let us watch a video message from Dmitry Otstavnykh, the Sverdlovsk Region.

Dmitry Otstavnykh: Good afternoon, Mr President.

My name is Dmitry Otstavnykh. In the city of Krasnoturyinsk, the Sverdlovsk Region, the distribution of subsidised medications that citizens need after illnesses and surgeries has stopped. This is going on every year starting in November. Local clinics explain that funding has run out. As Viktor Chernomyrdin once said: “Never before but once again.”

I would like to ask for your help in ensuring that Sverdlovsk Region officials restore this funding and provide residents with the subsidised medications they urgently need.

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Mr Otstavnykh, I will not deny that there are many such appeals. I read them yesterday and the day before. Before coming here, I spoke with the relevant officials: senior representatives of the ministries and the Government. They assured me that everything falling under federal responsibility, including the compulsory medical insurance system, has been fully financed and that all funds have been transferred to the regions without a single delay.

The issue you raise – and I repeat, many appeals mention the same problem, in fact, Dmitry Peskov gave me a pile this thick – concerns how this work is organised at the regional level: logistics, the timely conclusion of contracts, and the proper distribution of medications within the pharmacy network.

I promise that we will pay close attention to what is happening. I hope this problem will be resolved. The documents I reviewed also point to the closure of state-run pharmacies, which has led to shortages of subsidised medications. I want to emphasise to my colleagues in the regions that subsidised medications must be available at fixed prices even in private pharmacies. This is critically important, and the Ministry of Health and other regulatory authorities must strictly monitor compliance.

Moreover, we need to further develop the pharmacy network, including through mobile pharmacies, which are already being successfully introduced in many regions. This practice is expanding and proving effective. Certain medications can also be dispensed through village first aid stations, which helps address the issue, at least in part. We have also discussed expanding this approach through the Russian Post system. In general, the solution is clear: we simply need to ensure that it is properly implemented. We will definitely do this. And in your specific case, I am confident the issue will be resolved promptly.

Dmitry Peskov: Let’s take our next question from the audience.

Vladimir Putin: Let us: it looks nice first saying USSR and then TF1.

Dmitry Peskov: That is, first a placard saying USSR and then a placard saying TF1.

Vladimir Putin: A colleague of ours is already on his feet. Please, go ahead.

Remark: Good afternoon, Mr President.

Vladimir Putin: Good afternoon.

Remark: May I present a gift first, and then ask a couple of questions?

Dmitry Peskov: Please let us know what it is, and we will take it from you later. Thank you.

Remark: Yes, of course. It is a book titled “The Heart of Asia.” It features poems by126 Russian poets who praised Persia and Tajikistan. There is a dedication to you. The collection begins with Zhukovsky in 1743 and continues to the present day. We have compiled an anthology of the best Russian poets who praised Persia and Tajikistan, mostly Tajikistan. This is my gift to you. I know you love this.

Vladimir Putin: Thank you very much.

Question: Here is my question.

Mr President, you appreciate the poetry of Omar Khayyam. We – Tajiks and Persians – are his descendants. Could we ask the President of Russia to have a monument in honour of this great scholar erected, or an Omar Khayyam Centre created? Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: That is a good idea. We will definitely give it a thought. Thank you very much. As they say in such circumstances, thank you for the tip. We will think about it, I promise.

Yes, I wanted TF1 to ask a question.

Dmitry Peskov: Our French colleagues, TF1. Please go ahead.

Vladimir Putin: Please.

Jerome Jerome Garro, from TF1 French TV.

Mr President,

One of my compatriots, the Frenchman Laurent Vinatier, has been put in jail for three years for an administrative offence. Now the Russian justice system is raising the issue of espionage, which worsens the situation.

Vladimir Putin: Pardon me, could you say again the name of the person who was sentenced to three years?

Garro: Laurent Vinatier, a Frenchman.

Vladimir Putin: Who is that? This is the first time I am hearing this name.

Jerome Garro: All right. He was a researcher in Russia, and he wasn’t registered as a foreign agent. He didn’t know that the law changed. He was put in jail for three years for this administrative offence. His parents and children are deeply worried right now. We know there are huge tensions between France and Russia. But as the New year approaches, can his family hope for a Presidential pardon or an exchange, and his return to France?

Vladimir Putin: I know nothing about this. This is the first time I am hearing about it, but I promise that I will look into it. If there is even the slightest chance to resolve this matter favourably, if the Russian law allows it, we will make every effort to do so. I cannot say anything specific at this point, because I know nothing about it. But I will find out, I promise.

Dmitry Peskov: Mr President, if you don’t mind, let's proceed. I see someone sitting modestly with their phone out. Please introduce yourself.

Valentin Petukhov: Good afternoon, Mr President. My name is Valentin Petukhov, and I’m a Russian tech blogger. For the past 15 years, I have been informing my audience about services and technologies, both Russian and foreign, and I represent a substantial audience, with several million subscribers across my social media accounts. Currently, extensive work is underway on import substitution and the construction of what we call technological sovereignty. Perhaps one of the most significant topics discussed this year has been the national messenger, MAX.

However, we are aware that there is a vast array of messaging platforms already in use by people, so my question is the following: Was the creation of a national messenger truly such an important and necessary development? Can MAX compete adequately with the existing messaging platforms? And what is your view on such competition? In a purely blogger-like fashion, I’d like to ask you to subscribe to my MAX channel about technology, but I understand that you are already well-versed in this matter. Listening to my colleagues, I recalled that today, December 19, is my father’s birthday. I would like to congratulate him and all Russians, because, using neural networks, I discovered that several hundred thousand Russian citizens are also celebrating their birthdays today.

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: We, too, would like to join in congratulating your father.

As for MAX and competition, competition is always necessary. I am confident that there will be competition.

Regarding Telegram and other messengers, the issue lies in one thing only – compliance with Russian laws. The problem with these messengers was that the political leadership of their countries did not allow them to adhere to our laws, imposing certain restrictions. This was the reason behind the corresponding measures, such as slowdowns and speed limitations, and so on. You are all aware of this.

I am sure MAX will have competitors. Was it necessary to create it or not? Of course, yes, it was absolutely necessary. I would like to draw your attention to the fact that, in principle, we had all the tools in the digital sphere except for a messenger. Now, we can confidently say – and this is very important – that Russia has achieved full digital sovereignty. Russia is one of only three countries that possess this digital sovereignty: the United States, the People’s Republic of China, and now Russia.

Moreover, there are a number of services we can provide to our citizens through the MAX national system, services that we could not previously offer through foreign systems for a variety of reasons, including security considerations. Therefore, this is unquestionably the right step. But I agree with you that competition should exist. It will.

Pavel Zarubin: Many questions about healthcare have also been submitted via MAX, and, by the way, many of them – we have also noticed this – were resolved even before the Direct Line. In total, half a million questions were received through MAX, including many video questions from children and young people…

Vladimir Putin: Excuse me.

“We in Ulyanovsk live as if in the 19^th century. When will your subordinates finally start working and listening to you and the people?” But we just need to understand… I will ask you to note this, Mr Peskov, make a note – we need to understand what this is referring to.

Pavel Zarubin: Is this a text message?

Vladimir Putin: Yes. And now this: “I am tired of these programmes about Ukraine.” I completely agree. We need to wrap it up. “Maybe we should focus on solving our own problems and covering them?” We are trying to do that.

Pavel Zarubin: We should focus more on our domestic issues. There are several video messages from children and young people.

Video question: Hello, Mr President.

My name is Daniil, and I am at the International Literature Fair in Moscow right now. There are very few young people here, almost none compared to the older generation. I would like to ask about your opinion on this trend. Children and teenagers are reading less these days. They mostly prefer reels.

How critical is this, in your opinion? What can we do about this? Is there a book that, in your opinion, every Russian should read?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: What can I say? Unfortunately, people are reading less everywhere in the world. We used to be proud that the USSR was the world’s most reading nation. That is what they used to say about us. Even these days, many people enjoy reading although, unfortunately, the number of readers is shrinking worldwide.

What could be done? Of course, it depends on school, family and parents. Children need more attention in this regard. We should keep up with the competition against modern means of communication, tablets, and so on. I mean that parents should keep up with this competition. Why? Because it is important to communicate the value of books to children in a colourful, vivid and engaging way. It is not an easy task but creativity makes it possible.

You know, I have already said this once, and I want to reiterate and share it with you. I asked a priest once what people usually talk about when they are dying. His answer was that people usually regret not giving enough attention to their children.

I don’t want to personify this answer or comment. And it is not specific. I am not breaking the seal of confession. It is just a general message. It concerns anything, be it education or teaching values.

By the way, in response to the young man’s question about what book to read. World literature, Russian literature, classics and modern books provide many topics for discussion and can be useful reads. The most important thing is that a book should shape one’s views and beliefs. It is difficult for me to name a specific book.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Next, we have a text message. Let me read it out; this one also came via MAX, from Diana Giniyatullina. She asks: “What are your working hours? And what’s the number plate on your car?” Two questions there.

Vladimir Putin: To be honest, I don’t even know if it has a number plate. I’ve never really noticed; I just get in and go.

As for my working hours, from when to when? Well, I used to finish quite late, and these days it seems to be getting later and later. I won’t give you a specific cut-off time, as that wouldn’t be appropriate – it would probably breach labour laws, and that wouldn’t be right. One needs to go to bed on time to be fit and alert. And that’s the kind of work-life routine I’d encourage everyone to adopt.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: The next question is from Viktoria Vasilyeva. And Mr President, it’s not just for you, but for Pavel as well.

Vladimir Putin: For Pavel?

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Let’s have a look.

Viktoria Vasilyeva: Good afternoon, Mr President.

My name is Viktoria. I’m a big fan of Pavel Zarubin’s programme format. So I have a proposal for you. I’ll finish school and university, Pavel will have retired by then, and I’ll take his place. So please, don’t go anywhere; wait for me. I’ll be reporting on your work.

I also wanted to wish you a Happy New Year, good health, and that you always make the right decisions.

Vladimir Putin: Thank you very much, Viktoria.

I return your New Year wishes. All the best to you too, success in your studies, and may you have good, loyal friends by your side.

Let’s not pension Pavel off just yet; he’s still got plenty of life in him. I’ve got a different proposal. I’ll have a word with him, and he won’t say no – he’ll take you on as a trainee. He’s still got a lot to offer; he’s quite young, I repeat. And by the time I retire, and you’re there gaining experience with him, it will stand you in good stead for getting into a journalism programme. Then you and Pavel can work on keeping all sorts of bosses on their toes, right up to the federal level.

Pavel Zarubin: We’ll make that happen.

But while I’m not retired just yet, if I may, I’d like to ask about something that’s concerning us all more and more. You’ve spoken a lot recently about the opportunities, but also the dangers, of artificial intelligence – how you can now solve any problem at the push of a button, without using your head.

Here is another video message from MAX.

Video question (the recording is cut off.) … and what could be the right balance between modern technologies and the task of teaching children to think independently? We would appreciate your response.

We would also like to invite you to the opening of the Point of the Future centre in Yakutsk on September 1, 2026.

Vladimir Putin: This is a pressing and complex issue, given both the topic itself and the nature of the problem.

Of course, today it is possible to obtain a great deal of information and accomplish various tasks using the capabilities of AI. Indeed, there is a risk that children, teenagers, school and even university students will stop thinking for themselves and searching for solutions, and instead, as Pavel said, simply press a button and get the required answer.

This is a major challenge, and it will only become more complicated due to the organisation of the educational process in schools and universities. It is therefore necessary to structure the educational process in such a way that core skills are still developed and practised directly in classrooms, so that the tasks facing school and university students are set right there, in the classrooms, and solved right there by the students themselves. That way, there will be a real need to engage one’s mind, to work and to think.

In the long run, the development of modern technologies should not lead to a situation where part of our population, part of society, remains intellectually active because it works within this paradigm, while another follows the easier path – able to use technology and press the right buttons, but intellectually degrading. This must not be allowed to happen under any circumstances.

This is a major challenge for the education system and for families as well. I believe that there is little more to add.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Let’s give the floor to the audience.

Vladimir Putin: Let’s hear from Spas. Please.

Ksenia Aksyonova: Forgive me, but this is very important for us. Thank you.

Ksenia Aksyonova, Spas TV channel.

Thank you for recognising the International Satanist Movement as extremist. However, occult services, esotericism, psychics, and fortune-tellers remain accessible: they appear on TV shows, social media, and in books. Children’s tarot products are also now available on every shop shelf.

Last year, Russian citizens spent over 2.5 trillion rubles on occult services. Of course, Spas TV channel produced the film Demons: The Whole Truth About Psychics and Sorcerers, where we shared many human stories profoundly and destructively impacted by the occult business. Yet people continue to visit sorcerers.

Tell us, please, is it possible to introduce a ban on magical and occult advertisements, which contradict your Executive Order No. 809 on preserving our traditions and, indeed, the Supreme Court’s ruling prohibiting international Satanism?

Vladimir Putin: As for legislative decisions, rulings by the highest judicial authorities – both the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court – must be observed by all. I will certainly revisit this matter and instruct the relevant regulatory bodies to monitor it very closely, ensuring that no violations of decisions adopted at the legislative or highest judicial levels occur. But here, of course, we must act carefully.

I fully agree with you. Satanism, occult services, all these sorcerers and so on – it is absolute nonsense, which simply misleads people, driving them into a dark corner, both literally and figuratively, causing substantial harm to citizens, their moral state, and indeed their mental and psychological well-being.

This must be combated. We just need to do so carefully, ensuring we do not infringe upon human rights, as your colleagues here have also mentioned, or overstep with these restrictions. Nonetheless, we must, without question, continuously analyse developments in this sphere, respond, and make timely decisions.

We will certainly address this, including with you, representatives of the mass media – such as yours – and with representatives of our traditional religions, including, of course, the Russian Orthodox Church.

Dmitry Peskov: Mr President, we didn’t have enough questions from that sector. I see the Avtoradio radio station there.

Vladimir Putin: Good, let’s have Avtoradio.

Dmitry Peskov: Go ahead.

Nadezhda Rumyantseva: Good afternoon. My name is Nadezhda Rumyantseva, Avtoradio.

Mr President, here is our question. It is believed that the generation of the 1990s was lost for the state. What about the current generation? Do you feel its support?

Vladimir Putin: I can’t agree that the generation of the 1990s has been lost.

The problem of fathers and children is an evergreen issue, as you can clearly see in Turgenev’s novel Fathers and Sons. It has always been said, by every generation, that it was different “in our time,” that “fathers” did it differently, and life is not like it used to be.

I entered the security service immediately after graduating from university, and I was transferred to the Soviet foreign intelligence service soon afterwards. One of the ways to assess people and their ability to serve in intelligence services, especially undercover, is to place them in a difficult or critical situation, especially a life-threatening situation. That is when they reveal their true nature.

Yes, some things and some habits of our young people may seem absurd or inappropriate to the older generations, but it is in a critical situation that your true nature is revealed. It has always been like this throughout our history.

We are living in conditions of the special military operation. We have 700,000 people in the zone of the special military operation, and most of them are young people, including many from the generation of the 1990s. How have they been acting? Naran, how would you describe young people, the individuals you are serving with, those who are serving under your command?

Pass the microphone, please.

Naran Ochir-Goryayev: The children of the 1990s constitute the core. They are the heroes you can look up to.

Vladimir Putin: Thank you, Naran. That answers the question.

As for the younger generation, there is an interesting observation. Yesterday we analysed the information we received in the form of questions during the preparation of the Direct Line. Many questions have come from young people. This means that they are also very active in public life, even more active than in the past few years. Thank you.

Let’s proceed without any notes; you just raised your hand. Please go ahead.

Andrei Belov: Good afternoon. Andrei Belov, Ulyanovsk, Media 73.ru.

I’ve got a question about transport: aviation and public transport. Next year marks the 50^th anniversary of the unique Aviastar plant, which produced the extraordinary An-124 Ruslan aircraft and is now working on the Il-76. What do you think: are modern Russian aircraft like the Ruslan needed? How will Aviastar and Russia’s aviation industry be supported moving forward?

Public transport is a major issue specifically for the city of Ulyanovsk, and I know you discussed both topics with Governor [Alexei] Russkikh. Will there be more concrete steps to support public transport in Ulyanovsk, including procurement with federal assistance?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: We had an entire programme, and we are continuing this work to support the procurement of public transport for the needs of various regions of the Russian Federation. This has always been seen as a measure to support the automotive manufacturing sector, and in one form or another, we will certainly continue it.

As for road transport in the Ulyanovsk Region, I promise you that we will discuss this with the governor. Right now, I probably can’t say with absolute precision what the most pressing issues are or what the Ulyanovsk Region needs most, but we will talk it over with the governor and, if necessary, provide the required support.

Regarding Aviastar and aviation in general – this is a pressing and important issue for us. We have strong traditions in aviation, both military and civilian. The issue has always been that civilian aviation was developed from military-transport aviation, and military aviation involves entirely different approaches – in terms of lifecycle, fuel consumption, noise levels, and so on.

Even though we rightly took pride in our Tupolev, Ilyushin, and Yakovlev aircraft, purely civilian aviation – where these planes were designed from the outset for civilian purposes – was clearly underdeveloped in the Soviet Union. Now, we absolutely need our own modern domestic aircraft. Part of the reason for rising airfare prices is the shortage of such aircraft.

On the one hand, the companies that supplied us with Western aircraft have, for various political reasons, decided to stop working and cooperating with us. This is bad for them because it undermines their reputation, but to some extent, it’s good for us because it forces us to work independently, to engage in this effort, and to leverage the opportunities of our own market.

At one point, I told the incumbent Deputy Prime Minister [Vitaly Savelyev], then the head of Aeroflot, that we needed to buy more Russian-made aircraft. It seemed simpler and cheaper to purchase foreign-made aviation equipment, and we weren’t producing anything digitally controlled. But the aircraft we have now, like the MC-21, are very good machines, fully competitive in global markets. The Superjet 100 has become a fully localised aircraft – this is very important. Naturally, we need our own domestically produced aircraft for regional transport. We will certainly work on all of this.

Are aircraft like the Ruslan needed? Of course they are, and the modernised Il-76 is also needed – we will develop it. All of this is essential. Moreover, this is a high-tech industry requiring extensive cooperation at the same technological level. There are issues that require additional solutions, and there are many matters requiring resolution, but we will certainly address all of them.

Dmitry Peskov: Mr President, we’re coming up on four hours.

Vladimir Putin: Let’s give Dmitry Peskov a chance to speak, shall we? Just a moment, please. Everyone, settle down.

Dmitry Peskov: We really are coming up on four hours, which is practically a record. Frankly, I’d suggest we start wrapping things up.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Shall we do a quick-fire round, then?

Dmitry Peskov: Yes, I know that’s the tradition.

Vladimir Putin: Hold on a moment. Let’s do the quick-fire round, and then we’ll carry on a bit longer.

Pavel Zarubin: Short questions, short answers.

Vladimir Putin: Go ahead.

Pavel Zarubin: Centuries from now, schoolchildren will be studying the history of our time. What would you put in a “time capsule” to define our era?

Vladimir Putin: Is that what they call a “quick-fire” question? This sort of thing requires you to sit down and really think. I believe each of us thinks about the future of our children, our grandchildren, and the future of the country. I also know more or less what needs to be said, but it’s important to lay it out so that it all fits together without tripping over itself. Let’s give it a go. I’m not sure I can do this off the cuff, but I’ll try.

Take a pen and write this down: “We, who lived in Russia in this incessant flux of time, in the 20^th and 21^st centuries, received everything done by our predecessors, our ancestors with gratitude.

We lived, as everybody did everywhere and at all times, with our routine needs. But we were not at a standstill: we made headway, we struggled, we worked, we fought, and we tried to resolve the issues that our time posed for us.

We thought about our future and about you. If you are holding our message right now, that means that you also feel yourselves being part of our shared infinite flux of time, and you are aware of the continuity of time. This is very important, congratulations. That means that we, too, did not live our lives in vain when we worked, struggled and thought of you, and that we succeeded in many respects.

We wished you to be blessed with luck always and be happy, and for your kids, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren to be proud of you as we are proud of our fathers, grandfathers, and great-grandfathers.” Full stop.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Mr President, another question: are you gathering material for future memoirs, as many world leaders do?

Vladimir Putin: No. I generally believe one should just get on with the work. After all, memoirs are essentially a form of self-assessment. Let others, if they see fit, assess my work and the work of my team, the people who stand with me.

Pavel Zarubin: You speak about the country’s successes – perhaps you could tell us about your personal achievements this year.

Vladimir Putin: My achievements cannot be separated from those of the country. This is what I live by and work on from morning until night – that is precisely what it is all about.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Have you ever, even once in your life, sent a message to your loved ones – your children or grandchildren – via a messenger app, or recorded video messages for them?

Vladimir Putin: No, I have never done that.

Pavel Zarubin: There is one question I am particularly curious to ask. I have seen your Kremlin flat. Everything there seems bleak: an empty refrigerator and just a bottle of ryazhenka. Where is the comfort?

Vladimir Putin: You know, everything that was done there, in the Kremlin, was carried out under the previous Head of the Presidential Property Management Department, during Boris Yeltsin’s time, and nothing has changed since then – no renovations at all. Perhaps the chairs were replaced. I believe this was done, though one would have to ask Pavel Borodin because Kremlin interiors require a certain careful approach. Everything remains as it was done at the time. I think it was arranged so that one could rest there during the day if necessary. I doubt that Boris Yeltsin ever spent a single night there. But I do live there now – that is true, it is how things have worked out. First, I am satisfied with everything there. And second, comfort is created above all by people. And when my loved ones come, which is not often, that is when it feels comfortable.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Does the President experience professional deformation?

Vladimir Putin: Yes, I think so, as does anyone who becomes fully immersed in their work.

Pavel Zarubin: Which moment or event of the outgoing year do you remember most vividly, and which would you prefer to forget and not recall?

Vladimir Putin: It is difficult to single out just one. You know, I have the feeling that the New Year we last celebrated was two or three weeks ago. I say this without any exaggeration – everything has been so compressed, and so much has happened in that time. I believe there has been a great deal of positive development. I recently said at a meeting of the Defence Ministry Board that our Armed Forces have probably become the most combat-ready in the world, taking into account new weapons systems, including strategic weaponry. These are major events in the country’s life, and not only in the life of the Armed Forces. As I said at the outset, we are maintaining economic resilience. Many very important decisions were taken to ensure this, and they have all delivered results. These are all positive developments.

As for what one might want to forget, I have my own view on that. If you want to forget something, it means that something did not work out, something went wrong. That must not be forgotten. We should always remember it, draw conclusions and correct mistakes.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: What personal trait do you hate?

Vladimir Putin: I’ll try to formulate an answer. I’m living virtually all my life in the open, and saying that some of my traits are good and others are bad would be like giving ground for unnecessary gossip. Let people look and draw their own conclusions, which everyone certainly has.

Pavel Zarubin: Do you have a true friend?

Vladimir Putin: First, it is necessary to define true friendship. Definitions are necessary. At first glance, true friendship implies complete selflessness. It must be said that communication with people of my stature can produce a temptation to become part of it, one way or another. However, I can tell you confidently that those whom I regard as friends – there are such people – behave very reservedly and with dignity, and I am not ashamed of them.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: What motivates you and makes you keep moving? And what keeps you from losing heart?

Vladimir Putin: People’s trust is what keeps me motivated and moving. You know, I feel a lump in my throat when I come across or hear certain things that may have been said out loud before. This is what certainly motivates me. I think that anyone would be motivated by this. And belief in the future of Russia is what keeps me from losing heart.

Pavel Zarubin: What do you think is most important for a 13-year-old boy: to study well, to be strong, to have loyal friends, or something else?

Vladimir Putin: To love his mother. I’m not joking; this is not irony.

And again, I want to address Naran. He doesn’t need to say anything now; I’ll speak for him. We discussed this when I invited him to the Kremlin, just yesterday or the day before, and earlier, after his report from the frontline, I asked my colleagues to inquire if he had any issues, including everyday concerns.

They talked with him – Naran, excuse me, but I will disclose your secret now. I asked them what you wanted. “My mother is elderly; she has health problems. Please help my mother.”

Look, this attitude toward one’s mother – it’s not just one person’s attitude toward another; it’s a worldview. And people with this approach, with such values in life, become Heroes of Russia.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Is there love at first sight?

Vladimir Putin: Yes, I think so.

Pavel Zarubin: Where does the Motherland start from, for you personally?

Vladimir Putin: For me personally, well, it starts with my parents.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: A person must believe in something. What do you believe in?

Vladimir Putin: In God, who is with us and who will never abandon Russia.

Pavel Zarubin: The number of questions submitted has now passed three million. That is an all-time record. And for our final question: “What will Russia be like in 200 years, and will it even exist?”

Vladimir Putin: “In 200 years.” Well, you’ve just asked me – I don’t know if I did it correctly – to send a message to those living centuries from now. And as you said, it’s very difficult to make any firm predictions. Given the timescale of centuries, with the growing role of technology, the increasing influence of artificial intelligence on breakthroughs in genetics and nanotechnology – how will this alter human consciousness? Will there even be borders? What will the world be like in hundreds of years? It’s hard to say. So, my message to our descendants centuries from now – that was how I tried to frame it based on our current understanding. But what of the country itself in 200 years? That is quite conceivable. As my colleagues and I were discussing only yesterday, the Bolshoi Theatre is about to turn 250. So, for Russia, 200 years isn’t really that long. However, I very much hope that the country will be highly educated, and that, founded upon this learning, upon the high level of education of our people, it will be technologically advanced. That it will use these technologies to solve all the challenges we face in the economy, in healthcare, and in social policy. And that it will live in peace and prosperity, building relationships with all members of the international community based on mutual respect.

Pavel Zarubin: Thank you very much.

Vladimir Putin: Hold on a second, I promised we wouldn’t stop here. Let’s go sector by sector. What does Ychchuu mean?

Anna Yarygina: Good afternoon, Mr President.

My name is Anna Yarygina. I am from Yakutia. I represent the Sakha State Television and Radio Broadcasting Company. Ychchuu is Yakutian for “cold.” Yakutia is a cold place, indeed, but we are warm at heart. You know this better than anyone else. Here is my question. I’m sorry, I’m very nervous. I have been waiting a long time for you to call on me.

In Yakutia’s Arctic, electricity rates for hospitals, schools, and other social institutions have increased tenfold over the past four years from five rubles to 50 rubles per kilowatt-hour. This is, of course, an onerous burden to carry, especially given that efficiency has not improved at all. I apologise, I’m very nervous.

Vladimir Putin: It’s all right, please do not be nervous.

Anna Yarygina: The incidence of power failures remains high. As you may be aware, power outages are a disaster in the North, in the Arctic. I have a request: is it possible to reinstate the Far Eastern markup to replace the current reduced one at least in the Arctic territories? Thank you.

Mr President, one more question. You visited us in the summer, and before that in the winter. Perhaps, next time you come in the winter. With all due respect to the Kremlin press pool and the presidential press pool, we, regional journalists, would also like to interview you. Next time you come to see us I would be delighted to interview you. Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Good. Thank you very much. Thank you both for the invitation and for your assessment of the press pool’s performance.

Energy is a critical issue for the North in general and for Yakutia in particular. I promise I will pay attention to it. Overall, your economy is growing and needs more energy at affordable and competitive prices.

The coal-fired energy sector in Yakutia is strong, but we should and must consider alternative sources as well. This work is underway, including under designated urban areas effort to create corresponding social and economic infrastructure.

I will not go into details now, but this matter is clear and widely known. We will definitely address it, including, oddly enough, through the development of environmentally friendly modern energy sources. However, we should not forget about gas and oil – in a word, hydrocarbon – power generation. Fuel oil is prohibitively expensive, and we will certainly work to expand grid capacity; both the grid and power generation need to be expanded.

We will definitely work on this. It is extremely important for Yakutia, because it is truly a treasure trove of natural resources, and there is much to be done there. Rest assured the energy sector will also be at the centre of our attention.

I have taken note of your question, and we are working on it separately. Yes.

Artificial intelligence – this is probably a relevant topic.

Please.

Regina Orekhova: Good afternoon, Mr President. This is Regina Orekhova, from Channel 360.

The topic of artificial intelligence has already been touched upon today. You recently stated that you would not allow Russia to become dependent on foreign neural networks.

My question is as follows. Does this mean that ChatGPT and other foreign neural networks will be banned, and will there be any special regulation in this industry?

My second question, if I may, is this: you said today that you believe in love at first sight. Mr President, are you in love?

Vladimir Putin: Yes – that is the answer to the final part of your question.

Regarding your first point: we are not planning to ban anything; we simply demand compliance with our laws. If market participants fail to comply with these laws, then appropriate restrictions may be introduced. We are not planning to ban anything.

Now, let’s go to Tomsk, please.

Dinara Mindubayeva: Good afternoon, Mr President.

Dinara Mindubayeva, Tomskoye Vremya [Tomsk Time].

Tomorrow marks the end of the Federal Agency for Youth competition, and our Tomsk is leading the race for the title of Youth Capital of Russia.

I’d like to take a moment to appeal to those who haven’t yet voted for our student city to cast their votes. We have a lot of young people there. One in seven residents of our city is a student. But nevertheless… Let’s give Tomsk a round of applause.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, Tomsk is indeed a student city, that’s true.

Dinara Mindubayeva: Have you voted, if it’s not a secret?

Vladimir Putin: Absolutely.

Dinara Mindubayeva: Let’s hope so.

Here’s my question. Despite our city being full of young people and students, there is still a severe shortage of personnel, particularly in vocational trades. We lack drivers, seamstresses – a whole range of blue-collar professions.

In your opinion, to what extent is state policy focused on reviving the prestige of blue-collar professions – well, not from scratch, but on elevating it? Or, given the extensive discussion about artificial intelligence today, may I ask whether we no longer need drivers or seamstresses, and if AI will replace them?

Vladimir Putin: I’m almost offended by your question, because it seems to me that we are systematically addressing the issue of training highly skilled blue-collar workers. This is happening at all levels. I don’t even want to enumerate all the measures being taken in this direction right now.

Blue-collar professions are becoming prestigious – we can confirm this unequivocally. They are becoming more complex, which is why vocational training is also provided in secondary specialised educational institutions. Specialised training is a very important focus of our work. We will hold competitions, we will improve the quality of education, and we will integrate training with practical experience at enterprises.

We will continue to engage businesses in this effort. By the way, they are the most invested parties and have long been involved in this work – ensuring that young people can both study and gain practical experience simultaneously.

We will definitely continue all initiatives related to targeted personnel training. There is a whole set of measures, and we will only strengthen them; we will undoubtedly keep working in this direction.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Mr President, I’m sorry but we have breaking news. This news is important for at least one person in the audience. TASS reports that Kirill Bazhenov’s girlfriend has accepted his proposal.

Vladimir Putin: Kirill raised a question about the material side of marriage. And it is fair: a man is supposed to think about his substantial financial contribution. But we can send a hat around the room and at least raise money for your wedding.

I see somebody from A Different Ukraine in the middle. Although we have already talked about Ukraine, we have not talked about A Different Ukraine. Please.

Galina Merkulova: Good afternoon, Mr President.

My name is Galina Merkulova, I represent the online media outlet of the A Different Ukraine international public movement. My question is about Ukraine, of course. Because this matter directly concerns our Motherland, Russia, now.

When Trump said that Zelensky is using the war to avoid holding the presidential election, Zelensky answered that he is willing to hold it in 60˗90 days, which is, of course, a cynical lie. Zelensky has destroyed and ruined the country, choosing terror, violence and lawlessness over guarantees of democracy. How is it possible to hold an election or a referendum – and you, Mr President, said that it is necessary to hold a referendum on the de jure recognition of the new territories in Ukraine, according to its constitution – in a country where he and his corrupt gang have usurped the entire power vertical, destroyed parliamentarism, the judicial system, and turned law enforcement into his pocket puppets?

Naturally, before an election or referendum can be scheduled, it is necessary to restore the constitutional order, scrap the ban on the activity of 18 opposition parties, adopt a law prohibiting the persecution and prosecution of the people who have been persecuted for political reasons since the very beginning, since 2014 when the state coup took place, and continue to be under political persecution to this day, as well as a law on amnesty and exoneration. Those who conducted the state coup in 2014 granted amnesty that not only exonerated those involved in the state coup but also, absurdly enough, those who committed plunder and looting – apparently, for the sake of their independence.

It is necessary to ensure that people can exercise their election rights – because half of the population, or, according to official data, 18 million people, have fled the country because of Zelensky’s criminal regime. Where and how are they supposed to vote? What opportunities do they have for this?

It is necessary to abolish sanctions against citizens of Ukraine and the deprivation of citizenship affecting those who disagreed with the regime’s neo-Nazi policies.

It is necessary to resume the operation of the media outlets prohibited unlawfully since 2019, abolish the monopoly on information established by Zelensky’s executive order, and much more.

Pavel Zarubin: Can you formulate your question please?

Galina Merkulova: Yes, certainly.

Holding elections or a referendum without implementing these measures would legalise the criminal dictatorial regime, and would be elections without true choice. It is obvious that Zelensky’s criminal regime will not do this voluntarily.

Mr President, in March this year, you offered a way out of this situation by placing Ukraine under temporary international administration led by the UN, Russia, the United States and European countries, which would help create conditions for democratic elections.

Here is my question. Do you uphold your idea of a temporary international administration in Ukraine? If this does not help create conditions for holding elections, would you recognise the results of such elections or referendum as legitimate?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: This is more like a political statement than a question. I’ll try to be brief.

Speaking about elections in Ukraine or placing it under external administration, it is true that I have mentioned the idea but only hypothetically. If there was a will to do it, including by Western countries, the idea could be given more though in light of the corruption revelations.

As for the elections, we have heard the leaders of the Kiev regime demand that Western countries, including the United States, guarantee Ukraine’s security, which means a ceasefire, during the elections, for which they are allegedly ready.

What would I like to draw the attention of the Russian audience to? We have held elections, both presidential and municipal and regional ones. We held elections this September. Has anyone ensured our security? Quite to the contrary, attempts were made to disrupt them so as to undermine our internal stability. They deliberately targeted polling stations. I will never forget that when such a threat arose – I believe it was in the Donetsk People’s Republic, people were standing in line at a polling station when the shelling began. They hid in the basements, and once the air raid was over, they returned to the line and cast their votes. We did not demand security; we just did what we thought necessary.

I think that the current representatives of the Kiev regime could do the same, if they wanted to. But if they want to use elections exclusively for stopping the advance of Russian forces, it is the wrong choice.

Nevertheless, I will tell you something that may come as a surprise to you: we are ready to consider ensuring security during elections in Ukraine. At the least, we might stop or refrain from striking into Ukrainian territory on election day.

This brings us to a question that we must ask: millions of Ukrainian citizens are living in the Russian Federation now. According to various estimates, there are between 5 and 10 million of them, and they all have a right to vote. If elections are called, we will have a right to demand that the Ukrainians who are living in Russia are given an opportunity to cast their voice in the territory of the Russian Federation.

There are many other issues which call for a thorough analysis. But this is not an idle question. I agree that the government in Ukraine must become legitimate, which is impossible to do without holding elections.

Let us go over there, to Siberia.

Denis Shalyuta: Mr President, good afternoon.

My name is Denis Shalyuta, and I am a blogger from Siberia, running a Telegram channel that covers political and economic news and the development of Siberia. In this regard, I have a question. Since October, there have been numerous rumours about plans to create an entire cluster in the Angara˗Yenisei region focused on the deep processing of non-ferrous, rare, and rare-earth metals. Could you clarify whether this approach is truly the optimal solution for supplying the Russian economy with critical metals and for launching a new phase of Russia’s industrialisation? The prospects here are certainly enormous. Can we already say today that there is sufficient political will at the federal government level to see this project through to completion and full implementation?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: This is a very interesting project, and your question is quite relevant. Overall, these plans were developed back in Soviet times. This region is extremely promising. Despite being located in Siberia, it reportedly has nearly 360 sunny days a year, and the climate is quite favourable. There are indeed significant opportunities to extract and process minerals, as well as to create new energy sources necessary to support such work. Overall, the logistics in the region are also quite good. Of course, these objectives cannot be achieved today in the same way they were during the Soviet period: solely through centralised planning and the targeted allocation of state resources. Cutting-edge approaches are required. What does this mean? It means attracting companies as investors, with the state providing the support they need.

Work is underway to assess the feasibility of implementing projects in this promising territory. I believe this effort holds great potential.

Potential investor companies are being identified, and the task of the state is to provide them with every possible form of support through incentives, services, logistics, assistance in developing energy generation capacity, and more. This is a large-scale, historic task that could be addressed in this region. We will definitely continue working in this area.

“Mail”, please.

Remark: Good afternoon.

Vladimir Putin: Good afternoon.

Question: Good afternoon! Thank you very much for this opportunity.

Mr President, you have repeatedly stated that Russian culture is the core… Excuse me.

Vladimir Putin: Please, don’t worry. Don’t fret, and don’t rush.

Question: You have called Russian culture a powerful foundation for the development and cohesion of society, emphasising the importance of preserving historical memory and Russia’s ethnic and cultural diversity.

What cultural projects and initiatives do you personally consider a priority in the coming years? And will Russia protect Russian speakers and the Russian language abroad?

Vladimir Putin: What are the priorities, you say? Go on.

Question: What are the priority cultural projects you wish to support? And will Russia protect Russian speakers abroad? And, in this connection: will Russia develop a programme to train specialists to counter the aggressive and unprecedented information warfare being waged by the West? That is, a programme for training information warfare specialists?

If I may, a second question: will the prestige and salaries of teachers in Russia be increased? This is especially urgent in the regions. Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Regarding the protection of our compatriots abroad – of course, we will continue this work. We are already engaged in it, and we will carry on.

But I would like to underline one point for you. Regarding how this is to be done. It must be done in a way that does not worsen the situation of our compatriots, which means it must be handled carefully, ideally using non-confrontational methods.

As for training “information warfare specialists” – those two things do not fit easily together. Although we naturally have such specialists within the military sphere, and we will continue their training as part of the broader modernisation of our Armed Forces.

Regarding our work with compatriots overall: this work is ongoing and we will certainly continue it. But, of course, we probably need to introduce more modern tools to make it effective, to ensure it reaches its audience, and so forth.

Concerning specific, major cultural projects – we have many. I simply wouldn’t want to single any out individually just now, as that would create unhealthy competition, as if we weren’t supporting others. But the fact that such projects exist and that we intend to support them is certain; you can be assured of that.

“HSR: Speed.”

Dina Gazalieva: Good afternoon.

The young man was holding the sign because my arms grew tired, so I asked him to hold it for me.

Dina Gazalieva, TNV Media Holding, Tatarstan. I drew this sign after my colleague from Kazan asked his question.

Mr President, I’d like to thank you for the M12 motorway. We drive to Kazan as if on a breeze; it’s wonderful. There are rest stops, and we already take our children – but still, one always wants more. And as you’ve already gathered from my sign: the high-speed railway. There’s a lot of talk; it flares up and then dies down. Is there a chance, will at least our children get to ride on it?

Vladimir Putin: The railway?

Dina Gazalieva: Yes, the high-speed project. When?

Vladimir Putin: Yes, we will build it.

Dina Gazalieva: What’s the timeline?

Vladimir Putin: The design phase is currently underway, and this is also true for the Moscow – St Petersburg line. The Moscow – Kazan line will indeed be built.

Thank you all very much for your contributions today.

Pavel Zarubin: Thank you.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Thank you very much.

Statements following Russian-Laotian talks

2025-07-31T20:06:11+04:00

Vladimir Putin and Laos President Thongloun Sisoulith made statements following the Russian-Laotian talks.

Before the leaders made their statements, a ceremony was held to exchange documents signed during the official visit of the President of Laos to Russia.

* * *

President of Russia Vladimir Putin: Mr President, friends.

This official visit of the President of the Lao People’s Democratic Republic to Russia makes vivid the fact that Russian-Laotian relations are moving along at great strides. Both sides are sincerely committed to making this cooperation even more substantive and productive.

Russia and Laos are united by time-honoured traditions of friendship and mutual assistance. October will mark 65 years of bilateral diplomatic relations.

Our country has done its best to support the establishment of Laotian statehood, to enhance its defence capabilities, and to promote its national economic growth. With the involvement of Soviet specialists, major industrial facilities, critical transport infrastructure, hospitals, and educational institutions have been built in Laos. Many remain operational today, benefitting the Laotian people.

Russian-Laotian cooperation is multifaceted and mutually advantageous. The President and I have held productive and constructive talks.

Bilateral trade is growing dynamically. Last year, trade increased by 65 percent, and growth rates this year stand at about 20 percent.

In light of rising bilateral cargo flows, we are exploring options to expand maritime container shipments from Laos to Vladivostok via Vietnamese ports. Our plans include organising rail freight transit across the territory of friendly China.

Good prospects exist for enhancing energy cooperation. Agreements on peaceful nuclear energy signed during the talks lay the groundwork for supplying Laos’ economy with affordable and environmentally safe energy. Our Laotian friends also expressed interest in non-energy use of nuclear technology, such as in medicine, agriculture, and personnel training.

Russian companies are involved in developing deposits of ferrous and precious metals in Laos. Opportunities for cooperation in bauxite mining are being explored as well.

Bilateral cultural and humanitarian cooperation is highly important. Festivals of Russian cinema and performances by Russian artistic groups are regularly held in Laos. Last October, Days of Moscow were held in the Laotian capital, and this February Days of Vientiane were held in Russia.

The interest of Laotian citizens in learning Russian is particularly satisfying. Russian is taught at several educational institutions in the country, including the National University of Laos, where Russian teachers work. Plans are in place to build a joint Russian-Laotian school in the capital, offering a full educational cycle under a shared curriculum.

Notably, the President of Laos graduated from the Herzen Teacher Training Institute in Leningrad and holds an honorary doctorate from that university. This made it possible to conduct a portion of today’s talks, including face-to-face discussions, in Russian.

Over 8,000 Laotians have received education in Russia, and 159 Laotian students are studying here now.

We maintain extensive cooperate internationally. In May, a Laotian delegation participated in the events marking the 80^th anniversary of Victory in the Great Patriotic War. We remember the parade unit from the Lao People’s Army marching on Red Square.

We will continue upholding the principles of international law, sovereignty, and non-interference in other nations’ internal affairs.

In closing, I would like to express my appreciation to the President for our productive interaction and for accepting our invitation to visit Moscow.

Undoubtedly, today’s talks will strengthen the entire scope of Russian-Laotian relations for the benefit of our peoples.

Thank you.

President of Laos Thongloun Sisoulith: Mr Putin, President of the Russian Federation, members of the media, ladies and gentlemen.

It is a great honour for me to lead the high-level delegation of the Lao People’s Democratic Republic on an official visit to the Russian Federation at the invitation of the President of the Russian Federation.

This visit marks an important milestone in strengthening the long-standing relations of friendship and cooperation between the LPDR and the Russian Federation, including our security strategic partnership in the Asia-Pacific region, which will continue to be reinforced on the basis of trust, mutual understanding, and mutual benefit.

This visit also symbolises the celebration of the 65^th anniversary of diplomatic relations between the LPDR and the Russian Federation.

The meeting between President Putin and my delegation was held in an atmosphere of friendship, mutual understanding, and candid exchange of views. Today, we agreed to continue strengthening and expanding bilateral cooperation in many areas. I fully concur with all points made by President Putin.

Both sides reviewed and acknowledged the longstanding cooperation between the LPDR and Russia. The parties agreed to continue maintaining and strengthening political relations based on mutual understanding, trust, and support at regional and international forums, underpinned by our steadily growing security strategic partnership in the Asia-Pacific region.

The parties highly praised and agreed to further develop cooperation in the political and security spheres, particularly in areas of outstanding practical collaboration which is evidenced by regular delegation exchanges, assistance in training military personnel of the Lao People’s Army, including military-technical aid, and joint military exercises.

In particular, the LPDR expressed profound gratitude to Russia for assistance in conducting joint armed forces exercises.

I especially wish to thank Russia for its humanitarian assistance in clearing unexploded mines in Laos which impede the livelihoods and development of the Lao people and continue to threaten lives.

The parties will continue working together to further strengthen cooperation in the economy, trade, investment, transport, culture, social affairs, and tourism.

During this visit, dozens of cooperation documents across various fields have been signed.

On behalf of the Government and people of Laos, I thank the Government and the people of Russia for providing 100 annual scholarships to Laotian students at various educational levels. The parties agreed to further expand Russian language instruction at Laotian secondary schools and collaborate on establishing a Laotian-Russian public school in Vientiane.

We deeply appreciate the warm hospitality extended to our delegation. We will continue cooperating in areas of mutual interest that foster understanding and benefit both nations.

We hope to host Mr Putin, President of the Russian Federation, in Laos some time in the future.

Vladimir Putin: Thank you.

Press statements following Russian-Vietnamese talks

2025-05-10T21:53:18+04:00

Following Russia-Vietnam talks, Vladimir Putin and To Lam made statements for the press.

Before making the statements, the heads of state were present at a ceremony to exchange the documents signed.

* * *

President of Russia Vladimir Putin: Comrade To Lam, Ladies and gentlemen,

Comrades,

We are delighted to welcome our Vietnamese friends to Russia, led by General Secretary of the Communist Party of Vietnam Central Committee Comrade To Lam.

Yesterday, together with many other foreign leaders, we attended the celebrations marking the 80^th anniversary of Victory in the Great Patriotic War. A unit of 68 cadets from the First Army Officer Training School of Vietnam marched across Red Square shoulder to shoulder with the ceremonial units from Russia and other countries.

I consider the visit of our Vietnamese friends, timed to coincide with the anniversary of the Great Victory, as yet another evidence of the time-tested friendship, military comradery and mutual support between our nations. Russia remembers Vietnamese internationalist volunteers who fought heroically alongside Red Army soldiers in the Battle of Moscow in 1941–1942. Last year, a sculpture was erected in the Patriot Park near Moscow to honour their deeds.

In turn, the Soviet Union put significant effort into helping the emerging Vietnamese state to continue its struggle for freedom and independence, contributing to the country’s economic and social progress, infrastructure development, and personnel training. Undeniably, the Soviet Union also made a significant contribution to the liberation of southern Vietnam and the country’s reunification. April 30 marked the 50^th anniversary of those important historical events.

This year also marks the 75^th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between our countries. Over the years, our bilateral ties have grown stronger, evolving to a comprehensive strategic partnership, and continue to expand in the spirit of equality, mutual respect, and consideration of each other’s interests.

The talks we have just had with Comrade To Lam serve as a clear proof of all this. We substantively discussed Russian-Vietnamese cooperation across all sectors as well as the international agenda in a warm and constructive atmosphere.

As you have seen, an impressive package of documents has been signed following the talks. We have adopted a Joint Declaration, in which we reaffirmed the key principles of our bilateral partnership and mapped out specific guidelines for our further work.

First and foremost, these agreements are aimed at expanding our mutually beneficial economic cooperation. As of the end of last year, Russia-Vietnam trade grew by more than 20 percent, reaching US$6 billion. There is still more to achieve, as back in 2021, our mutual trade was slightly higher than that. But we know what steps are necessary to reach this prior level and go beyond that.

The steady increase in our mutual trade flows is largely a result of the Agreement on Free Trade signed by Vietnam and the Eurasian Economic Union. This document not only secured concessional terms for our goods and services to reach the respective markets but also facilitated a noticeable increase in investment and intensified technology and innovation exchanges.

It is important to note that Russia and Vietnam are shifting to financial payments in national currencies and seeking to develop reliable channels for cooperation in banking and lending.

Vietnam-Russia Joint Venture Bank plays a key role in servicing our trade transactions. The bank has been successfully operating for almost 20 years, steadily providing Vietnamese and Russian customers with a broad range of financial and lending services.

Our cooperation in energy is expanding. I will not list everything that has been done in this sector but I want to note that this cooperation has been developing for many years, and the progress is clear. Today, we approved new agreements in the context of implementing mutually beneficial Russian-Vietnamese projects.

In addition, Zarubezhneft plans to build a marine wind power station with a capacity of 1,000 MW in southeastern Vietnam. Russian companies are interested in joining the construction of new and modernisation of the existing hydropower generation facilities in the republic.

The agreements signed just now on peaceful atom are opening doors to providing Vietnam with affordable and environmentally safe energy. This project will become a good stimulus for the further growth of the Vietnamese economy, for the creation of thousands of new jobs, and the training of highly qualified local workforce.

This work is already underway. Moreover, as we have heard today from Rosatom CEO, certain Vietnamese specialists have joined the teams at Russian nuclear facilities in third countries. This means that the level of their training corresponds to all international standards.

A centre of nuclear science and technology in Vietnam is also on the agenda.

Among the examples of mutually beneficial industrial cooperation, I would like to note the facility that manufactures Gazelle cargo and passenger minibuses in Da Nang. Russia’s Kamaz is expanding its presence in the Vietnamese market, with a chain of dealerships and service centres now established across the country.

Russia and Vietnam are implementing a number of joint infrastructure projects. Regular container cargo transportation is maintained through the Vladivostok – Ho Chi Minh City maritime transport corridor. The logistics hub in the Ho Chi Minh City port consolidates cargo from Thailand, Malaysia and other countries of Southeast Asia for further shipment to Russia.

Bilateral partnership in agriculture is advancing steadily. Livestock farms are being built in several Russian regions, including Bashkortostan, the Tyumen Region, and the Moscow Region, with the participation of Vietnamese investors.

I know that a dairy plant will be launched in the Kaluga Region tomorrow, with the Vietnamese company TH Group participating in the project. The new facility will supply products to Asia-Pacific markets, among others.

In humanitarian sphere, Russia and Vietnam have a good tradition to hold mutual Days of Culture on a regular basis, a practice that effectively brings our nations together. National cinema weeks, art exhibitions, and touring music and theatre productions are popular in both Russia and Vietnam.

More than 3,000 Vietnamese citizens study at Russian universities; overall, about 75,000 Vietnamese people have been educated in our country. It goes without saying that we intend to continue to promote student exchanges and new joint educational projects and university programmes in every possible way.

I met with people who had graduated from our universities when I was in Vietnam last year. I must tell you that this is a very active group of our Vietnamese friends who are vigorously promoting the Russian language and Russian culture. This is certainly a reliable resource for expanding bilateral ties.

We greatly appreciate Vietnam’s attention to the study of the Russian language. It is included in the secondary school curriculum as the first foreign language. Work is underway to open a Russian gymnasium in Hanoi. A branch of the Pushkin Russian Language Institute has been operating in the capital of Vietnam for years. Under the intergovernmental agreement signed today, it is going to provide a platform for the Regional Centre for Russian Language Learning for citizens of all countries of Southeast Asia.

The Joint Vietnam-Russia Tropical Research and Technology Centre in Hanoi serves as an effective platform for Russian and Vietnamese specialists to conduct joint research in such important fields as ecology and nature conservation, medicine, combating infectious diseases and epidemics, and so on.

I certainly cannot fail to note the recent noticeable increase in tourist traffic between Russia and Vietnam, which nearly doubled last year. The direct air service is expanding, with several new flights added this year, connecting Moscow and other major Russian cities with Hanoi and Nha Trang.

Naturally, during the talks, we also discussed important issues on the global and regional agendas. I would like to emphasise that Russia’s and Vietnam’s respective stances on these issues largely coincide or are closely aligned.

Our countries firmly uphold and support the rule of international law, the sovereignty of states and non-interference in internal affairs. They coordinate their efforts at key multilateral platforms, including the Russia-ASEAN dialogue, and jointly advocate for the peaceful and sustainable development of the Asia-Pacific region.

In conclusion, I would like to once again express my gratitude to Comrade To Lam for the productive joint work. Today’s talks will undoubtedly serve to further strengthen the Russian-Vietnamese comprehensive strategic partnership, which benefits both nations.

I already expressed our gratitude to Comrade To Lam for his direct and personal involvement in the development of Russian-Vietnamese ties, and I would like to emphasise this once again. Since Comrade To Lam became General Secretary, we have seen rapid progress of Russian-Vietnamese relations and cooperation in many fields. Comrade To Lam, we greatly appreciate your contribution.

Thank you for your attention.

General Secretary of the Communist Party of Vietnam Central Committee To Lam (retranslated): Mr President,

Colleagues, members of the media,

I am glad to be again in great and beautiful Russia at the invitation of President Vladimir Putin, a loyal friend and comrade of Vietnam, in order to attend the celebration of the 80^th anniversary of Victory of the Soviet and Russian people in the Great Patriotic War.

I would like to begin by expressing my heartfelt gratitude to the President and Russia’s senior officials for the warm and comradely welcome extended to the high-ranking delegation and me. We congratulate Russia on the very successful and solemn celebration of Victory Day which is a particularly important event that will forever go down in history of humanity and forever glorify the great contribution of the Soviet Red Army, including those who laid down their lives for independence of their country and allied countries in fighting against Nazism, defending and bringing freedom, independence and peace to humanity. This victory makes the younger generations aware of the value of peace and the heroic traditions of the nation.

We also marked the 50^th anniversary of liberation of the South, which went down in history of our people as one of its most outstanding chapters, a glittering symbol of the complete victory of revolutionary heroism and human reason, which went down in world history as a great feat of the 20^th century. The two events become even more significant if you think about close ties and mutual support between our countries in the past.

President Vladimir Putin and I held very productive talks in an atmosphere of openness, sincerity, and mutual understanding. We discussed a whole range of bilateral issues. The President and I reiterated that the leaders and peoples of Vietnam and Russia have always cherished the long-standing traditional friendship between our two countries, which has been tested by time and gets ever stronger in the name of long-term interests of our two peoples and for the benefit of both nations.

President Putin and I have aligned our agendas on the main areas of comprehensive strategic partnership in the new era.

First, we will work to strengthen the foundations of high political trust and traditional friendship that have been laid by many generations of the leaders and peoples of our two countries, and to strengthen political exchanges and dialogues at all levels between our respective parties, states, governments, parliaments, and regions. We will also focus on improving traditional education of the two countries’ younger generations.

Second, we will create breakthroughs in economic, trade and investment cooperation, maximise the use of the existing potential, and eliminate all difficulties and obstacles. We will promote innovative areas of cooperation such as clean energy, support for the manufacturing industry, and the closed-cycle economy. We agreed on pursuing concrete projects symbolising our friendship in the new era.

The sides support energy and oil-and-gas companies to promote cooperation, to expand investment and to work in each other’s territories in accordance with international law and the UN Charter, in particular, the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea.

Third, we will work to develop new, substantial, and effective breakthroughs in scientific research and technology, nuclear energy, biotechnology, and the semiconductor industry. We also agreed to promote the implementation of joint research projects.

Fourth, we will deepen cooperation in defence, security, and military technology, jointly respond to non-conventional security and cyber security challenges and prevent and oppose high-tech crimes.

Fifth, we will strengthen cooperation in education, professional training, and labour. We agreed to step up the training of specialists to promote the Russian language studies in Vietnam and the Vietnamese language studies in Russia.

Also, we will work to expand direct air service between our two countries. I would like to take this opportunity to announce that yesterday the Vietnam Airlines national airline resumed direct flights between the capitals of the two countries, and the privately owned VietJet Air airline is about to launch flights connecting the two countries as well.

The President and I discussed ways to step up the efforts to maintain peace, security and stability in the Asia-Pacific region. Vietnam appreciates Russia’s efforts and hopes that Russia, as a permanent member of the UN Security Council, will continue to play an important role in maintaining peace and stability in the region, ensuring safety and freedom of navigation and air navigation, and peacefully resolving disputes in the region, including the East Sea, in accordance with international law, including the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea.

We welcome and support Russia’s initiatives to advance cooperation within ASEAN in order to build a strong and united ASEAN community.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank the Russian President and Government of Russia for their continuous support and assistance to the Vietnamese diaspora. We hope that the Russian side will continue to assist the Vietnamese diaspora so that they can live, work and integrate into Russian society in a peaceful and stable way, and continue to act as a bridge of friendship between our countries.

Thank you again to Mr President and media representatives for the full and truthful coverage of my visit.

I invited President Putin to visit Vietnam, and he gratefully accepted the invitation.

I wish good health to President Vladimir Putin and every media member present here.

Thank you very much.

Vladimir Putin: Mr To Lam, our dear friend and comrade, mentioned another area of our cooperation. He said we plan to strengthen defence and security cooperation. I did not mention that in my remarks, but I confirm that we have such plans. Bearing in mind the famous line from a Russian song, “From the taiga to the British seas, the Red Army is the strongest of all!” we have every reason to believe that all our plans in this area will come to fruition.

Vladimir Putin and Emomali Rahmon made statements for the press

2025-03-18T10:13:55+04:00

Following Russian-Tajikistani talks, Vladimir Putin and Emomali Rahmon made statements for the press.

President of Russia Vladimir Putin: Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, friends,

We are delighted to welcome President of the Republic of Tajikistan Emomali Rahmon on his official visit to Russia. Let me stress that our talks with Mr Rahmon today were held, as per tradition, in a friendly and businesslike atmosphere and were very constructive.

Relations between Russia and Tajikistan are a true strategic partnership and alliance. They are based on the immutable principles of mutual respect, equality, and consideration of each other’s interests. Most importantly, they continue to develop steadily and dynamically.

Russia is among Tajikistan’s largest foreign trade partners. Last year, trade grew by more than seven percent reaching $1.5 billion. Russia is a leading investor in Tajikistan’s economy. More than 300 enterprises with Russian participation operate in the republic, and our capital investments amount to $1.6 billion in total.

It is important that Russia and Tajikistan have almost completely stopped using foreign currency in mutual settlements. The share of the ruble in commercial transactions exceeded 96 percent at the end of last year. Sustainable channels of credit and banking cooperation are being consistently built. A number of Tajikistan’s banks have connected to the financial message transmission system of the Central Bank of Russia.

Russian and Tajikistani citizens have the opportunity to make cross-border money transfers through the fast payment system. Issues related to wider use of the Mir Russian payment cards in Tajikistan are being resolved.

The two countries’ governments are constantly working to improve the regime of mutual trade and investments and to create conditions for new mutually beneficial projects.

The economic cooperation programmes signed last October are being implemented. The relevant departments of the two countries have developed an action plan to increase bilateral trade turnover by 2.5 times by 2030.

Russia supplies large volumes of oil and oil products to Tajikistan, almost completely covering the needs of the Tajik economy for hydrocarbons. Moreover, fuel is supplied are export customs duties.

Gazprom Neft is actively operating on the Tajik market, owning a network of oil depots and petrol stations and providing a significant share of all tax payments to the state budget of the country.

Russia is helping Tajikistan develop hydropower. The Sangtuda hydroelectric power station, built with Russian participation, produces 12 percent of the electricity consumed by the republic.

Russian companies are ready to continue assisting in operating and upgrading existing generation capacities in Tajikistan based on the most advanced technological and environmental standards.

Industrial cooperation is also deepening. Russian BTK Group is implementing a project to create a full-cycle light industry cluster in the republic, starting from cotton cultivation to the production of finished garments.

Deliveries of mechanical engineering products, cars, pipes, rolled metal products to the Tajik market have been established, and, in accordance with the intergovernmental agreement signed today in Dushanbe, a Russian-Tajik Industrial Park will soon be set up.

It is well known that about a million of Tajiks live and work in Russia. They are employed in various sectors, especially such dynamically progressing ones as construction and housing and utilities, transport, and logistics. They make a big contribution to the development of the Russian economy. It is important that their remittances to their homeland are a serious help for both Tajikistan and their families.

We work to ensure that the Tajikistani citizens in Russia have decent working conditions and social protection. Russian specialised bodies maintain a constant dialogue with their Tajik colleagues and provide them with most detailed explanations of the migration rules.

I would also like to note that our country provides Tajikistan with significant donor assistance. School meals programmes, irrigation system upgrading, and many other projects in important areas of Tajik society are covered with Russian funds.

Cooperation in the cultural and humanitarian sphere is advancing. As is know, Russian has the constitutional status of the language of interethnic communication in Tajikistan. We are very grateful to the President of Tajikistan for such a careful attitude towards the Russian language.

In this context, let me note a successfully implemented joint project of school instruction in Russian: five schools in Dushanbe and other cities of Tajikistan, where about 5,500 schoolchildren study according to Russian educational curricula and standards. Almost 100 Russians teachers were sent to Tajikistan last year as part of the Russian Teacher Abroad project.

In addition to this, over 35,000 Tajikistani students are studying today in Russian universities, as well as in their branches in the republic and in the Russian-Tajik (Slavonic) University. One of the largest quotas for the CIS countries with a thousand state scholarships has been allocated for the needs of Tajikistan.

A ceremony has been held in Dushanbe today to mark the start of construction, with Russia’s involvement, of an International Educational Centre for Talented Children and the new building of the Vladimir Mayakovsky State Russian Drama Theatre. Mr Rahmon and I took part in it via videoconference. We hope that these new cultural facilities will become another symbol of friendship between the peoples of Russia and Tajikistan.

This year, we will mark together the 80^th anniversary of Victory in the Great Patriotic War. This a truly common victory, and we understand very well the price paid for it and treasure the memory of the heroism of our fathers, grandfathers, and great-grandfathers, who defended life and freedom for us and for future generations.

The President of Tajikistan accepted our invitation and will come to celebrate the anniversary of Victory on May 9 in Moscow. According to the existing agreement, a unit of the Armed Forces of Tajikistan will participate in the ceremonial parade on Red Square.

The discussion of the current regional and global agenda has reaffirmed that our countries have many aligned positions. Russia and Tajikistan adhere to the principles of the supremacy of international law, sovereignty, and non-interference in internal affairs.

We coordinate efforts in key areas and at key international venues such as the CSTO, the SCO, and the Commonwealth of Independent States. Russia provides support to Tajikistan during its chairmanship at the CIS this year, the main event of which will be the summit of the Commonwealth leaders in Dushanbe this October.

Of course, we could not help but discuss security issues in Central Asia, in particular focusing on the challenges and threats emanating from Afghanistan. Russia will continue to help maintain peace and stability in this region, including by using the capabilities of the 201^st Russian military base stationed in Tajikistan.

We have agreed to continue strengthening our defence, military-technical, antiterrorist and antidrug cooperation. Let me add that a border outpost was opened in a mountainous region of Tajikistan at the end of 2023. The outpost was built with funds from the Russian federal budget and has the most advanced technical equipment and weapons. Today, we have agreed that we will continue working in this area.

In conclusion, I would like to stress that today’s talks, discussion, and the documents signed will serve to further promote Russian-Tajikistani partnership and improve the well-being and prosperity of the two nations.

Thank you very much for your attention.

President of the Republic of Tajikistan Emomali Rahmon: Thank you, Mr President.

Members of the media,

I would like to begin by expressing my sincere gratitude to President Vladimir Putin for his invitation to visit the Russian Federation.

As President Putin has already mentioned, our discussions covered key aspects of the relationship between our two nations, along with pressing regional and international issues.

We are pleased to acknowledge the positive momentum in political dialogue at all levels. Trade and economic cooperation have also seen significant progress in recent years, with steady growth in trade turnover. Over the past year alone, trade volume increased by nearly 16 percent, reaching approximately two billion dollars.

We have agreed to develop an intergovernmental action plan through 2030 aimed at expanding mutual trade. Additionally, we will continue to support the operations of Russian-backed companies in Tajikistan, which currently number around 400.

We reached agreements to strengthen collaboration in industrial cooperation, highlighting the positive progress in the textile industry.

The agro-industrial sector was identified as a promising area for further partnership. In this regard, we proposed that Russia take active steps toward establishing processing enterprises in Tajikistan for agricultural products, including vegetables, fruits, raw cotton, leather, and wool. We also reaffirmed Tajikistan’s commitment to expanding exports of eco-friendly agricultural products to the Russian market.

Today, we agreed to move forward with the second phase of the uranium tailings reclamation project in northern Tajikistan in collaboration with Rosatom.

We also consider it important to explore the possibility of a joint expedition by experts from both countries to assess the condition of our glaciers. Due to climate change, Tajikistan's glaciers – which supply up to 60 percent of Central Asia’s water resources – are melting at an alarming rate. Additionally, our discussions placed significant emphasis on strengthening cooperation in the energy sector.

During our talks, Mr President and I highly commended the strong level of cooperation in culture. Via videoconference, we inaugurated the construction of the Vladimir Mayakovsky Russian Drama Theatre and the Centre for Talented Children in Tajikistan’s capital. We also agreed that the Days of Tajikistan Culture will take place in Russia this June.

Today, we had an in-depth discussion on cooperation in the area of labour migration. Interdepartmental efforts will be intensified, focusing on strengthening interregional cooperation. Currently, approximately 80 regions of Russia maintain trade, economic, cultural, and humanitarian ties with Tajikistan.

The negotiations highlighted the strong intergovernmental cooperation between our countries. Today, we had a detailed discussion on security cooperation. Close and productive collaboration between our special services and law enforcement agencies has been established, yielding concrete results over the past year.

The cooperation between our countries in this area encompasses a broad range of issues related to addressing security challenges and threats. These include, in particular, terrorism, extremism, radicalism, transnational organised crime, including cybercrime, and drug trafficking.

We greatly value our bilateral collaboration on multilateral platforms, particularly within the UN, CIS, SCO, and CSTO. We also express our gratitude to the Russian side for its continued support of our global initiatives on water and climate.

I would like to highlight that we are very pleased with the outcomes of these negotiations. Tajikistan will continue to work towards fully unlocking the vast potential of our relations, alliance, and strategic partnership with Russia.

In closing, I would like to once again express my thanks to President Putin and all our Russian friends for their warm welcome and hospitality.

Thank you for your attention.

Press conference following Russian-Iranian talks

2025-01-18T10:51:54+04:00

Following the Russian-Iranian talks, Vladimir Putin and Masoud Pezeshkian gave a joint press conference.

President of Russia Vladimir Putin: Mr President, friends,

I am genuinely delighted to extend a warm welcome to President of the Islamic Republic of Iran Masoud Pezeshkian, who is on an official visit to Russia. We have just concluded extensive discussions.

Our country gives priority to further strengthening of the friendly and neighbourly relations between Russia and Iran. These ties rely on the principles of equality, mutual respect, and consideration for each other’s interests, as well as reciprocity and support, which are consistently reflected in practical deeds. Our multifaceted bilateral partnership has been steadily advancing year by year.

We engage in an intensive political dialogue. Last year, Mr Pezeshkian and I held two meetings, including during the BRICS Summit in Kazan. Our foreign ministries and security councils maintain close contact. Cooperation between Russia and Iran in the economic, social, and cultural areas is becoming increasingly active; coordination has been established between industry-specific ministries, business communities, and public representatives, who interact fruitfully; youth, parliamentary, and interregional contacts occur regularly. In essence, the ties between our two countries are extensive and mutually beneficial, and we are committed to not resting on our laurels but elevating the relationship to a qualitatively new level.

This is precisely the objective of the signed interstate Treaty on Comprehensive Strategic Partnership. It outlines ambitious goals and benchmarks for deepening bilateral cooperation in the long term across political and security domains, as well as in trade, investment, and humanitarian affairs. This truly ground-breaking document aims to establish the necessary conditions for the stable and sustainable development of Russia, Iran, and our entire shared Eurasian region.

As I have already mentioned, today’s discussions with the President of Iran were exceedingly beneficial and substantial. They were conducted in a constructive and friendly manner. We deliberated on the full spectrum of issues on our bilateral agenda and exchanged views on pressing international and regional matters.

Naturally, economic cooperation was covered in depth during the talks. Russia and Iran are significant partners in trade, finance, and investment, and their collaboration in these areas is steadily growing. Over the first ten months of 2024, bilateral trade grew by 15.5 percent.

Notably, our countries have almost completely transitioned to using national currencies in mutual settlements. Efforts are being made to establish sustainable lending and banking interaction channels and to align national payment systems. In 2024, transactions conducted in Russian rubles and Iranian rials accounted for over 95 percent of bilateral trade.

The anticipated entering into force of a full-fledged free trade agreement between Iran and the Eurasian Economic Union is expected to further strengthen Russian-Iranian commercial ties. It is also worth noting that on December 26, 2024, the Supreme Eurasian Economic Council granted the Islamic Republic of Iran observer status at the EAEU. We see this as another step forward in promoting Iran’s relations with Russia and other EAEU members.

Energy remains a crucial area of Russian-Iranian cooperation. The flagship joint project for the construction of two new units of the Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant by Rosatom is making strides. Once implemented, this project will undoubtedly make a weighty contribution to enhancing Iran’s energy security, spur national economic growth, and provide affordable and environmentally friendly electricity for Iranian households and industrial enterprises.

We place great emphasis on cooperation in the transport sector, particularly expanding mutual railway freight operations. Promising opportunities are opening up in connection with the international North-South transport corridor. Discussions are ongoing regarding the construction of its Rasht-Astara railway section. Implementing this project would help establish seamless supply chain from Russia and Belarus to Iranian ports in the Gulf.

Humanitarian cooperation is deepening as well. Plans include opening a Russian cultural centre in Tehran. In June, Iran will host Days of Russian Culture, featuring numerous exhibitions, concerts, and theatre performances, as well as other vibrant cultural events. We are confident that Iranian audience will enjoy these activities.

Mutual tourist flows are expanding facilitated by direct flights between many Russian and Iranian cities, as well as decisions made in 2023 to allow visa-free group tours and electronic visas for individual tourists.

Russia is also helping Iran train highly skilled professionals. Currently, more than 9,000 Iranian students are studying at Russian universities, about 600 of whom – at the expense of Russia’s federal budget.

All issues related to bilateral cooperation are overseen by the Permanent Russian-Iranian Commission on Trade and Economic Cooperation. It was agreed that its regular meeting will be held in Moscow in the first half of this year.

Naturally, Mr President and I also discussed a range of foreign policy priorities. On most of them, the positions of Russia and Iran overlap. Our countries firmly uphold the principles of the rule of international law, state sovereignty, and non-interference in internal affairs of other countries. Both countries pursue independent foreign policy, and jointly resist external pressure, diktat, and the use of illegitimate and politically-driven sanctions. We also coordinate our efforts on key issues and on key international venues, including the UN, BRICS, and the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation.

When discussing recent developments in Syria, we emphasised that Russia remains committed to comprehensive settlement in that country based on respect for its sovereignty, independence, and territorial integrity. We stand ready to continue providing the Syrian people with the necessary support for stabilising the situation, to offer urgent humanitarian aid, and to start full-scale post-conflict reconstruction.

We believe that the future of Syria should be determined by the Syrians themselves through an inclusive dialogue. We wholeheartedly hope that the Syrian people will successfully overcome the challenges arising from the transitional period.

We also touched on the Middle East peace process in light of the recently reached agreement to cease hostilities in the Gaza Strip. This agreement provides for the reunification of freed Israeli hostages with their families and the release of Palestinian detainees. Significantly, it also opens the door to a substantial increase in the supply of food, fuel, and medicine to Gaza. We hope these measures will alleviate the humanitarian situation and contribute to long-term stabilisation in the sector.

However, it is essential not to ease up on efforts towards achieving a comprehensive resolution of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict based on the internationally recognised legal basis. This includes the establishment of an independent Palestinian state coexisting in peace and security with Israel.

Mr President and I also addressed Russian-Iranian cooperation in the South Caucasus. Ensuring peace and stability in this region serves the interests of both our nations.

Overall, the alignment of agendas on these and other regional matters was, in our view, highly beneficial and quite timely. I would like to close by stressing that we are satisfied with the results of these talks.

I am confident that the agreements we reached during these talks will further strengthen the entire spectrum of Russian-Iranian relations and ties. Without a doubt, the newly signed interstate agreement will serve this purpose as well.

Thank you for your attention.

President of Iran Masoud Pezeshkian (retranslated): In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful!

Colleagues, members of the press,

Mr President Vladimir Putin, I wish to extend my gratitude to you and express my appreciation to the Russian people and the Russian Government for the hospitality extended to both me and my delegation. I am optimistic that our bilateral engagements will persist within the framework of our mutual interests. Indeed, from today, we will witness expanded opportunities for the advancement of our bilateral relations.

Within the framework of the neighbourhood policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Russian Federation holds significant importance for us. I must say that in recent years, there has been a substantial exchange of delegations between our nations, and this process continues, for which we are deeply grateful to our colleagues in Russia.

I believe we will continue to operate within the framework of trade and economic relations, with certain mechanisms already in place. We have resolved to eliminate obstacles impeding our relations. We have conducted a comprehensive review of all pertinent issues, discussed the full spectrum of our relations, and concluded that we must continue working in this positive spirit and manner, both bilaterally, regionally, and on the international stage. The significant Treaty signed today will inaugurate a new chapter in our relations, particularly in trade and economic interactions between Iran and Russia.

I am confident that this document has been crafted with the interests of our countries in mind and will lay the necessary groundwork for our continued cooperation. Iran and Russia are committed to removing minor, insignificant barriers hindering our trade and economic relations.

Regarding customs, banking, and monetary issues, as well as our investment projects and the visa-free regime between our countries, we have engaged in discussions on these matters. Within the framework of this Treaty, we will have further opportunities to address these topics in the future.

I would like to underscore the significance of Iran’s observer status within the Eurasian Economic Union. This status is highly important to us. I believe that within the framework of this Union, we can significantly enhance the level of cooperation between our countries.

The shared approaches and perspectives of Iran and Russia in combating terrorism and extremism form another basis for our continued collaboration. We have deliberated on cooperative efforts in the South Caucasus, Syria, the Middle East, and Afghanistan.

I believe that some of the transformations occurring in our region, facilitated by new organisations and entities such as BRICS and the SCO, indeed represent new opportunities and potential for both countries to collaborate in the future. The active involvement of Iran and Russia in these emerging regional structures is of great importance to us all.

I wish to reiterate that combat and conflict do not resolve issues. We welcome a political settlement between Ukraine and Russia. It is imperative that mutual respect is maintained. Furthermore, Western nations should refrain from imposing their will on others.

Regarding the Israeli regime’s airstrikes against Lebanon and Syria, I believe we concur on the importance of discouraging such actions. We hope that a ceasefire in the Gaza Strip will indeed be implemented.

In conclusion, I wish to once again thank my esteemed colleague, the Russian President, for his hospitality and for the cordial relations we have cultivated with the fraternal people of the Russian Federation.

Thank you very much, Mr President.

Question (retranslated): Good afternoon, President Putin, President Pezeshkian.

Considering that we are also about to raise the issue of the big treaty, I would like the presidents of both countries to answer my question.

Everyone is aware of the fact that Iran and Russia share profound cultural and social approaches. We are two large and strong nations in this region. We possess great possibilities and oppose the unipolar world. Iran and Russia stand for a new world order based on multipolarity. We participate in important new entities such as the SCO, the Eurasian Economic Union, and BRICS.

Considering all these common approaches, we still see that our bilateral relations, particularly in the economy and trade, are lagging behind our political relations. I have a concrete question for you: What is the outlook for our relations considering the treaty that was signed today? What can we count on and hope for in the future? What will happen in the future with today’s treaty in mind? Thank you very much.

Vladimir Putin: Without a doubt, strengthening the legal framework creates better conditions for addressing bilateral cooperation issues across all areas, with trade and economy being the most important areas for us.

Mr President and I have discussed this in restricted and expanded formats and took a look at Russia’s relations with other neighbouring countries. With countries with much smaller – by orders of magnitude, I would say – economic and human potential compared to Iran, our trade is many times greater, many times. The level of our trade and economic relations, trade and economic cooperation with such a big country as Iran, with a population of 85 million people, is clearly way below what we can actually do.

The thrust of the treaty that we signed today is precisely to create extra conditions, basic additional conditions, to promote trade and economic ties. To put it in plain terms, we need less red tape and more concrete action. We got together today to discuss financial settlements and ways to speed up supply chain decisions, customs issues, and so on and so forth, in the sphere of energy.

Mr President mentioned – and I noted it as well – that Iran is expanding its interaction with the Eurasian Economic Union. All of that taken together, in my opinion, creates very favourable conditions for us to take major and decisive steps forward. We have promising projects across all areas that I just mentioned.

I look forward to us making big strides through joint efforts, including the intergovernmental commission. I have no doubt about this whatsoever. Whatever obstacles or difficulties may be imposed on us from outside, we are capable of overcoming them and moving forward. I am confident this is what it will be like.

Thank you very much for your question.

Masoud Pezeshkian: With regard to our cooperation prospects in light of the big treaty, we are convinced – and I have emphasised this since day one of the presidential election – that the first major step of my government will include strengthening our cooperation with neighbouring countries and expanding opportunities for continued cooperation. I am, of course, talking about the Russian Federation. It is a vast country with which we have excellent political relations, and it holds major importance for us both in the region and internationally.

In order for us to be able to strengthen bilateral relations across all areas without exception, our first step was to review our relationship and to reinforce, so to say, a new treaty framework.

What can we do in the future? We must develop a new mechanism, update our treaty, as my esteemed colleague, Mr President, said in the sphere of investment projects, industry, scientific research, and educational programmes. We already have excellent projects, commissions, sub-commissions, and working groups. These entities have all agreed to create a new treaty framework that will allow us to expand the scope of our activities in our country based on this treaty.

This, of course, aligns with our shared policy of ensuring regional security and opposing the unipolar world. We are confident that, in our region, we can cooperate without external influences or involvement from outlying players. Our major neighbours possess significant potential, and we can safely say that we do not need to heed advice from overseas countries.

I am very pleased to be here today, and I foresee a bright future ahead.

Question: Interfax Agency. I have a question for both presidents.

You mentioned various projects, and I am particularly interested in two of them. A year ago, the two countries announced their plans for a gas pipeline project to transport Russian gas to Iran. Was this matter discussed today? What progress has been made in implementing these plans, and what are the expected volumes?

The second project concerns the well-known international North-South transport corridor. How well is it going, and what challenges, if any, are hindering further expansion of this project?

Vladimir Putin: There are always difficulties with both projects, and all others for that matter. There is always something that needs to be agreed upon, or specific circumstances in a particular sector of the economy, be it logistics, transport, or energy, that need to be accounted for.

There are many issues to address, including price negotiation. Approaches to such negotiations vary and depend on numerous factors. For instance, Mr Miller, who is sitting next to you, can explain technical aspects like the calorific value of oil and gas, among other things. These are technical issues, they need to be agreed upon. Both projects are active, and both are highly important and very engaging.

Speaking of potential gas supply volumes, we believe we should start small with up to two billion cubic metres, but with an option to eventually increase annual shipments to Iran to up to 55 billion cubic metres of gas.

The oil sector also offers opportunities for cooperation. We operate a major nuclear project. One unit is operational and things are going well, and we are now discussing the possibility of building additional units. Indeed, we have to push certain deadlines back, mainly due to payment and settlement issues. This is no secret.

Nevertheless, work is being done and progress is being made. Thousands of people are working on these sites, with approximately 80 percent of the construction being carried out by local contractors. It is a massive and major effort, and we are moving forward despite some issues that need our attention. This is precisely why we get together to address such issues.

We are interested in the North-South project. It presents additional opportunities for promoting Iranian- and Russian-made goods on global markets. It is not just us who have a stake in it; other countries that are energetically developing trade and economic ties with us also have a stake in this project.

Technical, administrative, financial, and organisational issues are being addressed as well. We have established a special office dedicated to this project, with Deputy Prime Minister Savelyev closely involved in its work. He frequently visits Iran and meets with our Iranian partners. These projects are active, and we are confident they will be implemented.

Masoud Pezeshkian: With regard to gas cooperation, I would like to follow up on it by saying that just as the human body relies on vessels to deliver energy to different parts of the body, we too need such “vessels” in the form of ways to deliver energy where it is needed.

We have discussed the routes for delivering materials, energy, or any goods. We need robust supply chains.

To achieve our shared vision and goals, we need to upgrade the routes for delivering fuel and energy. This is an issue our colleagues have been working on for a long time now, and we are prepared to renew and restore the necessary supply infrastructure.

Regarding gas, electricity, other energy, as well as renewable energy, we have held discussions to this end. I believe that the expert teams on both sides are working hard on these matters. We are convinced that we can do it. We must remove any obstacles to ensure these supply routes function at full capacity.

Of course, there are technical issues. However, significant progress has been made. I can safely say that we have the opportunity to re-open a new chapter in energy cooperation between Iran and Russia. Day by day, we must enhance our ability to manage these processes effectively.

Question (retranslated): Given the good relations between Iran and Russia, alongside the Treaty signed today, what will be the policy of the two nations concerning the international agenda and regional cooperation, particularly within our region? How can this be effectively implemented?

Vladimir Putin: We have long been coordinating our efforts on the international stage. This pertains to the most urgent issues on the global agenda, including the Middle East and the South Caucasus, which I have just referenced. All of these matters directly impact our interests.

Mr President mentioned the conflict in Ukraine. Our colleagues are well-informed about the ongoing developments there. We consistently keep our Iranian counterparts apprised.

Broadly speaking, we operate on the premise of prioritising international law, grounded in the United Nations Charter. Relations in the international arena should be forged based on the principles of the UN Charter, respecting the interests of all parties engaged in the international dialogue and refraining from interference in internal affairs. These are the fundamental principles to which we adhere.

The Treaty signed today establishes an additional, as I have previously stated, significant and robust foundation for fostering relations of trust, based on the principles I have just mentioned. This Treaty articulates our priorities and our commitment to honouring them. It enables us to fortify our bilateral relations in the interests of the Iranian people and the citizens of the Russian Federation.

Masoud Pezeshkian: I believe that with the Treaty we signed today, regarding our cooperation in the regional dimension, we will contribute to establishing stability and peace, particularly in our region. Through dialogue, consultations, respect for the territorial integrity of countries, and by eschewing interference from extraregional forces, we, as regional countries, can and will find solution to our regional issues.

I am of the opinion that the dialogue between us, if replicated with other countries, could significantly diminish the scope of issues and eliminate border obstacles. When certain nations impose artificial difficulties at borders, it indeed becomes a substantial hindrance.

Our policy is to foster friendly relations with regional actors predicated on mutual interests, and we are confident in resolving all issues and eliminating all obstacles, especially pertinent in the Middle East.

Question: I have a question for both leaders.

It is evident to everybody that the old world order has come to its end, and the world is transitioning to a multipolar model, a transition that is not without challenges. With the persistent turbulence in the Middle East, how can the balance of power be maintained?

Vladimir Putin: As I have previously stated, by relying on the Charter of the United Nations. This is what we should strive for, and this is what we ought to pursue, rather than attempting to manipulate the rules of international law to serve vested interests, instantly redirecting them in a way favourable for one nation or a group of states. We must not substitute the UN Charter with certain rules that, as I have repeatedly mentioned, remain unseen. A return to the original understanding of the United Nations’ purpose and adherence to the principles enshrined in its Charter is of utmost importance.

Naturally, this is a complex instrument. I would like to remind you that during the Soviet Union era, our Foreign Minister Andrei Gromyko earned the moniker “Mister No.” You may ask, why? Because, even then, it was exceedingly challenging to reach consensus on all issues, especially amidst the Cold War. However, this is precisely why the UN was established, to seek acceptable solutions and to avoid the unilateral implementation of unacceptable ones.

However, at some juncture, there emerged a belief that everything could be resolved unilaterally, and the United Nations Organisation itself could be subordinated to serve someone’s selfish interests. If it did not comply, it could be declared unnecessary. And then, when the necessity arose, it could be recalled, along with the principles embedded in the United Nations Charter.

We must revert to the foundational intent behind the Organisation’s creation and operate from the premise that all nations, whether small or large, are equal. They have equal rights, which should be acknowledged and respected.

Masoud Pezeshkian: As my esteemed colleague Vladimir Putin articulated, the era of double standards has come to an end. The notion that one party has the right to kill ordinary citizens, to kill children and women, to obliterate hospitals and schools, and subsequently assert their stance on human rights, is untenable. They then presume to instruct us on the path to follow.

In another nation, particularly ours, we are advised to uphold human rights according to their dictates. We reject these double standards; such insincere human rights are unacceptable to us.

What is happening in Lebanon, Syria, and Gaza – where bloodshed is incessant – is evident. You have witnessed it first-hand. Even within the framework of international organisations, the protection of women and children has not been assured. How can we continue this discourse? No entity has ever been permitted to destroy hospitals, schools, infrastructure, and communications, yet it all occurred before our eyes in the Middle East. These double standards are intolerable to us. It is deeply regrettable that the situation persists.

I believe today’s agreements, especially those with other nations committed to international frameworks, ensure that the unipolar world will no longer dictate our course. No double standards can govern the world.

There is no difference between small and large nations; all are equal, as my colleague asserts. If we are to uphold human rights, they must be universal, not confined to a certain group in a particular country. Human rights are a global concern.

Today’s meeting and the agreements reached between our countries, I believe, serve as a further impetus and motivation towards the construction of a multipolar world. Of course, this primarily concerns the development of Iran and Russia.

Thank you very much.

Vladimir Putin: Thank you.

Results of the Year with Vladimir Putin

2024-12-25T20:07:28+04:00

Vladimir Putin summed up the results of the year and answered questions from journalists and the people of Russia in a live broadcast.

Channel One war correspondent Dmitry Kulko and VGTRK presenter Alexandra Suvorova moderated the Results of the Year with Vladimir Putin.

* * *

Deputy Chief of Staff of the Presidential Executive Office – Presidential Press Secretary Dmitry Peskov: Good afternoon everyone.

The President will be here within minutes to review the results of the outgoing year. I would like to remind you that this year we combine two events, the news conference and Direct Line.

Please show respect for your colleagues when I give the floor to journalists and make your questions as concise and clear as possible. This will allow the President to answer more questions.

Our moderators this year are Alexandra Suvorova and Dmitry Kulko, who will talk with the President. They worked hard to personally read extremely many questions from our people, possibly tens of thousands of them. They understand what the people of Russia are talking about and will help the President outline the subjects that are at the top of the agenda throughout the country.

Please.

Alexandra Suvorova: Good afternoon. This is the Results of the Year with Vladimir Putin. As usual, questions can be submitted in a number of ways until the end of our programme. Our colleagues continue working with the incoming questions.

First, you can submit your questions by calling 8 (800) 200 4040 or sending an SMS or MMS message to 04040. Questions can also be submitted via the programme’s official accounts on Vkontakte and Odnoklassniki. You can also use the website and mobile app called москва-путину.рф.

We have already received over 2.2 million questions, including 1.2 million via telephone, about 43,000 via SMS messages, and over 140,000 via the website. We can see that the number of questions is increasing in real time.

Let me share some interesting facts and figures on the Results of the Year with Vladimir Putin programme since this format was created. There was a time when the Direct Line and the news conference were two separate events and formats. This is the third time we are having it in a hybrid format. The first time it happened was before the COVID pandemic, the second was a post-COVID event in 2023, and now we are in 2024. Once again, the programme is taking place in a hybrid format, which means that both the people of Russia and, of course, journalists get to ask questions.

Here are some interesting statistics. For example, the event with the biggest number of questions took place in 2015 when the President received 2.25 million questions. This year, we have not reached this number. However, I believe that this could be attributable to the fact that regions hold their own direct lines, with governors answering questions from their people at the regional level. Therefore, some questions get resolved on the ground.

One thing to note here is that if we add up all the time Vladimir Putin has spent answering questions during events of this kind, the total already exceeds 64 hours. People have been tuning in from the regions since 2001 when the very first programme of this kind took place. It goes without saying that there will also be people joining us via videoconference from the regions today. Throughout the years when we had the Direct Line and the Results of the Year, people have been proactively contributing to these events not only by raising various issues with the President, sharing their concerns or asking for something, but also by expressing their gratitude. This year, considering that we are holding this event on December 19, we also received New Year greetings. This is another trend I wanted to mention.

Of course, social matters are in the spotlight today, judging by the submissions we have selected. Many questions deal with the special military operation. International matters are also high on the agenda, of course. So let us get started.

Dmitry Kulko: President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin.

For the third year in a row, volunteers from the Russian Popular Front have been helping prepare our programme and process the messages and calls. This year, they were also joined by veterans of the special military operation. For ten days since the free telephone line opened, they, too, have been taking phone calls. However, the Russian Popular Front’s work does not end today. In fact, we can say that it is only just beginning, because the moment the broadcast ends, the Popular Front volunteers will continue to work on the appeals people made to ensure that none of them is left unattended.

Alexandra Suvorova: I would like to add that some of the appeals have already been processed during the preparations for the Results of the Year programme, and some of the issues have been addressed by Popular Front volunteers and regional and federal authorities.

There is one more aspect that is different this year. GigaChat, an AI model provided by Sber, has helped us process people’s appeals and questions. Mr President, I know that you have already seen it.

President of Russia Vladimir Putin: I have.

Dmitry Kulko: Yes, GigaChat has drawn conclusions. This technology can do more than transcribe audio files into text – it can also extract the message and the essence of the problem, which has significantly accelerated the processing of requests this year. You will be able to see GigaChat’s insights on the screen throughout the programme. You will see the key subjects of people’s appeals, across the country and in each region. We will be using this virtual assistant during the programme today.

Anna Suvorova: Before we start taking questions from our people and our colleagues, journalists, I would like to ask the first general question.

In recent time, everyone has been feeling a disturbing sense that the world is going crazy, or already has, because the potential for conflict is off the charts in every part of the world, and the global economy is struggling. How does Russia manage not only to stay afloat, but also to continue growing in this situation?

Vladimir Putin: You know, when all is calm and life is measured and stable, we get bored. This amounts to stagnation, so we crave action. When action begins, time starts whistling by – or bullets do, for that matter. Unfortunately, bullets are what is zipping past our heads these days. We are scared, yes – but not as “all get out” kind of scared.

Our economics are the ultimate measure of things. As is traditional, I will start with the economy. Although your question was a bit provocative, I will turn to the economy anyway. The economy is number one; it is the cornerstone. It has an impact on living standards, general stability, and the country’s defence capability. The economy is everything.

The economic situation in Russia is generally positive and stable. We are growing in spite of everything, in spite of any external threats or attempts at outside influence.

As you know, last year Russia increased its GDP by 3.6 percent, and this year the economy is expected to grow by 3.9 percent, or possibly even four percent. However, we will have to wait and see the final results, as the year-end figures will be de facto factored into these projections in the first quarter of next year, which will be 2025 in this particular case. It may well be that this indicator reaches four percent. What this means is that our economy will have grown by eight percent over the past two years. After all, the tenths and hundredths of a percent make for a negligeable difference. This is what experts have been telling me – we exchanged views this very morning. About eight percent over the past two years, compared to a growth rate between five and six percent for the United States, one percent for the Eurozone, and zero for Germany, the EU’s leading economy. It seems that next year that country will also have zero growth.

International financial and economic institutions ranked Russia as Europe’s biggest economy in terms of volume, in terms of purchasing power parity, and the world’s fourth largest economy. We are behind China, the United States and India. Last year, Russia surpassed Germany and this year, we left Japan behind. But this is not the time for us to be complacent. We will definitely keep moving forward.

There is development everywhere you look and so much positive momentum across the board. If the Eurozone has fallen asleep, there are other centres of global development that are advancing. The situation in the Eurozone and the United States has been changing too. We must maintain the momentum we have gathered and transform our economy at its core, from a qualitative perspective.

There are other general performance indicators which have been quite satisfactory, to say the least. Unemployment is the first such indicator. All countries around the world, and all economies, pay a great deal of attention to this figure. For Russia, it is at its all-time low of 2.3 percent. We have not experienced anything like this before. This is my first point.

Second, there has been growth in specific manufacturing and industrial sectors. In fact, industrial output increased by 4.4 percent, while the processing sector reported a growth rate of 8.1 percent, with some of its sectors achieving even higher growth rates.

Of course, inflation has been causing some concerns. Only yesterday, while preparing for today’s event, I talked to the Central Bank Governor, and Elvira Nabiullina told me that the inflation rate has already reached about 9.2–9.3 percent year-to-date. That said, salaries have increased by nine percent, and I am talking about an increase in real terms, minus inflation. In addition, disposable incomes have also increased. So, the overall situation is stable and, let me reiterate, solid.

There are certain challenges with inflation and with the economy heating up. Therefore, the Government and the Central Bank have been seeking to ensure a soft landing. Estimates may vary for next year, but we expect the economy to grow at a rate of 2–2.5 percent. This soft landing would enable us to keep improving our macroeconomic performance.

This is what we must aspire to. I think that we will probably raise these matters during today’s meeting. Overall, the economy can be described as stable and resilient.

Alexandra Suvorova: I have a follow-up question, given the numerous questions surrounding price growth, to which we will return. You have cited Germany and Japan as examples. I wish to focus on Germany having a zero percent growth rate, which you mentioned as a case previously known for its economic expansion.

Do you believe this is perhaps linked to politics and sovereignty? Not long ago, at the VTB Forum Russia Calling!, you reminisced about Gerhard Schroeder's birthday celebration, remarking how all the songs were in English, with none performed in German.

Vladimir Putin: There were. It's an interesting episode. Quite some time ago, it was Gerhard Schroeder's birthday, he invited me and I attended. There was a small concert, and, as it happened, all the companies performed in English. I remarked at the time, “Even the Hannover girls' choir sang in English.”

There was, however, one ensemble that performed in German: the Kuban Cossack Choir, which accompanied me. Moreover, this was entirely unexpected on my part. I inquired, “How did you come to know these songs?” They replied, “Out of respect for the Germans, our hosts, we learnt these songs en route and performed them in German, including those from the local region where we are now.”

During the intermission, numerous attendees approached me (I recount this as it truly unfolded) and expressed, “We are embarrassed, truly, that only Russian Cossacks performed in German here.”

I recounted this to a colleague who was present at the event, which has now been recalled. You see, sovereignty is a crucial concept; it must reside within, in one's heart. In the post-war era, I believe this sense – of homeland and sovereignty – has been somewhat eroded among the German people.

Who are the Europeans, after all? They are proud to be European, yet they are foremost French, German, Italian, Spanish, and then European. There is a tendency to smooth out things, to homogenise. Ultimately, this affects everything, including the economy.

I previously spoke about our economic growth – this is largely attributable to the reinforcement of sovereignty, which extends to the economic realm.

Many foreign manufacturers have exited our market. What has been the consequence? Our entrepreneurs have started producing these goods domestically, necessitating further research and the engagement of institutions, including those focused on development. All of this – what we are discussing – is the enhancement of technological sovereignty.

Sovereignty manifests itself in various forms: defence, technology, science, education, culture. This is of paramount importance, especially for our nation, because should we lose sovereignty, we risk losing statehood. That is the crux.

Economic growth is also an effect of bolstered sovereignty.

Dmitry Kulko: Mr President, I suggest we move on to questions from our citizens.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, let us begin.

Dmitry Kulko: You spoke about economic growth. It is true that a look at our economic indicators, which do look good, shows that the majority of Russian enterprises are working to capacity and wages are rising, yet they cannot keep pace with price increases.

Many Russian citizens have written about this, and AI has analysed all the requests and compiled a list of regions where more questions concerned price growth. These are eastern regions, such as the Kamchatka Territory and the Sakhalin Region, and also our westernmost territory, the Kaliningrad Region. Also, the majority of questions from the Irkutsk Region concern price growth. In short, it is a topical issue.

Alexandra Suvorova: It is topical indeed. I will cite the figures which have also been provided by GigaChat, which we are using.

The most frequent questions have to do with the rise in prices of bread, fish, milk, eggs and butter. People also write about the growth of fuel prices. This file contains some of the citizens’ questions about price growth.

If we look at the official data of the Federal State Statistics Service (Rosstat), we got it last night, we will see that the prices of fruits and vegetables have increased by 3.4 percent over the past week. For example, the price of cucumbers has grown by ten percent after rising by 43 percent in November.

Vladimir Putin: First, I would like to apologise to the audience, especially those who are following this event via various media platforms, including online. When I said that price growth or inflation was slightly above nine percent this year, at 9.2–9.3 percent, and that people’s wages and real disposable incomes have grown as well, I cited average figures. Of course, our country is very big, and some people might ask me what I was talking about, that their well-being has not improved but remained at the same level. And some might even say that their well-being has deteriorated. Yes, this can be so and it is so, in some cases. I cited average figures, because when we make plans, we need to have figures to rely on, and we can only rely on average figures.

As for the growth of prices, there are both objective and subjective reasons for that.

What is more important is that the supply in our market should correlate with people’s incomes, or rather, people’s incomes and their purchasing capacity should correlate with the volume of goods produced in the country. Wages and incomes have been growing faster than the mass of commodities and the rate of production.

I will explain. Let’s say, food production in our country is constantly growing. I will talk about this later. There will certainly be questions on agriculture. In fact, I can tell you that it adds three percent every year. We are fully self-sufficient when it comes to meat. One hundred percent.

It is a good indicator. Why does this happen? In Russia, the annual consumption of meat is about 80 kg per capita while in other countries, it is about 42 kg on average. It may seem enough and yet, meat consumption has doubled recently, you see? Doubled.

Now, milk. Milk production grows every year, but consumption grows as well, and there is not enough milk to produce butter. I know that the butter prices have grown by 33–34 percent in some regions, and possibly higher in others.

Simply, the amount of products has not grown as much as consumption has. This is the first reason. The solution here would be to develop industries. And I will talk more about it later.

The second objective reason is harvest.

The third objective reason is that some products have become more expensive on world markets.

Of course, the external restrictions, sanctions and so forth are affecting the prices to a certain extent. They do not play a key role but still, they take a toll as they make logistics more expensive, in addition to other things.

There are also subjective reasons or things we could improve on our side. For example, some experts believe that the Central Bank could have used certain instruments other than raising the key rate, more efficiently and at an earlier stage. Yes, the Central Bank started doing it around summer. But again, these experts believe that it could have and should have been done earlier. There are many instruments. I will not list them now and will not tire our audience with these considerations about the Central Bank and its regulation methods.

The Government works efficiently and does a lot when it thinks about the future – and the future should always be considered. In our country, we always thought about the future even during the harshest times of the Great Patriotic War. We know these examples. There were efforts made and, as it turned out later, correct efforts.

Our Government does think about the future: it formulates tasks, national development goals and national projects. It is wonderful but it would also be great to take timely efforts with respect to industries and consider the development of certain sectors, the production of mass products. I will not list them now – perhaps, there will be questions on specific industries later. Timely decisions should have been made.

Growing prices are not something to enjoy and they have adverse impacts. But I hope that overall, as we preserve macroeconomic indicators, we shall address this issues as well because macroeconomics is the basis for a healthy economy in general.

Dmitry Kulko: Mr President, we are holding today’s event in a combined format, a direct line and a news conference. I now suggest that our journalist colleagues ask a question.

Alexandra Suvorova: We can sense that those present in the hall are eager to ask their questions.

Dmitry Peskov: Indeed, the audience is quite eager. Allow me …

A question from the audience.

Dmitry Peskov: You know, if we behave this way, it would be disrespectful towards everyone else.

Vladimir Putin: Nevertheless, let us refrain from acting this way, and let us begin. What is your name?

Alina Khastsayeva: My name is Alina Khastsayeva, I represent the 15^th Region information website in North Ossetia.

Vladimir Putin: Alina, go ahead, please.

Alina Khastsayeva: The issue of professional service personnel has become increasingly important. Multiple schools, including the North Caucasus Military Institute of Interior Troops in North Ossetia, used to train military specialists in the North Caucasus.

Quite literally, a legendary institute: seven of its graduates became Heroes of the Soviet Union, and 14 more received the title of Heroes of Russia. To this very day, its graduates are successfully carrying out missions set by our state. Its graduates include former Interior Minister Anatoly Kulikov, and Sergei Khairutdinov, a recent graduate, became Hero of Russia while taking part in the special military operation.

Is it possible to reinstate this institute at a time when the North Caucasus and the whole of Russia need it so much? Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Alina, thank you for this question. This is a good point, and do not be angry with Alina; here is why.

First, North Ossetia has always been Russia’s outpost in this region, in the Caucasus, and it has always justified its lofty designation. We know how the republic’s residents feel about their region and about Russia, our large common Motherland. They have always defended it and have fulfilled this role worthily and admirably.

You have noted that the number of schools has been reduced. This is not linked to a decision to close them in Ossetia alone. It is related to the fact that, according to military specialists and agencies, there were too many military schools, and the Russian army did not need so many specialists and so much service personnel at the time. Due to various circumstances, we are now increasing the strength of the army, security and law enforcement agencies to 1.5 million people. I cannot say that we will achieve this tomorrow, but I promise you that we will certainly analyse this issue.

Thank you.

Dmitry Peskov: We continue working with the audience. Let us go back to the centre after all.

ITAR-TASS, please.

Mikhail Petrov: Mikhail Petrov, Editor-in-Chief, TASS.

Mr President, before I ask my question, I would like to thank you.

This year, TASS is celebrating its 120^th anniversary. We are this country’s oldest news agency. Earlier this year, in August, you signed an Executive order on awarding TASS the Order for Valiant Labour. On behalf of our large team and at their instructions, I want to take a message of many thanks to you. This is a high praise for our work.

Vladimir Putin: Thank you.

Mikhail Petrov: As for the question, I think this issue is of concern for all of us today. Incidentally, TASS correspondents sent reports from the fronts during the Great Patriotic War. Today, too, our men are working in the special military operation zone, and they are concerned as well.

How do you assess the progress in the special military operation, which has lasted for nearly three years now? Is the victory nearer?

Vladimir Putin: I certainly hoped for questions of this kind. There are many of these within the bulk [of messages] that came in during the previous days. Moreover, I am grateful to you, too, for [asking this question], because this enables us to show what is going on and what our troops are doing at the battle contact line.

You know, the fighting men, with whom I am in regular contact, send souvenirs, chevrons, some weapons, and so on. Not long ago, men from the 155^th Marine Brigade of the Pacific Fleet gave me a copy of their colours.

Who can I ask to assist me? Come over to me, please, and someone from that side. I have a big favour to ask. You take a position here and you – there, and unfold this banner, please, at both ends.

Dmitry Kulko: Pacific Fleet marines.

Vladimir Putin: Yes.

I have brought it along on purpose.

First, I wanted to thank the men for this gift.

Second, let us consider than this banner of the 155^th Marine Brigade of the Pacific Fleet represents all the combat banners of our soldiers, who are fighting for Russia, for the Motherland, along the entire line of contact.

I must say that the situation is changing radically. You know this well and I just want to reaffirm this. The drive is on along the entire frontline every day.

As I said, the advance is not by 100, 200, or 300 metres. Our fighting men are regaining the territory by square kilometers. I want to stress – every day! Why is this happening?

First, last year, and this basically is the classical course of hostilities, the enemy attacks, sustains a heavy defeat, loses a lot of equipment, ammunition and personnel, and then the other side starts to push forward. In our case, this is happening exactly in this way. Combat operations are a difficult thing. So, it is hard – and makes no sense – to think far too ahead. But it happens precisely in this way. And we are advancing, as we said, towards achieving the priority goals that we outlined at the start of the special military operation.

As for our troops, they are acting heroically. I say this regularly and will repeat it, because there is every reason for saying so. Right now, the 155^th Brigade is fighting in the Kursk Region and pushing the enemy out from our land. Of course, they are not alone. Fighting alongside them are the 810^th Marine Brigade of the Black Sea Fleet, the 76^th and 106^th divisions of the Airborne Troops, and motorised infantry of the Sever Group. All of them are fighting heroically in the direct sense of the word. And they are involved in an engagement right at this moment. Let us wish them all success, victory and safe homecoming, meaning those fighting in the Kursk Region and along the entire frontline.

Thank you.

Dmitry Kulko: Mr President, I have just returned from the Kursk Region. We have been working with the units and formations you mentioned, which are currently undertaking the noble duty of liberating our homeland. For several weeks, we have been on the front lines, filming reports. Notably, the 155^th brigade has liberated several residential areas, and we have discussed this.

Our reports illustrate that once the enemy is expelled from a residential area, they begin bombarding these streets with drones and artillery, almost as if in retaliation. We visited the recently liberated Borki, Snagost, and Lyubimovka. The footage clearly shows the houses intact initially, only to be targeted by Ukrainian shells afterwards. Consequently, the residents of this border region now find themselves with nowhere to return to and are striving to build new lives somehow.

I propose we connect with Tatyana Zibrova by telephone. She is currently residing in temporary accommodation in the Kursk Region. Ms Zibrova, can you hear us?

Tatyana Zibrova: Yes, I can hear you.

Dmitry Kulko: Please direct your question to the President.

Tatyana Zibrova: Good afternoon, Mr President.

Vladimir Putin: Hello.

Tatyana Zibrova: I am a resident of the Kursk Region, Bolshesoldatsky District.

I have a question on behalf of all residents of the Kursk Region. When will our region be fully liberated? When will the Ukrainian armed forces be pushed back so far that they will not even dare to show themselves or look in our direction? When will we be able to return to our homes or have our own accommodation somewhere?

Additionally, will the small villages that were destroyed be rebuilt, and will infrastructure be restored? The residents of Bolshesoldatsky District are particularly concerned: will we be included on the list of those eligible to receive housing certificates? Currently, we are not receiving them, as the Ukrainian armed forces have not directly invaded us and we are not on the list for certificates.

Vladimir Putin: Ms Zibrova, rest assured. I cannot and do not want to provide a specific date as to when they will be driven out. Our troops are engaged in combat right now, and the battles are intense. As I have mentioned before, there was no strategic military reason for the Ukrainian armed forces to enter the Kursk Region or to hold their position there as they are, deploying their elite assault groups and units to no avail. Yet, this situation persists.

We will undoubtedly drive them out. There is no alternative. Concerning a precise date – I am afraid I cannot specify one at this moment. I have an understanding of the plans, which are regularly reported to me. However, it is not possible to declare a specific date. The troops can hear me now; if I were to specify a date, they would go to great lengths to meet it, potentially disregarding casualties. We cannot allow that. While a day or two may not make a significant difference, but we will undoubtedly expel them, the damage assessment will follow, and, most importantly, everything will be restored. There is no doubt about that.

We will rebuild the road network, restore utility infrastructure, and reinstate social facilities such as schools and kindergartens. Community centres and housing will be rebuilt, and housing reconstruction certificates will be issued.

We will assist those who wish to relocate to other regions. Currently, about 108 billion rubles have been allocated for this purpose, if I remember correctly. I know that the first funds have already been received. The Administration will work throughout the holidays, meeting with people and addressing their issues, including providing certificates.

I understand that what is happening is incredibly challenging for you: people are experiencing heavy losses, inconveniences, especially families with children. But rest assured, we will do everything in our power to restore everything. Everyone in need of housing assistance will be fully satisfied; everyone will receive what they are entitled to.

I genuinely hope that the new head of the region, who has been appointed to the Kursk Region, is experienced and capable of effectively working with people. That is why I chose him, he has a long history of working in the State Duma and directly with his voters, so he knows how to handle it. I expect that he will work with every person on an individual basis.

Dmitry Kulko: Mr President, our military personnel who are currently liberating the Kursk Region do not have the status of a participant in the special military operation.

Vladimir Putin: Pardon?

Dmitry Kulko: They don’t have the status of a participant in the special military operation.

Vladimir Putin: Why?

Dmitry Kulko: Because they are participants in the counter-terrorism operation. This also affects the payments they receive.

We received several requests, mostly from the wives of the military personnel: “My husband serves in an assault company in the Kursk Region and is carrying out combat missions. In October and November, he received a pay allowance of 42,000 rubles, even though he is on battle positions. Many soldiers have not received combat daily payments for three or four months. It has been argued that they are in the zone of a counter-terrorism operation, not the special military operation.”

Another appeal: “In the Kursk Region, they are paid a monthly salary of 25,000 rubles, not the 210,000 rubles promised in the Ministry of Defence contracts.“

Can this situation be corrected?

Vladimir Putin: It can and should be rectified. This is a mistake on our part. That is no news to me. I understand what you are talking about.

Our servicemen who fought in other parts of the front are recognised as combatants. If they have been transferred to the Kursk Region, they should receive all the payments they are entitled to. I will look into this.

There might be a category of individuals who had not previously participated at all or had not been on the front lines and were deployed to the Kursk Region from the very beginning, so they were not classified as participants in the special military operation.

To be honest, it never occurred to me, and I apologise for that. This will be corrected. It is unfortunate that the military department did not pay attention to this either; after all, it primarily falls under their responsibility.

We will correct everything, and all servicemen who are carrying out their duty to the Motherland on the line of contact will receive all payments due to them. We will recalculate retroactively.

Dmitry Kulko: Thank you very much.

Vladimir Putin: Absolutely, without a doubt.

Dmitry Kulko: I personally know a few soldiers who are eager to get an answer right now.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, and I want the fighters to hear me. Please, do not worry, and do not let your families worry about it: everything will be recalculated, and all the due payments, including the benefits for combat action, every payment to which you are entitled will be made.

Dmitry Kulko: Mr President, you have already said today that the Armed Forces of Ukraine are sending their special forces for slaughter in the Kursk Region. Indeed, their losses are enormous; this much is quite obvious. To be honest, I have never seen so many abandoned enemy bodies – indeed, all the local forests are littered with them. I do not even have to mention all the destroyed NATO equipment, including Abrams, Bradley, Leopard vehicles. They say the Kursk Region, its soil, is now the world’s biggest burial place of NATO equipment, and that is actually true.

Vladimir Putin: Possibly.

Dmitry Kulko: However, there is one small point to make here.

Vladimir Putin: As far as I know, the number of armoured vehicles destroyed in the Kursk Region has now exceeded the number of vehicles destroyed on the entire line of contact last year – in any case, these are comparable figures.

Dmitry Kulko: Please, could I ask, could I put in a word for the fighters, for those who destroyed that equipment: will they receive the promised reward?

Vladimir Putin: For the damaged equipment?

Dmitry Kulko: Yes.

Vladimir Putin: Of course, they should. Are there any problems with this?

Dmitry Kulko: To be honest, they are facing some difficulties.

Vladimir Putin: That is surprising. I know that the Defence Minister is listening to our conversation now, and this will definitely be done. No one should have any doubt about this.

Dmitry Kulko: Thank you.

Dmitry Peskov: Shall we move on to questions from the audience?

Vladimir Putin: Yes.

Dmitry Peskov: Since we are talking about military issues, let’s start with the Zvezda television channel.

Konstantin Kokoveshnikov: Good afternoon.

Konstantin Kokoveshnikov, Zvezda TV channel.

Vladimir Putin: Good afternoon.

Konstantin Kokoveshnikov: I cannot but ask you about the statements that we have heard over the past few weeks concerning the footage of the first combat tests of the latest Oreshnik missile, which has been shown all over the world. One gets the impression that it really has no drawbacks, but the West continues to refer to Oreshnik as a modification of old Soviet weapons, claiming that this missile can be shot down by air defence even at the launch stage.

How would you comment on this? Does it have any shortcomings?

If you do not mind, I have a clarifying question: what meaning did the creators of the Oreshnik put into the name – hazel tree? There are several versions.

Vladimir Putin: First, regarding how old or new and modern this weapon is. It is a modern, a brand new weapon. All new achievements in any sphere are based on the designs and achievements made in the past, which people use to move forward. This is also true about the Oreshnik system.

Yes, it is based on previous designs, but these designs were made in the contemporary Russian period. Our scientists, designers and engineers used that basis to create something new, coordinating their activities with the Defence Ministry as the contractor. When I was ultimately informed about that system, I joined the discussions on whether to make it or not, in what quantities, when and how.

It is a new system. As I have said, it is an intermediate- and shorter-range system.

You have said that some Western experts believe that this missile can be easily shot down and destroyed, especially in the boost phase of the missile trajectory.

What would I tell those experts? There are several types of air defence systems, as you know being from the Zvezda TV channel, such as Patriot and the more modern THAAD systems. I do not know if Ukraine has them, but I do not think so. If the Americans want, they can send its THAAD systems to Ukraine. These are more modern systems similar to our S-400 systems. The Patriot systems are comparable to our S-300s, while THAAD is similar to our S-400 systems, if only slightly inferior.

Let them send these systems to Ukraine, and we will ask our people in Ukraine to tell us about the modern solutions of these systems which we could use. I am not joking when I say “our people,” because there are people in Ukraine who you can talk to, there are many of such people who are dreaming, together with us, about liberating their country from the neo-Nazi regime.

There are also other strike systems such as the ballistic missile system (BMD), which used to be a hot topic of our discussions. We once asked the Americans not to deploy that system so that we would not have to create weapons that would be able to avoid it.

We have eventually done that. We have created the Avangard glide vehicle, which does not fly by a specific trajectory but hugs the terrain, without going up into space, because it is not a ballistic missile. We have done a great deal to evade air defence systems.

Overall, this whole story is an expensive product for the American taxpayers that can do little to ensure national security. However, that system has been created and produced in large quantities.

Two missile launching areas have been established in Romania and Poland, respectively. Around 24 missile interceptors are already deployed at each site. I don’t remember but I think they are called Standard Missile-3 systems. Standard Missile-3 Block 1B missiles are deployed in Romania. They have an effective range of 300 kilometres and can hit targets 80 to 250 km above the ground.

Even more formidable weapon systems are deployed in Poland, with a range and altitude of 1,000 and 500 km. However, our medium-range Oreshnik missile system can strike targets located 1,000, 1,500, 3,000-plus and up to 5,500 km away. Such is its range.

Supposing our system is located 2,000 km away, the missile interceptors on Polish territory would be unable to hit it. Yes, they say that the missiles are quite vulnerable during the initial boost phase. First, nothing will reach those missile bases, even if they are unprotected. And, of course, we are shielding them. Nothing can hit them. There are no systems capable of reaching these bases.

Second, it takes time to travel this distance, while our missile needs a few second to start dispensing warheads, and that’s it, the ship has sailed. There is almost no chance of shooting down these missiles.

If the Western experts you mentioned think otherwise, they should suggest to those in the West and the United States who are paying them for their analytical services to conduct a certain technological experiment, a high-tech 21^st-century duel.

Let them choose a target in Kiev, deploy all their air defence and missile defence forces there, and we will hit that target using an Oreshnik missile. We shall see what happens.

We are ready to conduct this experiment. Is the other side ready? In any event, we do not rule this out. What I want to say is that all of their air defence and ABM systems are operating.

It would be interesting for us. I am telling you what engineers, scientists and military specialists are telling me. They are also telling some things at the level of the US political leadership.

Let us hold this experiment, this technological duel, and see what happens. This would be interesting and I believe it would be useful for both us and the US side.

Konstantin Kokoveshnikov: Why this name?

Dmitry Peskov: Why this name?

Vladimir Putin: Honestly? I do not know.

Dmitry Peskov: Let’s take one more question from the audience. Let’s go over there. I can see. Rossiyskaya Gazeta. A question on peace perhaps?

Aisel Gereikhanova: Rossiyskaya Gazeta, Aisel Gereikhanova.

Mr President, you signed an executive order changing the nuclear doctrine recently. Do you think the West correctly took the signal and understood it properly?

Vladimir Putin: I don’t know how they took it. You should ask them about it. I know what constitutes these changes – and it is not a new doctrine but actual changes. I will name some key aspects. We are talking about some new military hazards that may grow into military threats. They include missile defence systems and some other things that we list.

Then we speak about increasing the responsibility of non-nuclear states that may participate in an aggression against the Russian Federation alongside the countries that have nuclear weapons. If, like their allies, these countries also pose a threat to our sovereignty and Russia’s existence, then we imply that we have the right to use our nuclear weapons against them.

Finally, another component related to nuclear arms management, and another, fourth important aspect is that we declared that, if similar threats are posed to Belarus, our ally and member of the Union State, the Russian Federation will consider these threats as threats to Russia. And we will do everything to ensure the security of Belarus. We do this upon agreement with the Belarusian leadership and President of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko. I believe it is a very important component of the updated nuclear strategy of the Russian Federation.

Alexandra Suvorova: Mr Peskov, let’s take one more question from the audience. I can see that you are holding the microphone.

Dmitry Peskov: Sure.

Darya Shuchalina: Mr President, please give the floor to the Arctic.

Dmitry Peskov: We agreed not to shout out questions and respect each other.

Vladimir Putin: Right, let’s not shout and please be respectful. But we will listen to the Arctic. Let’s do what the boss says.

Darya Shuchalina: Good afternoon, Mr President, Darya Shuchalina, Republic of Komi, Respublika newspaper.

First of all, thank you very much for returning our fellow Komi man, Rostislav Goldshtein. He is now Acting Head of Komi and let’s just say he immediately got down to business because he knows the region very well. Thank you for your choice.

Vladimir Putin: He is a good manager and an empathetic person, stable and organised. I hope he will succeed.

Darya Shuchalina: Thank you for your choice.

Now, to proposals. In the Russian Arctic territories, in the Far East and in the Far North, as well as in the Republic of Komi, there are many residential areas with up to 2,000 residents. Unfortunately, these residential areas are not eligible for a very good state programme on construction of cinemas.

We know that people in the North are dedicated to their home regions; they are not moving to bigger cities and instead serving their country in their towns and villages. There are not many entertainment opportunities in the North. At this moment in time, when the patriotic film industry is growing in Russia, it would be great to have this criterion amended in the law and ensure that northern residential areas with a population of up to 2,000 residents be eligible for this programme. So that residents would be able to go and see films in comfortable modern cinemas.

As for the poster I am holding, you worked in our region as a member of a student construction brigade in your younger years, so you know that this Soviet-era mechanism was very effective. Unfortunately, today there is no legal framework for it.

Would it be possible to amend Federal Law No 44 regarding state and municipal contracts for budget-funded construction projects so that these student construction brigades can carry out at least 10 to 15 percent of contractual work? This way, young people can gain valuable work experience and earn some money. Companies could also benefit from these human resources, and this could serve as a development driver for the regions since they would be able to build social infrastructure they need.

Vladimir Putin: Could you repeat, please: where do these 10 percent come from?

Daria Shuchalina: I was talking about municipalities and regions reserving a specific share in construction contracts for student construction brigades.

Vladimir Putin: I see. You mean allocating some of the funds from the construction sector to these mechanisms?

Daria Shuchalina: Yes.

Vladimir Putin: I will discuss this with Mr Khusnullin. I think it is quite possible. We are currently working to revive this movement, it is re-emerging. I think this has already happened – I am referring to the student construction brigades as a movement.

The funding mechanism you described could probably be an option, and I think it has already been adopted, but let me check with Marat Khusnullin. I will raise this issue with him. Agreed?

Daria Shuchalina: I also had a question about cinemas.

Vladimir Putin: Right. Was it about gyms or cinemas?

Daria Shuchalina: I was talking about cinemas.

Vladimir Putin: What a surprising question, at least for me, you know.

Regarding the Arctic zone, let me tell you, first, that we have kept subsidised mortgages at a rate of two percent for this region, as well as for Russia’s Far East. The Arctic can still benefit from two percent mortgages, and I believe this is something that matters a great deal for people there who have been eager to use this subsidy. We have also kept this two percent mortgage rate for the new territories. This is my first point.

Second, we have an entire programme for specific communities in this zone – I think that it covers 25 cities and metropolitan areas – and we will expand it to a nationwide effort covering 200 cities.

We are talking about small communities here. They may fall through the cracks of the initiatives to develop these 25 metropolitan areas and cities. Of course, we will try to come up with additional measures for these smaller communities and for the Arctic zone in general. It goes without saying that this is very important since most of them have a rather small population.

It could be that there was an idea that providing them with broadband internet and so forth would suffice. That said, I do agree with you that watching a film in a movie theatre creates a different kind of atmosphere, a special mood, if you will. I will look into this issue. Note taken.

Daria Shuchalina: Especially considering that we now have all these great Russian patriotic films…

Vladimir Putin: Indeed. But this is a separate topic. Many producers are leaving Russia, and we wish them well, nonetheless. But this has served as a development driver, including for the film industry. This is a fact.

History-themed films are very important too, considering the enthusiasm we are witnessing in our society and its unifying potential. We are witnessing a revival of our fairy tales, epic sagas and alike. I enjoy watching these films sometimes together with the small children in our family.

You are right. Note taken. We will try to find a way not to leave your request without a response.

Dmitry Peskov: Let’s take another question from the audience and continue.

Dear friends, with all due respect, by asking two questions in a row, you are depriving some of your colleagues of the opportunity to ask their questions.

Vladimir Putin: Do not mind Mr Peskov, go ahead with your question.

Dmitry Peskov: Let’s proceed this way, then.

Krasnoyarsk.

Dmitry Novikov: Good afternoon.

I am Dmitry Novikov with Yenisei TV channel, Krasnoyarsk.

Mr President, you once referred to Krasnoyarsk as the centre of Russia. The city is now preparing to celebrate its 400th anniversary.

Vladimir Putin: Sorry to interrupt, please do not take offense. I did not call it that way; it is, in fact, the geographical centre of Russia.

Dmitry Novikov: Yes, of course. The city is going to mark its 400th anniversary in 2028, and we would like to take this opportunity to invite you to join us in Krasnoyarsk for the celebration.

My question is this: the headquarters of RusHydro is currently relocating to Krasnoyarsk, following your initiative. Wouldn’t it be logical to extend this approach to other companies, not only state-owned but also private businesses? For the region, this would mean additional tax revenues and new opportunities for development. Are you considering this possibility?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Yes.

Firstly, I believe this is a very appropriate approach. Relocating certain entities, including federal bodies, to various regions of the country can stimulate development.

For example, we are working to consolidate the judicial branch in St Petersburg. This approach is common in some countries and serves to separate the judiciary from the Presidential Executive Office and the Government, making it more independent geographically. In this case, it also enhances St Petersburg’s role as a functional capital city.

Other regional centres, such as Krasnoyarsk, certainly benefit from having a stronger tax base tied to local production. Ensuring that taxes are paid at the site of economic activity provides a boost to regional development.

We are committed to advancing this initiative, though the process is complex.

Regarding RusHydro, when Viktor Maryin was being considered for the leadership role, I asked him directly if he was prepared to relocate to Krasnoyarsk. His response was, “Yes.” I followed up with, “What about your wife?” to which he replied, “She will agree.”

This process takes time, as you can understand. The necessary personnel need to be in place. Relocating people from Moscow is challenging, not because they are lazy or unwilling to move to Siberia, but due to other considerations like children, schools, kindergartens, universities and other family matters. It is indeed a difficult process. Personnel need to be trained on site. However, efforts are underway, and RusHydro is in the process of relocating.

We will also work hard so that major corporations and, I repeat, certain other government bodies move to other regions of Russia. This is a vast country – the world’s biggest, in fact. Of course, we must ensure that major manufacturing hubs, corporations and government institutions are spread out across its territory. However, there are also certain limits here, since the President and the Government must be close to one another as they must work closely together.

Nevertheless, we must pursue this path, and this is what we will try to do.

Thank you very much for the invitation.

Alexandra Suvorova: There were business leaders who went as far as to suggest moving the capital to Krasnoyarsk. This is something they have discussed.

Vladimir Putin: There was Krasnoyarsk, and Irkutsk too. In fact, remember Peter the Great? What did he want to do? He wanted a capital in the south, and was choosing between St Petersburg and Taganrog, a southern city. He wanted to move the capital to Taganrog. At the outset, he wanted to have the capital of the Empire in Taganrog.

Dmitry Peskov: Mr President, excuse me, but I spotted Andrei Rudenko, our war correspondent from Donetsk. I feel that I must give him the floor.

Vladimir Putin: Go ahead, Andrei.

Andrei Rudenko: Mr President, I have been working as a war correspondent in Donbass since 2014. Today, I am heading Donetsk State Television and Radio Broadcasting Company.

Here is my question, and it is quite a serious one. There is a massive reconstruction effort underway across Donbass, as well as in the Kherson and Zaporozhye regions. However, the war continues in our region. Our troops are gaining ground, while the enemy keeps destroying cities and villages. Do we have the strength and the resources we need for rebuilding and restoring our historical territories after recovering them?

Vladimir Putin: We do. Make no mistake about that. We have a large-scale programme for rebuilding and developing these territories until 2030. We have already embarked on this effort, and it will carry on across several domains, which include rebuilding roads, housing, putting utilities back into operation, as well as social and cultural infrastructure.

Speaking of roads, our plan consists of bringing the entire road network in these regions in compliance with Russia’s national standards within three years. You come from this region, and you know that this effort is already underway. There is a very useful and feasible initiative to build a ring road circling the Sea of Azov, which is now part of Russia’s internal waters. It will be just as good as the Tavrida motorway in Crimea, with four lanes and all the amenities a highway of this kind must offer.

Part of this road has already been built, even if it is just the beginning. It is quite short, just 40 kilometres, and runs from Taganrog to Mariupol. However, our plan consists of extending it to create a full circle around the Sea of Azov. There is also another road linking Mariupol to Donetsk. It is almost 100 kilometres long, or 97, to be more precise, if I am not mistaken. We will restore the road network in its entirety.

As I have said, the funds have been earmarked. Some social facilities have been finished and put into operation, like a world-class perinatal centre in Donetsk and a medical centre in Mariupol. A large children’s hospital is to be built in the south of the Zaporozhye Region. Local residents have submitted that request, and the governor insisted that they need it. I believe that this project is at the design stage. We will certainly build it.

Overall, we have big plans in these spheres until 2030. We have rebuilt 21,000 facilities, 11,000 of which have been financed from the federal budget and 10,000 from the budgets of regions across the Russian Federation that are overseeing these projects.

I would like to use this occasion, and looking directly into the camera, to express gratitude to the heads and people of these regions for their selfless and tremendous assistance. It is a national mission. I mentioned the projects that have been completed, but we need to restore and rebuild another 20,000 facilities within five or six years, and we will do so.

Andrei Rudenko: Mr President, I would like to say the following about the Lugansk People’s Republic, which never had good roads under the Ukrainian government. Today, the roads are ideal throughout the Lugansk People’s Republic. Our people are extremely grateful for this.

Vladimir Putin: This is the basic thing, which we can and must do. We will do more.

As for individual regions, I would like to address people in these regions and throughout Russia, so that everyone in the country knows that these regions have good development potential and large tax potential. I believe that tax collection in the Lugansk People’s Republic has increased by 97 percent. The relevant figure for Donbass as a whole is 69 percent. The tax collection in the Zaporozhye and Kherson regions has increased several-fold. The figures themselves are smaller there because their tax base is smaller, but the collection of taxes has increased manyfold, by more than 200 percent. In other words, their tax base is good, their revival is rapid, and these regions are approaching the level of self-sufficiency.

It is true that we need to support people, providing assistance and giving a helping hand at the right time. Our country is doing so and will continue doing so until these regions’ complete incorporation into Russia not only in legal terms but also in terms of social and economic development.

Alexandra Suvorova: Mr Putin, I have a follow-up question. Did you mean tax collection when you spoke about taxes in these regions?

Vladimir Putin: Yes, I meant the collection of taxes.

As I have said, I could be wrong but the collection of taxes has increased by about 79 percent in Donetsk, over 90 percent in Lugansk, and over 200 percent in Kherson and Zaporozhye regions. The absolute figures are smaller in the latter two regions because the tax base is smaller there, but it is an upward trend, and it is stable.

Alexandra Suvorova: Incidentally, we are receiving a lot of different questions from the new regions, particularly concerning the calculation of pensions.

The point is that often, the length of work in Ukraine is not being taken into account. People simply don’t have the supporting documents.

Let us now turn our attention to a video message from pensioner Leonid Shipilov.

Vladimir Putin: Please.

Leonid Shipilov: My name is Leonid Shipilov, I am a pensioner from Krasny Liman. I have an employment record spanning 45 years. Currently, I live in Donetsk with my daughter, due to the ongoing hostilities in Krasny Liman.

In May 2022, my home was destroyed in a shelling, resulting in the loss of my employment record book. Consequently, I am unable to secure a fair recalculation of my pension. The only document that could verify my employment history is the OK-5 certificate.

In July of this year, I submitted this certificate to the Pension Fund in the Kalininsky District of Donetsk, yet I still have not received a response.

I appeal to you for assistance in clarifying this matter.

Vladimir Putin: Mr Shipilov, these may appear to be everyday issues, yet they have great importance to people. I fully understand this, as it is essential to validate one's employment history. Previously, it was challenging to do so, but a recent legislative change has been enacted, recognising all prior employment records, even from years or decades past. I believe the pertinent federal law was enacted in November. Therefore, there are now regulatory and legal frameworks in place to address your concern.

All such matters, even in the absence of documents, can be resolved through witness testimonies and the decisions of interdepartmental regional commissions. I urge the republic's authorities to streamline their work in a way that ensures that these issues are resolved without unnecessary red tape.

I recently spoke with Denis Pushilin, the head of the Donetsk People's Republic. He mentioned hosting a delegation from Africa. We are delighted to welcome our friends and guests, and he himself is planning a visit to Africa, which is commendable and necessary for maintaining relations. However, I would like to remind him of Mr Shipilov, who also requires attention. I trust that the interdepartmental regional commissions will be duly organised. I reiterate, especially since a legal foundation for this is now in place: the relevant federal law has been adopted.

Alexandra Suvorova: Indeed, there are numerous queries regarding the loss of documents. This issue extends beyond pensions to include education and property titles. I would like to share a few more messages.

Vladimir Putin: As I have mentioned before, these matters are resolved through the decisions of interdepartmental commissions and based on what is termed witness testimony. We are not talking about legal proceedings, but rather obtaining reliable information from neighbours, former colleagues, and so forth.

Alexandra Suvorova: Housing is another major issue in this region.

We have numerous appeals and calls that came from Mariupol from people who expected to receive housing as compensation, but so far, that has proved problematic. I will quote a few of them.

“Mariupol needs help in building the compensatory housing,” this text message says. “The new buildings were completed last spring, but they have not been open for occupancy yet,” Alexei Tsygankov writes – this is one of the appeals.

In fact, there are many of them – these are just a few that we have selected.

Vladimir Putin: We are paying a lot of attention to Mariupol, which it certainly deserves, as it is a large city. Before the outbreak of hostilities, it was home to about 430,000 people. Local authorities are telling me there were even more people than that, closer to 470,000. More than 3,000 apartment buildings [may be needed] there. I have visited Mariupol; I know this, and my colleagues from the Government report to me regularly. About 1,700 multifamily houses have been rebuilt, but not all of them have been commissioned yet. Paperwork needs to be completed on more than 500 projects, but the buildings are already there.

What is the situation there? Residential buildings are being repaired or rebuilt. Where a building cannot be repaired, local authorities make the decision to demolish it and allocate the land for commercial development. Once developers build new housing there, buyers can purchase apartments with a mortgage at 2 percent.

Home loans with 2-percent interest continue to be available in Russia’s new regions. In fact, that has triggered quite a construction boom there. According to our estimates, at least 300,000 people have returned to Mariupol, and its population continues to grow rapidly.

We are also working to improve local roads, schools, social and cultural facilities, and healthcare – a large medical centre has recently opened there – and educational institutions. We will certainly continue this work. As for housing, again, many projects have been allocated to commercial developers. However, the local residents are entitled to new housing as near as possible to the place where they used to live. Better still, if their building has been repaired, they should be given apartments there. If a development company is building a new multifamily house in its place, they need to ensure that former residents receive new housing in the area, not on the outskirts or even outside the city boundary. There are 5,000 ownerless apartments in the city. Local authorities need to stop holding them, but to distribute them among people – legally, of course. It is important to bear in mind that people are still returning, so we need to give some thought to the procedure. But these issues must be addressed.

One thing I can say for sure: everyone who has the right to compensation will receive a compensation. If not, please contact the relevant authorities at the local or federal levels. I believe there are decision-making centres at both levels; they have been created. If my memory serves me correctly, the relevant agencies are located on Marata Street. Marat Khusnullin has reported this to me.

Alexandra Suvorova: It is easy to remember.

Vladimir Putin: It is easy to remember. If I am mot mistaken, I think they are there.

Dmitry Kulko: Mr President, speaking of the southern regions, I would like to highlight the environmental impact caused by the sinking of two tankers during a storm in the Kerch Strait.

The petroleum products were washed ashore, onto a beach near Anapa. Currently, the pollution is spreading in the direction of Gelendzhik.

The situation is worsening. Currently, the Emergencies Ministry staff, volunteers, and local residents are involved in the cleanup effort. They are making videos, posting footage on social media, and have sent a few to our programme. Let us take a look.

Vladimir Putin: Please.

(A video clip rolls.)

Dmitry Kulko: Mr President, these harrowing images come from a beach resort. I am aware of the fact that you ordered to clean things up as soon as possible. Is there any way to speed up this process and minimise the impact?

Vladimir Putin: First, this is, of course, an environmental disaster. This is absolutely clear. Law enforcement agencies are in the process of assessing the ship captains’ actions. I was informed that, in their opinion, the captains violated certain rules and failed to seek shelter in time. Other ships found safe spots before the storm and are doing just fine, but these did not and dropped anchors in the wrong places. Let the relevant services within the Ministry of Transport and law enforcement agencies deal with it. That is my first point.

I am not sure what is happening right now, but the 4- to 5-point storm raged on yesterday, posing a challenge to relief efforts. I think, by Saturday, the sea will calm down, and cleanup operations can proceed more effectively.

Second, the reason I call this a major disaster is because almost 40 percent of the fuel spilled, which is an established fact. Some tankers have submerged, some have sunk, and others remain partially submerged near the shore. We need to address this.

Various services are at work, including the Ministry of Natural Resources, the Ministry of Transport, and the Emergencies Ministry. This work must be coordinated. I asked the Prime Minister to set up a working group headed by Deputy Prime Minister in charge of transport Vitaly Savelyev. All services are at work, and I receive regular updates on the developments.

We need to study the tankers’ condition. We also need to think about the steps we need to take in the near future. This issue must be addressed in stages.

Stage one: Right now, we must contain the spill with containment booms to prevent the spill from spreading further.

Stage two: The fuel that has washed ashore must be removed. Governor (of the Krasnodar Territory) Veniamin Kondratiev reported to me yesterday or the day before yesterday saying that he had about 4,000 people working in the area. According to him, no additional measures are needed at the moment. However, we will, of course, deploy more Emergencies Ministry teams, if needed.

This is the task at hand. We are dealing with fuel oil, which displays specific properties at certain temperatures. It is a solid material that washes ashore and must be removed. However, a portion of this fuel oil has already settled on the seabed, and by May, when the water temperature rises, it could resurface and wash ashore again. We must get ready for that now. One way or the other, we need to remove the semi-submerged tankers from the water. These tankers need to be secured now to prevent further leakage. We will need to use containment tools, known as “towels,” and later draft a project which is a major undertaking, and to pull the tankers with fuel on the shore.

This is a major effort. The Government is working on it, and I very much hope that no time will be wasted in addressing it.

Mr President, if you don’t mind, I see American journalists over there.

Vladimir Putin: Go ahead.

Dmitry Peskov: I can see NBC News. Please.

Keir Simmons: Mr President, Keir Simmons, NBC News.

Two questions in English, if you don’t mind. Sorry, Mr Peskov.

The first one is about President-elect Trump.

Mr President, you have failed to reach the objectives of your special military operation. Large numbers of Russians have died, including a general assassinated here in Moscow this week. And the leader of Syria, who you supported, has been overthrown.

Mr President, when you face President-elect Trump, you will be the weaker leader. How do you propose to compromise? What are you going to offer?

And my second question, Mr President, is this: the mother of an American journalist who is missing in Syria, Austin Tice, has written to you and asked for your help to try to find him because, she says, you have such connections with the Syrian Government and former President Assad.

Are you prepared to ask President Assad for information about what happened in Syria to try to find the missing, including this American journalist?

Vladimir Putin: Could you repeat the part of your question about the journalist? Where did the journalist disappear? When and what happened to him there?

Keir Simmons: I have a letter here sent to you this week by the mother of an American journalist who is missing in Syria. He has been missing for 12 years. He is called Austin Tice. In this letter, she is asking for your help to try to find him because she says you have such close connections to the former Syrian Government, to President Assad.

Will you ask President Assad for information about the missing in Syria and about Austin Tice, this woman’s son? She says she is prepared to come to Moscow if it will help to find out anything she can about her son.

Vladimir Putin: I see. Please sit down.

Frankly, I have not met with President Bashar al-Assad after his arrival in Moscow. But I plan to do it and will certainly talk to him.

We are adults and understand that the person disappeared in Syria 12 years ago. Twelve years. We realise what was happening in Syria 12 years ago. The country was caught in active military action, on both sides. Does President al-Assad know what happened to this American citizen, the journalist who, as far as I understand, was working in the zone of hostilities? Nevertheless, I promise that I will definitely ask him this question just like we can forward this question to the people who are controlling the situation on the ground in Syria today.

You asked what we can offer or what I can offer to newly elected President Trump when we meet.

First of all, I don’t know when we will meet because he has not said anything about it. I have not talked to him for more than four years. Of course, I’m ready to talk any time; I will be ready to meet with him if he wishes. You said that this conversation will take place with me in some kind of weakened state.

Esteemed Mr Simmons. Why did I say “esteemed”? Because, despite all the persecution of Russian media, we allow you to continue working in Russia and you can do so freely. It is good enough. You and the people who pay your salary in the United States really want to see Russia in a weakened state.

My opinion differs. I believe that Russia has become significantly stronger in the past two or three years. Why? Because we are becoming a truly sovereign country, and we barely depend on anybody. We are capable of firmly standing on our feet when it comes to the economy. I have already talked about economic growth rates.

We are strengthening our defence capability. The combat readiness of the Russian Armed Forces is the highest in the world today. I assure you it is the highest.

The same is true of our defence industry. We are increasing the production of everything our army and navy need now and will need in the future. We are doing so confidently and quickly, unlike our opponents.

I have already spoken about the successes of our armed forces, which are due in large measure to production growth in the defence industry of the Russian Federation. As I have said, we are doing this confidently and quite rationally.

It has been said that our forces are advancing along the front line. One explanation for this is the existence of the equipment I have mentioned. Yes, in fact all NATO countries are fighting against us.

We spoke about our inflation. And what is the situation over there? Take a 155 mm shell, which cost 2,000 euros two years ago and now costs four times more, 8,000 euros. If this trend persists, two percent of GDP spending on defence in NATO countries, which President-elect Donald Trump always insisted on, will not suffice. Even three percent will not be enough. The training and combat standards and the morale of the Russian armed forces are higher than those of any other army in the world.

That is why I believe that Russia has largely achieved the state we wanted to achieve. It has grown stronger and become a truly sovereign state, and we will make decisions without looking at other people’s opinions, only with our national interests in mind.

You have mentioned Syria. You and, as I said, those who pay your salary would like to present the current developments in Syria as Russia’s defeat. I assure you that this is not the case, and here is why. We came to Syria ten years ago to prevent the creation of a terrorist enclave there, like the one that we saw in some other countries, for example, Afghanistan. We have achieved that goal, by and large.

Even the groups that were fighting against the Assad regime and the government forces back then have undergone internal changes. It is not surprising that many European countries and the United States are trying to develop relations with them now. Would they be doing this if they were terrorist organisations? This means that they have changed, doesn’t it? So, our goal has been achieved, to a certain degree.

Next, we did not deploy any ground forces in Syria; they simply were not present there. Our presence consisted solely of two bases: an air base and a naval base. The ground operations were conducted by the Syrian armed forces and, as is widely known, there is no secret here, certain pro-Iranian combat units. At one point, we even withdrew our special operations forces from the area. We were not engaged in combat there.

So, what transpired? When armed opposition groups advanced towards Aleppo, the city was defended by approximately 30,000 personnel. However, when 350 militants entered the city, the government forces, along with the pro-Iranian units, withdrew without resistance, demolishing their positions as they left. This pattern was observed across nearly the entire Syrian territory, with only minor exceptions where skirmishes occurred. In the past, our Iranian friends requested assistance to move their units into Syria; now they have asked us to help withdraw them. We facilitated the relocation of 4,000 Iranian fighters to Tehran from the Khmeimim air base. Some pro-Iranian units withdrew to Lebanon, others to Iraq, without engaging in combat.

The current situation in the Syrian Arab Republic remains challenging. We sincerely hope for peace and stability to be restored. We maintain dialogue with all groups controlling the situation there and with all regional countries. An overwhelming majority of them have expressed interest in retaining our military bases in Syria.

I do not know, we must reflect on how our relations will evolve with the political forces currently in control and those that will govern this country in the future – our interests must align. Should we remain, we must act in the interests of the host nation.

What will those interests entail? What can we do for them? These questions demand careful consideration on both sides. We are already capable of offering assistance, including utilising our bases – we have extended this proposal to our partners within Syria and neighbouring nations. For instance, we suggested employing the Khmeimim air base for the delivery of humanitarian aid to Syria, and this was met with understanding and a willingness to collaborate. The same applies to the Tartus naval base.

Therefore, for those who wish to depict Russia as weakened… since you are an American, I would like to remind you of a well-known writer who once remarked: “The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated.”

Should there be an opportunity for a meeting with the newly elected President, Donald Trump, I am confident there will be plenty to discuss.

Dmitry Kulko: Mr President, I would like to remind you of another question that my colleague asked about the murder of General Kirillov.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, about the murder of General Kirillov.

You have mentioned this was an “attempted assassination.” I thank you for this, because you have indirectly acknowledged that it was a terrorist attack. Why? Because the modus operandi used by the perpetrator for this murder endangered the lives of many.

The regime in Kiev has repeatedly committed similar crimes, acts of terror, and terrorist attacks against many citizens of the Russian Federation, let alone what they are doing in Kursk now, firing at civilians – I mean in the Kursk Region – and in other regions of Russia. They have killed journalists, your colleagues – committed terrorist attacks against journalists.

However, we have never heard – I am not referring to you personally – anyone from the Western journalistic corps openly condemn such attacks. But I am grateful to you for remembering this at least.

Dmitry Peskov: Let’s engage with the audience some more.

Alexandra Suvorova: Go ahead.

Dmitry Peskov: They are showing great interest.

I see a ‘Tatars. BRICS’ poster. We were in Kazan just recently.

Vladimir Putin: I am sorry, I would like to address your American colleague. Can you hear me? If you have any more questions, please ask.

Dmitry Peskov: Let’s go back to Kazan now.

Vladimir Putin: All right.

Do you need some time to think? You can gather your thoughts while we talk to the Tatars. After that, we will talk with the Americans.

Dmitry Peskov: Go ahead, please.

Keir Simmons: My question is, are you prepared to compromise in anyway over Ukraine? You say that Kiev should compromise, the Ukrainians should compromise, but what are you prepared to offer in the potential negotiations potentially led by President-elect Trump?

Vladimir Putin: I apologise for missing this part of your question, which is very important.

Politics is the art of compromise. We have always said that we are ready for both negotiations and compromises. The problem is that the opposing side, both literally and figuratively, rejected negotiations. We, on the contrary, have always been willing to talk, and talking always leads to finding a compromise.

We did reach an agreement in Istanbul in late 2022. I repeat for the umpteenth time: the Ukrainian side initialled that document, which meant that generally, it agreed with what it contained. Suddenly they wanted out. It is clear why. Because your ally, Mr Johnson, the man with an iconic hairstyle, told them they were to fight to the last Ukrainian. This is what they are doing. They will soon run out of Ukrainians who want to fight. I believe there will soon be no one left who wants to fight.

So, we are ready, but we need that country to be ready for both negotiations and compromise.

Dmitry Peskov: Thank you.

Kazan, please.

Vladimir Putin: We have talked with the Americans, now we will talk with the Tatars.

Artur Khalilullov: Good afternoon, Mr President.

Thank you for the opportunity to ask my question. I am Artur Khalilullov from Tatar Inform.

BRICS has obviously been taken to a fundamentally new level after the Kazan summit. In fact, I cannot even remember that dozens of world leaders, including Xi Jinping and Narendra Modi, gathered in Moscow.

Have your expectations regarding opposition to the Western world order materialised? That was my first question.

I also have a follow-up question. Last year, you told me personally in response to my question that Tatarstan is an example of peaceful coexistence of different cultures, nations and religions. The same can be said about BRICS, because BRICS is a group of widely different countries. This brings me to my question. Do you think that Kazan could become the seat of the BRICS headquarters? Of BRICS as a whole or its Russian part?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Artur, you have said that so many world leaders have never met in Moscow. This is correct, they did not, but they have met in Kazan. So, we are grateful to Kazan for giving us this opportunity. This is the first point.

Second, we are not planning to establish a headquarters now. There are several instruments that have been created and are working in the interests of our group. But we will certainly make use of the possibilities offered by the capital of Tatarstan, which have been created there over the past decades.

Kazan has made an astonishing leap in its development. I believe, and it is not an exaggeration, that Kazan is one of the best cities in Europe. I am pleased to say so. We are proud of Moscow, which is one of the largest and best mega-cities in the world, but Kazan is developing very rapidly and actively.

I remember visiting it with Mintimer Shaimiyev. I have told before that we entered a mud hut on the outskirts of Kazan, a real mud hut where people lived. It was a deep hole with a roof above it. However, as is typical of the Tatar culture, it was very clean, and there was tasty chak-chak fried dough dessert on the table.

You will not see anything like this in Kazan now. The city is developing. It is beautiful, and it even has a metro system. I talked with Mr Shaimiyev back then that this needed to be done, and it has been done. Your new leader, Rustam Minnikhanov, has taken over the baton and is working very effectively.

Overall, people in Kazan and Tatarstan as a whole are talented. They come from different ethnic groups, but they live in peace and accord with each other, respect each other and their traditions, and I know that they attend each other’s religious feasts. You are doing this very well. I congratulate you on this.

There is another aspect that I would like to highlight.

You said that BRICS has evolved into a tool for countering the West. This is not true; you are mistaken. BRICS is not a tool for countering the West. Our work is not aimed against anyone. We focus on our own interests and the interests of the group’s member countries. Giving BRICS any kind of a confrontational agenda is not what we are after.

This group has grown within a very short period of time and expanded its ranks. As you know, and we have mentioned this many times, so I will not repeat it to save time, many countries have expressed interest in developing the BRICS format.

Why? Because ensuring reciprocity, mutual respect and respecting each other’s interests have been our core guiding principles in this effort. We adopt all decisions by consensus, which is a very important point. There are no small or big countries within BRICS, no countries that are more or less developed: this is a group based on common interests. And there is one common interest: development. We try to identify available tools and create new ones for generating more economic growth and transforming the structure of the economy in order for it to be in step with the global development agenda, ensuring that BRICS countries and the group as a whole are at the forefront of this progressive movement. This is the way we will be operating.

Thank you very much.

Dmitry Peskov: I suggest that we take another question from the audience.

I see an unconventional media outlet. It is quite new and rather popular too. Readovka, please go ahead with your question.

Vladimir Putin: What was the title again?

Maxim Dolgov: Good afternoon, Mr President.

Maxim Dolgov, Readovka.

Here is my question. Many countries have been facing the issue of ageing and population decline these days, and Russia is no exception. It is interesting that there have been all these measures to increase the birthrate, and you have recently signed a law establishing the Council for Demographic and Family Policy. But if these laws fall short of their promise, what will we do?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: We will improve them.

Take your seat, please.

This is an extremely important matter. In fact, this is one of the key issues for Russia, and not only for our country. You were right to say that demography has become a matter of grave concern not only for Russia, but also for many countries around the world.

The Soviet Union was able to achieve replacement-level fertility of two points. What does the fertility rate mean? It stands for the number of children per woman. There was a time in the history of the Soviet Union when the fertility rate was equal to two. And there was a time in Russia’s recent past when we reached a rate of 1.7. Unfortunately, it fell to 1.41. Is this a lot or a little? Of course, it is very little. However, there are other countries facing a similar situation and located in a similar region. This includes Finland, where the birthrate is even lower, and I think Norway is at the same level. The fertility rate in Spain is lower, and this is also true for many other countries. In some developed countries, for example, in Japan, it is even lower than that, and South Korea has a fertility rate as low as 0.7. This is terrible. We have a slightly better situation in Russia, but just to reach the replacement fertility rate we must have 2.1 children per woman, and we need at least 2.3 for our population to grow.

I have said many times before what happened during the previous decades. There was a sharp decline in birth rate during the Great Patriotic War, especially in 1943–1944, and then, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the birth rate sank again similarly.

What happened next? I will take a couple of minutes to explain. When a low-numbered generation reaches the reproductive age, it reproduces in similarly low numbers. These two birth rate decline trends – the trend of the Great Patriotic War and the trend after the collapse of the Soviet Union – later converged, continuing in similar fluctuations to this day. The number of women of reproductive age has gone down 30 percent. We need more girls, young women.

What are we doing to improve the situation? An entire programme was developed. We address this matter continuously, improving the available instruments. Once again, it works differently in different periods of time.

First, there is a benefit for families with children that is quite effective. We pay this benefit from the moment a woman becomes pregnant and until the child reaches 18. This benefit is now available to over 10 million children and around 320,000 pregnant women.

Second, we invented a unique tool that no other country offers – maternity capital that we continue to replenish.

Next, family mortgage rates with 6 percent interest are still available. I suppose we will talk more about mortgages and construction later. In essence, family mortgage is still available.

We pay 450,000 rubles to families who have a third child, specifically to pay their mortgages.

We are developing the system that encompasses healthcare, childhood and maternity, and we will continue to do everything and improve these instruments further. These matters are very important.

I want to take this opportunity and address the heads of all Russian regions: this is what your working day should begin with and end with because it is a challenge for many countries, Russia included. The population is what makes a country. One territory is good, but it must be populated by the citizens of this country.

Perhaps we are doing a lot, but it is perfectly clear that these measures are not enough. We will be able to say that yes, we are doing something useful when we can overturn this trend and achieve the indicators I mentioned earlier.

Alexandra Suvorova: In fact, we have received many messages on this subject, including from large families. We have a whole selection of those.

The problem is as follows. You have mentioned the uniform allowance, but when the average per capita income in a family exceeds the regional subsistence minimum, the family does not qualify for the benefit. However, in many cases, this is due to a long streak of inaccuracies, or that income is literally just a few kopecks or rubles above the required level, but they fail to qualify anyway.

Now we are about to be joined by Anna Shenkao from Surgut, the mother of five.

Ms Shenkao, good afternoon. Please ask the President your question.

Anna Shenkao: Good afternoon, Mr President.

My name is Anna Shenkao. I was born and live in Surgut, Khanty-Mansi Autonomous Area, and I am a mother of five. One of my children also has a disability.

I have been applying for the relevant benefits every month since July 2023, but all my applications have been turned down because our per capita income exceeds the regional minimum subsistence level. In some cases, it was only 78 rubles above that level, but I was rejected anyway.

This is what I would like to ask. Is a child’s disability pension considered to be family income? Why are they counting the previous year’s income? And there is something else: my husband is officially employed, which implies full compliance with the tax laws. However, when they evaluate the per capita income, they use his gross pay, including tax, which the employer in fact deducts. We do not receive this money, so I would like to ask why it should be considered part of our income.

And, if you do not mind, I have one more question – about holidays.

How can a large family – or not necessarily a large family – afford a holiday in this situation? We really want to go somewhere, but when we analysed airfares a few days ago, most of them hovered around 140,000 −150,000 rubles one way.

I would really like to hear an answer to my question.

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Ms Shenkao, you said that you have five children, didn’t you?

Anna Shenkao: Yes.

Vladimir Putin: I congratulate you on this. This alone makes you a happy person.

Anna Shenkao: Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: I am sure of that. I want our viewers and listeners to join me in celebrating your family, and follow your example, first of all.

Secondly, this is the usual formula for evaluating someone’s income. They take into account everything, and they do use the previous year’s figures. I cited evaluating economic growth as an example – in any case, it is recalculated only the following year. Therefore, they consider the previous year’s income.

Certainly, we can deliberate on this matter. I will ask Ms Tatyana Golikova and the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection to examine the issue. However, that is not the most important point – what truly matters is that the issue you mentioned might arise for other reasons, namely a small excess of income over the threshold at which payments under the flat-rate allowance are still provided. That is purely a procedural approach.

We have given a lot of thought to how we can avert the situation that you and your family are experiencing. In principle, the decision has already been reached – we should recalculate personal income tax and subsequently refund at least seven percent of the tax your family has paid.

We will see how this unfolds. Hopefully, it will offset your loss from not receiving the respective money under the allowance you mentioned. We will see how it all pans out.

The Government’s assumption was that this measure would reimburse you the amount that was underpaid as part of the allowance you receive. That decision was made recently. I reiterate my hope that this issue will be resolved. That is the first point.

Secondly, with regard to holidays and travel, you are right – such a problem does exist. I have already spoken to the relevant executives on this matter.

By the way, our air transportation industry is operating steadily and quite successfully. Last year, they carried, I believe, 105 million passengers, and this year they are set to transport 111 million passengers. What is going on there?

There is a provision – it is stated in the code – that multi-child families, families with children, are entitled to a 50 percent discount, I think, on fares. This applies to the standard fare.

What do the airline companies do? They introduce their own discounts – minor, insignificant, but these are not standard fares. Then they claim, “We have a discounted fare, we already have a non-standard fare, so we will not give a 50 percent discount.”

This practice must be curtailed. I fully agree with you and urge the Government, together with the airlines, to address this problem no later than January 14 next year. We will solve this problem.

As for excess income, the refund of seven percent of the personal income tax, we will also observe how it works.

Anna Shenkao: Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Thank you very much.

Dmitry Peskov: Mr President, I saw there were more questions about demographics.

Vladimir Putin: Go ahead.

Dmitry Peskov: It says here, “Chechnya, important.” It is also about demographics.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, please. Where are you?

Ruzana Veselayeva: Vainakh State Television and Radio Broadcasting Company, Chechen Republic.

Mr President, you often emphasise the importance of demographic growth and have used the Chechen Republic as an example in this regard.

Vladimir Putin: Yes.

Ruzana Veselayeva: Perhaps, it is worth launching a dedicated programme?

Vladimir Putin: I have mentioned the Chechen Republic and Tuva. In Chechnya and Tuva, demographics are good.

Ruzana Veselayeva: But would it not make sense to introduce a separate programme for regions that are most efficient in this area?

If I may, a second question. Last year, you approved the high-speed railway strategy, which includes three stages. One of them – the third stage – covers the Moscow-Adler route.

According to most experts, including Grozny and Makhachkala in the Moscow-Adler Railway would make the project more cost-effective and efficient. What is your opinion on this? Do you see it as a practicable solution?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Thank you for the question.

You mentioned that demographics are in good shape in Chechnya.

Please take a seat.

Yes, demographics are indeed in good shape in Chechnya and Tuva. These are two federal constituent entities where the demographic situation is favourable.

In this regard, are additional measures needed? I would say we should simply say thank you, provide support, and encourage others to follow your example.

For regions where the birth rate is below the fertility rate of 1.41, there is a clear need for a dedicated programme to support them.

This is precisely what we are planning to do for these regions. There are about 35 of such regions, if memory serves. A separate support programme is being developed for these areas, with a funding of 75 billion rubles over the next few years. That is what we are going to do.

Now, regarding the Moscow-Adler-Grozny-Makhachkala railway. We have several questions in this regard. First, we need to ensure traffic along the Black Sea coast, provide proper access to Sochi, and eliminate traffic jams that tend to snarl traffic near Adler, especially during the tourist season. The congestions often leaves people stuck for hours.

This situation arose because, during preparations for the Olympic Games, a bypass road for Sochi was built, which created a bottleneck. It is, in fact, an old road that was slightly renovated, but two traffic flows – the old traffic flow and the Greater Sochi bypass flow – are merging there, creating a single congested access to Adler. This bottleneck needs to be broken up to make sure vehicles are not stuck in traffic. By the way, Chechen construction companies will be involved in this work near Adler, though I am not sure about the details.

With regard to Grozny-Makhachkala, this is also an important consideration which should be addressed in the future. It is a good idea.

Not to hurt anyone’s feelings, let’s take “Chechnya. Magistry” (masters). Did you want to say the same thing or not?

Khamzat Batukayev: Khamzat Batukayev, Grozny Chechen State Television and Radio Company.

My colleague has already asked the question we had for you and you answered it. Thank you very much. However, when you were talking to my colleague from Tatarstan, you shared the way you view Kazan.

By the way, I was also at the BRICS Summit. And this reminded me that you had visited the Chechen Republic not that long ago. So I am asking you: Is Grozny a beautiful city?

Vladimir Putin: It is great. You know, it is a miracle, a present-day miracle for Russia.

You know, I flew over Grozny during the harsh years when we were still fighting terrorists there, primarily international terrorist groups. The city was one big ruin, and you could hear machine gun rounds targeting the helicopter from these ruins.

At the time, there were quite a few people in Chechnya who talked about moving the capital to Gudermes. However, both the first President of the Chechen Republic, and the incumbent President spoke out against these proposals arguing that Grozny had established itself as Chechnya’s historical capital, a capital of the Chechen people, and that it would be rebuilt at whatever cost.

What has been achieved in Grozny over the past two years is a true miracle. Of course, credit for these achievements primarily goes to the current President of the Republic. Even more importantly, this is something the people of Chechnya achieved together. Their hard-working nature and their talent played an instrumental role. I am not even talking about the mosque. What a beauty! And look at all these new buildings and architectural solutions. We cannot fail to feel pride for what has been achieved in Chechnya and in Grozny over the recent years.

I would like to commend and congratulate you on these achievements.

Khamzat Batukayev: Mr President, I remember what you said during your visit to the mosque when you were talking to Chechnya’s mufti. You made an important point when you said that in terms of their spiritual and moral principles, Islam, the Orthodox faith, and all the traditional religions in general, share a common denominator and foundation.

I would like to ask you about the Russian Special Forces University. You have visited this institution. It has recently been given your name, to honour you as the Supreme Commander-in-Chief. What do you think about this training centre? Should it be expanded? Could you share your vision or your assessment? What do you think about it?

Vladimir Putin: It is great. We really need it. The National Guard has been using it all the time. After all, it trains not only people from Chechnya, but from across the country.

When I talk to some fighters who are currently fighting in the combat zone and who do not come from Chechnya, I ask them: “Where are you from?” And they tell me that they got their training at this centre. This centre plays an important role in enhancing our national defence capabilities.

Thank you.

Dmitry Peskov: Let us take a couple of more questions from the audience. I see our Chinese friends from Xinhua, the sector right in front of me.

Huang He: Mr President, good afternoon. My name is Huang He, and I represent the Xinhua News Agency of China. I am delighted to pose a question to you today. I have just two questions.

The first question is this: How do you evaluate the current state of China-Russia relations? Please share with us the main outcomes of cooperation between our two countries.

The second question: Next year, China and Russia will jointly celebrate the 80^th anniversary of Victory in the Second World War and the 80^th anniversary of the founding of the United Nations Organisation. In your view, what role do the interaction and coordination between China and Russia play in upholding global strategic stability and international justice?

Thank you very much.

Vladimir Putin: We often discuss cooperation between Russia and the People’s Republic of China. Next year, we will celebrate 75 years of diplomatic relations between our countries. A great deal has transpired in our relations over these years, but in the past decade, the level and quality of our relations have reached unprecedented heights in our history.

I will address the economic aspect now, but first and foremost, it is about mutual trust. Everything we do in relation to each other and how we do it is based on absolute trust to policies of both sides. We engage in nothing that contradicts our interests, and we do much that benefits both the Chinese people and the peoples of the Russian Federation.

I have already mentioned the economy: according to various estimates, it stands at US$220–230 billion, and according to Chinese statistics, up to $240 billion in dollar terms. The trade turnover is impressive. Over the past year, despite such a solid foundation, growth continues. It is moderate, with an expected three percent increase, but growth is present. That is the first part.

The second part concerns investment. We have nearly 600 joint investment projects amounting to US$200 billion. What does this indicate? It suggests that the future is secure.

Lastly, a very significant component, in my opinion, is the humanitarian aspect. We regularly hold cross years: the Year of Culture, the Year of Youth Exchanges, and so forth. This is crucial for the people of both countries. It forms the basis for developing economic ties and political cooperation.

The most critical aspect is regional cooperation. Regional leaders engage with one another: Maotai and vodka, of course, play a part there. But everything is in moderation, as far as I understand. This personal vibe is important, and there are exchanges between students, between higher education institutions, and so on.

Now, regarding the Great Patriotic War.

The Russian Federation and the People’s Republic of China are the countries that suffered the most and achieved victory in the Second World War at the cost of the heaviest losses. We used to say 20, then 25, and now some historians estimate 27 million dead. The toll is even higher in China. It is not widely discussed, but in China, it exceeds 30 million.

What the Japanese militarists did on Chinese soil was horrific, a dreadful ordeal. The Chinese people endured that trial. We stood together then, and we stand together now, which is the most important factor, I keep emphasising it, for stability in global affairs.

An instrument of stability, originally created for this purpose, is the United Nations Organisation: Russia and China, as founders of the Organisation and permanent members of the Security Council.

We very often, almost always, coordinate our actions on the international stage, and this is a very significant element of international life. We will continue doing so. I extend my very best wishes to the leader of the People’s Republic of China, a man I consider my friend, President Xi Jinping.

Dmitry Peskov: Friends, I kindly remind you to keep your questions brief and to ask one at a time. I see Kuban, please pass the microphone.

Marina Smirnova: Good afternoon. I am Marina Smirnova, representing the Ogni Kubani newspaper, Kavkazsky District, Krasnodar Territory.

My question concerns the current discussions about migration issues and potential solutions. The Krasnodar Territory is large, welcoming, diverse, and strong, but the challenges related to migrants persist. We have tight restrictions, such as patents that give the right to work only in the construction industry. What is your perspective on such restrictions? There is a labour shortage in various regions. How does Russia plan to address this issue? What is your vision for resolving these challenges?

Vladimir Putin: This is a highly sensitive and pressing issue, not just for us, but even more so for Europe. On the one hand, we face a significant shortage of workers. As I have mentioned before, our unemployment rate is just 2.3 percent, which is effectively negligible. Business leaders and government officials consistently report substantial shortfalls, particularly in the construction and industrial sectors, with the demand reaching into the hundreds of thousands. This is an undeniable fact.

What is the solution? First, to reduce reliance on labour migrants, we need to focus on increasing labour productivity. This involves introducing and utilising technologies that minimise the demand for large numbers of unskilled workers. By shifting the emphasis toward high-tech sectors, we can achieve desired outcomes without the need to bring in significant numbers of migrants for unskilled labour. That is the first step.

Second, if the influx of labour migrants is unavoidable, we must collaborate with partner countries, particularly those in Central Asia, to prepare individuals effectively. This includes expanding a network of Russian-language schools, promoting the study of Russian, and familiarising prospective workers with our traditions, culture, and legal requirements. And of course, we need to tighten requirements to migrants that are already in Russia, ensuring that they respect the communities in which they live and work. This responsibility falls on law enforcement agencies. In essence, the solution requires a balanced approach, integrating both economic and law enforcement measures.

There were extensive discussions about whether we should establish a separate agency (which we once had) or keep it within the Interior Ministry.

I believe that today, we need to strengthen this area of work within the Interior Ministry. We should establish a dedicated and robust division or centre either within the Interior Ministry or under its auspices, which should comprise representatives from economic departments to ensure that all decisions are made holistically, in close coordination with other ministries, departments, and regional authorities.

A significant volume of regulation exists and it should primarily be handled at the regional level. However, all of this should be coordinated from a single centre. As the system matures and gains the necessary competencies, there may be a need for a separate agency in the future. This agency should incorporate both a law enforcement and an economic component.

Certain steps in this direction have already been taken, with the State Duma passing a law that grants the right not to accept migrant children who do not speak Russian into schools. This makes sense since it is impossible to teach a child if they do not understand the language. There needs to be separate instruction in Russian for these children, but who will bear the cost of this additional language training?

We need to ensure that, on the one hand, the people who arrive have equal rights, that they have guaranteed access to healthcare and social security, but on the other hand, this should not be an additional burden on the local population in the host region. It is essential that everyone is comfortable.

There are many issues involved. And of course, the Government should pay great attention to this. How could this be developed? I just said that initially, this could be done within the Interior Ministry, and later, perhaps, if the situation requires, we will create a separate agency, which will employ both representatives of law enforcement bodies and economic agencies.

Dmitry Kulko: Mr President, we have been specially monitoring migration issues. This is indeed a very sensitive and complex problem.

A significant part of these questions has come from people who come to our country and not always in search of employment. Many of them are Russian-speakers who wish to return to their homeland, obtain a Russian passport, and become full-fledged citizens of the Russian Federation. We have received such requests from a range of countries, including the CIS and Ukraine – as you said today, there are many Russians there.

We have also received such questions from Germany. For example, we were contacted by Leo Seibel, our compatriot, who left for Germany in 1990 and returned in 2006. He currently resides in Tarusa [Kaluga Region], and says that, although he has a residence permit, he has not been able to obtain Russian citizenship for years, with the authorities always giving him the same answer: you are not entitled, there is no such law. A verbatim quote: only Putin can give you citizenship.

Here is a small detail though. After he told the officials that he had written a letter to Putin, their tone changed, and they gave him a list of documents he needed to bring. The process seemed to have got off the ground, but he would like to bring it to its logical end.

Vladimir Putin: Look, Russian citizenship is indeed granted by Presidential executive orders. But this is a purely formal act that must be prepared locally, by relevant agencies, commissions and committees.

The issue you just raised is part of what we call working with compatriots, meaning individuals who feel that they belong to Russia. They speak Russian, they consider themselves part of our culture, part of the Russian world, and as a rule, they are also highly qualified specialists. We are truly interested in attracting such professionals to Russia; we would like them to work and live here. We actually have a state programme for this. Well, apparently, it is not working as effectively as it should. Clearly, we need to improve these mechanisms.

You mentioned Ukrainians. It is quite possible that there are as many Ukrainians already living in Russia as in Ukraine; maybe even more. I am not kidding – this is quite possible, I mean, if we take into account the people living in our new territories, Crimea as well as those who have moved to Russia, there are millions of people. This suggests we have about the same number of Ukrainians living here as in Ukraine now. Speaking of which, they are welcome in Russia, the door is open to them. These people are part of our culture; they are part of our nation.

As I said, these mechanisms certainly need to be improved. We are interested in qualified workforce, including people who simply – well, not “simply,” as this is not a simple thing at all – who uphold our traditional values. This is difficult to assess. We need to work on this to be able to do this effectively. We will certainly continue doing this.

As for the specific case you mentioned – please send me this person’s details, will you? We will definitely help him.

Dmitry Kulko: Thank you.

Alexandra Suvorova: At the very beginning of the programme we told you that we also used artificial intelligence in our work. GigaChat helped us select most frequent topics in the queries.

Among the top queries, of course, is housing and mortgages. You also said at the beginning of the programme that we are going to revisit this issue more than once. If we look at our monitors now, we will see that this topic is at the top of the list. Actually, the number of queries is also significant.

Let us now bring up a video question from a young family from

Krasnodar.

Question: For three months we’ve been trying to take out a family mortgage. The banks are constantly running out of limits, or they increase the down payment from 20 to 50 percent.

Please, tell us how things will be with the family mortgage in general because at present it is very difficult to get it. Also, in addition to the family mortgage, it is next to impossible to get a rural and IT mortgage. That is, banks are constantly running out of limits, plus they do not want to approve it. They keep changing mortgage plans every day, when you apply.

Banks have recently introduced a so-called “combo-mortgage” plan, when they add their interest, and the mortgage rate goes up from six to 13 percent. In other words, banks simply do not want to issue mortgages for families. What are we to do?

Vladimir Putin: Thank you for this question and for highlighting this problem. This is an outrage, first of all, because there should be no limits, and the Government and I have already discussed this topic. I was promised – and I will check how well this promise is being fulfilled – that there will be no limits.

Because at the end of the day, this is all about subsidies from the state. Banks should enjoy receiving six percent from those who use family mortgage loans, while the difference between the bank rate and this six percent should be reimbursed by the state. And there should be no limits on the part of the state.

This difference ends up in banks, by the way, it is income for them, and not a small one. So if they refuse to approve a family mortgage, it means that the Government does not send this subsidy to the bank in time, probably. I will check, I promise you, I will definitely check. But we have agreed that there will be no limits. This is the first point.

Second, this refers to family mortgages at three percent and to rural mortgages. Family mortgages are issued at six percent, rural mortgages at three percent. This is a very important tool in housing construction. Why? Because of the total volume of housing built – which last year was 110 million square metres, a record high since the Soviet Union, nothing like this had ever happened before – 50 percent were private houses, mostly in rural areas. Moreover, such mortgages are taken out by people under 40 or a little older, they move to rural areas, live there, take out mortgages, and build families. This mortgage plan should not have any limits either. It amounts to a few tens of billions for the budget, which is absolutely uncritical, and it should be preserved.

The same goes for IT mortgages. How much do we have? Six or five percent. In any case, it is a preferential mortgage, and there are not that many people who take it out. We discussed it just recently, and someone suggested that it should be terminated but there is little sense in doing it so as to save budget funds.

Family mortgages are definitely staying, and rural mortgages are definitely staying. I ask the Government to provide the necessary subsidies. We will put things in order here.

Alexandra Suvorova: This also refers to Far Eastern regions and new regions.

Vladimir Putin: Far Eastern mortgages at two percent are staying, so do the Arctic mortgages – two percent, and the new regions – two percent.

Dmitry Kulko: Mr President, I suggest we now address an issue that, unfortunately, remains pressing year after year – the problem of phone scammers.

We warn people daily about this on television.

Vladimir Putin: By the way, sorry to interrupt, 110 million square metres of housing were built last year. This year, it will be slightly less – around 105 million – but that is still a very good figure.

Dmitry Kulko: Phone scammers. The severity of this problem can be understood from just one number: 250 billion rubles –that is how much scammers stole from Russians this year, according to Sberbank estimates.

These miscreants call and say all sorts of things: they claim to represent the Central Bank or the Federal Security Service (FSB), warn that deposits in all banks will be frozen, and demand that people transfer money to other accounts, or even take out loans. Yelena Markelova from Kazan found herself in such a situation. Let us watch her video appeal now.

Yelena Markelova: Good afternoon, Mr President.

My name is Yelena Markelova. I am a pensioner from Kazan, 63 years old.

Recently, I fell for a scam. My account on Gosuslugi (public services) portal was hacked, and as a result of their actions, I now owe two banks 1.9 million rubles.

My appeal is a cry for help. How is it possible that the banks, where I am a client and receive a pension of 18,770 rubles, approve such loans without requesting any income documents, without asking for any of my contacts who could act as a guarantor for me, and for such large amounts with monthly payments that exceed my monthly income?

Given the large number of pensioners being targeted by scammers, is it not time to take more serious measures and require banks to more thoroughly monitor the actions of their employees and rigorously verify applications, especially from elderly people?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, you are right. What is your name?

Dmitry Kulko: Yelena Markelova.

Vladimir Putin: Ms Markelova, you are absolutely right.

There is not much I can add to what you said. Indeed, banks have become adept at issuing loans quickly – practically instantly – but they must assess the borrower’s solvency. There is even a specific rule stating that if more than 50 percent of a citizen’s income goes toward servicing a loan, issuing such a loan becomes more costly for the bank, and the burden on the bank’s capital increases. This rule comes from the Central Bank. However, what is happening now is deeply concerning, because the scale of this fraud is off the charts.

At a recent Sberbank event, German Gref briefed me on this issue. He explained that across the entire banking system, scammers from the territory of Ukraine alone, where fraudulent activity has essentially been elevated to the level of state policy, where entire centres operating under the control of special services are dedicated to swindling money from Russian citizens, have stolen over 250 billion rubles from our citizens’ accounts.

Of course, these practices have reached a substantial scale. In fact, Nazi Germany acted in a similar fashion by printing banknotes of our World War II allies, including the UK. They printed pound sterling notes and placed them into circulation in order to undermine the British economy.

We are witnessing a similar trend in present-day Ukraine as far as these fraudulent practices are concerned. Of course, we need to make sure that there is discipline in this sector, so this is something that deserves our serious attention.

For example, let them grant loans under 50,000 rubles, and let them do this online and instantly. As for the loans between 50,000 and 200,000 rubles, people definitely need at least several hours to carry out additional checks and take a final decision. As for the loans exceeding 200,000 rubles, this process must definitely take at least several days.

I know that both the State Duma and the Central Bank have been discussing these matters and are committed to further improving the decisions dealing with the capital burden with respect to the banks granting unsecured loans of this kind. I hope that these efforts will enable us to achieve the desired outcomes.

There is another problem, as reported by both the Central Bank Governor and the Interior Ministry. Credit cards are opened for people who are not taking part in this fraud, or so it seems. The scammers get money out of their victims by first transferring it to the so-called intermediary cards, and then take hold of the money from these cards.

Meanwhile, those who open these credit cards pretend that they are not involved in any way. There is a proposal to strengthen controls in this regard and to tighten liability for these people, since they are accomplices in these crimes and are taking part in these scams. They may not be doing anything from a formal point of view, but they know why someone is opening a credit card in their name.

The proposal consists of making this a criminal offence. I am not saying that this decision is approved, but we will definitely have to move in this direction.

Alexandra Suvorova: Do you know anyone who has suffered from phone scams?

Vladimir Putin: I do not know anyone in my entourage who suffered from these practices, but there are certainly those who told me that they got calls from scammers.

Alexandra Suvorova: It seems that these phone calls will keep coming.

Vladimir Putin: Maybe so, but as soon as they hear an unfamiliar voice making any kind of proposals to them dealing with doing anything along these lines, they hang up immediately.

And this would be my advice for all people of Russia.

Dmitry Kulko: Quite often, these unfamiliar voices come from call centres in Ukraine. There were reports that the number of phone calls from scammers declines whenever the Ukrainian energy system suffers a strike. It seems that these call centres simply lose their power supply.

Vladimir Putin: They do not have enough electric power capacity.

Dmitry Kulko: What about adding these call centres to the list of our priority targets?

Vladimir Putin: No. The priority targets include military sites and defence industry manufacturing facilities. The list can also include decision-making centres. As for these call centres, we will not waste our munitions on them. There is no reason for doing so. We must take the necessary measures here in Russia and to work through the relevant institutions, including the Central Bank and the federal Government, as well as the Interior Ministry’s departments.

Alexandra Suvorova: Dmitry, Mr Peskov seems to be casting rather unfriendly glances our way.

Dmitry Peskov: Let’s shift our focus back to the audience for a moment.

Ukraine has been mentioned. I see the sign “Other Ukraine.”

Galina Merkulova: Mr President,

My name is Galina Merkulova, I am a deputy head of media resources for Other Ukraine, an international public movement that represents the interests of millions of Ukrainian citizens both within Ukraine, regrettably still under the control of the Kiev regime, and in Russia, Europe, and across the globe, where we have 55 offices in operation.

The Other Ukraine public movement believes that the sole means of rescuing Ukrainians from Zelensky’s criminal illegitimate regime, which has usurped the executive, legislative, and judicial powers, is through the reunification of the Ukrainian and Russian peoples.

Now, here is our question: under what conditions are you prepared to commence negotiations with Kiev? If not with Zelensky, then with whom?

Additionally, one more crucial aspect: in Ukraine, the Russian Orthodox Church is not merely under attack; it is virtually expelled. What is your stance on this matter, and do you believe that the position of the Russian Orthodox Church has been undermined?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Indeed. Firstly, regarding the illegitimacy of the regime, I have previously addressed this issue. I understand that the leader, the mastermind behind this movement, this organisation… Is it the Other Ukraine organisation?

Galina Merkulova: It’s a movement.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, it is, apparently, Viktor Medvedchuk, isn’t it?

We rarely see each other, but I am aware that he shares this view. So, what constitutes the illegitimacy of the regime? Allow me to reiterate: there is no provision in the Constitution of Ukraine to extend the powers of the President, even under martial law. There is only one representative body of power, the Council, or the Rada, whose powers can be extended without elections under martial law. I repeat, this is the Rada.

What is the challenge for Ukraine? I understand that you are cognisant of this: the state system in Ukraine is structured in such a way that a plethora of government bodies are appointed by the president. This includes regional governors, leadership of all law enforcement agencies, and so forth. However, if the head of state is illegitimate, then everything else loses its legitimacy in terms of executive bodies and law enforcement agencies. And everything they do, following his instructions, makes them aware that they are complicit in this unlawful activity. This is the first point.

Now, regarding the conditions for starting negotiations: We have no preconditions. We are ready to engage in dialogue without any preconditions. However, as I have mentioned numerous times before, based on the agreements that we reached during the negotiation process in Istanbul at the end of 2022 and proceeding from the current realities on the ground.

Our positions were clearly outlined, including in my June speech to the leadership of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation. Everything that needs to be said is already there. There is no point in repeating.

If the head of the regime is illegitimate, then with whom? You know, if someone were to go through elections and gain legitimacy, we would talk with anyone, including Zelensky.

If Ukraine truly wants a peaceful settlement, they have the ability to organise this process within their country as they see fit. We can only sign agreements with those who hold legitimate authority, such as the Verkhovna Rada and its Chair, who are fully subordinate to the head of the regime. This is simply a formal legal matter.

They can organise it as they see fit within their country. But if we ever get to the point of signing a document, it can only be done with the representatives of legitimate authorities, that is the bottom line.

Alexandra Suvorova: There was also a question about the Russian Orthodox Church.

Vladimir Putin: You know, what is happening with regard to the Russian Orthodox Church in Ukraine is a unique situation. This is a gross, blatant violation of human rights, the rights of believers. The church is being torn apart right before everyone’s eyes. This is like execution by firing squad, and yet the world seems to ignore it.

I think those who engage in such actions will get it back. You mentioned that they are tearing things apart, and that is exactly what is happening. These people are not even atheists. Atheists are individuals who believe in the idea that there is no God, but this is their faith, their convictions and worldview.

But these are not atheists; they are people without any faith at all. They are ethnic Jews, but who has ever seen them in a synagogue? They are not Orthodox Christians either, since they do not attend churches. And they certainly are not followers of Islam, as they are unlikely to be seen in a mosque.

These are individuals without kith or kin. They do not care about anything that is dear to us and the overwhelming majority of the Ukrainian people. Eventually, they will run away someday and go to the beach rather than to church. But that is their choice.

I believe that someday the people in Ukraine, and the majority of Ukrainians are still connected to Orthodoxy, will evaluate their actions accordingly.

Dmitry Peskov: Let us take a couple more questions from the audience. I would be remiss not to give Radio Purga a chance to ask a question.

Anastasia Lavrentyeva: Good afternoon.

Radio Purga, Chukotka Autonomous Area. My name is Anastasia Lavrentyeva. Thank you very much for this opportunity.

I am looking at the monitors showing the relevance of topics for various regions, and I see confirmation that my question is indeed important and concerns many residents of our region. It is about connectivity and internet access.

Mr President, in Chukotka, high-speed internet is available only in the regional capital, the only city. All other residents of the region are deprived of the benefits and opportunities the internet has to offer. Beyond entertainment, essential services like the Gosuslugi portal, banking services for the business are inaccessible to most of Chukotka residents. Could you help address this issue of digital inequality, if possible?

Vladimir Putin: Yes, there is no need for lengthy discussion, because we already have a programme for developing internet connectivity, including high-speed internet, as well as communication infrastructure in general. This involves satellite constellations, particularly those focused on communication systems.

All of this will certainly be implemented. I will not go into the details since they are widely known and publicly available. We are working in this direction, with corresponding resources allocated and plans in place. There will be no disruptions, and we will proceed according to the plan.

I very much hope that residents of remote regions too, including Chukotka, will fully enjoy the benefits of modern civilisation. For a country like ours, this is extremely important, as more and more people work remotely and receive education online. High-speed internet is critical in this regard. We will undoubtedly achieve this. There is no doubt about it.

Dmitry Peskov: Alexander is one of the patriarchs of Russian journalism. Please.

Alexander Gamov: Thank you very much.

Komsomolskaya Pravda website, radio, and newspaper. And “Putin’s team.” I am sitting here today with young ladies, Yulia and Marina, who welcomed me into their group.

This has not been mentioned yet, but I would like to congratulate all of us, and you, Mr President, because, by my estimates, today marks the 20^th news conference, even though some colleagues argue that it is the 21^st conference. There is no other format like this elsewhere in the world, and I hope it continues for as long as possible.

Now, my question. Contrary to sceptics’ predictions, the presidential programme “The Time of Heroes” has not become a fleeting project or a mere formality. It is working. What hopes did you personally have for it? Have they been realised? What hopes do you have for it now?

In the past few days and hours, a question has increasingly occupied my mind: why do we not adequately care for and protect our heroes? I am speaking not only about the death of General Kirillov, which was briefly mentioned here today, but also about numerous instances where participants in the special military operation have been insulted. Fortunately, law enforcement agencies have been vigilant, and justice has prevailed, as was extensively reported.

As concerns the Time of Heroes programme. I represent the heroic newspaper Komsomolskaya Pravda, which served as a frontline publication during the Great Patriotic War and continues to do so today. Our war correspondents work with courage, and since 2014, we have been publishing KP in Donetsk, Donbass.

Next year, we will be celebrating our 100^th anniversary on May 24, 2025. My colleagues have asked me to extend an invitation to you. Mikhail Petrov shared with us how the TASS agency commemorated its 120^th anniversary with great ceremony and was honoured with an order. We look forward to welcoming you on May 24 at about noon. Will you attend, Mr President?

Vladimir Putin: I will make every effort to be there.

Alexander Gamov: Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Thank you very much for the invitation. The Komsomolka newspaper has been an integral part of the lives of many generations of our citizens. People would begin their day with it and continue to rely on it throughout the day. The newspaper is evolving into a modern media platform, operating across all information environments. It remains a stable, reliable, and objective media outlet. I would like to congratulate you on the success of your work and express my gratitude for the invitation.

Regarding the Time of Heroes platform, I have previously mentioned that the idea occurred to me after meeting in St Petersburg with young participants, mainly students, involved in the special military operation. Observing them, I thought: here they are – the future of our country, the future workforce. This is how the concept for such a platform was conceived. I will not conceal that after returning to Moscow and presenting the idea, I requested my colleagues in the Executive Office to bring it to fruition. They are the ones who came up with the name The Time of Heroes, which I believe is an excellent choice.

The first round attracted 43,000 applications. Naturally, the selection process is quite rigorous: we chose only 83 individuals from these 43,000. And understandably so, as we require individuals with experience in administrative work, those who are educated and meet the criteria necessary for future roles as leaders of major companies, municipalities, entire regions, ministries and agencies, among others.

I stated this at the United Russia party congress, and I would like to reiterate it now: certainly, all are worthy – every one of our men and women fighting for their Motherland, risking their lives and health, is deserving. However, there is the matter of their suitability for the professional path they aspire to pursue. Once again, education and experience are prerequisites.

In general, it is one thing to fight for the Motherland and quite another to work with people. You must possess a certain talent and aptitude for it, you know? These are distinct types of activities. We must select the right individuals from this group who are both willing and able to excel in these areas. Thus far, there have been no missteps: they are truly outstanding individuals.

The second enrolment campaign is currently underway, and the number of applications has already exceeded 15,000. It will continue next year until mid-January or February, I think. This is to say that this effort is gathering pace.

As for the first class, its participants continue their training, even though many of them have already received offers, and quite a few are already working in new positions. Some of them went as far as become heads of regions. This genuinely makes me happy. Some are working in the private sector, while others have taken up jobs in government institutions and administrations at all levels, including regional, local and federal agencies, as well as major corporations.

I would like to reiterate what I said at the United Russia congress. During my recent visit to a rehabilitation centre, I met with young men who had suffered severe wounds. Some had lost a leg, or an arm. But here is what I wanted to tell you: there was fire in their eyes. They want and are ready to work and to make a difference. And they have everything it takes to succeed. Thanks to the latest rehabilitation methods – I am talking about the most advanced and recently developed treatments – they can do anything without any health restrictions or limitations. All we need to do is help them get there.

Let me reiterate that one of these men – I remember his face – told me: “I understand that I need an education and experience, but I do not have either an education or any experience; still, I want to do it.” These are the kind of people we need. We need people who want to work. All we need to do is help them. We must find them and support them.

You know, it just occurred to me that when I applied to join a judo club, our coach, Anatoly Rakhlin, told us: go ahead and do as many pull-ups as you can. For some reason, several of those who did more pull-ups than I did were not accepted. Several years later, we asked him: Mr Rakhlin, how come you refused to accept these young men, but decided to take us on board despite the fact that we could not do as many pull-ups? You know what his answer was? He was a wise man, you know. He said, this is because you put in all the effort you had until your arms were shaking, but you still kept trying to reach the bar with your chin, while those who did more pull-ups than you, they did it without any stress, and they could have done more, but they did not put in all the effort they had and did not give it their all.

These men have given all they have, they are willing to go the whole nine yards, and we must help them. They need our support.

Alexander Gamov: There was also a question about protecting our heroes.

Vladimir Putin: This is a very important question, indeed. You are right.

What can I say? First, this has happened before, and we have already seen these attempts and understand what our adversary is after. Unfortunately, this was not a standalone, isolated assassination attempt. In fact, people outside the military have also been targeted. I have already told your American colleague that there have been assassination attempts against journalists and public figures before. Do you remember how Dugina lost her life?

What does it mean? This demonstrates the Kiev regime’s terrorist nature. At the same time, of course, it indicates that our competent law enforcement agencies and intelligence services failed to prevent these attacks and allowed these blows to reach their targets. What can I say in this regard? We must further improve their work and prevent these failures, which come at such a huge cost to us. That is all there is to it.

Alexander Gamov: Thank you.

Dmitry Peskov: You know, I have caught sight of a very popular young blogger. He is getting up.

Vlad Bumaga: Mr President, good afternoon.

My name is Vlad Bumaga, and I am a popular video blogger. I have over 80 million subscribers on social networks, mostly young people.

As we know, young people spend a lot of time online – an average of five to eight hours per day, with half of that time devoted to watching video content. For my part, like many other creators, I am actively involved in developing our Russian platforms, such as VK Video. Of course, these platforms are not yet very large, but they demonstrate good and confident growth and provide high-quality services.

My question in this connection is this: why block YouTube if our platforms are coping well as they are? They are competitive and offer excellent terms and alternatives for creators? Moreover, we can upload content there and transmit our ideas and messages to audiences that extend beyond the Russian-speaking community.

There is another important issue. As I mentioned before, practically all children in this country know and watch me. I will add that I became a father myself earlier this year.

Vladimir Putin: My congratulations!

Vlad Bumaga: Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Please congratulate your wife on my behalf, it is her due.

Vlad Bumaga: I will do so without fail.

I would like to ask what values I, as a person whose videos nurture an entire generation, should communicate to the audience. Or, perhaps, what messages I should not communicate to the audience. What is your personal opinion on the ideas and messages that should be prioritised when it comes to young people? Give us a direction, so to speak. We will take note and start working.

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: First, regarding the YouTube slowdown. Here, there are more questions for YouTube than for us.

Sorry, let me first ask whether Vlad Bumaga is your pen-name?

Vlad Bumaga: No, it is my real name.

Vladimir Putin: I see, excellent! Paper (bumaga), in a well-known game, is stronger than stone. Therefore, I congratulate you: 80 million subscribers, did you say? This is certainly a unique achievement. This means the content you create meets the expectations of these 80 million people. This is the result of your creative work, and I congratulate you on that.

As for the slowdown, YouTube is owned by Google. When it started operating in Russia, it created its Russian subsidiaries, the legal entities on its payroll, as well as the services it should take care of. It worked with the subsidiaries it had created, but when the West started introducing various restrictions and sanctions, Google stopped or reduced the financing of these subsidiaries and the provision of the necessary equipment, thereby creating problems for itself. This is the first point.

Second, YouTube and Google must comply with our laws and avoid dishonest online activities. In other words, they must not use online resources for promoting their governments’ political goals.

Here is what I mean. Suppose you search for some information online, for example regarding culture or music, but instead, you are offered information that has nothing to do with culture or music but promotes a certain political platform. They are also removing the names of our artists, bloggers, politicians and the like from their services.

All this amounts to a violation of Russian laws. As a result, Roskomnadzor and other relevant authorities present their claims, and rightly so. Therefore, the perpetrators face a choice. They can choose to respect our laws, which would expose them to restrictions in their own country, forcing them to limit their operations to their own territory, or they can choose to work in Russia, in which case they must respect our laws.

As for what you have said, nature abhors a vacuum, and competition is growing here with the development of VK, Telegram and Rutube. If Google and YouTube, being aware of that, change the mode of their operations, they will have no problems here.

Regarding the subjects that can be used to enhance the awareness of our young people, how this can be done and what should not be done, I am sure that there is no need for my advice. People like you, especially now that you have become a father, have a growing sense of responsibility. It is a responsibility to your children, their future and the country where your children will live. This feeling of responsibility is a better guide than I could ever be about what would be useful for our children in the future, what is dangerous and unacceptable, and what you should fight against, not on my instructions but at the call of your heart.

Dmitry Peskov: Thank you.

I believe I have overlooked TV-3; they certainly do not deserve this.

Vladimir Putin: May I interrupt you for a second? We were just talking about children, and I see a young woman over there with a “Families with children deceived” sign. How were they deceived?

Anna Suvorova: Apparently, this is not about child benefits, because we have already discussed them.

Vladimir Putin: I could have mentioned them. I think I did.

Yelena Usmanova: I can explain.

Good afternoon, Mr President.

Yelena Usmanova, Business Online newspaper from Tatarstan – this is Tatarstan again.

First of all, I would like to thank you on behalf of Kazan for the honour of hosting the BRICS summit, but my question is about something else, as you can see from the poster.

A group of scammers deceived hundreds of families in Tatarstan who wanted their own homes. Each of them took out a preferential mortgage for individual housing construction under the state support programme, but the houses were never built.

Will the authorities help the defrauded borrowers under that programme, as they once helped the unfortunate co-investors in apartment block projects who were subsequently cheated out of their property? These people continue to pay mortgages for hot air, while the government continues to transfer state support to banks for houses that were never even built. When will they start helping people, not banks?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Please, listen to me. It is not about the banks at all. We have created a system of escrow accounts, where people transfer their money when they take out a mortgage. The money is then frozen in those escrow accounts until the new owners receive their housing. Where have they transferred the money?

Yelena Usmanova: No, this is about the individual housing construction programme. Houses, not apartments.

Vladimir Putin: There is no difference.

Yelena Usmanova: Apparently, that arrangement was not yet in place at the time.

Vladimir Putin: Individual housing construction qualifies for preferential mortgage programmes. As I said, the interest is 3 percent in rural areas. Single-family homes account for 50 percent of the 110 million square metres built in 2023 and 105 million this year. Fifty percent is a breakthrough. But the money should be in escrow accounts. Where have the people transferred this money and why did they do it, if those were not escrow accounts? I really do not understand what you are talking about.

Yelena Usmanova: This is what happened in Tatarstan. Hundreds of families have indeed found themselves in this predicament.

Vladimir Putin: Can you tell me where they transferred the money?

Yelena Usmanova: I am not sure about the details. I know that they took –

Vladimir Putin: Listen, please, what is your name?

Yelena Usmanova: Yelena.

Vladimir Putin: Yelena, these details matter.

Yelena Usmanova: There were definitely no escrow accounts there.

Vladimir Putin: How could this have happened? This may be another fraudulent scheme, like the ones scammers use to steal money from people’s accounts.

We will need to look into this, because this particular case may give us leads on other possible cases of this kind and help prevent this kind of fraud.

Right now, I cannot make heads or tails of what you are saying. Please provide us with more information. All right, Yelena? This is extremely important.

Why? Because the main point here is that we still have numerous unfinished housing projects. However, the total amount we now have in the escrow accounts is about 7 trillion rubles, or maybe even a little more. This is more than 65 percent of the amount needed to complete the projects co-financed by the people in 2025. I can almost guarantee that this housing will be built. And no one will be cheated out of their apartments, because part of the work is already done. The money is in these accounts; it is protected. If you are referring to cases where no escrow accounts were used, please provide this information – this needs to be sorted out.

Thank you.

Dmitry Peskov: Yes, we will request this information.

We wanted to give the floor to the TV-3 channel.

Vladimir Putin: I see someone from Turkiye.

Dmitry Peskov: All right, let it be Turkiye then.

Vladimir Putin: Do not worry, we will get back to you.

Ali Cura: My name is Ali Cura, Anadolu news agency.

Mr President, Israel is violating international law, killing tens of thousands of people, including children, in Palestine and Lebanon. Israel is using the current situation to occupy Syria and is infringing on its sovereignty. What can you say about Israel’s actions? Have you spoken with President Erdogan about the region as a whole? Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: I maintain regular contact with President Erdogan. I do not remember when we last spoke, but we certainly discussed the situation in the Middle East.

Everyone is aware of President Erdogan and Turkiye’s attitude to the developments in the Middle East, as well as our stance on Lebanon and Palestine. It does not depend on fluctuations. We have always believed, and continue to do so, that the Palestinian problem can only be settled if the reasons for its existence are eliminated. There is a well-known UN Security Council decision on the establishment of two states – Israel and Palestine. Israel has been established, but the state of Palestine has not been created to this day. That is the problem.

Moreover, Israel continues to implement its illegal settlement policy. I am not aware of Israel’s ultimate goal in the Gaza Strip, but its activities deserve to be censured. We have done this on many occasions and at nearly all levels, from public venues to putting forth our position at the UN Security Council. There is nothing more to add.

The same goes for our stance on Lebanon.

As for Syria, frankly, I believe that Turkiye is doing everything in its power to ensure its security along the southern borders in light of the situation in Syria, to create conditions for the movement of refugees from its territory to other areas, most of which are located in the Turkiye-controlled territories in Syria, and possibly to push the Kurdish forces from the border. All these goals can and possibly will be achieved, to a certain degree. And yet, I believe that the main beneficiary of the developments in Syria is Israel.

You may hold any opinion about Israel’s actions, but Russia condemns the seizure of Syrian territories. Our position on this matter is clear and unchanging. At the same time, Israel is addressing its own security concerns. For instance, in the Golan Heights, Israel has advanced along the front by 62–63 kilometres and to a depth of 20–25 kilometres. They have occupied fortifications originally built for Syria by the Soviet Union, strong defensive structures comparable to the Maginot Line.

We remain hopeful that Israel will eventually withdraw from Syria. However, at present, it is deploying additional troops there. It seems there are already several thousand personnel stationed there. It appears not only that they have no intention of leaving, but they may also be planning to further reinforce their presence.

Moreover, the local population has already expressed a desire to be incorporated into the Jewish state, which could create further complications down the line. If the ongoing developments ultimately result in the fragmentation of Syria, these matters will need to be addressed by the local population in line with the United Nations Charter and the principle of self-determination. It is a complex issue, perhaps best reserved for future discussions.

We are well aware that Turkiye has faced longstanding challenges with the Kurdistan Workers’ Party for decades. While we hope for no further escalation, some European politicians recently remarked in meetings that, after World War I, the Kurds were promised their own state but were ultimately deceived.

The Kurdish population in the region is substantial, numbering in the tens of millions across Turkiye, Iran, and Iraq, where they live in concentrated communities. Estimates suggest there are at least 30 to 35 million Kurds. This underscores the gravity of the Kurdish issue. The Kurds are formidable and resilient, known for their fighting spirit. For instance, they withdrew from Manbij, but only after putting up fierce resistance.

The Kurdish issue requires a resolution. This should have been addressed within the framework of Syria under President Assad. Now, it must be resolved with the authorities currently in control of Syrian territory, while Turkiye must also find a way to ensure its security. We understand the complexity of these matters. However, this is a topic for another discussion, so as not to take up time today.

I want to emphasise that while challenges remain, our position firmly aligns with international law and the sovereignty of all nations, including respect for Syria’s territorial integrity. This extends to supporting the stance of the current authorities governing the territory of the Syrian Arab Republic.

In this regard, we stand with them. Furthermore, we maintain communication with these authorities as well as with all major groups currently exerting control in Syria.

Dmitry Peskov: We’ve promised to call on a TV-3 war correspondent.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, I am sorry.

Alexander Malkevich: Alexander Malkevich, Itogovaya Programma, TV-3.

A brief message to begin with: our soldiers asked me to thank you. Last week, you met with members of the Presidential Council for Civil Society and Human Rights and supported their idea of creating a federal museum of the special military operation. Preserving historical memory, particularly in creative formats, is our media Oreshnik in the information war that the West is attempting to wage against us.

The fighters from St Petersburg convey their special thanks for awarding our legendary Leningrad Regiment the honorific Guards title.

Now, my question is about the Defenders of the Fatherland Foundation. Created in April 2023 by your Executive Order, it has operated for one and a half years. How do you assess its performance in 2024 on a five-point or ten-point scale? What main goals have you set for the foundation for next year? What is the chief criterion of its efficiency, as you see it?

Vladimir Putin: As for the work done by the Defenders of the Fatherland Foundation… I think it was created in June, not April, but this is unimportant. It started operating in June.

It was established after I had a meeting with mothers and widows of participants in the special military operation. I realised that the usual methods of support for the soldiers who needed assistance or had been heavily wounded or handicapped, for the families of our fallen heroes, were not sufficient and it was necessary to create a special mechanism, a special tool for those, among others, who were losing their connection with the Armed Forces. The Defenders of the Fatherland Foundation was created precisely for this purpose, to support the men who are leaving military service and yet require a caring attitude from the state; they need attention that is not formal or superficial but implies an individual approach to each person in every family. The foundation was created with this objective in mind.

What is on its agenda? Addressing social issues, processing various allowances and payments on behalf of those who need prosthetic care or have been registered as disabled, and arranging prosthetics for them.

We must give credit to the foundation: they are doing good work. They not only order an item but provide a comprehensive service. This includes training the men and selecting a facility that offers prosthetic care. They also plan for further care, ensuring that it is straightforward and does not require patients to travel across this country for treatment. Ours is a huge country after all. This problem still exists, but they are working to resolve it. This was their task.

I spoke to Anna Tsivileva not so long ago. She says the requests are now amended with… Do you know what? I was quite happy to learn that the men were sending requests for jobs. This is one of the most important areas of their work, by the way. Increasingly more people are sending requests for engagement in sports and participation in cultural events. And this is a positive development. You see, this means a trend towards better options; it exists, it has emerged. And this is very encouraging.

But employment is certainly the most important aspect. I have already mentioned this – they are young men with shining eyes, and they have received excellent training, something many can only dream of. In today’s conditions, they could certainly continue their service in the Armed Forces – a relevant decision has been made. What I am saying is that their further careers should not be limited to military enlistment offices, where they are unlikely to earn much, as they offer a rather modest level of income. They can work in IT, or in medicine. They can work anywhere, or they could engage in sports – military sports or civilian sports.

There are various ways to achieve fulfilment, and there is a growing number of opportunities, thanks to modern technologies and with due account of personal preferences. They are working on this, and they are generally doing very well. You know, no big project is implemented without a hitch. In this case, however, we have many people working on this who have some connection with the special military operation: the widows of unfortunately fallen soldiers, the mothers of our fighters who are still there at the frontlines, or just people who care. In this sense, and perhaps because of this – incidentally, many veterans who have returned from the front are working there, too – this is probably the key reason the work is going well.

I was reluctant to let the head of the foundation, Anna Tsivileva, go to work for the Defence Ministry, but I finally consented to Minister Belousov’s proposal when he told me that he thought it would be a good idea to build a seamless support system, which would encompass those who continue to serve in the Armed Forces, with the Defence Ministry, those who are still fighting, but need some support measures, as well as those who are now beyond the scope of the Defence Ministry. I thought we needed someone to do this.

Just recently, last summer, I think, the Defence Ministry created a social centre. So today, this social centre and the Defenders of the Fatherland Foundation are working as a one-stop shop, which helps people who are part of the Defence Ministry system and those who are not. This system seamlessly combines both spheres. They are probably struggling with many problems, but overall, the work is improving.

They have actually participated in decision-making on compensation rules for wounded soldiers. Until now, all wounded soldiers in our country received 3 million rubles regardless of the severity of their case – a small scratch, a minor injury, or a serious injury that led to disability – everyone received 3 million. In fact, servicemen themselves have asked the Ministry of Defence and the Defenders of the Fatherland Foundation to change this system, and we did. Now the fighters who are seriously injured, receive 4 million.

But when this was reported to me, I immediately saw that the fighters who had been seriously injured and received disabilities before that, had been paid 3 million. And now, we have started paying four, meaning they have been left out. So, I had a simple idea: those who had earlier received 3 million, need to be given an additional million retroactively. This means the government has underpaid them. So, now all of them are receiving an additional million each, and the payments are being processed quickly.

This work is also organised by the Defenders of the Fatherland Foundation.

Dmitry Kulko: I suggest we return to the concerns of Russian citizens. You've probably seen them.

Vladimir Putin: Excuse me, Ksenia has been raising her hand for a while. Please, Ksenia.

Ksenia Sobchak: Mr President, Ksenia Sobchak, Ostorozhno Media.

You touched on a very important topic regarding the one-stop shop concept and the capabilities of the Ministry of Defence. I would like to discuss this issue from a different perspective.

Many of us – journalists, celebrities and concerned citizens – are involved in various initiatives. For example, for the past two years, we have been running a large-scale project to help residents of Belgorod and Kursk regions – our fellow citizens affected by attacks from the Armed Forces of Ukraine. This year alone, we have managed to help over 600 families.

I believe there are many other compassionate individuals out there. Would it be possible, in your opinion, to create a one-stop shop for these civic initiatives as well? This could help integrate public and volunteer efforts with social workers and existing state structures. Such a platform could function on a voluntary basis but provide a unified mechanism for coordinating assistance across a wide range of needs.

For example, we often encounter challenges like finding employment in new locations or securing spots in kindergartens and other institutions for families with children that are temporarily relocating. Could such a one-stop shop be established to support these civic initiatives?

Vladimir Putin: First, let me thank you for what you are doing. Providing direct assistance to people is extremely important.

Second, I want to express gratitude to all volunteers. Their work is invaluable, but it also comes with risks. Sadly, there have even been losses among volunteers. Their efforts often reach individuals more directly and sometimes reveal where state mechanisms are effective and where they fall short.

As for your suggestion, we do have programmes in place. For instance, there is a recovery programme for the Kursk Region, with allocated funding that is already practically in place. Similar measures are being implemented in other border regions, including Belgorod and Bryansk regions. No one will be left without support. You probably perceive these needs more acutely, given your involvement.

I will personally consider how this can be organised and will consult with the relevant agencies, including the Ministry of Defence and regional governors, to explore how these efforts can be coordinated – whether through a one-stop shop or some other mechanism. We will definitely think it through. Thank you, Ksenia.

I do not have an immediate answer right now, but the question you have raised is absolutely valid, and we will work on a solution.

Thank you.

Dmitry Kulko: Mr President, I suggest we continue the topic of the special military operation and the support for the military and their families.

You must have seen that among the inquiries we received for this programme, there were also requests for assistance with payments and benefits that are supposed to be allocated for the military and their families. There were also requests for assistance with finding people who are reported missing or with whom there is no contact, or who, according to their families, are being held captive.

Mr President, is it possible to issue an instruction to the Defence Military specifically to deal with these cases? The families are struggling without knowing for certain what has happened. Is it possible to improve the notification system for the families of the military?

Vladimir Putin: It is a very sensitive issue for many.

It is one thing when a person is fighting and, God willing, everything turns out well.

There are different forms of benefits. In general, they are quite decent: there is battle pay, sometimes also called detached-duty allowance, for those who found themselves in certain regions before the start of the special military operation and it was considered a tour of duty. There is also pay for participation in offensive and storming operations, and in organising defence. There is a slight difference, but the grounds for pay are real.

When a person disappears from the radar, the matter of family support arises. We discussed this, and the Defence Minister is aware of this issue. There are at least two things that need to be done.

First of all, it is necessary to expedite final decisions. When information is lacking, families stop receiving corresponding benefits because the person is not there; he is not involved in any offensive or defensive operation; he is not receiving battle pay, and so forth. As a result, the scope of family support diminishes.

Here, the Ministry of Defence and the Government must take a different decision – on what can substitute these payments at least partly. There are different ideas: to develop a form of child benefit, or find another solution. But a decision is necessary on temporary measures, and this matter must be resolved promptly. I will not go into details now. Overall, the Ministry of Defence is aware of this problem and is working on it.

Alexandra Suvorova: Meanwhile, we have been working for more than three hours; almost three hours and ten minutes.

We have many questions, and they are different. I propose a a quick round of questions. Dmitry, what do you think? Shall we begin?

Dmitry Kulko: Let’s start with a question from Georgy Arefyev from the Smolensk Region: Why do high-ranking officials have to ask for your instructions at the meetings you hold so that they can start doing something?

Vladimir Putin: There is no need to scold officials.

Why is that so? The decision-making process is difficult; and when it reaches me, there are this kind of questions and problems. There are various ways to approach the solution: some of my colleagues believe it should be done one way, and others think differently. When there is a dispute or a fork, as they say in the Government, as they are deciding on an issue, then my colleagues come to me asking to make the final decision, as the commander. They ask for instructions so they won’t forget anything; the final decision is turned into instructions, and they get down to work.

There are many bureaucratic subtleties; sometimes everyone agrees on something, but it must be put on paper and implemented as a regulation.

Alexandra Suvorova: The next question is: “Who would you like to have a cup of tea with from among currently living or deceased people?”

Vladimir Putin: Considering the living, I would like to meet with my friends and relatives more often, to have tea and talk with them.

As for the deceased world leaders, I was in touch with German Chancellor [Helmut] Kohl, though not very personally, but for a long time.

He was a person of the global scale, and not just because he was a big man but because of his actions and convictions. He came to visit me right after our first meeting in 1993 and continued to do so for a very long time, not very often but regularly, even after his term ended. I had the pleasure – let me stress this – to talk to him.

It was a big political figure of that time, as they used to say in the Soviet Union. He did a lot for his country and for the Germans. He was a major European and global politician.

I vividly recall many of our conversations. They were very useful for me; I am saying this without exaggeration.

President of France [Jacques] Chirac was a very interesting person, too. Just interesting. You know, he was something of an encyclopedist, or an academic: he knew everything you could ask about. It was curious, honestly. He had an opinion about everything, and he always stood for it. He was a very tactful and courteous person. I learned a lot from him, too, to be honest, just as I learned a lot of things from Kohl and made a mental note of them. I noted this in Chirac too: his behaviour, and his intelligence among other traits.

Berlusconi was slightly different, but also very pleasant to talk to, he was active and very tenacious. Just like Chirac, he did a lot for the development of Russian-Italian relations. Despite what is happening today, we can feel that that there is a certain affection for Russia in Italian society, just like we feel affection for Italy.

All of them made a significant contribution to the development of bilateral relations and world politics. Their company was always interesting. They had strong personalities and their own opinions. It was all focused on achieving the maximum result for their countries and strengthening the sovereignty of their states.

I still have many friends in Asia. I have already spoken about friendly relations with…

Alexandra Suvorova: With China, as you said.

Vladimir Putin: With China and India. I have very warm relations with the Prime Minister of India. I have many people I can talk with. However, like any person, I would like to say once again that these are my family and some friends I have had since childhood, and I treasure that a lot.

Alexandra Suvorova: Next question.

Dmitry Kulko: Mr President, I have something between a question and request for advice from Tatyana Prokhorova from Chuvashia: “Do you have bank deposits? If so, in which banks?”

Vladimir Putin: Initially, I had a deposit in Sberbank, I think. Then, when Rossiya Bank was the first financial institution to be sanctioned, I demonstratively transferred my money there. I think, my salary is also transferred there.

Alexandra Suvorova: Next question: “Did Elvira Nabiullina tell you what the Central Bank rate will be tomorrow?” I think this would be interesting not only for Valery Semenov from the Pskov Region, who wrote this question.

Vladimir Putin: No, she does not tell me what the rate will be. Perhaps she does not know this yet, because they discuss it at the board meeting, their “Komsomol cell,” and make the final decision in the course of the discussion. I hope that it will be balanced and will meet today’s requirements.

Dmitry Kulko: Another question: “Vladimir Zhirinovsky’s predictions about the developments in the Middle East and the South Caucasus are coming true. Will other predictions of the LDPR founder come true?”

Vladimir Putin: Of course, I knew Vladimir Zhirinovsky well. He was no fortune teller, but he liked provocations and had fun shocking others. However, he was an erudite, and a well-prepared one; he was a specialist on the Middle East. A true expert. Everything he said came true because he relied on his analysis of what was happening in Russia and the world, and forecast the unfolding of the situation. This really comes true.

However, it was a forecast based on real knowledge and the experience he had as an expert.

Alexandra Suvorova: I propose returning to the blitz a bit later, near the end.

Dmitry Peskov: The blitz can go on forever.

Alexandra Suvorova: Yes, sure, with 2,200 questions.

Dmitry Peskov: I cannot quite see what you have written on the paper, but you’ve been raising your hand for a long time.

Vladimir Putin: There is a man in a mask. You’re next, okay?

Svetlana Shevchenko: I can speak, aren’t I?

Vladimir Putin: Please, please.

Svetlana Shevchenko: Svetlana Shevchenko, Novosibirsk, Novosibirsk Region.

We are an agroindustrial region and produce high-quality products with added value for export. However, recently we have had an acute shortage of young personnel in the countryside. It has had a real impact: there are not enough personnel despite rural mortgages and the development of rural areas.

Mr President, what would you advise us? What measures should we take to attract new youth and retain those who already live in the countryside?

Vladimir Putin: This is a very important question, because agriculture is a key sector of the Russian economy. I have already said that it is developing at a good pace: three percent per year. We cannot but be pleased with what is happening in agriculture.

I have already given this example, but I will still say this, if I remember it right. In 1986, if I remember correctly, the Soviet Union purchased 35 million tonnes of grain. Last year, we exported 56 million tonnes. We started exporting grain back in 2000, but it was only 1.2 or 1.3 million tonnes; and today it is 66 million tonnes. It seems impossible, but it is happening.

Look, we are among the three largest exporters of food to the world market, and the top one wheat exporter in the world. Last year we had a record harvest of 148 million; this year it will be 130 million, but this is also a very large harvest, and we are stable: we have harvested over 100 million tonnes for 10 years and have a stable large supply for export operations. As I have already said, we have completely covered our need in meat – 100 percent – and we export it.

There are problems with dairy, fruit and vegetable products, but there is also a development programme. Everything is growing gradually.

Social issue in the country is one of the most important problems. There is a programme for the socioeconomic development of the countryside, and overall its has funding. Of course, it may be not enough, but the main thing is to increase the level of well-being and income of people living in the countryside. All other issues will be resolved based on this. I am sure that we will make progress in this area.

Personnel is also a key element. We have traditionally focused on personnel since the Soviet Union era, and now work in the rural areas is becoming more interesting. It is a whole industry now. It requires high-class specialists in various areas: biology and chemistry, in addition to traditional agronomists, and genetics as well.

For example, genetics is an important area, and it is currently developing at the highest pace precisely because of and in the interests of agriculture.

I think all this is very interesting, and we should talk about this not only at events like this once a year, but constantly, as well as create conditions for young people who would be interested in coming and working in this sector of the economy.

The government will do everything possible to attract applicants this industry needs; and manufacturers must do what they do in other industries: create conditions to send people for training intentionally, pick personnel they need during the training, and ensure their work at enterprises and industrial practice. We will certainly provide for all of this.

Dmitry Peskov: Mr President, you promised to take a question from the journalist wearing a mask.

Vladimir Putin:Yes, please.

Andrei Knyazev: I have already taken off the mask. I wear it because I use the metro as probably most of those present here do.

I am Andrei Knyazev, a volunteer with Argumenty Nedeli – Uzbekistan, and head of The World of the Young, a studio of young and adult journalists in Moscow.

Here is my question. This year marks 45 years of my journalistic career which I started in Uzbekistan and have been persuing here for the past 30 years. I see that paper journalism is dying out. Maybe bloggers like Vlad Bumaga will help independent newspapers which depend only on their readers, not on the goverment or business people.

What do you think can be done to stop at least weekly press from dying? Becasue the bloggers we have now are not always intelligent, not always sincere and not always good. This is my short question.

I asked my second question to many officials, inlcuding Ms Zakhartova, the Foreign Minsitry spokeswoman. She told me to address the President’s Direct Line. That’s why I am here.

A great number of our scientists and many clairvoyants say that within the coming 10 to 12 years European countries, Japan, the United States and the American continent will be submerged or destroyed. However, the peopole will survive and they will ask to come to us, Mr President. Meanwhile, they are against us. Should they be informed in advance?

This is hypothecal, of course. Yet, there are such forecasts. I read a lot, and I basically read newspapers, not those lying Telegram channels and others of the kind.

So I have two questions to you. Sorry for that.

Vladimir Putin: I am not sure if I should say it. Ok, I will. You know a popular joke, a banter about a family at table with a little boy doing a crossword puzzle, who says: “Tell me a four-letter word.” His mom hits him on the forehead with a spoon – bang! He cries: Why? It’s ‘home.’ Then the father bangs his wife saying: “You should think about your home! Think about your home.”

You have said that some continents would be underwater and we should think about what is to be done with those people. We should think about our home!

Andrei Knyazev: Mr President, but they will run to us. What are we going to do with them?

Vladimir Putin: I was listening to you very attentively. You are a person full of energy! Please, let me finish.

I am saying this because the forecasts you have referred to are ethemeral. They are made by serious researchers who say that permafrost is going to start melting. This carries huge problems for the environment because new emissions into the atmosphere will exceed those from all the vehicles in the world. So if permafrost starts melting, the coastal regions of the Russian Federation are also in danger.

We have entire villages and towns with houses built on stillts in the permafrost. They already hear some crepitation underneath there. That’s what we should be thinking about, our coastal cities, including even St Petersburg, you see? We did build a flood dam there, which they dreamed of building since the times of Peter the Great. But we should think about what will happen to the coastal cities. We should think about our homeland first.

Andrei Knyazev: And about the paper journalism.

Vladimir Putin: I’ll be right with you on that. If people begin relocating to us, we have unemployment at 2.3 percent, it’s practically non-existent. We are talking about labour migration and issues related to it.

You are right, think about that. If there is a massive influx of people, we must think about how to cope with it and where and how to accommodate those people. We are the biggest country in the world but do you know how many people live east of the Ural Mountains? About 12 million people. We do have space to resettle people.

In principle, we have to think about social and other infrastructure and rules in advance. It is not really an empty question. You are so egregious when you say all this, but there is actually an issue. I repeat once again: First of all, we need to think about the problems we have in our country.

As for paper journalism and help from Vlad Bumaga, I think that such fellows, of course, will gladly support you, especially since we are talking about paper journalism in this case.

I think that paper journalism will have its place in this huge changing world, just like the paper book. You can flip through a gadget, and everything is in good font there and in different languages. I myself, frankly speaking, sometimes use it. But picking up a book is a different story. Not only because there are pictures – although that is also interesting to look at – and a book illustration is sometimes a work of art, too.

Picking up an issue of Izvestia or Komsomolskaya Pravda, leafing through it, digging in it – there’s a thrill in that, isn’t there? I hope that those who are engaged in paper journalism will also take this into account and keep this remaining public interest alive.

The most important thing, of course, is the content, because whatever the media, the most important thing, as Vlad Bumaga said, is what’s inside, the content. That’s the most important thing. If paper-based media have a worthy and interesting content compared to some internet rubbish, they will be here to stay, they will not die.

Alexandra Suvorova: Mr President, let us think about home, above all, a healthy one. This topic is among those the Russians are most concerned about. If we look at statistics, healthcare and related issues come second – people ask about the shortage of doctors in outpatient clinics, and pretty often about a lack of some medicines.

I suggest we listen to a telephone call from Irina Sychyova from Nizhny Novgorod.

Mr Sychyova, good afternoon. Please, ask your question.

Irina Sycheva: Good afternoon, Mr President.

My name is Irina Sycheva. I am from Nizhny Novgorod.

I would like to draw your attention to our free medical care. First, I would like to sincerely thank you for the renovated outpatient clinics. Thank God, they are starting to make them look decent.

However, these outpatient clinics are in a dire shortage of medical specialists and primary care physicians as the doctors are leaving to work in commercial clinics. What should we, retired and low-income people, do in this situation?

For over a month, I have been unable to obtain an appointment with a cardiologist for my father who suffered a heart attack recently. This doctor receives patients only once a week. There are no online appointments because the doctor is not working full-time. To get an appointment, people have to queue outside the clinic from 5 or 6 am, and their chances are pretty slim. The people are standing on the street until 7 am, when the outpatient clinic opens. Many elderly people are unable to cope with this situation. We hope that you will resolve this issue.

Thank you very much in advance.

Vladimir Putin: Ms Sycheva, healthcare issues – and I perceive them in the context of the entire range of issues – come second, I think. Yes, second. This is always very important – in all countries, by the way, including those with the so-called developed market economy. It appears that the situation there is now even more acute than in Russia. But why should we care about them? I agree that we should think about our home country.

So, thank you for mentioning the renovated outpatient clinic. This means that things are moving, nevertheless.

We have a whole programme, I’ll talk about it in a second. Because our main problem is human resources. This problem exists in primary care sector. We have hospitals, with doctors and physicians working there, as you know – we have no personnel shortages there, while in primary care this problem does exist. This results in an obvious conclusion: the problem is mostly linked with the way a healthcare system is organised in the Russian Federation’s regions.

Speaking about the hospital bed rotation, we can see that beds in hospitals are not fully used all year round. At the same time, there is a problem in primary care, including outpatient clinics and district hospitals where medical specialists work every day. Local healthcare authorities are supposed to distribute the load correctly. This is the first thing.

The second aspect is linked with personnel training. We are trying, and the Healthcare Ministry is trying to enrol as many applicants at universities as possible. The process is ongoing. We have started paying an additional 50,000 and 29,000 rubles to doctors and nurses at small communities, and this is also quite important. For the first time in several years, we can see an influx of 17,500 specialists, but their number is still not enough.

Going back to the organisation of healthcare and the need to continue strengthening the primary care sector, we should certainly be doing all this much quicker than we did before. I cannot help but agree with this. Speaking of your particular case, my colleagues will give me your data. You do have the information, right?

Alexandra Suvorova: Yes.

Vladimir Putin: We’ll do all we can and will certainly help your father.

Dmitry Kulko: Let us continue with the topic of healthcare. It is important.

Compared to last year, the number of complaints regarding shortage of medicines has gone down this year, but we still have them, and they mainly concern subsidised prescription drugs.

For instance, here is what a pensioner from Kerch wrote us, “I have cancer. I was prescribed free medication, but the last time I had it for free was three months ago. I called the hotline in Simferopol and was told the drugs were unavailable. I have to buy them with my own money now. Please help resolve this issue.”

This is not limited to expensive medications – the situation with absence of normal saline was especially striking. People with diabetes also report difficulties with obtaining insulin. Here are a few examples.

Rashida Gainutdinova had the following to write to us: “In Neftekamsk, I have not been able to obtain insulin for four months now. I used to get it from a hospital, but it is no longer available there. I cannot buy it at the pharmacy either.”

Vitaly Mayorov from Atkarsk, the Saratov Region, “I have had type 1 diabetes for 50 years now. I have never experienced such poor insulin and test strip availability.”

Mr President, where does the domestic pharmaceutical industry stand at this point, and what is your take on patients’ access to essential medications for cancer and other acute conditions?

Vladimir Putin: This is a critically important issue, just like ensuring we have enough medical specialists and doctors.

The pharmaceutical industry is high on our list of priorities. You might be aware that as far back as 2008, when I served as the Prime Minister, we started working on developing our own pharmaceutical industry.

We began discussing this in 2008 and started creating programmes to this end. These programmes were finalised in 2009. They went by different names, but they came down to one and the same thing which was developing our own pharmaceutical industry. I cannot give you the exact budget we set aside back then, but this sector has largely grown with the help and support of the state, mostly through federal funding.

More recently, our pharmaceutical companies have begun investing their own resources into growing this business, and the investment amounts to impressive tens of billions of rubles, around 40 billion, I believe.

We now have development programmes of our own in place and have started creating our own medications based on our own molecules and producing our own APIs, which we did not have before. We have begun manufacturing complex medicines, including for cancer treatment. This sector is doing quite well, particularly in St Petersburg. The same goes for insulin.

As for test strips and similar supplies, the issues arise from operational shortcomings and delays at local levels. Overall, funding for these medications is allocated in full. The challenge lies in organising procurement and making timely decisions.

I will certainly discuss this with the colleagues in the Government and regional administrations. It is essential to act promptly and understand the market’s needs.

We have a programme for expanding the pharmaceutical industry, which is part of the technological leadership initiative. This programme specifically addresses medication production. By 2030, we aim to meet 90 percent of the demand for vital medicines with domestic medications, and 40 percent of the demand for medical products.

Overall, this work is moving, and the pace is good. However, this is a major undertaking, and things do not always go without a fault. Please provide the details, and we will see if there are any disruptions. I am sure there are.

Regarding insulin, we have always had sufficient supplies of it. Normal saline is not a problem. I am following these developments. It is not about the saline solution itself, but the package. What happened is that two agencies – the Ministry of Industry and Trade and the Healthcare Ministry – failed to agree on the package price in time. The proposed price made production a loss-making operation, forcing manufacturers to import packages.

All due decisions have been made by now, and I hope these setbacks are a thing of the past. We will certainly look into this specific case.

Thank you.

Dmitry Kulko: Mr Peskov, please take the baton.

Dmitry Peskov: Thank you. Let’s go into the audience.

Remark from the audience.

Dmitry Peskov: You know, we won’t go far like that.

Vladimir Putin: Go ahead, please. But let’s not act that way. Chaos will reign this hall, and we won’t be able to cope with it. Please.

Ksenia Aksyonova: Thank you. I apologise.

Ksenia Aksyonova, Spas TV channel.

I will ask questions that have in common a phrase of a person whom I know you respect very much and whom the entire Russian church loves. This is the spiritual father of our Patriarch, Elder Iliy (Nozdrin).

At the beginning of the special military operation, he listed three conditions for victory: ban abortions, ban foul language, and bury Lenin’s body.

I have three questions on these three points.

First, abortions. Our Patriarch has been talking about removing abortions from the compulsory medical insurance system each and every year, because it is not a medical procedure, and it does not help but maims. The leaders of traditional religions in Russia support the Patriarch in this. Will this be done?

Second, foul language. Recently, you have given an exhaustive opinion on the subject saying that it is anti-prayer and an invocation of dark forces. In order not to repeat myself, I will ask specifically about dark forces, because esoterics, occult science, fortune telling, accessible pornography are currently booming in Russia, and people are now spending more money on psychics than on doctors. Porn sites are now the most visited in our country. Will there be any measures taken to restrict these clearly dangerous types of activity?

Third, burying Lenin’s body. I am not talking about an assessment of his actions right now. You have done that many times. I’m referring specifically to fulfilling his will and that of his family, and that keeping an embalmed body in the Mausoleum is a pagan and ungodly custom. Please tell me what is preventing us from burying Lenin's body?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: These questions are clearly not for an extended news conference or a direct line. All of them are very sensitive.

As for abortions, of course, here we should be thinking about how not to harm people’s religious beliefs and at the same time deal with our demographic challenges. However, we should also think about the level of well-being of Russian families with children, their future and women’s right to make decisions. This is a delicate issue that cannot be resolved at a news conference, just like porn sites and so on.

See, some people don’t like that YouTube is slowing down. You say, “in our country,” but I think porn sites are visited all over the world. First come porn sites, and then one can think about ordering a cutlet, you see. All over the world. This is not just our problem; it is a problem in many other countries.

What answer can there be? In fact, any bans are possible, but it is always about offering a more interesting alternative to porn sites, so that a person would go to a porn site and say: I have already seen this, I want to watch something different. Something captivating. (Laughter in the audience.)

The same goes for the burial of Lenin’s body. Someday, society will probably come to this. But today, especially today, we must not take a single step that would split the society in Russia. That’s how I see it.

Overall, Iliy is right, of course. I like him and always listen to what he says. I know, he told me about it.

Dmitry Peskov: Can we take a question from that sector?

Mr President, Kolesnikov is there. I have completely forgotten about him. If I may.

Vladimir Putin: Please go ahead, Andrei.

Andrei Kolesnikov: Good afternoon.

Andrei Kolesnikov, Kommersant newspaper.

Vladimir Putin: Good afternoon.

Andrei Kolesnikov: Mr President, the war has been on for nearly three years now, and we all have changed much. The war changed everyone. How have you changed? Have you found out anything new about yourself?

I have one more question, if Mr Peskov does not object. No one has asked this question yet, and perhaps never will, but I am curious. Some time ago, as is widely known, US President Joe Biden pardoned his son Hunter, who had been convicted of making a false statement when buying a firearm. This caused quite a stir around the world, and everyone had something to say about that, yet you remained silent. Perhaps, you have nothing to say about that. What do you think about that anyway?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: They say silence is golden. It is better to keep things to yourself sometimes.

Thank you for the question, though.

Regarding Biden pardoning his son, even though he promised not to do so, it is a delicate matter. Our history has other examples to offer. Everyone saw the famous painting, Ivan the Terrible and His Son Ivan. That story may be a legend or not, just like what happened to the son of Peter the Great, Alexei. Or take Stalin – and this is no legend, when he refused to exchange his son Yakov, who was in captivity, for Field Marshal Paulus, saying, “I will not exchange a marshal for a soldier.”

You see, it is a personal decision, but during the war even surrendering was considered an act of treason. Why? You can cite all kinds of reasons, but at that time the country was facing possible annihilation of not only its statehood, but also its people. It was a battle for survival of the ethnicity, our nation. The measures taken to ensure victory were harsh, if not cruel.

Considering this public mindset, which Stalin likely abided by, he was unable to save his son. He said what he said and did what he did.

As we know, Stalin’s son was executed in a camp, while Paulus was “used” during the Nuremberg Trials. When Paulus entered the courtroom, everyone gasped as no one expected to see him there.

As for Biden, he is a politician, you know, and it is always important to understand what is dominating you – a politician or a human. It turns out Biden is more human than politician. I would not judge him for that.

Alexandra Suvorova: The first part of Andrei Kolesnikov’s question was about the three years of the special military operation and the ongoing hostilities.

Vladimir Putin: What has changed?

Andrei Kolesnikov: How have you changed over the past three years?

Vladimir Putin: You know we all change every day, and every hour. I think everyone in the audience and the people who are listening or watching us also change. That is the fact of life: everything changes, and nothing stands still. These past three years, or rather over two years, have been a serious test for all of us, including our country and me personally.

Let me give it to you straight: we are sitting here, joking occasionally, with laughter being heard in the audience, but I now make fewer jokes and almost stopped laughing.

There is another circumstance. I am now honing what I consider my skills – let us call them that – in identifying key issues and concentrating my attention and energy on solving them.

Dmitry Peskov: Moving on. Let's go to the diametrically opposite sector.

I see RBC. RBC, please.

Polina Khimshiashvili: Good afternoon.

Polina Khimshiashvili, RBC.

Just to follow up on the question already posed. You have said that now you laugh and smile less. If it were possible to go back to February 2022, would you change your decision?

Vladimir Putin: Such a hypothetical question: “If it were possible…” You know, if I could look at the situation in 2022, knowing what is happening now, what would I think? That the decision that was taken in the beginning of 2022 should have been taken earlier. This is my first point.

And second, being aware of this, we should have simply started to get ready for these measures, including for the special military operation. Indeed, the Crimean events were simply spontaneous and we also started the events of 2022 without any special preparations. But why did we start them? It’s because it was impossible for us to stand still any longer and tolerate and wait until the situation becomes worse for us. That's what it's all about.

After all, the Kiev authorities declared that they were not going to honour the Minsk agreements. They said it in a straightforward manner, laying their claims on some sort of weapons of mass destruction. We saw that we had been deceived regarding the Minsk agreements, with war and massacre and destruction of people in Donbass going on for eight years. Nothing was happening, they repudiated the Minsk agreements.

What’s more, we saw that they simply set on military development of these territories while at the same time destroying everything connected with Russia. We could no longer remain in the state we were in. They forced us to do what we did. If we had known in advance what was going to happen, of course, we would have engaged in serious systemic preparations. That’s what I would mean.

Dmitry Peskov: Friends, we have already been working for four hours.

Vladimir Putin: Let’s give the floor to the colleagues. Please pass the microphone.

Yekaterina Lazareva: Thank you, Mr President.

Hello,

Yekaterina Lazareva, URA.RU agency.

Today, you mentioned European leaders as well as the new and the current American leader.

My question is: in 2025, Russia will mark the 80^th anniversary of Victory in the Great Patriotic War, and I know that you are already extending invitations to leaders from various countries. However, if we recall, this year, for the anniversary of the Allied landing in Normandy, France did not invite us. Additionally, there will be memorial events at Auschwitz in January 2025, and to my knowledge, we have not been invited either.

Have you extended invitations to our allies in the Anti-Hitler Coalition for Victory anniversary celebrations in 2025, encouraging them to come to Moscow? Is it important to you that the leaders of the United States, the United Kingdom, and perhaps France attend, or at least send representatives?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: First, as for being invited anywhere, we are not seeking invitations. We are happy here at home. Our focus is on strengthening ourselves, that is the essence of our work.

Second, we will never forget the sacrifices our people made in the fight against Nazism. The most important thing is that we remember. If other countries are trying to forget, it reflects the priorities of today’s leaders, who are focused on undermining Russia as a whole, forgetting, erasing, and shifting focus. But that is their own business.

We will be happy to welcome anyone who wishes to join us in celebrating this significant anniversary. While I personally sign some invitations, the Foreign Ministry handles most of the arrangements. My stance is that we are open to all who wish to be with us in Moscow on those days and mark this important anniversary.

We will be happy to welcome everyone, including the participants of the Anti-Hitler Coalition, who made a significant contribution to the victory over Nazism, such as the United States and Great Britain with its northern convoys. There were many heroes among them too, and we honour and respect them. Moreover, I believe there are still veterans among them. The British sailors demonstrated true heroism, and the Americans fought during the landing in northern France.

Indeed, their participation and losses are not comparable to those of the Soviet people in the Great Patriotic War. We lost 27 million, while the United States lost around 500,000, and Great Britain lost even less: around 400,000, if I am not mistaken. Although in World War I, they lost 1.5 million. So, the scale of their contribution to Victory is different, but their involvement was still significant, especially since they were with us. They supported us through Lend-Lease. It is true, though, that we eventually paid for it in full. When I became President, we paid off the entire Lend-Lease debt. The Americans got that money from us, you see. We paid that in full, even though so many years passed by.

Nonetheless, we value the contribution of our allies to the shared struggle and will be happy to welcome anyone who wishes to join us in celebrating the joy of Victory.

Dmitry Kulko: Mr President, we still have many questions left, including personal ones.

Vladimir Putin: Let’s take another question from the audience.

Yamal. What is Yamal up to?

Andrei Zhizhin: Good afternoon, Mr President.

Andrei Zhizhin, Yamal-Media.

Western countries have imposed over 20,000 sanctions…

Vladimir Putin: It is 40,000, I believe.

Andrei Zhizhin: 40,000?

Vladimir Putin: Frankly, I stopped counting.

Andrei Zhizhin: They have a particular issue with our progressive development in the Arctic. It has come to the point where they openly declare their goal to destroy and kill the liquefied natural gas production projects in the Arctic.

What are they afraid of? Do they have any success with slowing the pace of our development in the Arctic? How are we going to respond?

Vladimir Putin: They are afraid of the competition. They are leveraging political tools to engage in unfair competition.

Take the well-known company NOVATEK. It is not an industry leader; other countries, including the United States, produce more LNG. However, we are getting bigger, and they are trying to hamper our growth using unfair methods for keeping competition in check.

This may backfire if they continue to deal with competitors using non-economic methods. They will eventually lose their competitive edge. Not tomorrow, perhaps, but someday they will if it goes on like that.

Are they in our way or not? Yes, they are. Are they creating problems for us? Yes, they are. Will they be able to completely shut us down or to destroy us? No, they will not. They might cause us a certain amount of harm, but, without a doubt, we will overcome these difficulties, just as we have overcome energy supply challenges in the past. Moreover, the global demand for energy resources did not go anywhere, as the global economy still needs them. The demand for them is on the rise and will continue to grow (this is not our data; it comes from the world economic institutions), and this product will remain in demand on international markets. We will continue to expand our share on the global LNG market.

By the way, the same applies to pipeline gas supplies. Ukraine refused to renew the transit contract. It was not us who did it. Ukraine did. They refused to renew the contract, even though they used to receive about US$700–800 million a year under it.

Now, the question is what to do with it. But that is not our problem. It was Ukraine who cut off our gas supply to European consumers. On one hand, it is eating from their hand because it can survive, not just war, but survive only with the support of the West, including Europe, but at the same time, it is creating problems for them by cutting off supplies of our relatively cheap gas. That contract is clearly history. Fine, we will survive. Gazprom will survive.

By the way, the other day our intelligence services told me that saboteurs, clearly Ukrainian ones, were detained in Slovakia. They had maps of Slovakia’s gas infrastructure facilities on them.

I was briefed about this just recently. I will ask our intelligence agencies to request information from their colleagues about what exactly occurred, the connections are still in place. You see, it is not enough for them to carry out terrorist attacks in our country; now they are targeting European countries.

Once again, they are eating from their hand, and now they are attempting acts of terror in Europe. But that is their choice. Our choice is to pursue cooperation, and we will push forward to achieve our goals.

Kosmos, go ahead. And I can see BBC, too. You will soon get your chance to put us under fire. Go ahead. All we do is defend ourselves.

Dmitry Maslak: Thank you.

I am a staff correspondent for the Russian Service of China state television in Moscow. We work here in Russia, and I am a Russian citizen, although I am considered a foreign journalist.

If I may, I will start with a question from China state television, from CGTN, because thanks to them I got here, and we have been working here for the second year already.

First question. Today’s programme is called “Results of the Year,” and throughout the year you have been saying that Chinese peace initiatives are among the most – I cannot remember the exact wording – but you have said that they were more realistic than all the others proposed by the mediator countries.

We have all heard and remember that the West has exhausted its trust limit, and Russia has been deceived by European leaders, as they themselves admitted. But if we talk about specifics, Mr Trump and his assistant Keith Kellogg say that it is possible to end the war even before the inauguration on January 20.

We are not talking about any country joining NATO… But is it possible to cease fire in one minute? Is Russia ready to at least take this simple step if European and American partners manage to convince Kiev?

The entire world is really tired with the Ukraine crisis, and I think people in Russia now want peace, too. This is a simple step: nobody risks anything if everything just stops where it is. If promises are not kept or broken, it may continue. No one will lose anything if it just stops at some point

And my second question, since this is a mixed-format event. I live in Korolev and would like to draw your attention to the largest science town in Russia, because in fact we, the residents of Korolev, have many questions.

Currently, a National Space Centre is being built at the Khrunichev centre, and many residents of Korolev, and we are talking about a quarter of a million, residents of the Moscow Region are perplexed: are we still the historical space capital, where Korolev and leading designers worked, or not? For example, perhaps we need a special economic zone on the territory of the integrated house-building factory, which they are trying to divide now; because the city needs a boost, it needs to regain its title as the country’s historical space capital, because Energia RSC continues to work there, among other things.

This calls for building a third entrance to the city. Everyone is asking for it, because people spend up to four hours in traffic jams. When this event is over, we will drive all the way up there to be stuck in that notorious traffic jam for three and a half hours. We need a flyover. We have a little problem with democracy in the city. Sorry, these are pressing issues.

Dmitry Peskov: You have combined two roles: a citizen and a journalist.

Dmitry Maslak: A direct line and a news conference.

Alexandra Suvorova: Since you are already here.

Dmitry Maslak: In fact, yes. A third entrance to Korolev. You have used this flyover personally. A third entrance is necessary, because we are stuck, we cannot waste time in these traffic jams. I believe the entire city is applauding now, because if you can solve this problem, it would make us very happy.

Thank you very much.

Colleagues, I apologise.

Vladimir Putin: Your employer will not be happy about the second part of your question. It is not what he has sent you here for. But you got me right: you should care about your home. This is absolutely true.

The idea of a third entrance to Korolev was discussed. I know about it from our previous discussions on the development of Korolev as a space capital. Another centre that is under construction in Moscow is extremely important for the development of the space industry, but Korolev remains a prominent space centre. I will not go into detail now, but Korolev as a science city certainly deserves to be given attention. I will discuss this matter with my colleagues by all means, both in the Moscow Region and with those who are working in the aircraft and space sector. They have various plans.

There are grounds for the idea of a special economic zone [in Korolev]. I will not present a final decision now, but this is something that can and should be given attention. You are right that we should think about using the potential of Korolev. This is the first point.

Second, regarding the peace initiatives of the People’s Republic of China, Brazil and South Africa. We have taken note of them because this is a sincere attempt to find a solution. We regard it as a balanced attempt that is not being imposed on either side, Ukraine or Russia. That is because these initiatives have been proposed by neutral countries, which are not interfering in the conflict, unlike the Western countries, which are actually waging a war against us by the proxy of Ukrainians. And so, their initiatives must be analysed very carefully because they are actually a party to the conflict.

As for stopping the conflict where it is, you see, I have already spoken about the situation. We see the exhaustion of weapons, equipment, ammunition and, most importantly, personnel in the Ukrainian armed forces. They are running out of all this.

What do we really see on the battlefield now? Our army is advancing, while the opponent is unable to become entrenches in the positions in has retreated to at any given day or moment. Its troops have retreated in an organised manner, but they cannot consolidate their hold on them, because our men will continue to advance tomorrow, and so on and so forth.

We pause for a week – we give the enemy a chance to gain a foothold and fortify their positions. It will give them the opportunity to rest, regroup and rearm. Most importantly, it will allow them to recruit and train soldiers. With the current shortage of personnel, they literally grab people off the streets, as I told the Defence Ministry board – they cart people off like stray dogs. But stray dogs at least are taken to animal shelters, and subsequently put up for adoption, and eventually get a new home. Unlike them, Ukrainian men are being sent for slaughter.

They have no time for training, and our military see this on the battlefield: their training is lacking, it is not anything like a Soviet military school; this is a totally different story. Even those who are trained in Western countries are not good enough compared to the Soviet training because their instructors have never fought themselves; they have never participated in real action. How can they train anyone?

The point is that a lengthy period of relative truce will give the enemy the opportunity to improve this aspect as well – train and retrain, and consolidate their personnel. Some battalions of the Ukrainian army have only 35 or 40 percent of the required number of fighters. You have a battalion, but no personnel in it. Do you really want to give them the opportunity to reman their units?

We do not need a truce. We need peace: a long-term and lasting peace with guarantees for the Russian Federation and its citizens. It is difficult to say how these guarantees can be provided, but it is a place to start.

In fact, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban put forth a proposal for a short-term truce. This is what he told me – I do not think Victor will be angry with me if I reveal a part of our conversation – he said, it will not hurt to call a Christmas truce, just for a day or two, and the enemy will not be able to do anything in these two or three days. I said, you are probably right, but you should first ask the Ukrainian side. We have earlier agreed to at least three such proposals – on navigation in the Black Sea, on energy infrastructure, and so on.

Erdogan contacted me; ask your President. This is true, he made a proposal to me as an intermediary. I said I had to think about it. The next day, just a day later, I called him and said we agreed. Suddenly, the head of the Ukrainian regime announced there would be no talks and no truce. So, I called Erdogan and asked what that meant? He said: this is what our partners do. I said: well, all right.

I have asked Orban the same question. He proposed a Christmas truce, and he also proposed a prisoner exchange. I have not refused anything. I said we needed to think, but you should ask them. He did. The next day, the head of the [Kiev] regime said that there would be no truce, no prisoner exchange. This is the answer to your question.

Dmitry Kulko: We have been on the air for over four hours now. Let’s wrap it up.

Vladimir Putin: I promised [to take a question from] the BBC.

Go ahead.

Alexandra Suvorova: They promised to attack.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, you promised to attack. They gladly do so even without promises. This is their job; it is what they are paid for.

Steven Rosenberg: BBC News.

Exactly 25 years ago, Boris Yeltsin resigned, transferred power to you, and said, “Take care of Russia.” After 25 years, do you believe you have taken care of Russia? Because looking from the outside, what do we see? We see substantial losses in the so-called special military operation that you declared; and we see Ukrainian soldiers in the Kursk Region. You criticise NATO expansion, but there is more NATO now on Russia’s borders: Sweden and Finland. There are sanctions, high inflation, and demographic problems. But what do you think? Have you taken care of your country?

Vladimir Putin: Yes. I believe I have not just taken care of it, but I believe we have stepped back from the edge of the abyss, because with everything that was happening in and around Russia before and since was leading us towards a complete, total loss of our sovereignty. Without sovereignty, Russia cannot exist as an independent state.

Let me draw your attention to what you said about Boris Yeltsin. Everything seemed fine; they patted him on the back patronisingly, and turned a blind eye when he drank. He was welcome in all Western circles. But as soon as he raised his voice in defence of Yugoslavia, as soon as he said that it violated international law and the UN Charter, as soon as he said that striking Belgrade, the capital of a European country, without UN Security Council approval was unacceptable in modern Europe, they immediately started having a go at him, calling him names, saying he was a drunk, and so on. Do you not remember that?

I have done everything so that Russia can be an independent and sovereign state that is capable of making decisions in its own interests, rather than in the interests of the countries that were dragging it towards them, patting it on the back, only to use it for their own purposes. I could stop there. But I understand you have laid out the entire set of arguments that seem support your stance.

You mentioned inflation. Yes, there is inflation. We will fight it. But we also have economic growth. We rank fourth in the world in purchasing power parity. Please share that with your readers. We are first in Europe, far ahead of the United Kingdom, which, I believe, is not even in the top five.

But we are ready to work with the UK, if the UK wants to work with us. If not, that is fine. We will cope without our former WWII Allies.

Dmitry Kulko: Mr President, there are numerous questions from Russians, including some of a personal nature. Time is short, so I suggest we proceed in a rapid-fire manner.

Dmitry Peskov: We have already been at it for four and a half hours.

Vladimir Putin: Let's bring it to a close.

Alexandra Suvorova: Do you have a dream? Not one related to governance, but a personal one. What is your dream?

Vladimir Putin: Yes, I do, of course. But it is a personal dream. May I keep it to myself?

Dmitry Kulko: A question from social media. Alexandra Pukhova asks: Are you a happy person?

Vladimir Putin: Do you consider this a rapid-fire question? Am I meant to respond with a simple yes or no? How can I possibly convey that with just yes or no?

You see, the point is this: everyone knows I was born into a humble, working-class family. My ancestors crossed the Danube back in the 19^th century, and I have a document from the archives showing one of my ancestors was awarded the Cross of St George, one of the first Crosses of St George. Then my father, along with all my relatives on both my mother's and father's sides, fought on the fronts of the Great Patriotic War. Many died, indeed a great many; probably every second one fell. My father was left disabled by the war. I myself served in the foreign intelligence services, and my work has always been linked to serving the Fatherland. And of course, the fact that it is not the first time the people, the citizens of Russia, have entrusted me with leading the Russian state is a profound honour and an immense responsibility. So, in principle, one could say, ”That's it, I am happy, thank you.“ One might also say, ”God forbid, what more could I want?“

But you know, the reality is that happiness cannot be complete until our lads return from the front, until their mothers and wives reunite with them, until their children embrace them, until our young men and women form the right number of families for us, for the country, for Russia, and have children.

I deeply desire for our scientists, artists, and cultural figures to realise their aspirations. Only then, perhaps, might it be possible to claim that I am happy.

Alexandra Suvorova: There's a question from St. Petersburg: Why do various foreigners insult you, and yet you remain silent?

Vladimir Putin: It comes down to one's level of culture. I have said before: ”He who calls names is called that himself.“ In my opinion, such behaviour is born out of impotence. Why should we showcase such impotence? We have ample arguments to state our position clearly and succinctly.

Dmitry Kulko: An SMS from the Stavropol Region: Are there any duties you despise?

Vladimir Putin: No, there aren't. You see, if people have entrusted me with the responsibilities of the presidency, there are certain obligations, and I aim to fulfil them with honour, at least with complete dedication.

I am aware that if I begin to harbour aversion towards any aspect of my official duties, the desired outcomes will not be achieved. That's why, long ago, I resolved that everything I am required to do should be approached with a sense of satisfaction.

Alexandra Suvorova: A question from the Nizhny Novgorod Region. Whose portrait is hanging in your office?

Vladimir Putin: I do not have a portrait in my office. I have an icon in one of my offices, and a bust of Lomonosov in the other.

Dmitry Kulko: Another text message from Moscow. Would you grant political asylum to Zelensky? He will sure need it soon.

Vladimir Putin: I do not know. I do not think he will need it. In the most likely scenario – I cannot say what he will do, probably the same as other individuals from the top political leadership of Ukraine who went abroad – he will leave. I think those people whose interests he serves today will take care of him.

If by any chance he suddenly popped out of nowhere, like a jack-in-the-box, appearing when we would least expect it, and said he needed political asylum – Russia never refuses anyone.

Alexandra Suvorova: A question from Tatyana Kostyuchenko. What is Russia for you?

Vladimir Putin: This is a complex issue.

You see the map opposite us. Russia, like any other country, is first of all a vast territory. But it is not just the territory – it is history, culture, our customs and traditions. This all is Russia. And in any case, the most important component is the people.

You know what I sometimes find myself doing lately? When I watch something – I rarely watch television, I do not have time, I almost never go online – I always note our achievements, the successes of our people.

I recently watched the World Swimming Championships. The swimmers – strong torsos, healthy, confident, world champions, beautiful women. I look at the boys and girls who achieve success at international [student] Olympiads. I look at our young scientists with whom I recently met. Honestly, I look at them and I feel happy and proud, as I would have felt at the success of my family members. Without any exaggeration, I look at them, and I am happy and proud as if they were my family. What I am saying is I view Russia as a family.

Alexandra Suvorova: Mr President, millions of viewers have been watching us for more than four and a half hours. We have answered numerous questions, and it is clear that there will be many more.

In conclusion, what else would you like to say to the nation?

Vladimir Putin: I just said that I view Russia as my family.

We are holding this conference ahead of the best time of the year, a season of joy – the New Year and Christmas. I speak to many representatives of different religions, and they all say that they celebrate Christmas, just as our neighbours celebrate Eid al-Adha, Passover, and so on.

When I meet with clergy, I often ask them: what do your people share with you at the everyday level, what do they most often talk about, what do they regret? I do not expect them to break the Seal of Confession, of course, but do you want to know what they answer? What is the most common regret? Giving too little attention to their children.

The New Year’s is a family holiday, and Christmas even more so, so I would like to wish you to spend more time with your loved ones. And I want to wish you all every success, happiness and prosperity.

Alexandra Suvorova: Thank you very much.

Dmitry Kulko: Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Thank you.

Press statements following talks with Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban

2024-07-05T21:11:23+04:00

Vladimir Putin and Prime Minister of Hungary Viktor Orban made press statements following their talks.

President of Russia Vladimir Putin: Mr Prime Minister, ladies and gentlemen,

Our substantive talks with the Prime Minister of Hungary, Mr Viktor Orban, have just concluded.

It is important that we maintain a dialogue even in the current difficult geopolitical situation.

Like during many of our previous meetings, we had a truly useful and sincere conversation on topical issues of bilateral cooperation and also, naturally, on the acute issues on the international and regional agenda, including developments around Ukraine.

Let me note that Russia and Hungary continue cooperating in a number of areas, above all in the energy sector. Healthy pragmatism and mutual benefit are the key principles.

Work is underway on our flagship joint project to expand the Paks Nuclear Power Plant. Putting into operation the fifth and sixth units will more than double the capacity of the station, hence improving the energy supply of the Hungarian economy and powering industrial enterprises and households with cheap and clean energy. When building new units, only the most advanced engineering and technological solutions are used, and physical safety and environmental requirements are fully ensured.

We continue working together in medicine and pharmaceutical industry. We speak in favour of continuing work in priority areas of cooperation.

Of course, a substantive, direct and honest discussion was held on pressing international issues, including the Ukraine conflict and possible ways to settle it.

Mr Prime Minister told me about his recent meetings in Kiev, where he advanced a number of proposals, among them a call for a ceasefire to create conditions for peace negotiations with Moscow.

As for Russia, I have repeatedly said that we remain open for a discussion on a political and diplomatic settlement. However, the opposite side only makes clear its reluctance to resolve this issue in this manner. Ukraine’s sponsors continue using this country and its people as a ram, making it a victim in the confrontation with Russia.

As we see the state of affairs, including in the light of what we heard today from Mr Prime Minister, Kiev is still not ready to abandon the idea of waging “war until final victory.”

In my opinion, the Kiev regime does not allow the very idea of cessation of hostilities because in this case the pretext for extending martial law disappears. And if the martial law has to be cancelled, it means that the elections, which were not held on time, will have to be held. But the chances of winning them are close to zero for the Ukrainian rulers who have lost their ranking and legitimacy.

Meanwhile, we outlined our peace initiative quite recently at my meeting with the senior officials of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation. We believe that its implementation would make it possible to end hostilities and begin negotiations. Moreover, this should not just be a truce or a temporary ceasefire, nor should it be a pause that the Kiev regime could use to recover its losses, regroup and rearm. Russia advocates a full and final end to the conflict. The conditions for that, as I have already said, are set out in my speech at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. We are talking about the complete withdrawal of all Ukrainian troops from the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics and from the Zaporozhye and Kherson regions. There are other conditions as well. But this is a subject for fairly detailed consideration in the course of possible joint work.

Ladies and gentlemen,

Given that Hungary has held the Presidency of the Council of the European Union since July 1, Mr Orban and I exchanged views on the state of affairs in relations between Russia and the European Union, which are currently at their lowest point. We also talked about the tentative principles of a future security architecture in Europe, also tentative.

Overall, the talks were very timely and, I think, useful for both sides. Of course, Mr Prime Minister presented a general idea of the Western outlook, which is known to us, including from the point of view of Ukraine’s interests. Nevertheless, we are grateful to Mr Prime Minister for visiting Moscow. We see it as an attempt to restore dialogue and give it an additional impetus.

Thank you.

Prime Minister of Hungary Viktor Orban (retranslated): Ladies and gentlemen,

Mr President,

Today I met with the President of Russia for the 11^th time. This meeting is special because it is being held at the time of war, when Europe badly needs peace. Peace is what Europe needs most of all. We see the struggle for peace as the main task for the next six months of our European Council presidency.

I have told Mr President that Europe received the greatest impetus for development during peaceful decades. We in Europe have now been living in the shadow of war for two and a half years. This is causing enormous difficulties in Europe. We cannot feel safe, we see pictures of destruction and suffering. This war has already started affecting our economic growth and our competitiveness.

In general, as I have already told Mr President, Europe needs peace. Over the past two years we have realised that we will not achieve peace without diplomacy, without channels of communication. Peace will not come by itself, we need to work for it.

I was just discussing with Mr President today the ways to achieve peace. I wanted to know what the shortest road to end the war is. I wanted to hear Mr President’s opinion on three important questions, and I heard his opinion. What does he think about the current peace initiatives? What does he think about a ceasefire and peace talks, and in what succession can they be carried out? And the third thing that interested me was Mr President’s vision of Europe after the war. I am thankful to Mr President for this open and honest conversation.

Ladies and gentlemen.

In the recent two and a half years, there are practically no countries left that could contact both one and the other opposing parties. Hungary is just one of such few countries. This is why I was in Kiev this week, and this is why I am in Moscow now.

From my experience I understood that the positions are poles apart. Very many steps are needed to be done to become closer to the end of the war. However, we have made the most important step – we have established contact. And I will continue to work towards this end.

Thank you.

Question: How did Mr Zelensky react to your ceasefire proposal? What did he say to that?

Viktor Orban: I told that to the President of Russia.

Question: Mr President, could you tell us?

Vladimir Putin: No.

Vladimir Putin and President of Vietnam To Lam’s statements to the media

2024-06-21T12:29:41+04:00

President of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam To Lam (retranslated): President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin, guests, correspondents and journalists.

On behalf of the party, the Vietnamese state and its people, I would like to offer myheartfelt greetings and welcome President Vladimir Putin with the delegation of high-ranking officials from the Russian Federation to Vietnam.

We are delighted to host your state visit to Vietnam which is taking place at the invitation of General Secretary of the Communist Party of Vietnam Nguyen Phu Trong. This visit is particularly important as it coincides with the 30^th anniversary of the Treaty on the Principles of Friendly Relations between Vietnam and the Russian Federation. Preparations for marking 75 years of diplomatic relations between our countries next year are advancing at full speed.

Our countries share traditional bonds of friendship and have forged a comprehensive strategic partnership. We have always been keen to express our deep gratitude for the assistance and support we received from the Russian people in the past, when we were fighting for our independence, as well as at the current stage in the development of our country.

Vietnam follows an independent, self-reliant, peaceful, friendly and multifaceted foreign policy, and has always viewed Russia as one of its priority foreign policy partners. We want to work with Russia to further enhance our traditional friendship which results from the constructive efforts by many generations of our two countries’ leaders and their people.

President Vladimir Putin and I have held talks that were quite a success. We exchanged views in an open and sincere manner on the cooperation between our countries in multiple aspects and also discussed international and regional matters of mutual interest for developing our two countries, as well as promoting peace, cooperation and development across the region. This was the spirit that guided our efforts to agree on the main vectors and principles for further reinforcing the comprehensive strategic partnership between Vietnam and the Russian Federation.

We also agreed to step up our cooperation based on the principles of equality, mutual respect and non-interference in each other’s domestic affairs. Guided by the core principles of the UN Charter, we will not join any unions or sign treaties with any third countries which could be detrimental to our respective independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity. We will not target any third countries either. Our mission is to promote regional and global peace and cooperation.

Regarding political relations, we agreed to step up our regular contacts and reinforce our political trust. We will step up our contacts at the party level, between our states, governments, parliaments, as well as between our ministries and agencies, while also promoting youth contacts.

Economic cooperation is one of the main pillars of our comprehensive strategic partnership. We agreed on the need to make full use of the Vietnam-EAEU Free Trade Agreement.

We also agreed to work together to overcome the challenges stemming from the international environment. We will expand our trade and bilateral investment, achieve better performance when undertaking cooperation projects in energy and gas in order to create a favourable environment for our businesses and enable them to work together in keeping with international law, including the 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea.

We also agreed to explore opportunities for stepping up our cooperation on new energy sources and clean energy, as well as facilitate the green transition and sustainable development. We will also step up our cooperation in the defence and security sectors in order to combine our efforts in countering new and traditional threats to peace in keeping with international law.

We agreed to expand our cooperation in education, research, technology, innovation and vocational training. By the same token, we are committed to having more cooperation in culture, arts, tourism, facilitating people-to-people ties and youth contacts in order to reinforce our mutual trust and friendship. We also agreed to create a favourable environment for the people of Vietnam in Russia and for Russians in Vietnam so that they benefit from stable and comfortable working and living conditions and build a genuine bridge of friendship between our two countries.

As for international and regional matters, we advocate a democratic and transparent world order with the UN Charter serving as its foundation, including the principle of non-use of force and the threat of force and resolving disputes by peaceful means. We also stand for building an inclusive and open trade system with the WTO at its core. We also stand for equal and indivisible security cooperation architecture in the Asia-Pacific Region with ASEAN playing a central role in it, and rooted in international law. We will promote international integration, including within APEC, the G20, the ASEAN Dialogue and the EAEU. We also welcome Russia's cooperation with the Greater Mekong Subregion, which contributes to peace, stability and prosperity.

As for the East Sea (South China Sea), we stand for ensuring the freedom and safety of navigation and air traffic, for resolving all disputes by peaceful means, and against using force or the threat of force. We also advocate carrying out the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties and for adopting a Code of Conduct without delay, in a substantive and effective manner and in keeping with international law.

Comrade President Vladimir Putin, journalists.

Today, we will be adopting a Joint Statement on further strengthening the comprehensive strategic partnership between the ministries and agencies of our countries. We also signed many cooperation agreements in education, research, justice and sports. This will help us develop the legal framework for stepping up our practical and fruitful ties.

I am certain that our relations will grow even stronger considering the success of President Putin's visit to Vietnam, as well as the commitment by the leaders and the people of our countries, their ministries and agencies to delivering on this vision.

I will now pass the floor to President Putin.

President of Russia Vladimir Putin: Comrade To Lam! Friends, ladies and gentlemen.

First of all, I would like to express my gratitude to Comrade Nguyen Phu Trong, General Secretary of the Communist Party of Vietnam Central Committee, to you, Comrade To Lam, as well as to the Prime Minister of Vietnam, Comrade Pham Minh Chinh, and to all our Vietnamese friends for organising our state visit, for your hospitality, for the warm and cordial welcome we have received. When I say warm, I mean not only the weather outside but also the friendly and genial welcome that the Russian delegation has been given by the people of Hanoi. I would like to take this opportunity to extend my sincerest greetings and best wishes to them.

I would like to say that Russia places great emphasis on further strengthening the Russian-Vietnamese comprehensive, longstanding and friendly relations, our strategic partnership. Our ties continue to expand and progress in the spirit of equality, mutual respect and consideration of each other’s interests.

Our countries are linked by a strong bond of shared history. Next year will mark 75 years of diplomatic relations between Russia and Vietnam. As is widely known, the Soviet Union did a lot to support the young Vietnamese statehood, assisting in the development of economic facilities and infrastructure, helping Vietnam with personnel training and improving the country’s defence capabilities.

Also, a few days ago, it was 30 years since the signing of the Treaty on Foundations of Friendly Relations between the two countries. This underlying document opened up vast opportunities to strengthen and develop the whole range of bilateral ties, giving them a powerful impetus and increasing their dynamics. And today, Comrade President and I have adopted a statement that supports the principles of the Russian-Vietnamese comprehensive strategic partnership and announces new guidelines for our joint work in the future.

I fully agree that the talks that just ended were held in a constructive and businesslike atmosphere. We have had an extensive discussion on the key areas of bilateral cooperation, and touched upon the most pressing international and regional issues.

Naturally, we dedicated considerable time to discussing mutual trade and investment. Last year, bilateral trade increased by 8 percent. The upward trend continued in the first quarter of this year, with Russian-Vietnamese trade growing by more than a third compared to the same period in 2023.

In this context, I would like to mention the tangible benefits our friends have derived from the Free Trade Agreement with the Eurasian Economic Union. Enacted in 2016, it has since then vastly promoted growth in Russian-Vietnamese trade through favourable conditions for access of goods and services to each other’s markets, also fostering investment, technology exchange and innovation.

Equally important is that our countries are consistently pursuing the transition to settlements in national currencies and striving to create sustainable channels of cooperation in lending activities and banking. Last year, transactions in Russian rubles and Vietnamese dong accounted for over 40 percent of bilateral trade volume, and in the first quarter of this year, this figure rose to nearly 60 percent.

The joint Vietnamese-Russian Bank plays a crucial role in servicing foreign trade transactions between our countries, successfully operating in the Vietnamese market for nearly 20 years. The bank shows positive growth in its key indicators, consistently offering a broad array of financial and credit services to clients from both Vietnam and Russia.

The strategic point of our bilateral cooperation is the energy sector. Over the decades, the Vietsovpetro joint venture has extracted approximately 250 million tonnes of oil from oil and gas fields in Vietnam. Simultaneously, the Petrovietnam Corporation has been operating in the Nenets Autonomous Area of Russia since 2008, braving the challenging conditions of the Far North to extract around 35 million tonnes of oil.

A Russian-Vietnamese enterprise currently produces gas motor fuel in Vietnam. Additionally, Russian companies are prepared to participate as investors and suppliers in large-scale projects utilising liquefied natural gas.

Russia and Vietnam have excellent opportunities for cooperation in renewable energy. Vietnam’s master plan for developing the nation’s energy grid already includes a joint Russia-Vietnam project for the construction of offshore wind power generation facilities in the province of Binh Thuan with a total capacity of 1,000 megawatts.

I want to note that Russian specialists contributed to the design and construction of energy facilities in Vietnam, which collectively generate more than a third of the country’s current hydropower capacity. Our company, RusHydro, plans to participate in the renovation of hydroelectric power plants along Vietnamese rivers to increase their efficiency.

Another promising area for expanding bilateral cooperation is nuclear energy. Discussions include plans for Rosatom to construct a centre for nuclear science and technology in Vietnam, along with the training of Vietnamese nuclear specialists at specialised universities in Russia.

Cooperation in the industrial sector is making strides. In Da Nang, a joint Russian-Vietnamese enterprise is involved in assembling Gazel cargo and passenger minibuses. Last year, this facility assembled 1,150 units of equipment, including buses and vans, some of which were exported to Laos and the Philippines.

We consider our cooperation on the Vladivostok – Ho Chi Minh City maritime transport corridor, a large-scale infrastructure project, to be highly promising. Since its opening in 2022, this corridor has facilitated regular cargo shipments with container ships operating on a weekly basis.

Our bilateral partnership in agriculture is progressing: mutual supplies of agricultural products are growing, and their range is expanding. Vietnam’s TH Group is building milk processing plants in several Russian regions, including the Kaluga Region and Primorye Territory. The first stage of a cattle-breeding complex for 6,000 dairy cattle began operation in the Moscow Region last year.

Russia-Vietnam cooperation in culture and education is vibrant and strong. Over the past decades, tens of thousands of Vietnamese professionals have received training or upgraded their skills in Russia. Several thousand have earned academic degrees.

Currently, more than 3,000 undergraduate and postgraduate students from Vietnam are studying in Russian universities. Speaking of academic exchanges, I must mention the Vietnam-Russia Tropical Science and Technology Research Centre in Vietnam, where Russian and Vietnamese specialists have been successfully conducting joint research for years. The centre’s projects span highly important areas, such as ecology and nature protection, medicine, combating infectious diseases and epidemics.

It has become a good tradition to hold cross culture days on a regular basis. These events help Russians and Vietnamese to learn more about each other’s history, customs and everyday life. The next Vietnam Culture Days in Russia will be held soon, between July 1 and 7, in Moscow and St Petersburg. Russian and Vietnamese film weeks, art exhibitions, photo displays, music and dance performances have been highly successful in both countries.

Tourism is also on the rise. Many Russians visit Vietnamese resorts, which is noticeably facilitated by direct flights between our two countries. I would like to note that last year, we launched flights to Vietnam from Irkutsk, and this year, regular flights between Moscow and Ho Chi Minh City.

Naturally, we also considered a number of issues on the regional agenda and touched upon current international matters. I would like to emphasise that Russia's and Vietnam's respective stances on these issues are largely in accord or closely aligned. Our countries remain committed to the principles of the rule of international law, sovereignty, and non-interference in countries' domestic affairs. They coordinate their efforts on key international platforms, including the UN, as well as within the Russia-ASEAN dialogue and at summits in East Asia.

During our discussion on the situation in the Asia-Pacific region, we expressed mutual interest in building a strong and reliable security architecture in the Asia-Pacific region based on the principles of the non-use of force and peaceful settlement of disputes, with no room for closed military-political blocs.

In conclusion, I would like to once again thank Comrade President and all our Vietnamese friends for their hospitality and substantive talks. This visit will undoubtedly contribute to the further development of the Russian-Vietnamese partnership across the board.

Thank you for your attention.

Answers to media questions following the visit to China

2024-05-18T13:56:14+04:00

Vladimir Putin replied to questions from Russian media representatives on the outcomes of his two-day state visit to the People’s Republic of China.

Question: It would not be an exaggeration to say that the whole world watched your visit here, as evidenced by a spate of news reports and publications. It is clear that the future of the rapidly changing world largely depends on the positions of Russia and China. Following your talks in China, we would like to know whether Moscow and Beijing have a shared understanding of how the future system of international security and politics should evolve.

President of Russia Vladimir Putin: First of all, I would like to thank President of the People’s Republic of China Xi Jinping and the leadership of China for this invitation and for creating a very favourable and warm atmosphere for our joint work.

On the whole, the talks were very meaningful and very substantive.

This was an official state visit, but it was also very much a working trip. From morning until evening, we spent virtually the entire day with the President of China and his colleagues. We raised multiple issues for discussion.

You said that the future depends on Russia and China, but this is only partly true. The future of humankind depends on the whole of humanity. Certainly, Russia and China are important components of modern civilisation. We have our own views on how we should develop. Certainly, our advancement will influence the advancement of all partners on the planet.

We believe that development should be constructive and peaceful, no doubt about it. Apart from our interests, it should heed the interests of all parties to international interaction.

Of course, it is necessary to strengthen the emerging multipolar world. There is absolutely no doubt that a new world is taking shape before our eyes and becoming multipolar. I believe all the people are aware of this. It is important that those who are trying to maintain their monopoly on making decisions on all issues globally should realise this (I believe that they do realise it perfectly well). Understanding this, they should do everything possible to facilitate this natural process. I repeat, this process should be peaceful and conflict-free, with the opinions of all parties to the international process fully considered. All of us should seek compromises while making the difficult decisions that lie ahead.

We are committed to this approach and to precisely this kind of work. I have discussed this repeatedly, and the President of China has also emphasised this: our interaction, cooperation and strategic partnership with China, Russia-China partnership, is not directed against anyone. Our aim is solely to create better conditions for the development of our countries to improve the well-being of the peoples of China and the Russian Federation.

Question: How did your informal meeting with Xi Jinping go? Your aide said it took place in a super-narrow format but was attended by Defence Minister Andrei Belousov and Security Council Secretary Sergei Shoigu. Did you discuss Ukraine? What would you personally consider convincing evidence of Ukraine’s readiness for talks? Earlier both you and Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov repeatedly said that the Western partners could no longer be trusted.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, this meeting took place in the narrow format. We really discussed many issues that are important for bilateral relations.

We discussed the issue of settling the Ukrainian crisis. The President of the PRC told me the main theses of what he discussed during his recent visit to Europe. He set forth his position linked with Chinese peace initiatives. We have said more than once that we believe that China is sincerely striving to settle this problem. It offers different options and is very flexible. I believe it is sincerely striving to resolve this problem. We discussed this at some length.

As for our counter partners, let’s say in this case these are Ukrainian leaders and their European and overseas bosses. Well, we have spoken about this many times.

When our troops stood near Kiev, our Western partners told us: it is impossible to sign documents when the other side puts a gun to your temple. “What should be done?” we asked. “It is necessary to withdraw troops from Kiev.” We did this. On the following day, they threw all our agreements into the dustbin and said: “Now we will fight to the end.” Their Western curators occupied the position that is now known to the whole world – to defeat Russia on the battlefield, to inflict a strategic defeat on it.

It wasn’t us who behaved in this way. These were our partners. Ukrainian officials confirmed this, in particular, the head of the Ukrainian delegation at the talks in Minsk and later in Istanbul, said this. The then Prime Minister [of Great Britain] Mr Johnson came to Kiev and advised Ukraine to continue hostilities. Mr Arakhamia, the head of the Ukrainian delegation, who now leads the ruling parliamentary party in Ukrainian parliament, said that otherwise all hostilities would have been ended a year and a half ago. He said this in public, I believe, at his meeting with journalists. Nobody actually had doubts about this.

So, let’s sum up this part of my answer to your question – we were cheated again. Now we need to understand whom and how we should deal with, whom we should trust and to what extent.

Of course, we are analysing now everything that is taking place in this regard. Of course, we are looking at what is happening around the universally announced meeting in Switzerland, in Geneva. I believe this is the venue of the meeting. We are certainly not going to discuss any formulas about which we know absolutely nothing.

But as distinct from Ukraine, we have never rejected talks. It is they who have quit the negotiating process. They announced that they are going to inflict a strategic defeat on us. It is they who said they were “going to fight to the end,” actually not to the end but to the last Ukrainian. They did everything with their own hands.

We have a foundation for the negotiating process – what we agreed on in Istanbul and a signature of the head of the Ukrainian delegation under an excerpt from this large document. He initialed it. We have this document with his signature on it. What are these other additional terms about which we have never heard and know nothing?

The goal of this event is clear. They want to gather as many countries as possible, declare that everything has been agreed upon with everyone and then present it to Russia as a resolved issue, as an ultimatum. This will never happen.

Question: Keeping with the theme of Ukraine… Yesterday, Vladimir Zelensky visited Kharkov and held a general headquarters meeting there. At the same time, we are involved in heavy fighting near Kharkov and our troops seem to be gaining success.

Vladimir Putin: The word “seem” is wrong. They are gaining success. Each day, they advance in strict conformity with the plan.

Question: What is the plan all about? Are we going to seize Kharkov? Or does our objective consist in creating a sanitary zone, as you said earlier? Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: I do not know what the head of the Ukrainian state was saying. The only thing I know is that in the final analysis, they are to blame for what is happening. The origin of the current Kiev authorities is the coup d’etat [that occurred in 2014]. This is the source of the present-day authority in Ukraine. This is my first point.

Second, [Kiev’s] Western sponsors allowed the coup to happen by facilitating and orchestrating it. They created the conditions for a smoldering conflict to grow into an armed conflict. They are to blame for this. They are attempting to lay the blame on someone else and make Russia responsible for the current tragic developments. But this is the result of their own policies.

As far as the developments in the Kharkov sector are concerned, they are also to blame for these, because they shelled and, regrettably, continue to shell residential areas in border territories [of Russia], including Belgorod. Civilians are dying there, it’s clear for everyone. They fire missiles right at the city centre, at residential areas. I said publicly that if this continues, we will be forced to create a security zone, a sanitary zone. And this is what we are doing today.

As for [the seizure of] Kharkov, there are no such plans for now.

Question: It has recently been reported that Chinese banks stopped accepting payment transfers from Russian banks. Did you discuss this issue with the Chinese leader? If so, have you reached an agreement? Have you coordinated a potential scheme of settlements that would be immune from Western sanctions? Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Sanctions imposed on third countries engaged in economic activities are doubly or triply illegitimate because sanctions are absolutely illegitimate when adopted without the approval of the UN Security Council. This goes beyond common sense when it comes to third countries.

Incidentally, the Americans or Europeans are even using such sanctions against their own allies. Europeans are not using them against the Americans, but the Americans apply such sanctions against European economic operators and often follow them through not only with regard to Russia but also against other countries in other situation. It is a common practice, and Europeans bear with this, proving yet again their vassal dependence on the sovereign over the sea. Well, whatever!

As for such decisions, they certainly do direct damage to the global economy, not just to the countries they are adopted against or their economic operators, but also to the global economy as a whole, including energy and other spheres of economic operation, and primarily the issues of settlements that are discussed by the economic operators. Solutions are possible, and there are such solutions. Of course, they should be supported at the level of governments, and I hope that this is how it will be.

The reasons behind the behaviour of large financial institutions are understandable: nobody wants to sustain losses because of US actions, even if they are illegal. However, I would like to repeat what I said before: it is silly and a huge mistake of the American political elites because they are inflicting big harm on themselves by undermining trust in the US dollar. They are gradually undermining the status of the dollar as a global settlement and reserve currency, even though they are deriving huge profits from this now. First, they adopted the Bretton Woods system. Then they abandoned the gold standard of the dollar and [formalised a floating exchange rate system under] the Jamaica Agreement. What is it based on? It fully depends on the money printing press, or putting it more gallantly, on the might and quality of the American economy. Yes, this is exactly how things stand.

All countries in the world trust the American economy, its might and stability, which is why they accept the dollars. This gives a huge and seemingly inexplicable advantage to the American economy and financial system. However, it can be presented in figures. According to our economists, it amounts to over 10 trillion dollars that have not been earned but are a gift from heaven that comes from the use of the dollar as a global reserve currency. Overall, the obligations of the US financial system to the rest of the world have been estimated at $53.4 trillion.

However, by undermining trust in the dollar for political reasons, the US authorities are weakening the main and the most powerful and important instrument of their might – the dollar itself. They are doing irreparable damage to themselves. Using one of popular sayings, they are quarrelling with their own bread and butter. This is thoughtless, but they seem unable to stop doing it.

The disadvantage of this for us is that we have to look for other solutions. However, there are also advantages, because it is unacceptable when one side is using financial and economic instruments to force its will on the rest of the world, including on the political stage. I assure you that all countries are aware of this; you only have to look at how fast their dollar-denominated reserves are diminishing. The world is responding. I believe that the [de-dollarisation] process is inevitable.

We have started doing this, and it is a correct process. It entails certain shortcomings and problems, but it is correct in general, when we speak about making settlements in national currencies or creating other settlement instruments jointly with other countries. The process is underway; it has begun, and it cannot be stopped.

Question: Mr President, let me return to the subject of Ukraine and certain Western initiatives.

You have mentioned yesterday’s lengthy discussion with Xi Jinping on this issue. Could you please tell us whether you touched upon Macron’s initiative to declare an “Olympic truce”? Do you believe an Olympic truce is possible now? Or is this another attempt by the West to lure Russia into a trap, especially amid its military successes? Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, President Xi Jinping mentioned this, and we did discuss this issue briefly.

What I think is, first, the principles of Olympism, including the Olympic truce concept, are very sound principles. There is a reason the international community has spent centuries working them out. True, few countries ever invoked this particular principle, with the exception of Ancient Greece, but in general, the idea itself is good and constructive. The issue lies elsewhere. It has to do with the current international sports officials themselves violating the principles of the Olympic Charter. They are politicising sport, which is absolutely unacceptable, because the purpose of sport is to serve as a platform for communication between people and for negotiating compromises on other issues, including political ones.

They are violating their own rules, now with regard to Russia, by excluding our athletes from the Olympic Games, not allowing them to display their flag, anthem, or national colours. They are violating the rules with regard to us, but they want us to comply with the rules that they dictate to us. Has anyone given this a thought? Is this in line with the elementary norms of justice? No. They are violating the rules but they demand that we comply with them. Well, friends, this is not getting us anywhere. No one has ever reached agreement like this. Before demanding anything or expecting others to do something, one needs to follow these rules.

Overall though, sports are certainly progressing, and this progress will continue. I don’t know how the Olympic movement will fare now, with such officials. If they put money first, if money is the only thing that motivates or drives them, if sport becomes a commercial enterprise solely aimed at making a profit, I cannot see a bright future for the Olympic movement.

Look, sport has actually transformed into a for-profit corporation. What is their top priority? To raise money from sponsors and to have large information companies pay for broadcasting. This is just a big business profiting from sporting events. But the principle of Olympism is something else – it is about humanitarian values.

Question: This week, the US imposed duties on a number of Chinese goods – chips, semi-conductors, metals and solar batteries. Most important, it raised the duty on Chinese electric cars, I believe, four times, up to 100 percent. Can these moves be considered sanctions against China? Is Russia-China cooperation helping counter such attacks?

Vladimir Putin: Of course, on the surface, they look like sanctions but these are already elements of an economic war to a certain extent. This is not the first time they have been used. Incidentally, I can assure you that politics, the character of Russia-China relations and the situation in Ukraine have nothing to do with this. These are just elements of unfair competition.

We were making an MS-21 aircraft. We agreed on purchasing certain components that we had to put into its wings. These components have nothing to do with military production. They simply denied them to us by including them into a sanctions list. Indicatively, this list was linked with military production whereas the components we wanted had nothing to do with it whatsoever. Yes, we lost time and this production was pushed back by about a year and a half. But eventually, we made these components, these aircraft wing carbon fibre tows. We made them and they are even better than the American ones in quality and durability. The result will be the same in this case.

I have just explained at the meeting with students why such restrictions were introduced against the Chinese auto industry, against electric cars. Just because they have become better and cheaper than European or American ones. That’s it. They are simply killing competitors, in this case, the Chinese rival and do not let it into their market. This is a prohibitive duty. The same is taking place in Europe, of course.

As soon as some country, a global development centre, as we often put it, is developing and becoming more competitive, they stop it and put it down, they try to make it happen.

Can Russia-China cooperation counter this in some way? To prevent this from happening, they are creating problems in financial items because we could purchase more. But we are restricted in purchasing these products because of money transfer problems.

Is it possible to do something about this? Yes, it is. We will develop joint productions. This requires time, just as it was with aircraft components when we had to delay their production by half a year. This is the same case. We will go for joint production.

This is the most erroneous and stupid way of building an international economic system. The correct idea is that the market decides everything and they were drumming it into our heads for decades, if I may put it this way – pardon the fancy language. But the market will still push them down. Do you understand what the point is? They are creating this problem for themselves with their own hands.

What will this lead to? They have introduced sanctions against various goods. What will it lead to? Inflation in the US. This is what they will get. Because they will try to make these products themselves, at their own sites, paying wages to their own workers, paying for their expensive metal and their expensive energy. This is the result – the German economy in Europe is already operating nearly in the red while the French economy is teetering on the brink of recession. If the German economy starts coughing and feels bad, the entire European economy will not feel quite well, putting it mildly. This is the result of such decisions. These are not market decisions. They are completely stupid and have no prospects whatsoever.

Question: Please, tell us at what conditions you would attend a peace conference on Ukraine in Switzerland if you should receive such an invitation. Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Well, politics does not know the subjunctive mood: “if only.” We will not continue. You know what would have happened there in other cases. But there are no “ifs.” They do not invite us. Moreover, they say they cannot imagine us being there. So what will we be [talking] about? “If you do this” looks like we are trying to get invited. “But if you do this, and if this is the case, then we would make these decisions.” Well, if they cannot imagine us being there, so much the better. This is first.

The second, very important thing, is that we are not going to discuss right away what we do not know. As I said, we had been holding painstaking talks for a long time, almost a month and a half; first in Minsk, then in Istanbul, and reached certain compromises. The Ukrainian side signed an abstract of these documents. The package alone is so thick, but the summary with the fundamental issues outlined there were initialed by the Ukrainian side. So, we worked on it. Now there are some formulas but what are they based on? Based on some wishes and not on the real situation. Well, it is impossible to discuss.

However, we are ready for discussion. We never refused. I have just said that, and this is not a joke, I did not make it up. As soon as the troops withdrew, the Westerners immediately told Ukraine: “Do not sign anything. Fight.” They snapped a salute and are following out. While we were immediately told, “Now we will fight to the last man.” This is what we were told. There will be no more talks.

Now they see that they cannot succeed. Perhaps they will be able to fight to the last man but they cannot inflict a strategic defeat on Russia, and they can see that. Now they are beginning to squeak . “Let us urgently convene a conference.” – “Sure.” – “Will Russia participate?” “We are ready to participate in peace talks.” “But we will not invite you.” Here you are, Good Lord, there we go. And Russia is being accused of being reluctant to take part. But we have not been invited.

You are asking: on what conditions? Why should I be proposing terms and asking to let me come where we are not wanted? And what is it that they want to do? Gather as many countries as possible, convince everyone that the terms proposed by the Ukrainian side are the best offer, and then present this to us as an ultimatum, saying, “You see, the whole world thinks so. Thus you must agree.” Is this a way to conduct substantive and serious talks? Of course, not. This is an attempt to impose.

There was an attempt to inflict a strategic defeat, but it failed. The attempt to impose will end the same way.

Remark: But still, as I see it, your condition is that the agreements reached must be in force.

Vladimir Putin: Of course. This is the basic condition. They initialed it, but the document was not fully signed. It includes very serious issues related to ensuring Ukraine’s security. They are worded in such a way that requires subsequent consideration. But overall, this is the basis. They have been initialed by the Ukrainian side. I think, not least, probably, if not under the diktat, then with the consent of their Western sponsors. But everything is rigorously worded there regarding their interests.

There is also something that has been taken into account concerning Russia’s security interests. There are a lot of questions there, which I do not want to go into right now. I remember if not all of them but all the main provisions. We are ready to discuss this.

But then they dumped it because they wanted to gain an advantage on the battlefield and achieve a strategic position, which did not work out; so now they are handing out their terms. Have they gone nuts? Why on earth?

Of course, we will proceed from the realities on the ground. This goes without saying.

Question: My question isabout China and supplies of our hydrocarbons to it.

Has an agreement in principle been reached on the Power of Siberia 2 project? When will construction start: this year or next year? Have there been any talks about a possible increase in supplies?

Vladimir Putin: Yes. I am not ready to speak about technical details now, but both sides have confirmed their interest in implementing these projects. Since the Chinese economy is growing, it requires, accordingly, more energy resources needed to maintain this growth. Nothing is more reliable (I think this is clear) than supplies from Russia.

We have a huge common border, and no one will interfere here: neither sanctions against the tanker fleet, nor even sanctions against financial institutions. We will buy and sell everything in national currencies. Therefore, the interest on both sides has been reaffirmed. On the one hand, there is interest in receiving additional volumes, on the other hand, there is interest in selling on the Chinese market. This is always a complicated process, involving the question of prices, the question of who will earn and how much. However, strategically we are absolutely interested, both the countries, in implementing these projects, and we will move forward with them.

Gazprom and our oil companies will certainly come to terms. There are different routes. One of them runs via Mongolia, and both gas and oil pipelines can be laid in the same corridor. Specialists will have to decide how best to proceed. It is possible to use the Northern Sea Route. We can buy extra tankers and set up supplies via the Northern Sea Route, which is almost the same as the pipeline. All these alternatives are possible. They are all acceptable and economically expedient. It is necessary to choose the best ones. I am confident that this work will be completed as well.

Question: My question is also about Ukraine, if I may.

Vladimir Zelensky’s term of office is about to end, it expires on May 20. Will Russia no longer consider him a legitimate president after that date? And would it matter to you, will you be ready to talk to him afterwards?

Vladimir Putin: We used to talk with him; we were in constant contact with him before the conflict entered the extreme phase of armed struggle.

As for legitimacy, this question must first of all be resolved by the political and legal systems of Ukraine itself. There are all sorts of options in their Constitution. This is a question of assessment. This assessment, of course, should be primarily made by the Constitutional Court and in general, by the political system of Ukraine. But for us, of course, it matters, because if it comes to signing some documents, we certainly will have to sign documents in such a crucial area with the legitimate authorities, this is an obvious fact. But, I reiterate, this question must be answered by the political and legal (juridical) systems of Ukraine itself. Thank you very much.

Question: Did you discuss with President Xi Jinping the fact that China had been invited to this international conference?

Vladimir Putin: We discussed this issue as part of the package. Thank you very much for your attention.

Question: Mr Putin, what about the French army in Ukraine?

Vladimir Putin: I am not the president of France. Why are you asking me this? I am not the one to make this decision.

Question: Mr Macron has repeatedly conveyed that he was ready to send troops there. If regular French troops move to Ukraine, will it mean a direct conflict, a war with the French?

Vladimir Putin: First, you should have him answer your question about the French troops in Ukraine. Once you get the answer, we will start considering the consequences of this step.

Question: Mr Putin, may I ask about the figure of [Defence Minister Andrei] Belousov? Excuse me, please, this is my last question. Why was Belousov appointed the Defence Minister? We are now at a critical juncture of the special military operation.

Vladimir Putin: I covered that already. Mr Peskov covered that, too, because I asked him to do so. I will go over it again.

This year, the level of defence spending for the Defence Ministry alone amounted to 6.7 percent of GDP. If you combine that with the amounts spent on law enforcement and security agencies, the total amount will slightly exceed 8 percent. The Defence Ministry accounts for the bulk of the spending meaning that the amount of spending of law enforcement and security agencies depends on how much the Defence Ministry spends. The Defence Ministry is the first to make purchases followed by law enforcement and security agencies. Their choices depend on the Defence Ministry’s choices. In addition, the Defence Ministry is charged with building the national defence system which is does with the enlistment of other security agencies. Their spending depends on that, too.

So, with the Defence Ministry spending 6.7 percent, and the total defence and security spending coming at slightly over 8 percent, this amount of spending is not critical. Defence spending in the Soviet Union in 1985–1986 stood at 13 percent. Taking into account the state of the economy, macroeconomic indicators, and budget revenue forecasts, combined defence and security spending at slightly 8 percent is not critical and is absolutely safe. Experts are even saying it could be larger since the budget is robust enough to handle that. But this level of spending is what we currently have.

As you are aware, Mr Belousov served as the Minister of Economy. He is considered a good economist, one of the best in the country. He was my aide on economic matters. He also served as the First Deputy Prime Minister. In this sense, he is, without a doubt, able to coordinate the Defence Ministry’s work with other ministries and agencies, as well as the regions. This is important as well. I am talking not only about the border regions, but other regions as well, because they, too, to a certain extent, are economic agents. This is my first point.

My second point covers his mission. He must open the Defence Ministry to constructive interaction with the research centres and economic agents in the broad sense of the word, the manufacturers of the military-technical products and components that are needed for the production of military equipment. His job is to open the Defence Ministry to innovation.

Indeed, Mr Shoigu has taken the initial steps towards this end. However, I believe that given his job functions in the recent past, the former Deputy Prime Minister will find it easier to accomplish this. These were the motives behind appointing him to this position.

You all saw Mr Shoigu – it was widely covered – often visit and tour enterprises. He is fully aware of what is going on. He knows what the Armed Forces need in the medium and short term, and knows our industrial capabilities. To a certain extent, he was involved in the contacts with our foreign defence cooperation partners, because the Federal Service for Military-Technical Cooperation was under the Defence Ministry, and he oversaw it.

Considering this, he will have an enormous layer of work to deal with. It is all combined now. If you paid attention, I supported the idea of appointing Mr Manturov First Deputy Prime Minister precisely because we plan to focus the administrative resources on achieving the main objective facing the country today which is gaining the special military operation results that we need.

Thank you very much.

Vladimir Putin flies a Tu-160M missile carrier

2024-02-22T19:58:16+04:00

The President flew an upgraded Tu-160M strategic bomber-missile carrier.

The plane took off from the Gorbunov Kazan Aviation Plant that Vladimir Putin visited the day before. The flight lasted about 30 minutes.

Upon returning from the flight, the President shared his impressions of the updated bomber/missile carrier, pointing to its high reliability and armed capability, better aircraft control and increased level of crew comfort.

“The technology is excellent. It really belongs to a new generation. Of course, it can be accepted by the Armed Forces,” the President summed up.

Answers to questions from journalist Pavel Zarubin

2024-02-15T17:40:44+04:00

Pavel Zarubin: Mr President, your interview with Tucker Carlson has already garnered one billion views. While there has been a lot of positive feedback, we can see the kind of comments that Western leaders are making. For example, the Prime Minister of the UK and the German Chancellor labelled your explanation that the special military operation had been caused by a threat from NATO as “absurd” and “clearly ridiculous.” What do you think of this?

President of Russia Vladimir Putin: First of all, it is good that they have been watching and listening to what I say. If we are not able to maintain a direct dialogue today due to certain reasons, we should be grateful to Mr Carlson for acting as an intermediary. So, it is good that they are watching and listening.

The fact that they are distorting my words and misrepresenting things is concerning. Why? Because I never said those things. Nowhere in the interview did I say that the start of the special military operation in Ukraine is linked to the threat of a NATO attack on Russia. Where in the interview did I make such a statement? The interview was recorded. They can go back and pinpoint exactly where I said this.

What I actually said was that we have been constantly deceived about NATO’s non-expansion to the east. By the way, then NATO Secretary-General, a representative of Germany, made such a promise. He explicitly stated NATO would not expand even an inch to the east. After that, NATO proceeded to expand five times, completely deceiving us. Of course, we were concerned about the possibility of Ukraine being drawn into NATO, as it poses a security threat to us. So, this is what I actually said.

However, what served as the trigger was the current Ukrainian officials’ outright refusal to comply with the Minsk agreements, coupled with Ukraine’s relentless attacks on the unrecognised republics of Donbass, the Donetsk People’s Republic and the Lugansk People’s Republic, which continued for eight years and resulted in numerous deaths. Realising that there are no prospects of resolving this problem under the Minsk agreements, these republics formally requested our recognition. We recognised them and signed a treaty of friendship and mutual assistance. After that, as required by the UN Charter, we fulfilled our obligations under the treaty.

As I said, we did not initiate this war; rather, we are striving to end it. During the first phase, we tried to achieve this through peaceful means, specifically, through the Minsk agreements. However, it became apparent that we had been given the runaround once again. Both the former German Chancellor and the former President of France admitted and publicly stated that they had never intended to honour the agreements and had merely used them to buy time to supply the Ukrainian regime with more weapons, which they successfully did. Our only regret is that we did not take action sooner, believing that we were dealing with honest people.

Pavel Zarubin: Carlson faced criticism before the interview, and since then he has been accused of asking too few probing questions and of allegedly being too soft on you, which is why you felt so comfortable with him. Do you think you overwhelmed the American journalist with your authority?

Vladimir Putin: I believe that your Carlson – “your” as a member of the journalistic community – is a dangerous man, and here is why. To be honest, I thought he would be quite aggressive and ask so-called tough questions.

I was not just prepared for this, I wanted it, because it would give me the opportunity to respond with equally sharp answers, which would add a certain character to our conversation. But he chose a different tactic. He tried to interrupt me several times, but still, surprisingly for a Western journalist, he remained patient and listened to my lengthy monologues, especially when I spoke about history. He gave me no cause for doing what I was prepared to do. That is why, to tell the truth, I did not fully enjoy that interview. But he acted strictly according to his plan, and he did what he intended. As for how informative it turned out to be in the end, that is not for me to judge. It is for the viewers, listeners and possibly readers of this material to judge.

Pavel Zarubin: Following that interview, calls have been made to impose sanctions against Tucker Carlson, and there are even rumours that he could be arrested. Is this possible?

Vladimir Putin: Assange has been locked up, and few people mention him now. Only those close to him still talk about it, and that is all. One specific feature of public opinion is that people tend to forget quickly. But Assange was at least accused of revealing state secrets. Carlson cannot be charged with that because he did not touch upon any secrets. Nevertheless, anything is possible, theoretically, in modern-day America, in the United States today.

This would be bad for Carlson. I feel sorry for him, but it was his choice. He knew what he was doing. On the other hand, this could be a good opportunity for people around the world to see the true nature of modern “liberal democratic” (in scare quotes) dictatorship, which is supposedly represented in the current ruling class in the United States. This would reveal its true face.

Pavel Zarubin: Carlson said that after the interview… I wanted to ask you a question so that we can put the doubt to rest. Carlson said that after the interview your conversation continued. What did you discuss? Now everyone wants to know.

Vladimir Putin: As I have already said, and as far as I can see, he had a plan for the interview and he stuck to it. But there were other topics too that had to be raised, in my opinion. Still, I decided not to inject new topics into our conversation without being prompted to do so by the journalist.

During the taped part of the interview, we should have discussed efforts to use inter-ethnic relations and the Jewish pogroms in the Russian Empire as a way of denigrating and demonising Russia. One of the subjects we discussed when the cameras were turned off was what US Secretary of State, Mr Blinken, mentioned on several occasions. He said that his relatives, his great-grandfather, fled the Jewish pogroms and left Russia.

This topic keeps surfacing across the world, in Europe and in the United States. Let me reiterate that it is being used to demonise and discredit Russia and to demonstrate that it is home to barbaric, cruel people and outlaws. However, we can clarify many issues if we try to understand what today’s US Secretary of State actually said and if we look beyond political slogans by focusing on the substance.

All this information is in our archives. For example, Mr Blinken’s great-grandfather did leave the Russian Empire. I think that he was born somewhere in the Poltava Province, and then moved to Kiev before emigrating. This raises the following question: does Mr Blinken think that Kiev and the surrounding territories are historically Russian land? This is my first point here.

Second, if he says that his great-grandfather left Russia to escape the Jewish pogroms, this, at least, means, and I would like to stress this point, that in 1904, since this is when Mr Blinken’s great-grandfather left Kiev for the United States, Ukraine did not exist – this is what he seems to believe. This way, Mr Blinken seems to share our views. That said, he should have refrained from saying so in public. This could undermine his cause.

Pavel Zarubin: Just the other day, there were articles in the German media saying that the grandfather of Germany’s current Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock was a devoted Nazi. Considering the way the relations between our countries have been unfolding over the past years, could it be that the Nazi virus still exists in this country at a genetic level or something like that?

Vladimir Putin: This is an iteration of nationalism, albeit a radical one. By the way, something has just occurred to me about these pogroms. They took place mainly in the south and southwest of the Russian Empire. In fact, this is where present-day Ukraine is, for example in Kiev, in 1905. If Mr Blinken’s ancestor left in 1904, the first pogrom in Kiev, I mean a big one, happened in 1905, which means that his great-grandfather, or his great-great-grandfather, could only find out what happened there from newspapers, or from those who were in Kiev at that time.

In fact, these tragic mass atrocities started in the early 19^th century. I think it was in 1820 or in 1821 when the first major pogrom took place. We know that these crimes took place in Odessa, and later in Melitopol, in Zhitomir, and in other cities of present-day Ukraine, as well as in Byelorussia. There were also several incidents of this kind in Siberia, but the very first one happened after a Greek Patriarch was killed in Constantinople. This was when the Greeks who lived there thought that the Jews were involved in the assassination in one way or another.

But this is not what matters here. What does matter is that there were resistance militias who tried to counter these attacks, formed by Jewish and Russian youth, while the government, even the tsarist authorities, delivered a proper assessment of these tragic events and tried to stop them, including by sending in the army. Let me reiterate that this is a whole different story.

Speaking of nationalism, Nazism and fascism, you know, I will tell you something that may sound strange. First, Ms, what is her name?

Annalena Baerbock.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, Baerbock (I do not want to mispronounce her surname) represents the Greens party. Many representatives of this part of the European political spectrum speculate on people’s fears and engage in fearmongering about what might happen in the world due to climate change. Later, they speculate on these fears, fanned by themselves, and follow their political line that differs greatly from their earlier programme, with which they assumed power. This is what is now happening in Germany. For example, the share of coal has increased in the national energy mix. The share of coal was already higher than in Russia, and it has now increased even more. I mean, what happened to the “green” agenda? This is the first thing.

Second, the German Foreign Minister and people like her, are, of course, hostile towards Russia. In my opinion, she is also hostile towards her own country because it is hard to imagine such a high-ranking politician treating the economic interests of her country and people with such disdain. Right now, I will not go into details, but this is exactly what is happening in reality, and we can see this.

The next part of my statement will probably sound out of tune with what I have just said. I do not think that the current generations of Germans should assume complete political responsibility for everything perpetrated by Nazi Germany. It is impossible to blame the current generation of people for what Hitler and his cronies perpetrated in Germany and other parts of the world, in Europe and so on. I believe that this would be unfair. To be frank, sticking this label on the entire German nation is an unfair position; this misuses what people experienced, what the people of the Soviet Union experienced. To my mind, this is unfair and inappropriate. We should proceed from present-day realities and see who is doing what, and what policy they are conducting.

By the way, in this connection, it would be useful to do the following. As I see it, many people in many countries are voicing this viewpoint; unfortunately, this concerns even those countries where this issue should not be politicised.

What am I talking about? I am referring to an exceptionalism of certain nations, as compared to others, some kind of exclusivity, etc. Just listen: this is how Nazism started. Now that this has become so widespread, it would be appropriate to conduct this anti-fascist and anti-Nazi propaganda and work at the same global level. I repeat, at the global level.

And this should not be done at some state level. This will prove effective only if it is done at the level of public conscience and public initiative, regardless of the country where it takes place.

Pavel Zarubin: The European Union is generally in panic over Donald Trump’s potential return to the presidential post in the United States. Trump completely dumbfounded European leaders with his recent statements, made just a couple of days ago, and they are not trying to hide it. Trump said that the United States must protect the European countries only if the European countries can pay for it. Why has this sort of relationship come about between Europe, the European leaders and politicians, and Donald Trump?

Vladimir Putin: Trump has always been considered a non-system politician. He has his own ideas about how the US should develop its relations with its allies. There was friction before. Take, for example, the United States and its withdrawal from the Kyoto Protocol on environmental protection. It was tense. But the then President of the United States decided that the United States should withdraw from the agreement, despite the high appeal of the environmental agenda. He believed that the agreement causes harm to the US economy. That was all. He stood his ground and that was it. There was a massive wave of criticism from European leaders but he still did it. Yes, he made certain changes later.

How is Trump’s stance different? It is fundamentally no different. He wanted to force Europeans to raise their defence expenditure or, as he said, to pay the United States for protection and for opening a nuclear umbrella over their heads. Well, I don’t know, it is their problem, they need to work it out for themselves. There may be logic from his perspective. There is none from the Europeans’ perspective. Europe wanted the United States to continue performing certain functions that it took up at the establishment of NATO, at no charge. It is their business.

I personally believe that there is absolutely no point in NATO. Its only purpose is to serve as a tool of US foreign policy. If the United States considers this tool no longer necessary, that is their decision.

Pavel Zarubin: The current President of the United States Biden has been causing a mounting wave of speculation around the world concerning his health. We are talking about the president of one of the world’s biggest nuclear powers, all while witnessing very peculiar, to put it mildly, scenes almost every day. What do you think when you see and hear all this?

Vladimir Putin: What this suggests to me is that the election campaign and domestic political struggles are gaining traction in the United States. These processes are exacerbating so I do not think that it would be appropriate for us to weigh in on them.

You see, when Biden and I met in Switzerland, even if it happened several years ago, in fact, three years ago, there were already those back then who were saying that he was unfit for office. I did not see anything of this sort. Well, he did keep glancing at his notes but, to be honest, I looked at mine too. Nothing special about that. And the fact that he banged his head on something when descending from a helicopter, well, who of us has never banged his head on something, let them throw the first stone, as the saying goes.

Overall, what I think… I am not a doctor, so I do not think that I can make any comments on this topic. We must look elsewhere, focus on the political position instead. I believe that the current administration is pursuing what amounts to a harmful and erroneous policy. This is what I told President Biden back then.

Pavel Zarubin: Therefore, the question we had four years ago is taking on new relevance today. Who would be better for us? Biden or Trump?

Vladimir Putin: Biden. He has more experience, and he is more predictable too, an old school politician. That said, we will work with any leader of the United States who has the trust of the American people.

Pavel Zarubin: Allow me to come back to the Tucker Carlson interview. We mentioned statements by the current German and British leaders. We also heard from the person whom you mentioned in your interview with Carlson with the following words: “Where is Mr Johnson now?” According to Arakhamia’s confessions, it was Johnson who ordered Kiev not to sign a deal with Moscow and to keep fighting instead. Had the Kiev authorities ignored this kind of advice, how would events have unfolded?

Vladimir Putin: This is what Mr Arakhamia said. After all, he… Look at the recording. We did not force him to say these words. He spoke his mind. Why he did so is another matter. I do not know. Maybe he likes saying things as they are. He did say that had we fulfilled the agreements negotiated in Istanbul, the war would have ended one and a half years ago. He was the one who said it. I think Arakhamia’s recordings should be included in the interview with Carlson.

Why has the West adopted this position? I am referring to the West, primarily the Anglo-Saxon world, since former Prime Minister Johnson would have never travelled there on his own initiative, without seeking Washington’s advice. These consultations probably took place, and I think that he was on a business mission, with expenses covered by the US administration, including the per diem. So he went there on a mission to make the case for fighting Russia until the last Ukrainian (without saying so directly), or should we say until victory and Russia’s strategic defeat. This is probably the kind of result they hoped for.

However, I can repeat here what I told Mr Carlson. If they see that it is not working out the way they expected, they probably have to make adjustments. But this is a matter of the art of government and politics, since politics, as we all know, is the art of compromise.

Interview to Tucker Carlson

2024-02-11T16:32:01+04:00

Vladimir Putin answered questions from Tucker Carlson, a journalist and founder of Tucker Carlson Network.

Tucker Carlson: Mr. President, thank you.

On February 24, 2022, you addressed your country in your nationwide address when the conflict in Ukraine started and you said that you were acting because you had come to the conclusion that the United States through NATO might initiate a quote, “surprise attack on our country.” And to American ears that sounds paranoid. Tell us why you believe the United States might strike Russia out of the blue. How did you conclude that?

President of Russia Vladimir Putin: It's not that the United States was going to launch a surprise strike on Russia, I didn't say so. Are we having a talk show or a serious conversation?

Tucker Carlson: That was a good quote. Thank you, it’s formidably serious!

Vladimir Putin: You were initially trained in history, as far as I know?

Tucker Carlson: Yes.

Vladimir Putin: So if you don’t mind I will take only 30 seconds or one minute of your time to give you a brief historical background.

Tucker Carlson: Please.

Vladimir Putin: Let’s look where our relationship with Ukraine started from. Where does Ukraine come from?

The Russian state started to exist as a centralized state in 862. This is considered to be the year of creation of the Russian state because this year the townspeople of Novgorod (a city in the North-West of the country) invited Rurik, a Varangian prince from Scandinavia, to reign. In 1862, Russia celebrated the 1000^th anniversary of its statehood, and in Novgorod there is a memorial dedicated to the 1000^th anniversary of the country.

In 882, Rurik's successor Prince Oleg, who was, actually, playing the role of regent for Rurik’s young son because Rurik had died by that time, came to Kiev. He ousted two brothers who, apparently, had once been members of Rurik's retinue. So, Russia began to develop with two centres of power, in Kiev and in Novgorod.

The next, very significant date in the history of Russia, was 988. This was the Baptism of Russia, when Prince Vladimir, the great-grandson of Rurik, baptized Russia and adopted Orthodoxy, or Eastern Christianity. From this time the centralized Russian state began to strengthen. Why? Because of a single territory, integrated economic ties, one and the same language and, after the Baptism of Russia, the same faith and rule of the Prince. A centralized Russian state began to take shape.

Back in the Middle Ages, Prince Yaroslav the Wise introduced the order of succession to the throne, but after he passed away, it became complicated for various reasons. The throne was passed not directly from father to eldest son, but from the prince who had passed away to his brother, then to his sons in different lines. All this led to the fragmentation of Rus as a single state. There was nothing special about it, the same was happening then in Europe. But the fragmented Russian state became an easy prey to the empire created earlier by Genghis Khan. His successors, namely, Batu Khan, came to Rus, plundered and ruined nearly all the cities. The southern part, including Kiev, by the way, and some other cities, simply lost independence, while northern cities preserved some of their sovereignty. They had to pay tribute to the Horde, but they managed to preserve some part of their sovereignty. And then a unified Russian state began to take shape with its centre in Moscow.

The southern part of the Russian lands, including Kiev, began to gradually gravitate towards another “magnet” – the centre that was emerging in Europe. This was the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. It was even called the Lithuanian-Russian Duchy because Russians were a significant part of its population. They spoke the Old Russian language and were Orthodox. But then there was a unification, the union of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the Kingdom of Poland. A few years later, another union was signed, but this time already in the religious sphere. Some of the Orthodox priests became subordinate to the Pope. Thus, these lands became part of the Polish-Lithuanian state.

For decades, the Poles were engaged in the “Polonization” of this part of the population: they introduced their language there, tried to entrench the idea that this population was not exactly Russians, that because they lived on the fringe (u kraya) they were “Ukrainians.” Originally, the word ‘Ukrainian’ meant that a person was living on the outskirts of the state, near the fringe, or was engaged in border service. It didn't mean any particular ethnic group.

So, the Poles were trying in every possible way to polonize that part of the Russian lands and actually treated it rather harshly, not to say cruelly. All that led to the fact that that part of the Russian lands began to struggle for their rights. They wrote letters to Warsaw demanding that their rights be observed and that people be commissioned there, including to Kiev…

Tucker Carlson: I beg your pardon, can you tell us what period… I am losing track of where in history we are.

Vladimir Putin: It was in the 13^th century.

Now I will tell what happened next and give the dates so that there is no confusion.

Then in 1654, even a bit earlier, the people who were in control of the authority over that part of the Russian lands, addressed Warsaw, I repeat, demanding their rights be observed that they send to them rulers of Russian origin and Orthodox faith. When Warsaw did not answer them and in fact rejected their demands, they turned to Moscow so that Moscow took them under its rule.

So that you don't think that I am inventing things… I'll give you these documents…

Tucker Carlson: It doesn’t sound like you are inventing it, but I am not sure why it’s relevant to what’s happened two years ago.

Vladimir Putin: But still, these are documents from the archives, copies. Here are letters from Bogdan Khmelnitsky, the man who then controlled the power in that part of the Russian lands that is now called Ukraine. He wrote to Warsaw demanding that their rights be upheld, and after being refused, he began to write letters to Moscow asking to take them under the strong hand of the Moscow Tsar. Here are copies of these documents. I will leave them for your good memory. There is a translation into Russian, you can translate it into English later.

Russia did not agree to admit them straight away, assuming that would trigger a war with Poland. Nevertheless, in 1654, the Zemsky Sobor, which was a representative body of power of the Old Russian state, made the decision: those Old Russian lands became part of the Tsardom of Muscovy.

As expected, the war with Poland began. It lasted 13 years, and then a truce was concluded. In all, after that act of 1654, 32 years later, I think, a peace treaty with Poland was concluded, “the eternal peace,” as it said. And those lands, the whole left bank of the Dnieper, including Kiev, reverted to Russia, while the entire right bank of the Dnieper remained in possession of Poland.

Under the rule of Catherine the Great, Russia reclaimed all of its historical lands, including in the south and west. This all lasted until the Revolution. Before World War I, the Austrian General Staff, relying on the ideas of Ukrainianization, started to actively promote the ideas of Ukraine and the Ukrainianization. Their motive was obvious. Just before World War I, they wanted to weaken the potential enemy and secure themselves favourable conditions in the border area. So this idea which had emerged in Poland that people residing in that territory were allegedly not really Russians, but rather belonged to a special ethnic group, the Ukrainians, started to be promoted by the Austrian General Staff too.

As far back as the 19^th century, theorists calling for Ukrainian independence appeared. All those, however, claimed that Ukraine should have a very good relationship with Russia. They insisted on that. After the 1917 Revolution, the Bolsheviks sought to restore the statehood, and the Civil War began, including the hostilities with Poland. In 1921, peace with Poland was proclaimed, and under that treaty, the right bank of the Dnieper River once again was given back to Poland.

In 1939, after Poland cooperated with Hitler — it did collaborate with Hitler, you know —Hitler offered Poland peace and a treaty of friendship and alliance (we have all the relevant documents in the archives), demanding in return that Poland give back to Germany the so-called Danzig Corridor, which connected the bulk of Germany with East Prussia and Konigsberg. After World War I this territory was transferred to Poland, and instead of Danzig, a city of Gdansk emerged. Hitler asked them to give it amicably, but the Poles refused. Still they collaborated with Hitler and engaged together in the partitioning of Czechoslovakia.

Tucker Carlson: May I ask… You are making the case that Ukraine, certain parts of Ukraine, Eastern Ukraine, in fact, has been Russia for hundreds of years. Why wouldn’t you just take it when you became President 24 years ago? You have nuclear weapons, they don’t. It’s actually your land. Why did you wait so long?

Vladimir Putin: I’ll tell you. I’m coming to that. This briefing is coming to an end. It might be boring, but it explains many things.

Tucker Carlson: It’s not boring.

Vladimir Putin: Good. Good. I am so gratified that you appreciate that. Thank you.

So, before World War II, Poland collaborated with Hitler and although it did not yield to Hitler’s demands, it still participated in the partitioning of Czechoslovakia together with Hitler. As the Poles had not given the Danzig Corridor to Germany, and went too far, they pushed Hitler to start World War II by attacking them. Why was it Poland against whom the war started on September 1, 1939? Poland turned out to be uncompromising, and Hitler had nothing else to do but start implementing his plans with Poland.

By the way, the USSR — I have read some archival documents — behaved very honestly. It asked Poland’s permission to transit its troops through the Polish territory to help Czechoslovakia. But the then Polish foreign minister said that if the Soviet planes head to Czechoslovakia, they would be downed over the territory of Poland. But that doesn’t matter. What matters is that the war began, and Poland fell prey to the policies it had pursued against Czechoslovakia, as under the well-known Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, part of that territory, including western Ukraine, was to be given to Russia. Thus Russia, which was then named the USSR, regained its historical lands.

After the victory in the Great Patriotic War, as we call World War II, all those territories were ultimately enshrined as belonging to Russia, to the USSR. As for Poland, it received, apparently in compensation, the western lands which had originally been German: the eastern parts of Germany (these are now western lands of Poland). Of course, Poland regained access to the Baltic sea, and Danzig, which was once again given its Polish name. So this was how this situation developed.

In 1922, when the USSR was being established, the Bolsheviks started building the USSR and established the Soviet Ukraine, which had never existed before.

Tucker Carlson: Right.

Vladimir Putin: Stalin insisted that those republics be included in the USSR as autonomous entities. For some inexplicable reason, Lenin, the founder of the Soviet state, insisted that they be entitled to withdraw from the USSR. And, again for some unknown reasons, he transferred to that newly established Soviet Republic of Ukraine some of the lands together with people living there, even though those lands had never been called Ukraine; and yet they were made part of that Soviet Republic of Ukraine. Those lands included the Black Sea region, which was received under Catherine the Great and which had no historical connection with Ukraine whatsoever.

Even if we go as far back as 1654, when those lands returned to the Russian Empire, that territory included three or four regions of modern Ukraine, with no Black Sea region. That was completely out of the question.

Tucker Carlson: In 1654?

Vladimir Putin: Exactly.

Tucker Carlson: You have, I see, encyclopaedic knowledge of that region. But why didn’t you make this case for the first 22 years as president, that Ukraine wasn’t a real country?

Vladimir Putin: The Soviet Ukraine was given a great deal of territory that had never belonged to it, including the Black Sea region. At some point, when Russia received them as an outcome of the Russo-Turkish wars, they were called “New Russia,” or Novorossiya. But that does not matter. What matters is that Lenin, the founder of the Soviet State, established Ukraine that way. For decades, the Ukrainian Soviet Republic developed as part of the USSR, and for unknown reasons again, the Bolsheviks were engaged in Ukrainianization. It was not merely because the Soviet leadership was composed to a great extent of those originating from Ukraine. Rather, it was explained by the general policy of indigenization pursued by the Soviet Union. Same things were done in other Soviet republics. This involved promoting national languages and national cultures, which is not bad in principle. That is how the Soviet Ukraine was created.

After World War II, Ukraine received, in addition to the lands that had belonged to Poland before the war, part of the lands that had previously belonged to Hungary and Romania (known today as Western Ukraine). So Romania and Hungary had some of their lands taken away and given to the Ukraine and they still remain part of Ukraine. So in this sense, we have every reason to affirm that Ukraine is an artificial state that was shaped at Stalin’s will.

Tucker Carlson: Do you believe Hungary has a right to take back its land from Ukraine? And that other nations have a right to go back to their 1654 borders?

Vladimir Putin: I am not sure whether they should go back to the 1654 borders, but given Stalin’s time, the so-called Stalin’s regime — which, as many claim, saw numerous violations of human rights and violations of the rights of other states. In this sense it is quite possible, of course, to claim back those lands, if we are not talking about their having the right to do that, it is at least understandable…

Tucker Carlson: Have you told Viktor Orban that he can have a part of Ukraine?

Vladimir Putin: Never. I have never told him that. Not a single time. We have not even had any conversation on that, but I actually know for sure that Hungarians who live there wanted to return to their historical homeland.

Moreover, I would like to share a very interesting story with you, I'll digress, it's a personal one. Somewhere in the early 80's, I went on a road trip in a car from then-Leningrad (now St. Petersburg) across the Soviet Union through Kiev, made a stop in Kiev, and then went to Western Ukraine. I went to the town of Beregovo, and all the names of towns and villages there were in Russian and in a language I didn't understand – in Hungarian. In Russian and in Hungarian. Not in Ukrainian – in Russian and in Hungarian.

I was driving through some kind of a village and there were men sitting next to the houses and they were wearing black three-piece suits and black cylinder hats. I asked, “Are they some kind of entertainers?” I was told, “No, they're not entertainers. They're Hungarians.” I said, “What are they doing here?” — “What do you mean? This is their land, they live here.” This was during the Soviet time, in the 1980’s. They preserve the Hungarian language, Hungarian names, and all their national costumes. They are Hungarians and they feel themselves to be Hungarians. And of course, when now there is an infringement….

Tucker Carlson: And there’s a lot of that though, I think. Many nations feel upset about — there are Transylvanians as well as you, others, you know — but many nations feel frustrated by their re-drawn borders after the wars of the 20^th century, and wars going back a thousand years, the ones that you mention, but the fact is that you didn’t make this case in public until two years ago in February, and in the case that you made, which I read today, you explain at great length that you thought a physical threat from the West and NATO, including potentially a nuclear threat, and that’s what got you to move. Is that a fair characterization of what you said?

Vladimir Putin: I understand that my long speeches probably fall outside of the genre of an interview. That is why I asked you at the beginning: “Are we going to have a serious talk or a show?” You said — a serious talk. So bear with me please.

We are coming to the point where the Soviet Ukraine was established. Then, in 1991, the Soviet Union collapsed. And everything that Russia had generously bestowed on Ukraine was “dragged away” by the latter.

I’m coming to a very important point of today's agenda. After all, the collapse of the Soviet Union was effectively initiated by the Russian leadership. I do not understand what the Russian leadership was guided by at the time, but I suspect there were several reasons to think everything would be fine.

First, I think that the then Russian leadership believed that the fundamentals of the relationship between Russia and Ukraine were: in fact, a common language — more than 90 percent of the population there spoke Russian; family ties — every third person there had some kind of family or friendship ties; common culture; common history; finally, common faith; co-existence within a single state for centuries; and deeply interconnected economies. All of these were so fundamental. All these elements together make our good relations inevitable.

The second point is a very important one. I want you as an American citizen and your viewers to hear about this as well. The former Russian leadership assumed that the Soviet Union had ceased to exist and therefore there were no longer any ideological dividing lines. Russia even agreed, voluntarily and proactively, to the collapse of the Soviet Union and believed that this would be understood by the so-called (now in scare quotes) “civilized West” as an invitation for cooperation and associateship. That is what Russia was expecting both from the United States and the so-called collective West as a whole.

There were smart people, including in Germany. Egon Bahr, a major politician of the Social Democratic Party, who insisted in his personal conversations with the Soviet leadership on the brink of the collapse of the Soviet Union that a new security system should be established in Europe. Help should be given to unify Germany, but a new system should also be established to include the United States, Canada, Russia, and other Central European countries. But NATO needs not to expand. That's what he said: if NATO expands, everything would be just the same as during the Cold War, only closer to Russia's borders. That's all. He was a wise old man, but no one listened to him. In fact, he got angry once (we have a record of this conversation in our archives): “If, he said, you don't listen to me, I'm never setting my foot in Moscow again.” He was frustrated with the Soviet leadership. He was right, everything happened just as he had said.

Tucker Carlson: Well, of course, it did come true, and you’ve mentioned it many times. I think, it’s a fair point. And many in America thought that relations between Russia and the United States would be fine after the collapse of the Soviet Union, at the core. But the opposite happened. But have never explained why you think that happened, except to say that the West fears a strong Russia. But we have a strong China that the West doesn’t seem to be very afraid of. What about Russia, what do you think convinced the policymakers to take it down?

Vladimir Putin: The West is afraid of a strong China more than it fears a strong Russia because Russia has 150 million people, and China has a 1.5 billion population, and its economy is growing by leaps and bounds — over five percent a year, it used to be even more. But that's enough for China. As Bismark once put it, potentials are most important. China's potential is enormous — it is the biggest economy in the world today in terms of purchasing power parity and the size of the economy. It has already overtaken the United States, quite a long time ago, and it is growing at a fast clip.

Let's not talk about who is afraid of whom, let's not reason in such terms. And let's get into the fact that after 1991, when Russia expected that it would be welcomed into the brotherly family of “civilized nations,” nothing like that happened. You tricked us (I don't mean you personally when I say “you,” of course, I'm talking about the United States), the promise was that NATO would not expand eastward, but it happened five times, there were five waves of expansion. We tolerated all that, we were trying to persuade them, we were saying: “Please don't, we are as bourgeois now as you are, we are a market economy, and there is no Communist Party power. Let's negotiate.”

Moreover, I have also said this publicly before (let's look at Yeltsin's times now), there was a moment when a certain rift started growing between us. Before that, Yeltsin came to the United States, remember, he spoke in Congress and said the good words: “God bless America.” Everything he said were signals — let us in.

No. Remember the developments in Yugoslavia. Before that Yeltsin was lavished with praise, as soon as the developments in Yugoslavia started, he raised his voice in support of Serbs, and we couldn't but raise our voices for Serbs in their defense. I understand that there were complex processes underway there, I do. But Russia could not help raising its voice in support of Serbs, because Serbs are also a special and close to us nation, with Orthodox culture and so on. It's a nation that has suffered so much for generations. Well, regardless, what is important is that Yeltsin expressed his support. What did the United States do? In violation of international law and the UN Charter it started bombing Belgrade.

It was the United States that let the genie out of the bottle. Moreover, when Russia protested and expressed its resentment, what was said? The UN Charter and international law have become obsolete. Now everyone invokes international law, but at that time they started saying that everything is outdated, everything has to be changed.

Indeed, some things need to be changed as the balance of power has changed, it's true, but not in this manner. Yeltsin was immediately dragged through the mud, accused of alcoholism, of understanding nothing, of knowing nothing. He understood everything, I assure you.

Well, I became President in 2000. I thought: okay, the Yugoslav issue is over, but we should try to restore relations. Let's reopen the door that Russia had tried to go through. And moreover, I've said it publicly, I can reiterate. At a meeting here in the Kremlin with the outgoing President Bill Clinton, right here in the next room, I said to him, I asked him, “Bill, do you think if Russia asked to join NATO, do you think it would happen?” Suddenly he said: “You know, it's interesting, I think yes.” But in the evening, when we had dinner, he said, “You know, I've talked to my team, no-no, it's not possible now.” You can ask him, I think he will watch our interview, he'll confirm it. I wouldn't have said anything like that if it hadn't happened. Okay, well, it's impossible now.

Tucker Carlson: Were you sincere? Would you have joined NATO?

Vladimir Putin: Look, I asked the question, “Is it possible or not?” And the answer I got was no. If I was insincere in my desire to find out what the leadership's position was…

Tucker Carlson: But if he had said yes, would you have joined NATO?

Vladimir Putin: If he had said yes, the process of rapprochement would have commenced, and eventually it might have happened if we had seen some sincere desire on the part of our partners. But it didn't happen. Well, no means no, okay, fine.

Tucker Carlson: Why do you think that is? Just to get to motive. I know, you’re clearly bitter about it. I understand. But why do you think the West rebuffed you then? Why the hostility? Why did the end of the Cold War not fix the relationship? What motivates this from your point of view?

Vladimir Putin: You said I was bitter about the answer. No, it's not bitterness, it's just a statement of fact. We're not the bride and groom, bitterness, resentment, it's not about those kinds of matters in such circumstances. We just realised we weren't welcome there, that's all. Okay, fine. But let's build relations in another manner, let's look for common ground elsewhere. Why we received such a negative response, you should ask your leader. I can only guess why: too big a country, with its own opinion and so on. And the United States – I have seen how issues are being resolved in NATO.

I will give you another example now, concerning Ukraine. The US leadership exerts pressure, and all NATO members obediently vote, even if they do not like something. Now, I'll tell you what happened in this regard with Ukraine in 2008, although it's being discussed, I’m not going to open a secret to you, say anything new. Nevertheless, after that, we tried to build relations in different ways. For example, the events in the Middle East, in Iraq, we were building relations with the United States in a very soft, prudent, cautious manner.

I repeatedly raised the issue that the United States should not support separatism or terrorism in the North Caucasus. But they continued to do it anyway. And political support, information support, financial support, even military support came from the United States and its satellites for terrorist groups in the Caucasus.

I once raised this issue with my colleague, also the President of the United States. He says, “It’s impossible! Do you have proof?” I said, “Yes.” I was prepared for this conversation and I gave him that proof. He looked at it and, you know what he said? I apologise, but that's what happened, I'll quote. He says, “Well, I’m going to kick their ass.” We waited and waited for some response – there was none.

I said to the FSB Director: “Write to the CIA. What is the result of the conversation with the President?” He wrote once, twice, and then we got a reply. We have the answer in the archive. The CIA replied: “We have been working with the opposition in Russia. We believe that this is the right thing to do and we will keep on doing it.” Just ridiculous. Well, okay. We realised that it was out of the question.

Tucker Carlson: Forces in opposition to you? Do you think the CIA is trying to overthrow your government?

Vladimir Putin: Of course, they meant in that particular case the separatists, the terrorists who fought with us in the Caucasus. That's who they called the opposition. This is the second point.

The third moment, a very important one, is the moment when the US missile defense (ABM) system was created. The beginning. We tried for a long time to persuade the United States not to do it. Moreover, after I was invited by Bush Jr.’s father, Bush Sr. to visit his place on the ocean, I had a very serious conversation with President Bush and his team. I proposed that the United States, Russia and Europe jointly create a missile defense system that, we believe, if created unilaterally, threatens our security, despite the fact that the United States officially said that it was being created against missile threats from Iran. That was the justification for the deployment of the missile defense system. I suggested working together – Russia, the United States and Europe. They said it was very interesting. They asked me, “Are you serious?” I said, “Absolutely.”

Tucker Carlson: May I ask what year was this?

Vladimir Putin: I don't remember. It is easy to find out on the Internet, when I was in the USA at the invitation of Bush Sr. It is even easier to learn it now from a person I’ll name.

I was told it was very interesting. I said, “Just imagine if we could tackle such a global, strategic security challenge together. The world would change. We'll probably have disputes, probably economic and even political ones, but we could drastically change the situation in the world.” He says, “Yes.” And asks: “Are you serious?” I said, “Of course.” “We need to think about it,” I was told. I said, “Okay.”

Then Secretary of Defense [Robert] Gates, former Director of the CIA, and Secretary of State [Condoleezza] Rice came here, to this cabinet. Right here, at this table, they sat on this side. Me, the Foreign Minister, the Russian Defense Minister – on that side. They said to me, “Okay, we have thought about it, we agree.” I said, “Thank God, great.” – “But with some exceptions.”

Tucker Carlson: So, twice you've described US presidents making decisions and then being undercut by their agency heads. So, it sounds like you're describing a system that is not run by the people who are elected, in your telling.

Vladimir Putin: That's right, that's right. In the end they just told us to get lost. I am not going to tell you the details, because I think it is incorrect, after all, it was a confidential conversation. But our proposal was declined, that’s a fact.

It was right then when I said: “Look, but then we will be forced to take counter measures. We will create such strike systems that will certainly overcome missile defense systems.” The answer was: “We are not doing this against you, and you do what you want, assuming that it is not against us, not against the United States.” I said, “Okay.”

Very well, that’s the way it went. And we created hypersonic systems, with intercontinental missiles, and we continue to develop them. We are now ahead of everyone – the United States and other countries – in terms of the development of hypersonic strike systems, and we are improving them every day.

But it wasn’t us, we proposed to go the other way, and we were pushed back.

Now, about NATO's expansion to the East. Well, we were promised, no NATO to the East, not an inch to the East, as we were told. And then what? They said, “Well, it's not enshrined on paper, so we'll expand.” There were five waves of expansion, the Baltic states, the whole of Eastern Europe, and so on.

And now I come to the main thing: they have come to Ukraine ultimately. In 2008 at the summit in Bucharest they declared that the doors for Ukraine and Georgia to join NATO were open.

Now about how decisions are made there. Germany, France seemed to be against it as well as some other European countries. But then, as it turned out later, President Bush, and he is such a tough guy, a tough politician, as I was told later, “He exerted pressure on us and we had to agree.” It's ridiculous, it's like kindergarten. What are the guarantees? What kind of kindergarten is this, what kind of people are these, who are they? You see, they were pressed, they agreed. And then they say, “Ukraine won't be in NATO, you know.” I say, “I don't know, I know you agreed in 2008, why won't you agree in the future?” “Well, they pressed us then.” I say, “Why won't they press you tomorrow? And you'll agree again.”

Well, it's nonsensical. Who's there to talk to, I just don't understand. We're ready to talk. But with whom? What are the guarantees? There are none.

So, they started to develop the territory of Ukraine. Whatever is there, I have told you the background, how this territory developed, what kind of relations there were with Russia. Every second or third person there has always had some ties with Russia. And during the elections in already independent, sovereign Ukraine, which gained its independence as a result of the Declaration of Independence, and, by the way, it says that Ukraine is a neutral state, and in 2008 suddenly the doors or gates to NATO were open to it. Oh, come on! This is not how we agreed. Now, all the presidents that have come to power in Ukraine, they've relied on the electorate with a good attitude to Russia in one way or another. This is the south-east of Ukraine, this is a large number of people. And it was very difficult to dissuade this electorate, which had a positive attitude towards Russia.

Viktor Yanukovych came to power, and how: the first time he won after President Kuchma – they organised a third round, which is not provided for in the Constitution of Ukraine. This is a coup d'état. Just imagine, someone in the United States wouldn’t like the outcome…

Tucker Carlson: In 2014?

Vladimir Putin: No, before that. This was before that. After President Kuchma, Viktor Yanukovych won the elections. However, his opponents did not recognize that victory, the US supported the opposition and the third round was scheduled. What is this? This is a coup. The US supported it and the winner of the third round came to power. Imagine if in the US, something was not to someone’s liking and the third round of election, which the US Constitution does not provide for, was organized, Nonetheless, it was done in Ukraine. Okay, Viktor Yushchenko who was considered a pro-Western politician, came to power. Fine, we have built relations with him as well. He came to Moscow with visits, we visited Kiev. I visited it too. We met in an informal setting. If he is pro-Western, so be it. It’s fine, let people do their job. The situation should develop inside the independent Ukraine itself. As a result of Kuchma’s leadership, things got worse and Viktor Yanukovych came to power after all.

Maybe he wasn’t the best president and politician. I don’t know, I don’t want to give assessments. However, the issue of the association with the EU came up. We have always been lenient to this: suit yourself. But when we read through that treaty of association it turned out to be a problem for us, since we had a free-trade zone and open customs borders with Ukraine which, under this association, had to open its borders for Europe, which could have led to flooding of our market.

We said, “No, this is not going to work. We shall close our borders with Ukraine then”. The customs borders, that is. Yanukovych started to calculate how much Ukraine was going to gain, how much to lose and said to his European partners: “I need more time to think before signing.” The moment he said that, the opposition began to take destructive steps which were supported by the West. It all came down to Maidan and a coup in Ukraine.

Tucker Carlson: So, he did more trade with Russia than with the EU? Ukraine did…

Vladimir Putin: Of course. It’s not even the matter of trade volume, although for the most part it is. It is the matter of cooperation ties which the entire Ukrainian economy was based on. The cooperation ties between enterprises were very close since the times of the Soviet Union. One enterprise there used to produce components to be assembled both in Russia and Ukraine and vice versa. There used to be very close ties.

A coup d’état was staged, although, I shall not delve into details now as I find doing it inappropriate, the US told us, “Calm Yanukovych down and we will calm the opposition. Let the situation unfold according to the scenario of a political settlement.” We said, “Alright. Agreed. Let’s do it this way.” As the Americans requested us, Yanukovych did use neither the Armed Forces nor the police, yet the armed opposition staged a coup in Kiev. What is that supposed to mean? “Who do you think you are?”, I wanted to ask the then US leadership.

Tucker Carlson: With the backing of whom?

Vladimir Putin: With the backing of the CIA, of course. The organization you wanted to join back in the day, as I understand. Maybe we should thank God they didn’t let you in. Although, it is a serious organization. I understand. My former vis-à-vis, in the sense that I served in the First Main Directorate – Soviet Union’s intelligence service. They have always been our opponents. Work is work.

Technically they did everything right, they achieved their goal of changing the government. However, from a political standpoint, it was a colossal mistake. Surely, it was political leadership’s miscalculation. They should have seen what it would evolve into.

So, in 2008 the doors of NATO were opened for Ukraine. In 2014, there was a coup, they started persecuting those who did not accept the coup, and it was indeed a coup, they created a threat to Crimea which we had to take under our protection. They launched a war in Donbass in 2014, using aircraft and artillery against civilians. This is when it started. There is a video of aircraft attacking Donetsk from above. They launched a large-scale military operation, then another one. When they failed, they started to prepare the next one. All this against the background of military development of this territory and opening of NATO’s doors.

How could we not express concern over what was happening? From our side, this would have been a culpable negligence – that’s what it would have been. It’s just that the US political leadership pushed us to the line we could not cross because doing so could have ruined Russia itself. Besides, we could not leave our brothers in faith and, in fact, a part of Russian people, in the face of this “war machine.”

Tucker Carlson: So, that was eight years before the current conflict started. What was the trigger for you? What was the moment where you decided you had to do this?

Vladimir Putin: Initially, it was the coup in Ukraine that provoked the conflict.

By the way, back then the representatives of three European countries – Germany, Poland and France – arrived. They were the guarantors of the signed agreement between the Government of Yanukovych and the opposition. They signed it as guarantors. Despite that, the opposition staged a coup and all these countries pretended that they didn’t remember that they were guarantors of a peaceful settlement. They just threw it in the stove right away and nobody recalls that.

I don’t know if the US know anything about that agreement between the opposition and the authorities and its three guarantors who, instead of bringing this whole situation back in the political field, supported the coup. Although, it was meaningless, believe me. Because President Yanukovych agreed to all conditions, he was ready to hold early election which he had no chance to win, frankly speaking. Everyone knew that.

But then why the coup, why the victims? Why threaten Crimea? Why launch an operation in Donbass? This I do not understand. That is exactly what the miscalculation is. The CIA did its job to complete the coup. I think one of the Deputy Secretaries of State said that it cost a large sum of money, almost 5 billion dollars. But the political mistake was colossal! Why would they have to do that? All this could have been done legally, without victims, without military action, without losing Crimea. We would have never considered to even lift a finger if it hadn’t been for the bloody developments on Maidan.

Because we agreed with the fact that after the collapse of the Soviet Union our borders should be along the borders of former Union’s republics. We agreed to that. But we never agreed to NATO’s expansion and moreover we never agreed that Ukraine would be in NATO. We did not agree to NATO bases there without any discussion with us. For decades we kept urging them: don’t do this, don’t do that.

And what triggered the latest events? Firstly, the current Ukrainian leadership declared that it would not implement the Minsk agreements, which had been signed, as you know, after the events of 2014, in Minsk, where the plan of a peaceful settlement in Donbass was set forth. But no, the current Ukrainian leadership, foreign minister, all other officials and then President himself said that they don’t like anything about the Minsk agreements. In other words, they were not going to implement them. A year or a year and a half ago, former leaders of Germany and France said openly to the whole world that they indeed signed the Minsk agreements but they never intended to implement them. They simply led us by the nose.

Tucker Carlson: Was there anyone free to talk to? Did you call the US President, Secretary of State and say if you keep militarizing Ukraine with NATO forces, we are going to act?

Vladimir Putin: We talked about this all the time. We addressed the United States’ and European countries’ leadership to stop these developments immediately, to implement the Minsk agreements. Frankly speaking, I didn’t know how we were going to do this but I was ready to implement them. These agreements were complicated for Ukraine; they included lots of elements of those Donbass territories’ independence. That’s true. However, I was absolutely confident, and I am saying this to you now: I honestly believed that if we managed to convince the residents of Donbass – and we had to work hard to convince them to return to the Ukrainian statehood – then gradually the wounds would start to heal. When this part of territory reintegrated itself into common economic, social environment, when the pensions and social benefits were paid again, all the pieces would gradually fall into place.

No, nobody wanted that, everybody wanted to resolve the issue by military force only. But we could not let that happen.

And the situation got to the point, when the Ukrainian side announced: “No, we will not implement anything.” They also started preparing for military action. It was they who started the war in 2014. Our goal is to stop this war. And we did not start this war in 2022. This is an attempt to stop it.

Tucker Carlson: Do you think you have stopped it now? I mean have you achieved your aims?

Vladimir Putin: No, we haven't achieved our aims yet, because one of them is denazification. This means the prohibition of all kinds of neo-Nazi movements. This is one of the problems that we discussed during the negotiation process, which ended in Istanbul early last year, and it was not our initiative, because we were told (by the Europeans, in particular) that “it was necessary to create conditions for the final signing of the documents.” My counterparts in France and Germany said, “How can you imagine them signing a treaty with a gun to their heads? The troops should be pulled back from Kiev.” I said, “All right.” We withdrew the troops from Kiev.

As soon as we pulled back our troops from Kiev, our Ukrainian negotiators immediately threw all our agreements reached in Istanbul into the bin and got prepared for a longstanding armed confrontation with the help of the United States and its satellites in Europe. That is how the situation has developed. And that is how it looks now.

Tucker Carlson: What is denazification? What would that mean?

Vladimir Putin: That is what I want to talk about right now. It is a very important issue.

Denazification. After gaining independence, Ukraine began to search, as some Western analysts say, its identity. And it came up with nothing better than to build this identity upon some false heroes who collaborated with Hitler.

I have already said that in the early 19^th century, when the theorists of independence and sovereignty of Ukraine appeared, they assumed that an independent Ukraine should have very good relations with Russia. But due to the historical development, these territories were part of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth – Poland, where Ukrainians were persecuted and treated quite brutally and were subjected to cruel behaviour. There were also attempts to destroy their identity. All this remained in the memory of the people. When World War II broke out, part of this extremely nationalist elite collaborated with Hitler, believing that he would bring them freedom. The German troops, even the SS troops made Hitler's collaborators do the dirtiest work of exterminating the Polish and Jewish population. Hence this brutal massacre of the Polish and Jewish population as well as the Russian population too. This was led by the persons who are well known – Bandera, Shukhevich. It was these people who were made national heroes – that is the problem. And we are constantly told that nationalism and neo-Nazism exist in other countries as well. Yes, there are seedlings, but we uproot them, and other countries fight against them. But Ukraine is not the case. These people have been turned into national heroes in Ukraine. Monuments to these people have been erected, they are displayed on flags, their names are shouted by crowds that walk with torches, as it was in Nazi Germany. These were the people who exterminated Poles, Jews and Russians. It is necessary to stop this practice and prevent the dissemination of this concept.

I say that Ukrainians are part of the one Russian people. They say, “No, we are a separate people.” Okay, fine. If they consider themselves a separate people, they have the right to do so, but not on the basis of Nazism, the Nazi ideology.

Tucker Carlson: Would you be satisfied with the territory that you have now?

Vladimir Putin: I will finish answering the question. You just asked a question about neo-Nazism and denazification.

Look, the President of Ukraine visited Canada. This story is well known but is silenced in the Western countries: The Canadian parliament introduced a man who, as the speaker of the parliament said, fought against the Russians during World War II. Well, who fought against the Russians during World War II? Hitler and his accomplices. It turned out that this man served in the SS troops. He personally killed Russians, Poles, and Jews. The SS troops consisted of Ukrainian nationalists who did this dirty work. The President of Ukraine stood up with the entire Parliament of Canada and applauded this man. How can this be imagined? The President of Ukraine himself, by the way, is a Jew by nationality.

Tucker Carlson: Really, my question is: What do you do about it? I mean, Hitler has been dead for eighty years, Nazi Germany no longer exists, and it’s true. So, I think, what you are saying, you want to extinguish or at least control Ukrainian nationalism. But how do you do that?

Vladimir Putin: Listen to me. Your question is very subtle.

And can I tell you what I think? Do not take offense.

Tucker Carlson: Of course!

Vladimir Putin: This question appears to be subtle, it is quite pesky.

You say Hitler has been dead for so many years, 80 years. But his example lives on. People who exterminated Jews, Russians and Poles are alive. And the President, the current President of today's Ukraine applauds him in the Canadian Parliament, gives a standing ovation! Can we say that we have completely uprooted this ideology if what we see is happening today? That is what denazification is in our understanding. We have to get rid of those people who maintain this concept and support this practice and try to preserve it – that is what denazification is. That is what we mean.

Tucker Carlson: Right. My question is almost specific, it was, of course, not a defense of Nazism. Otherwise, it was a practical question. You don't control the entire country, you don’t seem like you want to. So, how do you eliminate that culture, or an ideology, or feelings, or a view of history, in a country that you don’t control? What do you do about that?

Vladimir Putin: You know, as strange as it may seem to you, during the negotiations in Istanbul we did agree that – we have it all in writing – neo-Nazism would not be cultivated in Ukraine, including that it would be prohibited at the legislative level.

Mr. Carlson, we agreed on that. This, it turns out, can be done during the negotiation process. And there is nothing humiliating for Ukraine as a modern civilized state. Is any state allowed to promote Nazism? It is not, is it? That is it.

Tucker Carlson: Will there be talks? And why haven’t there been talks about resolving the conflict in Ukraine? Peace talks.

Vladimir Putin: They have been. They reached a very high stage of coordination of positions in a complex process, but still they were almost finalized. But after we withdrew our troops from Kiev, as I have already said, the other side (Ukraine) threw away all these agreements and obeyed the instructions of Western countries, European countries, and the United States to fight Russia to the bitter end.

Moreover, the President of Ukraine has legislated a ban on negotiating with Russia. He signed a decree forbidding everyone to negotiate with Russia. But how are we going to negotiate if he forbade himself and everyone to do this? We know that he is putting forward some ideas about this settlement. But in order to agree on something, we need to have a dialogue. Is not that right?

Tucker Carlson: Well, but you would not be speaking to the Ukrainian president, you would be speaking to the American president. When was the last time you spoke to Joe Biden?

Vladimir Putin: I cannot remember when I talked to him. I do not remember, we can look it up.

Tucker Carlson: You do not remember?!

Vladimir Putin: No, why? Do I have to remember everything? I have my own things to do. We have domestic political affairs.

Tucker Carlson: But he is funding the war that you are fighting, so I think that would be memorable?

Vladimir Putin: Well, yes, he funds, but I talked to him before the special military operation, of course. And I said to him then, by the way – I will not go into details, I never do – but I said to him then: “I believe that you are making a huge mistake of historic proportions by supporting everything that is happening there, in Ukraine, by pushing Russia away.” I told him, told him repeatedly, by the way. I think that would be correct if I stop here.

Tucker Carlson: What did he say?

Vladimir Putin: Ask him, please. It is easier for you, you are a citizen of the United States, go and ask him. It is not appropriate for me to comment on our conversation.

Tucker Carlson: But you haven’t spoken to him since before February of 2022?

Vladimir Putin: No, we haven't spoken. Certain contacts are being maintained though. Speaking of which, do you remember what I told you about my proposal to work together on a missile defense system?

Tucker Carlson: Yes.

Vladimir Putin: You can ask all of them. All of them are safe and sound, thank God. The former President, Condoleezza [Rice] is safe and sound, and, I think, Mr. Gates, and the current Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, Mr. Burns, the then Ambassador to Russia, in my opinion, a very successful Ambassador. They were all witnesses to these conversations. Ask them.

Same here, if you are interested in what Mr. President Biden responded to me, ask him. At any rate, I talked to him about it.

Tucker Carlson: I am definitely interested. But from the other side it seems like it could devolve, evolve into something that brings the entire world into conflict, and could initiate a nuclear launch, and so why don’t you just call Biden and say, “Let’s work this out”?

Vladimir Putin: What's there to work out? It's very simple. I repeat, we have contacts through various agencies. I will tell you what we are saying on this matter and what we are conveying to the US leadership: “If you really want to stop fighting, you need to stop supplying weapons. It will be over within a few weeks. That's it. And then we can agree on some terms before you do that, stop.”

What's easier? Why would I call him? What should I talk to him about? Or beg him for what? “You're going to deliver such and such weapons to Ukraine. Oh, I'm so afraid, please don't do that.” What is there to talk about?

Tucker Carlson: Do you think NATO was worried about this becoming a global war or nuclear conflict?

Vladimir Putin: At least that's what they're talking about. And they are trying to intimidate their own population with an imaginary Russian threat. This is an obvious fact. And thinking people, not philistines, but thinking people, analysts, those who are engaged in real politics, just smart people understand perfectly well that this is fake. They are trying to fuel the Russian threat.

Tucker Carlson: The threat I think you were referring to is Russian invasion of Poland, Latvia – expansionist behaviour. Can you imagine a scenario where you send Russian troops to Poland?

Vladimir Putin: Only in one case: if Poland attacks Russia. Why? Because we have no interest in Poland, Latvia or anywhere else. Why would we do that? We simply don't have any interest. It’s just threat mongering.

Tucker Carlson: Well, the argument, I know you know this, is that, well, he invaded Ukraine – he has territorial aims across the continent. And you are saying unequivocally, you don’t?

Vladimir Putin: It is absolutely out of the question. You just don't have to be any kind of analyst, it goes against common sense to get involved in some kind of global war. And a global war will bring all of humanity to the brink of destruction. It's obvious.

There are, certainly, means of deterrence. They have been scaring everyone with us all along: tomorrow Russia will use tactical nuclear weapons, tomorrow Russia will use that, no, the day after tomorrow. So what? These are just horror stories for people in the street in order to extort additional money from US taxpayers and European taxpayers in the confrontation with Russia in the Ukrainian theatre of war. The goal is to weaken Russia as much as possible.

Tucker Carlson: One of our senior United States senators from the State of New York, Chuck Schumer, said yesterday, I believe, that we have to continue to fund the Ukrainian effort or US soldiers, citizens could wind up fighting there. How do you assess that?

Vladimir Putin: This is a provocation, and a cheap provocation at that.

I do not understand why American soldiers should fight in Ukraine. There are mercenaries from the United States there. The biggest number of mercenaries comes from Poland, with mercenaries from the United States in second place, and mercenaries from Georgia in third place. Well, if somebody has the desire to send regular troops, that would certainly bring humanity on the brink of a very serious, global conflict. This is obvious.

Do the United States need this? What for? Thousands of miles away from your national territory! Don't you have anything better to do? You have issues on the border, issues with migration, issues with the national debt – more than 33 trillion dollars. You have nothing better to do, so you should fight in Ukraine?

Wouldn't it be better to negotiate with Russia? Make an agreement, already understanding the situation that is developing today, realizing that Russia will fight for its interests to the end. And, realizing this, actually return to common sense, start respecting our country and its interests and look for certain solutions. It seems to me that this is much smarter and more rational.

Tucker Carlson: Who blew up Nord Stream?

Vladimir Putin: You, for sure. (Laughter.)

Tucker Carlson: I was busy that day. I did not blow up Nord Stream.

Vladimir Putin: You personally may have an alibi, but the CIA has no such alibi.

Tucker Carlson: Do you have evidence that NATO or the CIA did it?

Vladimir Putin: You know, I won't get into details, but people always say in such cases: “Look for someone who is interested.” But in this case we should not only look for someone who is interested, but also for someone who has capabilities. Because there may be many people interested, but not all of them are capable of sinking to the bottom of the Baltic Sea and carrying out this explosion. These two components should be connected: who is interested and who is capable of doing it.

Tucker Carlson: But I am confused. I mean, that’s the biggest act of industrial terrorism ever and it’s the largest emission of CO₂ in history. Okay, so, if you had evidence and presumably, given your security services, your intel services, you would, that NATO, the US, CIA, the West did this, why wouldn’t you present it and win a propaganda victory?

Vladimir Putin: In the war of propaganda it is very difficult to defeat the United States because the United States controls all the world’s media and many European media. The ultimate beneficiary of the biggest European media are American financial institutions. Don't you know that? So it is possible to get involved in this work, but it is cost prohibitive, so to speak. We can simply shine the spotlight on our sources of information, and we will not achieve results. It is clear to the whole world what happened, and even American analysts talk about it directly. It's true.

Tucker Carlson: Yes. But here is a question you may be able to answer. You worked in Germany, famously. The Germans clearly know that their NATO partner did this, that they damaged their economy greatly – it may never recover. Why are they being silent about it? That is very confusing to me. Why wouldn’t the Germans say something about it?

Vladimir Putin: This also confuses me. But today's German leadership is guided by the interests of the collective West rather than its national interests, otherwise it is difficult to explain the logic of their action or inaction. After all, it is not only about Nord Stream-1, which was blown up, and Nord Stream-2 was damaged, but one pipe is safe and sound, and gas can be supplied to Europe through it, but Germany does not open it. We are ready, please.

There is another route through Poland, called Yamal-Europe, which also allows for a large flow. Poland has closed it, but Poland pecks from the German hand, it receives money from pan-European funds, and Germany is the main donor to these pan-European funds. Germany feeds Poland to a certain extent. And they closed the route to Germany. Why? I don't understand.

Ukraine, to which the Germans supply weapons and give money. Germany is the second sponsor after the United States in terms of financial aid to Ukraine. There are two gas routes through Ukraine. They simply closed one route, the Ukrainians. Open the second route and get gas from Russia. They do not open it. Why don't the Germans say: “Look, guys, we give you money and weapons. Open up the valve, please, let the gas from Russia pass through for us.

We are buying liquefied gas at exorbitant prices in Europe, which brings the level of our competitiveness, and economy in general down to zero. Do you want us to give you money? Let us have a decent existence, make money for our economy, because this is where the money we give you comes from.” They refuse to do so. Why? Ask them. (Knocks on the table.) That is what it is like in their heads. Those are highly incompetent people.

Tucker Carlson: Well, maybe the world is breaking into two hemispheres. One with cheap energy, the other without it. And I want to ask you that, if we are now a multipolar world, obviously we are, can you describe the blocs or alliances? Who is on each side, do you think?

Vladimir Putin: Listen, you have said that the world is breaking into two hemispheres. A human brain is divided into two hemispheres: one is responsible for one type of activities, the other one is more about creativity and so on. But it is still one and the same head. The world should be a single whole, security should be shared, rather than meant for the “golden billion.” That is the only scenario where the world could be stable, sustainable and predictable. Until then, while the head is split into two parts, it is an illness, a serious adverse condition. It is a period of a severe disease that the world is now going through.

But I think that, thanks to honest journalism — this work is akin to work of the doctors, this could somehow be remedied.

Tucker Carlson: Well, let’s just give one example — the US dollar, which has, kind of, united the world in a lot of ways, maybe not to your advantage, but certainly to ours. Is that going away as the reserve currency, the universally accepted currency? How have sanctions, do you think, changed the dollar’s place in the world?

Vladimir Putin: You know, to use the dollar as a tool of foreign policy struggle is one of the biggest strategic mistakes made by the US political leadership. The dollar is the cornerstone of the United States' power. I think everyone understands very well that, no matter how many dollars are printed, they are quickly dispersed all over the world. Inflation in the United States is minimal. It is about 3 or 3.4 percent, which is, I think, totally acceptable for the US. But they won't stop printing. What does the debt of 33 trillion dollars tell us about? It is about the emission.

Nevertheless, it is the main weapon used by the United States to preserve its power across the world. As soon as the political leadership decided to use the US dollar as a tool of political struggle, a blow was dealt to this American power. I would not like to use any strong language, but it is a stupid thing to do, and a grave mistake.

Look at what is going on in the world. Even the United States' allies are now downsizing their dollar reserves. Seeing this, everyone starts looking for ways to protect themselves. But the fact that the United States applies restrictive measures to certain countries, such as placing restrictions on transactions, freezing assets, etc., causes grave concern and sends a signal to the whole world.

What did we have here? Until 2022, about 80 percent of Russia's foreign trade transactions were made in US dollars and euros. US dollars accounted for approximately 50 percent of our transactions with third countries, while currently it is down to 13 percent. It was not us who banned the use of the US dollar, we had no such intention. It was the decision of the United States to restrict our transactions in US dollars. I think it is complete foolishness from the point of view of the interests of the United States itself and its taxpayers, as it damages the US economy, undermines the power of the United States across the world.

By the way, our transactions in yuan accounted for about 3 percent. Today, 34 percent of our transactions are made in Rubles, and about as much, a little over 34 percent, in Yuan.

Why did the United States do this? My only guess is self-assurance. They probably thought it would lead to a full collapse, but nothing collapsed. Moreover, other countries, including oil producers, are thinking of and already accepting payments for oil in yuan. Do you even realize what is going on or not? Does anyone in the United States realize this? What are you doing? You are cutting yourself off… all experts say this. Ask any intelligent and thinking person in the United States what the dollar means for the US? You are killing it with your own hands.

Tucker Carlson: I think that is a fair assessment. The question is what comes next? And maybe you trade one colonial power for another, much less sentimental and forgiving colonial power? Is the BRICS, for example, in danger of being completely dominated by the Chinese economy? In a way that is not good for their sovereignty. Do you worry about that?

Vladimir Putin: We have heard those bogeyman stories before. It is a bogeyman story. We are neighbours with China. You cannot choose neighbours, just as you cannot choose close relatives. We share a border of several thousand kilometres with them. This is number one.

Second, we have a centuries-long history of coexistence, we are used to it.

Third, China's foreign policy philosophy is not aggressive, its idea is to always look for compromise, and we can see that.

The next point is as follows. We are always told the same bogeyman story, and here it goes again, though in a euphemistic form, but it is still the same bogeyman story: the cooperation with China keeps increasing. The pace at which China's cooperation with Europe is growing is higher and greater than that of the growth of Chinese-Russian cooperation. Ask Europeans: aren’t they afraid? They might be, I do not know, but they are still trying to access China's market at all costs, especially now that they are facing economic problems. Chinese businesses are also exploring the European market.

Do Chinese businesses have small presence in the United States? Yes, the political decisions are such that they are trying to limit their cooperation with China.

It is to your own detriment, Mr Tucker, that you are limiting cooperation with China, you are hurting yourself. It is a delicate matter, and there are no silver bullet solutions, just as it is with the dollar.

So, before introducing any illegitimate sanctions — illegitimate in terms of the Charter of the United Nations — one should think very carefully. I think, those who make decisions have a problem with that.

Tucker Carlson: So, you said a moment ago that the world would be a lot better if it were not broken into competing alliances, if there was cooperation globally. One of the reasons you don’t have that is because the current American administration is dead set against you. Do you think if there was a new administration after Joe Biden that you would be able to re-establish communication with the US government? Or does it not matter who the President is?

Vladimir Putin: I will tell you. But let me finish the previous thought. We, together with my colleague and friend President Xi Jinping, set a goal to reach 200 billion dollars of mutual trade with China last year. We have exceeded this level. According to our figures, our bilateral trade with China totals already 230 billion, and the Chinese statistics says it is 240 billion dollars.

One more important thing: our trade is well-balanced, mutually complementary in high-tech, energy, scientific research and development. It is very balanced.

As for BRICS, where Russia took over the presidency this year, the BRICS countries are, by and large, developing very rapidly.

Look, if memory serves me right, back in 1992, the share of the G7 countries in the world economy amounted to 47 percent, whereas in 2022 it was down to, I think, a little over 30 percent. The BRICS countries accounted for only 16 percent in 1992, but now their share is greater than that of the G7. It has nothing to do with the events in Ukraine. This is due to the trends of global development and world economy that I mentioned just now, and this is inevitable. This will keep happening, it is like the rise of the sun — you cannot prevent the sun from rising, you have to adapt to it.

How do the United States adapt? With the help of force: sanctions, pressure, bombings, and use of armed forces. This is about self-conceit. Your political establishment does not understand that the world is changing (due to objective circumstances), and in order to preserve your level — even if someone aspires, pardon me, to the level of dominance — you have to make the right decisions in a competent and timely manner. Such brutal actions, including with regard to Russia and, say, other countries, are counterproductive. This is an obvious fact; it has already become evident.

You just asked me if another leader comes and changes something. It is not about the leader, it is not about the personality of a particular person. I had a very good relationship with, say, Bush. I know that in the United States he was portrayed as some kind of a country boy who does not understand much. I assure you that is not the case. I think he made a lot of mistakes with regard to Russia, too. I told you about 2008 and the decision in Bucharest to open the NATO’s doors for Ukraine and so on. That happened during his presidency. He actually exerted pressure on the Europeans.

But in general, on a personal human level, I had a very good relationship with him. He was no worse than any other American, or Russian, or European politician. I assure you, he understood what he was doing as well as others. I had such personal relationships with Trump as well.

It is not about the personality of the leader, it is about the elites’ mindset. If the idea of domination at any cost, based also on forceful actions, dominates the American society, nothing will change, it will only get worse. But if, in the end, one comes to the awareness that the world has been changing due to objective circumstances, and that one should be able to adapt to them in time, using the advantages that the US still has today, then, perhaps, something may change.

Look, China's economy has become the first economy in the world in purchasing power parity; in terms of volume it overtook the US a long time ago. The USA comes second, then India (one and a half billion people), and then Japan, with Russia in the fifth place. Russia was the first economy in Europe last year, despite all the sanctions and restrictions. Is this normal, from your point of view: sanctions, restrictions, impossibility of payments in dollars, being cut off from SWIFT services, sanctions against our ships carrying oil, sanctions against airplanes, sanctions in everything, everywhere? The largest number of sanctions in the world which are applied – are applied against Russia. And we have become Europe's first economy during this time.

The tools that the US uses don't work. Well, one has to think about what to do. If this realization comes to the ruling elites, then yes, then the first person of the state will act in anticipation of what the voters and the people who make decisions at various levels expect from this person. Then maybe something will change.

Tucker Carlson: But you are describing two different systems. You say that the leader acts in the interests of the voters, but you also say that these decisions are not made by the leader – they are made by the ruling classes. You have run this country for so long, you have known all these American presidents. What are those power centres in the United States, do you think? And who actually makes the decisions?

Vladimir Putin: I don't know. America is a complex country, conservative on the one hand, rapidly changing on the other. It's not easy for us to sort it all out.

Who makes decisions in the elections – is it possible to understand this, when each state has its own legislation, each state regulates itself, someone can be excluded from the elections at the state level. It is a two-stage electoral system, it is very difficult for us to understand it.

Certainly there are two parties that are dominant, the Republicans and the Democrats, and within this party system, there are centres that make decisions, that prepare decisions.

Then, look, why, in my opinion, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, such an erroneous, rough, completely unjustified policy of pressure was pursued against Russia? After all, this is a policy of pressure. NATO expansion, support for the separatists in the Caucasus, creation of a missile defense system – these are all elements of pressure. Pressure, pressure, pressure.

Then, dragging Ukraine into NATO is all about pressure, pressure, pressure. Why? I think, among other things, because excessive production capacities were created. During the confrontation with the Soviet Union, there were many centres created and specialists on the Soviet Union, who could not do anything else. It seemed to them, they convinced the political leadership: it is necessary to continue “chiselling” Russia, to try to break it up, to create on this territory several quasi-state entities and to subdue them in a divided form, to use their combined potential for the future struggle with China. This is a mistake, including the excessive potential of those who worked for the confrontation with the Soviet Union. It is necessary to get rid of this, there should be new, fresh forces, people who look into the future and understand what is happening in the world.

Look at how Indonesia is developing! 600 million people. Where can we get away from that? Nowhere, we just have to assume that Indonesia will enter (it is already in) the club of the world's leading economies, no matter if someone likes or dislikes it.

Yes, we understand and are aware that in the United States, despite all the economic problems, the situation is still normal with the economy growing decently, the GDP is growing by 2.5 percent, if I am not mistaken.

But if we want to ensure the future, then we need to change our approach to what is changing. As I already said, the world would nevertheless change regardless of how the developments in Ukraine end. The world is changing. In the United States themselves, experts write that the United States is nonetheless gradually changing its position in the world, it is your experts who write that, I just read them. The only question is how this would happen – painfully and quickly or gently and gradually. And this is written by people who are not anti-American; they simply follow global development trends. That's it.

And in order to assess them and change policies, we need people who think, look forward, can analyse and recommend certain decisions at the level of political leaders.

Tucker Carlson: I just have to ask. You have said clearly that NATO expansion eastward is a violation of the promise you were all made in the 1990s. It is a threat to your country. Right before you sent troops into Ukraine the Vice-President of the United States spoke at the Security Conference and encouraged the President of Ukraine to join NATO. Do you think that was an effort to provoke you into military action?

Vladimir Putin: I repeat once again, we have repeatedly, repeatedly proposed to seek a solution to the problems that arose in Ukraine after the 2014 coup d’état through peaceful means. But no one listened to us. And moreover, the Ukrainian leaders who were under the complete US control, suddenly declared that they would not comply with the Minsk agreements, they disliked everything there, and continued military activity in that territory.

And in parallel, that territory was being exploited by NATO military structures under the guise of various personnel training and retraining centres. They essentially began to create bases there. That's all.

Ukraine announced that the Russians were (a law was adopted) a non-titular nation, while passing laws that limit the rights of non-titular nations in Ukraine. Ukraine, having received all these southeastern territories as a gift from the Russian people, suddenly announced that the Russians were a non-titular nation in that territory. Is it normal? All this put together led to the decision to end the war that neo-Nazis started in Ukraine in 2014.

Tucker Carlson: Do you think Zelensky has the freedom to negotiate the settlement to this conflict?

Vladimir Putin: I don’t know the details, of course it’s difficult for me to judge, but I believe he has, in any case, he used to have. His father fought against the fascists, Nazis during World War II, I once talked to him about this. I said: “Volodya, what are you doing? Why are you supporting neo-Nazis in Ukraine today, while your father fought against fascism? He was a front-line soldier.” I will not tell you what he answered, this is a separate topic, and I think it’s incorrect for me to do so.

But as to the freedom of choice – why not? He came to power on the expectations of Ukrainian people that he would lead Ukraine to peace. He talked about this, it was thanks to this that he won the election overwhelmingly. But then, when he came to power, in my opinion, he realized two things: firstly, it is better not to clash with neo-Nazis and nationalists, because they are aggressive and very active, you can expect anything from them, and secondly, the US-led West supports them and will always support those who antagonize with Russia – it is beneficial and safe. So he took the relevant position, despite promising his people to end the war in Ukraine. He deceived his voters.

Tucker Carlson: But do you think at this point – as of February 2024 – he has the latitude, the freedom to speak with you or government directly, which would clearly help his country or the world? Can he do that, do you think?

Vladimir Putin: Why not? He considers himself head of state, he won the elections. Although we believe in Russia that the coup d’état is the primary source of power for everything that happened after 2014, and in this sense, even today’s government is flawed. But he considers himself the president, and he is recognized by the United States, all of Europe and practically the rest of the world in such a capacity – why not? He can.

We negotiated with Ukraine in Istanbul, we agreed, he was aware of this. Moreover, the negotiation group leader, Mr. Arakhamia is his last name, I believe, still heads the faction of the ruling party, the party of the President in the Rada. He still heads the Presidential faction in the Rada, the country’s parliament, he still sits there. He even put his preliminary signature on the document I am telling you about. But then he publicly stated to the whole world: “We were ready to sign this document, but Mr. Johnson, then the Prime Minister of Great Britain, came and dissuaded us from doing this saying it was better to fight Russia. They would give us everything we needed to return what was lost during the clashes with Russia. And we agreed with this proposal.” Look, his statement has been published. He said this publicly.

Can they return to this or not? The question is: do they want it or not?

Further on, President of Ukraine issued a decree prohibiting negotiations with us. Let him cancel that decree and that’s it. We have never refused negotiations indeed. We hear all the time: is Russia ready? Yes, we have not refused! It was them who publicly refused. Well, let him cancel his decree and enter into negotiations. We have never refused.

And the fact that they obeyed the demand or persuasion of Mr. Johnson, the former Prime Minister of Great Britain, seems ridiculous and very sad to me. Because, as Mr. Arakhamia put it: “We could have stopped these hostilities, this war a year and a half ago already. But the British persuaded us, and we refused this.” Where is Mr. Johnson now? And the war continues.

Tucker Carlson: That is a good question. Why did he do that?

Vladimir Putin: Hell knows. I don't understand it myself. There was a general starting point. For some reason, everyone had the illusion that Russia could be defeated on the battlefield. Because of arrogance, because of a pure heart, but not because of great intellect.

Tucker Carlson: You have described the connection between Russia and Ukraine; you have described Russia itself, a couple of times as Orthodox – that is central to your understanding of Russia. What does that mean for you? You are a Cristian leader by your own description. So what effect does that have on you?

Vladimir Putin: You know, as I already mentioned, in 988 Prince Vladimir himself was baptized following the example of his grandmother, Princess Olga, and then he baptized his retinue, and then gradually, over the course of several years, he baptized all Rus. It was a lengthy process – from pagans to Christians, it took many years. But in the end, this Orthodoxy, Eastern Christianity, deeply rooted itself in the consciousness of the Russian people.

When Russia expanded and absorbed other nations who profess Islam, Buddhism and Judaism, Russia has always been very loyal to those people who profess other religions. This is its strength. This is absolutely clear.

And the fact is that the main postulates, main values are very similar, not to say the same, in all world religions I’ve just mentioned and which are the traditional religions of the Russian Federation, Russia. By the way, Russian authorities were always very careful about the culture and religion of those peoples who came to join the Russian Empire. This, in my opinion, forms the basis of both security and stability of the Russian statehood – all the peoples inhabiting Russia basically consider it their Motherland.

If, say, people move over to you or to Europe from Latin America – an even clearer and more understandable example – people come, but yet they have come to you or to European countries from their historical homeland. And people who profess different religions in Russia consider Russia their Motherland, they have no other Motherland. We are together, this is one big family. And our traditional values are very similar. I’ve just mentioned one big family, but everyone has his/her own family, and this is the basis of our society. And if we say that the Motherland and a specific family are connected with each other, it is indeed the case, since it is impossible to ensure a normal future for our children and our families unless we ensure a normal, sustainable future for the entire country, for the Motherland. That is why patriotic sentiment is so strong in Russia.

Tucker Carlson: Can I say, the one way in which religions are different is that Christianity is specifically a non-violent religion. Jesus says, “Turn the other cheek,” “don’t kill,” and so on. How can a leader who has to kill, of any country, how can a leader be a Christian? How do you reconcile that to yourself?

Vladimir Putin: It is very easy: when it comes to protecting oneself and one’s family, one’s homeland. We don’t attack anyone. When did the developments in Ukraine start? Since the coup d’état and the hostilities in Donbass began, that’s when they started. And we are protecting our people, ourselves, our homeland and our future.

As for religion in general. You know, it’s not about external manifestations, it’s not about going to church every day or banging your head on the floor. It is in the heart. And our culture is so human-oriented. Dostoevsky, who is very well known in the West as the genius of Russian culture, Russian literature, spoke a lot about this, about the Russian soul.

After all, Western society is more pragmatic. Russian people think more about the eternal, about moral values. I don’t know, maybe you won’t agree with me, but Western culture is more pragmatic after all.

I’m not saying this is bad, it makes it possible for today’s “golden billion” to achieve good success in production, even in science, and so on. There's nothing wrong with that, I'm just saying that we kind of look the same, but our minds are built a little differently.

Tucker Carlson: So do you see the supernatural at work? As you look out across what’s happening in the world now, do you see God at work? Do you ever think to yourself: these are forces that are not human?

Vladimir Putin: No, to be honest, I don't think so. My opinion is that the development of the world community is in accordance with the inherent laws, and those laws are what they are. It's always been this way in the history of mankind. Some nations and countries rose, became stronger and more numerous, and then left the international stage, losing the status they were accustomed to. There is probably no need for me to give examples, but we could start with Genghis Khan and the Horde conquerors, the Golden Horde, and then end with the Roman Empire. It seems that there has never been anything like the Roman Empire in the history of mankind.

Nevertheless, the potential of the barbarians gradually grew, as did their population. In general, the barbarians were getting stronger and began to develop economically, as we would say today. This eventually led to the collapse of the Roman Empire and the regime imposed by the Romans. However, it took five centuries for the Roman Empire to fall apart. The difference with what is happening now is that all the processes of change are happening at a much faster pace than in Roman times.

Tucker Carlson: So when does the AI empire start do you think?

Vladimir Putin: (Laughing.) You are asking increasingly more complicated questions. To answer them, you need to be an expert in big numbers, big data and AI.

Mankind is currently facing many threats. Due to genetic research, it is now possible to create a superhuman, a specialized human being – a genetically engineered athlete, scientist, military man.

There are reports that Elon Musk has already had a chip implanted in the human brain in the USA.

Tucker Carlson: What do you think of that?

Vladimir Putin: Well, I think there’s no stopping Elon Musk, he will do as he sees fit. Nevertheless, you need to find some common ground with him, search for ways to persuade him. I think he’s a smart person, I truly believe he is. So you need to reach an agreement with him because this process needs to be formalized and subjected to certain rules.

Humanity has to consider what is going to happen due to the newest developments in genetics or in AI. One can make an approximate prediction of what will happen. Once mankind felt an existential threat coming from nuclear weapons, all nuclear nations began to come to terms with one another since they realized that negligent use of nuclear weaponry could drive humanity to extinction.

It is impossible to stop research in genetics or AI today, just as it was impossible to stop the use of gunpowder back in the day. But as soon as we realize that the threat comes from unbridled and uncontrolled development of AI, or genetics, or any other fields, the time will come to reach an international agreement on how to regulate these things.

Tucker Carlson: I appreciate all the time you’ve given us. I just want to ask you one last question and it’s about someone who is very famous in the United States, probably not here. Evan Gershkovich who is the Wall Street Journal reporter, he is 32 and he’s been in prison for almost a year. This is a huge story in the United States and I just want to ask you directly without getting into details of your version of what happened, if as a sign of your decency you’ll be willing to release him to us and we’ll bring him back to the United States?

Vladimir Putin: We have done so many gestures of goodwill out of decency that I think we have run out of them. We have never seen anyone reciprocate to us in a similar manner. However, in theory, we can say that we do not rule out that we can do that if our partners take reciprocal steps.

When I say “partners,” I, first of all, refer to special services. Special services are in contact with one another, they are talking about the matter in question. There is no taboo to settle the issue. We are willing to solve it, but there are certain terms being discussed via special services channels. I believe an agreement can be reached.

Tucker Carlson: So, typically, I mean, this stuff has happened for, obviously, centuries. One country catches other spy within its borders and trades it for one of its own intel guys in other country. I think what makes it, and it’s not my business, but what makes it different is that this guy is obviously not a spy, he is a kid, and maybe he was breaking a law in some way but he is not a superspy, and everybody knows that and he has been held hostage and exchange, which is true, with respect, it’s true and everyone knows it’s true. So maybe he is in a different category, maybe it’s not fair to ask for somebody else in exchange for letting him out. Maybe it degrades Russia to do that.

Vladimir Putin: You know, you can give different interpretations to what constitutes a “spy,” but there are certain things provided by law. If a person gets secret information, and does that in a conspiratorial manner, then this is qualified as espionage. And that is exactly what he was doing. He was receiving classified, confidential information, and he did it covertly. Maybe he had been implicated in that, someone could have dragged him into that, maybe he did that out of carelessness, or on his own initiative. Considering the sheer facts, this is qualified as espionage. The fact has been proven, as he was caught red-handed when he was receiving this information. If it had been some far-fetched excuse, some fabrication, something not proven, it would have been a different story then. But he was caught red-handed when he was secretly getting confidential information. What is it, then?

Tucker Carlson: But are you suggesting he was working for the US government or NATO? Or he was just a reporter who was given material he wasn’t supposed to have? Those seem like very different, very different things.

Vladimir Putin: I don’t know who he was working for. But I would like to reiterate that getting classified information in secret is called espionage, and he was working for the US special services, some other agencies. I don’t think that he was working for Monaco, as Monaco is hardly interested in getting that information. It is up to the special services to come to an agreement. Some groundwork has been laid. There are people who, in our view, are not connected with special services.

Let me tell you a story about a person serving a sentence in an allied country of the US. That person, due to patriotic sentiments, eliminated a bandit in one of the European capitals. During the events in the Caucasus, do you know what he [bandit] was doing? I don’t want to say that, but I will do it anyway. He was laying our soldiers, taken prisoner, on the road and then he drove his car over their heads. What kind of a person is that? Can he be even called a human? But there was a patriot who eliminated him in one of the European capitals. Whether he did that of his own volition or not, that is a different question.

Tucker Carlson: Evan Gershkovich, that’s a completely different, I mean, this is a thirty-two year old newspaper reporter.

Vladimir Putin: He committed something different.

Tucker Carlson: He is just a journalist.

Vladimir Putin: He is not just a journalist, I reiterate, he is a journalist who was secretly getting confidential information.

Yes, it is different, but still, I am talking about other people who are essentially controlled by the US authorities wherever they are serving a sentence. There is an ongoing dialogue between the special services. This has to be resolved in a calm, responsible and professional manner. They are keeping in touch, so let them do their work.

I do not rule out that the person you referred to, Mr. Gershkovich, may return to his homeland. By the end of the day, it does not make any sense to keep him in prison in Russia. We want the US special services to think about how they can contribute to achieving the goals our special services are pursuing. We are ready to talk. Moreover, the talks are underway, and there have been many successful examples of these talks crowned with success. Probably this is going to be crowned with success as well, but we have to come to an agreement.

Tucker Carlson: I hope you’ll let him out. Mr. President, thank you!

Vladimir Putin: I also want him to return to his homeland at last. I am absolutely sincere. But let me say once again, the dialogue continues. The more public we render things of this nature, the more difficult it becomes to resolve them. Everything has to be done in a calm manner.

Tucker Carlson: I wonder if that’s true with the war though also, I mean, I guess I want to ask one more question which is, and maybe you don’t want to say so for strategic reasons, but are you worried that what’s happening in Ukraine could lead to something much larger and much more horrible and how motivated are you just to call the US government and say, “let’s come to terms”?

Vladimir Putin: I already said that we did not refuse to talk. We are willing to negotiate. It is the Western side, and Ukraine is obviously a satellite state of the US. It is evident. I do not want you to take it as if I am looking for a strong word or an insult, but we both understand what is happening.

The financial support, 72 billion dollars, was provided. Germany ranks second, then other European countries come. Dozens of billions of dollars are going to Ukraine. There is a huge influx of weapons.

In this case you should tell the current Ukrainian leadership to stop and come to the negotiating table, rescind this absurd decree. We did not refuse.

Tucker Carlson: Well, sure, you have already said it — I didn’t think you meant it as an insult — because you have already said, correctly, it's been reported that Ukraine was prevented from negotiating peace settlement by the former British prime minister acting on behalf of the Biden administration. Of course, it's our satellite, big countries control small countries, that's not new. And that is why I asked about dealing directly with the Biden administration, which is making these decisions, not president Zelensky of Ukraine.

Vladimir Putin: Well, if the Zelensky administration in Ukraine refused to negotiate, I assume that they did it under the instruction from Washington. If Washington believes it to be the wrong decision, let it abandon it, let it find a delicate excuse so that no one is insulted, let it come up with a way out. It was not us who made this decision, it was them, so let them go back on it. That is it.

However, they made the wrong decision and now we have to look for a way out of this situation, to correct their mistakes. They did it so let them correct it themselves. We support this.

Tucker Carlson: So, I just want to make sure I am not misunderstanding what you are saying — and I don't think that I am — I think you are saying you want a negotiated settlement to what's happening in Ukraine.

Vladimir Putin: Right. And we made it, we prepared a huge document in Istanbul that was initialled by the head of the Ukrainian delegation. He affixed his signature to the extract from the treaty, not the whole treaty but the extract. He put his signature and then he himself said: “We were ready to sign it and the war would have been over long ago, eighteen months ago. However, Prime Minister Johnson came, talked us out of it and we missed that chance.” Well, they missed it, they made a mistake, let them get back to that, that is all. Why do we have to bother ourselves and correct somebody else’s mistakes?

I know one can say it is our mistake, it was us who intensified the situation and decided to put an end to the war that started in 2014 in Donbass, as I have already said, by means of weapons. Let me get back to further in history, I already told you this, we were just discussing it. Let us go back to 1991 when we were promised that NATO would not be expanded, to 2008 when the doors to NATO opened, to the Declaration of State Sovereignty of Ukraine declaring Ukraine a neutral state. Let us go back to the fact that NATO and US military bases, British bases started to appear on the territory of Ukraine creating threats for us. Let us go back to coup d'état in Ukraine in 2014. It is pointless though, isn’t it? We may go back and forth endlessly. But they stopped negotiations. Is it a mistake? Yes. Correct it. We are ready. What else is needed?

Tucker Carlson: Do you think it is too humiliating at this point for NATO to accept Russian control of what was two years ago Ukrainian territory?

Vladimir Putin: I said let them think how to do it with dignity. There are options if there is a will.

Up until now there has been the uproar and screaming about inflicting a strategic defeat on Russia on the battlefield. Now they are apparently coming to realize that it is difficult to achieve, if possible at all. In my opinion, it is impossible by definition, it is never going to happen. It seems to me that now those who are in power in the West have come to realize this as well. If so, if the realization has set in, they have to think what to do next. We are ready for this dialogue.

Tucker Carlson: Would you be willing to say, “Congratulations, NATO, you won?” And just keep the situation where it is now?

Vladimir Putin: You know, it is a subject for the negotiations no one is willing to conduct or, to put it more accurately, they are willing but do not know how to do it. I know they want. It is not just that I see it but I know they do want it but they are struggling to understand how to do it. They have driven the situation to the point where we are at. It is not us who have done that, it is our partners, opponents who have done that. Well, now let them think how to reverse the situation. We are not against it.

It would be funny if it were not so sad. This endless mobilization in Ukraine, the hysteria, the domestic problems – sooner or later it all will result in an agreement. You know, this will probably sound strange given the current situation but the relations between the two peoples will be rebuilt anyway. It will take a lot of time but they will heal.

I will give you very unusual examples. There is a combat encounter on the battlefield, it is a specific example: Ukrainian soldiers got encircled (this is an example from real life), our soldiers were shouting to them: “There is no chance! Surrender yourselves! Come out and you will be alive!” Suddenly the Ukrainian soldiers were shouting back in Russian, perfect Russian: “Russians never surrender!” and all of them perished. They still identify themselves as Russians.

What is happening is, to a certain extent, an element of a civil war. Everyone in the West thinks that the Russian people have been split by hostilities forever. No. They will be reunited. The unity is still there.

Why are the Ukrainian authorities dismantling the Ukrainian Orthodox Church? Because it unites not the territory, it unites our souls. No one will be able to disunite them.

Shall we end here or there is something else?

Tucker Carlson: Thank you, Mr. President.

Results of the Year with Vladimir Putin

2023-12-17T11:56:00+04:00

Vladimir Putin summed up the year’s results and answered questions from journalists and the people of Russia in a live broadcast.

In 2023, the direct line with the people of Russia and the annual news conference have been merged into a single event taking place in Moscow’s Gostiny Dvor.

* * *

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: We have been accepting questions from across the country for precisely two weeks, and we have received an incredible number of submissions. It would not be an exaggeration to say that this broadcast brings together Russia in its entirety. We are in for a direct, honest, and open conversation.

Pavel Zarubin: Yekaterina and I took a very close look at all these submissions by reading thousands of pages and watching so many video messages.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: I can compare what happened over the past two weeks with holding the biggest national public opinion poll. Pavel and I felt as if we were not just journalists but also pollsters.

Pavel Zarubin: Of course, answering all these millions of questions would be impossible, but there are cross-cutting topics, of course. What were the most popular ones? It goes without saying that the special military operation came on top. We received messages from the service personnel and their family members dealing with payments, certificates, and supplies. We will definitely discuss all this in detail today.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: As usual, there were traditional – popular – questions about utilities, sports and so on.

So shall we start?

Good afternoon.

President of Russia Vladimir Putin: Good afternoon.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: This year, the Russian Popular Front got involved already at the stage of collecting the questions. There is no doubt that all questions and appeals will be processed, and none of it will go unanswered. Activists from the Russian Popular Front have a whole year to do this. And the sharpest, most interesting and topical questions will be asked live today.

Pavel Zarubin: “Yesterday morning, I posted a complaint about not getting paid on the moskva-putinu.ru website, and in the evening the money came in.” Many problems were solved proactively, but there are many more that remain unsolved. And most importantly, we all live in a completely different world now and people are naturally concerned about more than social issues.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: What time is better than now, two weeks before the New Year, to review the past 12 months’ results? December is always rich in events.

Mr President, last week you announced your decision to run for president. In this regard, what goals do you consider the most important, at home and abroad?

Vladimir Putin: I have spoken about this many times, but it would not hurt to say it once again. For a country like Russia, existence, mere existence, is impossible without sovereignty. Without sovereignty, Russia would cease to exist, at least in the form it exists today and has existed for a thousand years.

Therefore, our main objective is to strengthen sovereignty. But it is a broad concept. For example, strengthening sovereignty on the international stage involves enhancing our defence capability and security on the external contour. It also includes strengthening social sovereignty, which means providing safeguards for the rights and freedoms of our citizens, as well as developing our political and parliamentary systems. And lastly, it includes economic security and sovereignty, as well as technological sovereignty.

I think that right now, to answer your question, there is no need to be specific about all these vectors and avenues, but I am certain that people in this audience and across the country understand perfectly well that Russia would not survive without this. Just like any other country, Russia must assert its financial, economic, and technological sovereignty in order to have a future.

These are the main vectors from a conceptual standpoint.

Pavel Zarubin: Since we are discussing the economy, the fact that the Russian economy has not crumbled under pressure from its so-called former partners surprised many people around the world. However, these former partners have been openly seeking to finish their job by exerting even more pressure, as we have been hearing in their public statements.

How strong and resilient is the Russian economy? What is its margin of safety?

Vladimir Putin: Big enough so that we not just feel confident but also progress.

This margin of safety, as we have said on numerous occasions, but let me say it again, rests on several components.

The first and most important element is the high level of unity in Russian society.

The second element is the stability of our financial and economic system. As it turned out, and this came as a big surprise to our so-called partners and, frankly, many of us, over the previous decades Russia has accumulated a sufficient margin of safety and stability in finance and the economy.

And the third element is, of course, the growing capability of our security component, that is, the army and security agencies.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Mr President, what specific economic indicators can we be proud of?

Vladimir Putin: You know, I have brought a chart with me, as I usually do. There is nothing we do not know, and I believe the Finance Minister spoke about some figures yesterday. The main indicator of economic growth is GDP, which is expected to have grown by 3.5 percent as of the end of the year. It is a good indicator, which shows that we have recouped last year’s losses (when GDP decreased by 2.1 percent). If it grows by 3.5 percent this year, it means we have recouped the losses and have taken a significant step forward.

Unfortunately, inflation has increased and is expected to reach 7.5 percent as of the end of the year or slightly higher, around 8 percent. But the Central Bank and the Government are taking the necessary action. We can talk more about this, I mean raising the key interest rate and other measures being taken by the Central Bank and the Government. Our expectation is that we will be able to return to our target indicators.

Our industrial output is increasing steadily, at 3.6 percent. I am particularly pleased with the results in manufacturing, where output has grown by 7.5 percent year-on-year. It is a result we have not seen in a long time.

It is especially uplifting to see that investment in fixed capital has risen by 10 percent. What does this mean? The growth in industrial output and GDP are obvious. Plus 10 percent in fixed capital investment, what does it indicate? It indicates there will be sustainable growth in the medium term. Investors provide funding; production will expand; and new jobs will be created. I will talk about the unemployment rate later.

Businesses have added 24 percent in profit, not to mention the banks, which will earn almost three trillion rubles, in fact, over three trillion rubles by the end of the year. Of course, I know that people in the audience and generally across the country will say: banks are rolling in clover and so on. It is true. But it is good news for people who keep their money in Russian banks because it signifies the resilience of the banking system.

Now, real wages will grow by around eight percent after inflation. I understand that it will not be true for everybody but on average across the country, this statistic is accurate. And real disposable income is already on the rise. This indicator depends on more factors so the increase will be around five percent.

I mentioned the unemployment rate. Only recently, we were proud to see it drop to a historic low of three percent. Yesterday, when my colleagues and I were preparing for today’s meeting, we noted that the unemployment rate is now 2.9 percent. It is something we have never seen in Russian history. It is a very good integrated indicator of the economy’s health.

Since I talked about the rise in real income, I should mention that the minimum wage will be increased by as much as 18 percent from January 1. We do not do this very often.

The foreign debt is decreasing. This also indicates macroeconomic stability, financial stability. Government debt has been reduced from US$46 billion to US$32 billion. And private foreign debt has also decreased (our companies are duly repaying all the loans taken from foreign financial institutions) from US$337 billion to US$297 billion. That is, repayment is proceeding at a steady pace, often even ahead of schedule.

And this is an integrated social indicator. We will probably have a lot of social issues to discuss today, but still, there is such an integrated indicator – the growth in life expectancy, something we always talk about and strive for.

Look at the dynamics: in 2021, life expectancy in Russia was 70.06, in 2022 it was 72.73, and in 2023 it is expected to be 74 years. Still, this is a measure of how the state’s efforts in both the economy and social policy are reflected in the most important social indicator.

Pavel Zarubin: The other day you honoured the Heroes of Russia, and we saw you saying that we should save the young men, but we should do it, do it, do it.

For almost two years now, our country has been living under the conditions of the special military operation, and of course there has been a flurry of questions from the public. I will just read out some of them, literally. ”How do you assess these two years?“ ”What is the situation now? What are the dynamics?“ ”The goals and objectives of the operation – are they the same as they were at the beginning or not?“ And of course, the most important thing: ”When will there be peace?“

Vladimir Putin: There will be peace when we achieve our goals, which you have mentioned. Now let’s return to these goals – they have not changed. I would like to remind you how we formulated them: denazification, demilitarisation, and a neutral status for Ukraine.

Look what is happening in terms of denazification. During the negotiation process, there was a certain stage after the drafting of a possible agreement, which was recently mentioned by officials in Kiev, where, in general they did not agree that some kind of denazification was needed, and they said that there was no fascistisation, no growth of such sentiments. How could there not be? When a national hero – a famous, not just a nationalist, but a Nazi – Bandera is elevated to the rank of a national hero, what do you mean, there is not?

And when the head of today's Kiev Administration in front of the whole world gives a standing ovation to a former SS soldier who directly participated in the Holocaust, in the extermination of 1.5 million Jews in Ukraine, Russians and Poles. Is this not a manifestation of Nazism? Therefore, the issue of denazification is relevant. It is true that during the negotiation process we, our negotiators, were told that in principle they did not rule out the possibility of adopting some legislative acts in Ukraine. That was then, during the negotiations in Istanbul.

Now, as for demilitarisation. If they do not want to reach an agreement, then we have to resort to other measures, including military ones. Today Ukraine produces very little; they are trying to maintain some production, but it is almost non-existent. Everything they get is a freebie, and I apologise for such talk. But these freebies may end one day; in fact, they are already coming to an end little by little. But that is not even the main issue. I believe they will still be receiving these freebies, but they are being destroyed. I will not go into specific numbers for aircraft and air defence systems. They received 400 tanks, around 420 or 430, as promised. By the way, they got everything as promised. Ukraine received everything, and even more than what was promised by the West. But ever since the start of the so-called counteroffensive, we have destroyed 747 tanks. This is as of yesterday evening. We have also destroyed almost 2,300 armoured vehicles of various types. This is what is called demilitarisation. Alternatively, we can agree on demilitarisation and establish certain parameters. We actually agreed on them during the Istanbul talks, although these agreements were thrown out later, but we managed to reach agreement. There are also other possibilities to either reach an agreement or resolve the conflict by force. This is what we will strive for.

Pavel Zarubin: There is a short but important question that many people are concerned about: will there be a second wave of mobilisation?

Vladimir Putin: I understand that this is a burning issue. Look, we had a partial mobilisation, and at that time we called up 300,000 people. By the way, at first there was a lot of irony, many giggles about the mobilised personnel, and silly nicknames given to them. I remember this well. But these guys are fighting incredibly well. There are 14 Heroes of the Russian Federation from among those mobilised, not to mention other medals and orders. If I am not mistaken, there are 244,000 soldiers directly in the combat zone, in the special military operation zone. We formed regiments for equipment maintenance because there are many experts in this field who are in great demand. If I am correct, 41,000 were discharged due to mandatory retirement, health reasons, and so on.

After this, we launched a fairly broad campaign to attract volunteer fighters to sign contracts with the Armed Forces. Our goal was to recruit a little over 400,000 people by the end of the year. As of yesterday evening, I received a report that 486,000 have been recruited, and the number of men who are ready to defend the interests of our Motherland with arms in hand is not decreasing. There are 1,500 volunteer fighters being recruited every day throughout the country. So, together with the volunteers there will be about half a million people by the end of this year. This is just a conventional division into two groups: the contract is signed for two or three years, and the so-called volunteers, although, in fact, they are all heroes fighting for the Fatherland, but they have a one-year contract, which is a shorter period. So, what do we need mobilisation for? There is absolutely no need for it today.

Dmitry Peskov: If I may, I would like to remind everyone that today’s event is a combined format, Direct Line and a news conference with the President, so could we start the Presidential Q&A now?

Lyudmila Kolieva: If you don’t mind, can a young lady from the Caucasus go first?

Dmitry Peskov: Just a second, excuse me.

Vladimir Putin: You see, we have a democracy here. (Addressing Lyudmila Kolieva.) You can say what you wanted to say. Mr Peskov, please.

Dmitry Peskov: Please pass on the microphone.

Lyudmila Kolieva: Good afternoon. My name is Lyudmila Kolieva, I am from North Ossetia.

Mr President, North Ossetia has always defended the interests of our country. Issa Pliev and Hadji-Umar Mamsurov – great commanders and Heroes of the Soviet Union – fought courageously in the Great Patriotic War. And now, people from North and South Ossetia, as well as from other North Caucasus regions, continue to defend the interests of North Ossetia – that is, the interests of Russia.

What I want to say is that a lot of volunteer fighters are involved. We have two volunteer detachments in North Ossetia – Storm.Ossetia and Alania. Today, military personnel who serve under contracts are entitled to numerous benefits and support measures. Will volunteers be able to count on them as well?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Actually, I have looked through the questions coming in, but it really is impossible to even leaf through all of them. How many are there, Dmitry?

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Over two million.

Dmitry Peskov: Already 2.1 million.

Vladimir Putin: Nonetheless, a few days ago, Mr Peskov brought me a pile this tall, and I looked through them, and there were many questions like yours. I would like to repeat my view, and I am sure that there will be more questions like this. All volunteers who have taken up arms to defend Russia’s interests, who are fighting for it and risking their health and lives, must be ensured absolutely identical conditions.

There have been a few problems, and we are aware of them. Only yesterday, analysing the incoming letters, I spoke about this with the Defence Minister and the Chief of the General Staff. I also discussed this with Ms Golikova in her capacity as the Deputy Prime Minister who leads the social bloc in the Government. We will need to adopt amendments to laws to address specific issues. We may come back to that. I am sure that the State Duma deputies will support them 100 percent; we just need to formulate them correctly.

We will definitely ensure that everyone has the same conditions and receives the same level support from the state.

I know that both Storm.Ossetia and Alania are fighting valiantly. The head of the region also spoke about this and reported to me.

Pavel Zarubin: Can I show you how many questions I have here? These are only those I selected on issuing certificates to veterans proving their status.

I suggest that we hear a question on this topic in a recorded video. Sergei Sobolev from Iskitim, Novosibirsk Region.

Sergei Sobolev: Good afternoon, Mr President.

It is a great honour and privilege for me to submit this question to you from Donbass. I am very close to the frontline right now and can hear the war very well. Here with me I have fighters from the Defence Ministry assault brigade, veterans of the brigade which bears your name. All the men here have been taking part in the special military operation for almost two years now. They have been fighting on the frontlines and are now near Donetsk. They have been highly effective in gaining ground, and the enemy is struggling to hold them back, with its defences cracking at the seams, as they say. Every new day brings new achievements.

Mr President, victory is already within reach, and even the enemy understands this. But when the war ends, there will be a need to provide support for the people who fought in it. Take the veterans – these are people with immense combat experience, who represent the example of true patriotism. They could help educate the younger generation and train a new generation of fighters for the Russian army.

Do you think that it would be sensible to create a military and patriotic educational organisation for our young people? Do you have any plans in this regard?

Vladimir Putin: First, I would like to thank you for what you are doing. This may sound a bit too formal but trust me – I sincerely mean it. The Chief of the General Staff, as well as other commanders have been briefing me on the situation in specific locations. Now that we have the veterans over there, we will have the situation under control, no doubt about that. These simple words offer an assessment of what you are doing, and what you can do and will, no doubt, accomplish on the battlefield.

As for whether people like you can contribute to educating the younger generation, our school students, young people in general, this is something that is extremely relevant. It is obvious and absolutely necessary for any country when it reaches a turning point in its history, as we have today.

Mentioning Bismarck may not be appropriate here, but there was a time when he served and lived in Russia, even if he went on to become an outstanding German leader. He once said that wars are not won by generals, but by schoolteachers and parish priests. He was absolutely right.

Educating young people in the spirit of patriotism – and I use this term in its most positive sense without referring to any form of crude patriotism – is crucial, and we are already moving in this direction. More than a thousand of your colleagues and comrades-in-arms who have completed their service and returned to civilian life are already working in schools or work with children and teenagers in other formats.

We will definitely continue this work and expand our efforts. It is one thing to read a patriotic book or watch a patriotic film, but teaching patriotism through your own example is quite another matter. The best way to do it is by personal example. There is no one better than you for this job.

Pavel Zarubin: We are broadcasting live which means that it goes the way it goes. Go ahead, Mr Peskov.

Dmitry Peskov: Thank you, Pavel.

Vladimir Putin: Excuse me, Dmitry.

“They’re killing the Volga.” What do you mean? What is wrong with the Volga?

Pavel Zarubin: It seems that we will be sticking to this format…

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Indeed, the Volga is among the issues mentioned in the messages we have been receiving.

Yelena Usmanova: Good afternoon, Mr President. My name is Yelena Usmanova from Business Online, a business newspaper in Tatarstan.

This year, people living along the Volga region suffered from a disastrous decline in the water levels of the Kuybyshev Reservoir. Throughout the summer, the operator has been releasing water and sending it downstream while arguing that otherwise Astrakhan’s fishing industry would suffer.

Do you think that we need to address the issue of the declining water levels in the Volga? Do you think that the way we approach this issue could cost us Russia’s most prominent river?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: I do hope that this never happens. There is a conflict of interest involving the energy sector and other water users downstream. The energy sector wants to keep water levels at a sufficient level in order to generate enough power along the Volga cascade to meet the needs of industrial users and utilities. Meanwhile, there are water users downstream who want water levels to be high over there. Of course, sailors and ship owners want to ensure that Volga remains open to navigation and the deeper its waterway, the better. We know all this.

Trust me, the Government is working on it and will not let this situation spin out of control. Of course, this issue is real. I do agree with you on that.

Dmitry Peskov: Moving on, there are many questions, and we need to have some parity here.

Vladimir Putin: I suggest that we put Mr Peskov back in charge.

Dmitry Peskov: I can see ITAR-TASS in the middle sector. Go ahead, over there in the first row. Representative of the Kremlin pool, by the way. Go ahead, please.

Yekaterina Korostovtseva: Mr President, good afternoon. TASS news agency, Yekaterina Korostovtseva. We have a question on international matters for you. It has three parts.

What are the prospects, in your opinion, for bringing relations with the European Union back to normal? It has been becoming increasingly obvious lately that the Western countries have grown tired of helping Ukraine. What do you think about this new factor?

I have another question for you. The right has been gaining traction on the European political stage. What do you have to say about this topic and is this a matter of concern to you?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: As for normalising relations, it does not depend on us alone. We did not do anything to sour them; it was them who did it and who consistently tried to push us further back, disregarding our interests.

How did the conflict in Ukraine begin? Let us look back, even though it may take three or four minutes. It began with the state coup in Ukraine in 2014. Before that, we did our best for decades, I repeat, for decades, to develop normal relations with Ukraine, even after the events that amounted to a state coup, when Viktor Yanukovych was prevented from assuming office after he won the [presidential] election in the second round. But they decided to hold a third round. What was it if not a state coup? The [Ukrainian] Constitution did not allow for a third round. It was a gradual coup. But we accepted that.

What happened next? He [Yanukovych] won the next election, and what did our so-called opponents do? They staged a state coup.

Do you see the core of the problem? The problem is, as I have always said and as I am saying today, that despite the current tragic developments, Russians and Ukrainians are essentially one people. What is happening now is an immense tragedy; it is like a civil war between brothers who stand on different sides [of the conflict]. But overall, they are not, to a large extent, responsible for this.

The southeastern part of Ukraine has always been pro-Russian because it is historically a Russian territory. I see a colleague holding up a sign saying “Turkiye.” He knows, and people in Turkiye know that the entire Black Sea region was incorporated into Russia as the result of Russo-Turkish wars. What does Ukraine have to do with that? Neither Crimea nor the Black Sea region has any connection to Ukraine. Odessa is a Russian city. We know this. Everyone knows this. But they [Ukrainians] have concocted some historical nonsense.

Well now, Vladimir Lenin incorporated these regions into Ukraine when the Soviet Union was established. We did not dispute that after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, and we were ready to live within that paradigm. However, this southeastern part is pro-Russian, which was important to us. They aways voted for those who advocated a pro-Russian stance in Ukraine’s domestic and foreign policy. On the whole, this suited Russia.

But after the 2014 state coup, it became clear to us that they would use force to prevent us from developing normal relations with Ukraine. They spent US$5 billion on that state coup, as the Americans openly admitted, without any hesitation.

In 2014, three foreign ministers from Europe (from Poland, Germany and France) went [to Ukraine] to sign off as guarantors of agreements between the government – President Yanukovich – and the opposition. They agreed to resolve their disagreements peacefully. Two days later, they carried out a coup d’état. Why did they do it? They could have run and won the next election. But no. They wanted it straight away, and they wanted to create a conflict – that is why.

Who did it? Our American “buddies.” And the Europeans, who signed the agreements between the government and the opposition as guarantors, pretended they did not know anything about it. Today, if you ask them in Europe if anyone remembers this – no, they do not. But we have not forgotten and we will not forget.

That, combined with a burning urge to creep up to our borders and drag Ukraine into NATO – all of this has led to the tragedy. In addition, there has been bloodshed in Donbass for eight years. All this taken together has led to the tragedy that we are now experiencing. They forced us to take these actions.

So, as I say, in a situation where the United States conceived and orchestrated this act with Europe standing by and averting its gaze, or playing along and singing along with them, how can we build relations with them in these circumstances? We would – we did not break off any ties – but they pretend they do not know or remember anything. Only two or three times did they mention the Minsk agreements, saying they were not for real and were never going to be implemented. In 2014, they also signed those guarantees, those agreements between the government and the opposition in Ukraine just like that, and immediately forgot about them or threw them away.

Do you see my point? My point is that they have lost their sovereignty to a large extent, as we can see now, and they are making many decisions to their own detriment. To their own detriment! But they do it, nonetheless.

Outwardly, many European politicians may look like General de Gaulle, who took up arms to fight for his country’s interests, who rallied whatever resources France could muster to resist the occupiers. But in reality, they are more like Marshal Pétain – although he was a WWI hero, he became a collaborator and succumbed to the invaders during World War II.

Almost everyone [in Europe] behaves this way, except for a few people. Robert Fico became a new leader [in Slovakia] after the election, and Viktor Orbán in Hungary. I have said many times that they are not pro-Russia politicians, they are pro-national – they are defending their countries’ interests. But there are too few politicians like this; I do not know why they do not exist. Maybe this has to do with Europe’s excessive dependence on the Big Brother – the United States. But we are ready to build relations with them.

In fact, we are ready to build relations with the United States as well. We believe that America is an important country on the world stage. But this absolutely imperial policy the country pursues is bad for them, not even for us. Why? Because the public expects them to act like an empire, and if they agree to compromise on something or concede something to someone, their voters will see this as a failure or a flaw. That may partly be the reason the elites have to act in this way.

As soon as they change on a deeper level, and begin to respect other people, other countries, start searching for compromises instead of addressing their problems using sanctions and military force, which would create the underlying conditions for restoring full-fledged relations. So far, there are no such conditions. But we are ready for this.

Dmitry Peskov: Mr President, not all of our war correspondents are on the frontline. I see Nikolai Dolgachev in the studio. Ask your question, please.

Nikolai Dolgachev, Mr President, good afternoon!

I am Nikolai Dolgachev, Vesti correspondent and now the director of the VGTRK affiliate in Lugansk.

The Lugansk Republic has almost been fully liberated. Peaceful life is being restored, but we are worried about the whole front, knowing what heavy fighting is going on in the south and along the Dnieper. People have even been talking for some time about a certain bridgehead on the left bank of the Dnieper, in the Krynki township area. What kind of a bridgehead is it and how do we stand there?

And, I would like to ask you an additional question, with your permission. Large-scale work on restoring social and other infrastructure facilities is really going on in the liberated regions that are already a bit further from the front. We see this with our own eyes and life is changing a lot, but many people ask, and I will join them, what is the future of the new regions of our country? What is the goal? What will they be like in our country in several years?

And we know, Mr President, whatever you say will happen, so please tell us what will happen.

Vladimir Putin: It would be good if whatever I say would happen but, unfortunately, this is not always the case. Such is the world’s practice. I think everyone sitting here, listening to us and looking at us has the same experience. We talk about something, we want something to happen, and some things happen and others do not. This is normal, but it is certainly necessary to strive to reach one’s goals.

Now about Krynki. The enemy announced a big counteroffensive but nothing came of it anywhere. The last attempt – at any rate it looks like the last attempt for now – was to break through to the left bank of the Dnieper and ensure the movement towards Crimea. Everyone is talking about this, it is common knowledge, and it is nothing new. What happened in this section?

The Armed Forces of Ukraine focused its artillery shelling on a very narrow section of the left bank. To keep our men alive and not to subject them to excessive risk, not to sustain losses, the military command decided to retreat for several metres (I will tell you and as a war correspondent you understand what I am talking about). They are hiding their personnel in the forest to save it from unnecessary losses.

The Armed Forces of Ukraine walked into this section. It is small – about 1,200 metres long and some 300 metres wide. I do not even understand why they are doing this – they are simply pushing their people into death. The Ukrainian military say themselves that this is a one-way trip. To get the personnel there – about 80 people were there the whole time, but now the number is somewhat smaller – they are using only boats, and the boats are under fire from artillery, drones and other weapons. The sanitary losses among our personnel are two or three people, and there were six wounded three days ago. The enemy has dozens of dead. They were simply caught in a “fire bag.” They are throwing their men into it only for political reasons – I believe it’s just for political reasons.

Where does this come from? One can only guess and speculate. Apparently, it has something to do with foreign travel by Ukrainian leaders to beg for more money to keep the country running, to pay for the military component, equipment, and munitions. It appears that their approach is based on the assumption that as long as they travel and beg for arms, everyone will believe that the “counteroffensive” by Ukraine’s armed forces has at least some chances of achieving success, regardless of losses. They are just being driven out of there; that is all there is to it. They can build bridges and pontoons, but they don’t do this because they know these structures will be destroyed instantly, since they are within our reach. That is what is happening.

Here is what I would like to draw your attention to. These are not just servicemen of the Ukrainian armed forces; they are the elite, the assault squads. There are not many of them, actually. If you tally the losses sustained by the Armed Forces of Ukraine over the past 45 days, you will know how tangible it is. I believe this represents foolish and irresponsible behaviour on the part of the country's political leaders. But it is up to them.

This is no longer a secret. Some time ago, I told the Chief of the General Staff, “Do not rush to push them out of there.” I will be open about it: it is good for us if they mindlessly continue to send more troops there. This is unfortunate, but that is the logic of hostilities. But they continue to do so, and it is their tragedy, I think. Nevertheless, the Minister and the Chief of the General Staff said, “No, we will continue to gradually narrow down their latitude of movement.” This is what is happening. I think that everything will be over soon.

Now, you asked me about the overall state of affairs on the front. You already know it yourself, you are an expert. By the way, I watch you there and my heart sinks, especially when I see female reporters on the front line. I think maybe we should tell the main channels to remove women from there; it is a scary sight. Well, ok.

You are aware of the situation. Let us be humble about it, but our Armed Forces are improving their position almost along the entire line of contact. Almost all of them are engaged in active combat. And the position of our troops is improving along [the entire line of contact].

Now, about the future of these regions. There are many questions about this coming from the new regions and from other parts of the Russian Federation: what will become of them? Annually, the federal budget provides for over a trillion rubles for the development of these regions and their gradual integration into Russia’s economic and social life.

Of course, the situation in other regions is much better. This is because, for some reason, just like in Crimea, Kiev’s previous authorities never focused too much on these regions. However, over a trillion rubles are invested annually and will be invested in the coming years. Plus, these regions and other regions of the Russian Federation have established twin-region relations and these regions have already invested, I think, about 100–140, around 150 billion. Other regions will chip in and invest about 100 billion more.

Here is what I would like to share with you. Importantly, this year these “new regions” paid 170 billion rubles into the federal budget, meaning that the economy of these regions is recovering and getting back to normal. Of course, much remains to be done, and we will handle it.

Pavel Zarubin: We are working live and there can always be technical nuances. A little earlier, we saw a video question from VGTRK war correspondent Sergei Zenin.

Vladimir Putin: May I?

Pavel Zarubin: Of course.

Vladimir Putin: I noticed some of your colleagues. The person over there has a sign that says “Turkiye.” Let’s hear them.

Pavel Zarubin: And then we will get back to the war correspondent.

Vladimir Putin: Certainly, I promise.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Some war correspondents are actually women.

Dmitry Peskov: Please introduce yourself.

Ali Jura: Ali Jura, Anadolu Agency.

Mr President, as a result of Israel’s attack on Gaza, a child dies every 6–7 minutes. Eight thousand Palestinian children and more than 6,000 women have already died. Unfortunately, the UN and world major powers are not able to stop these attacks. Do you think the UN has lost its function?

Also, with respect to Palestine, are Turkiye and Russia working together to ensure peace in the region? What are Moscow and Ankara’s common plans on international and regional issues? Do you plan to visit Turkiye any time soon? Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: First of all, of course, I am watching the developments in Gaza. I will tell you what I think. In general, I agree with you, but it should be noted that President of Turkiye Erdogan is playing a significant leading role in improving the situation in Gaza. He is certainly one of the leaders of the international community who is paying attention to this tragedy and doing everything to change the situation for the better, so that conditions are created for a lasting peace. This is obvious. He is very active in this matter. And God bless him. Because what is happening is, of course, a disaster.

We were just talking about the Ukraine crisis – and we will return to it later. You and the audience here, everybody in the world can see (compare the special military operation and Gaza and you will see the difference): nothing of this kind is happening in Ukraine.

You mentioned the deaths of thousands of women and children. The Secretary-General of the United Nations called today’s Gaza the biggest children’s cemetery in the world. This opinion speaks volumes. It is an objective opinion, what else can I say?

As for the UN’s role, you know, it is nothing out of the ordinary and I have already said that. During the Cold War, there were different forces and different countries that often blocked decisions promoted by other countries. But the United Nations was initially created for the purpose of finding a consensus. Without a consensus, decisions cannot be made. So, nothing out of the ordinary is happening at the UN; it was always like this, especially during the Cold War. There is a reason why Foreign Minister of the USSR Gromyko had the nickname, Mr No, because the Soviet Union very frequently vetoed decisions. It is very significant. When there is a veto, no steps that a country sees as hostile towards itself will be taken. And it is important. It is important to preserve such mechanisms in the UN; otherwise it will simply be reduced to a talking shop as happened during a certain period after World War I.

But it does not mean that we cannot and should not seek these consensuses. We should. We, like Turkiye, proceed from the premise that the UN decisions to create a Palestinian state with its capital in East Jerusalem should, after all, be implemented, and this is extremely important. It is necessary to create the foundations for an Israeli-Palestinian settlement.

Now let us talk about plans. President Erdogan and I are in constant contact on these issues, and our positions are very similar. I think that we will manage to meet; in fact, I am planning to do just that. I also planned this quite recently, but I can say – there are no secrets in this regard – that it did not work out on account of President Erdogan’s busy schedule. I was prepared to take a flight to Turkiye, and I told him so, but it failed to transpire because of his busy schedule. He was unable to meet, not me. This happens sometimes. But we continue to have talks and perhaps we will arrange this visit early next year.

And now let us look at our efforts. As you may know, I visited two Arab countries not so long ago and had consultations with our friends in Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. We are also in contact with Egypt.

First, it is necessary to keep people in Gaza.

Second, it is necessary to bring humanitarian aid on a massive scale to these people.

When I was on my visit to the Emirates, it transpired that the UAE had opened a field hospital in Gaza, not far from the Rafah border crossing and the Egyptian border. We discussed whether it was possible for Russia to open a hospital of its own at a stadium in the same area. But for this to happen, we need to have consent from both Egypt and Israel. I talked to the President of Egypt, and he is in favour of this idea. I also talked to Prime Minister Netanyahu, and they consulted various armed agencies. The Israeli side believes that opening a Russian hospital in Gaza is not safe.

But this does not mean that we will discontinue our efforts. If today this is not safe and the Israeli side does not support the idea, we nevertheless have agreements with the Israelis, and they asked us to step up our deliveries of medical equipment and medicines, and we will certainly do that. So, we are in contact with all parties involved under the current developments and will work actively on this.

Pavel Zarubin: We would like to say a few words about our brave young women, our war correspondents. They are real reporters. We have a link with Channel One correspondent Valentina Solovyova who is working in the Zaporozhye Region again.

Valentina Solovyova: Good afternoon.

We are visiting the Melitopol Regional Oncology Clinic. Here is one of its wards. Look at the beds squeezed inside. We see three beds here, and another six over there.

Allow me to introduce Konstantin Lakunin, the Head Physician of this Clinic.

Konstantin Lakunin: Good afternoon.

Valentina Solovyova: Mr Lakunin, we can see that you have many patients. What is the situation like with doctors?

Konstantin Lakunin: We have many patients, and, of course, we are hard-pressed for doctors, as everywhere in Russia. However, our situation is perhaps even more dramatic: we are not only short of oncologists, haematologists or child oncologists. Actually, we just do not have them at all, so the clinic has to assume all these functions. We would like to thank the federal research centres that provide clinical and methodological assistance and take our patients for treatment.

Valentina Solovyova: How many patients does one doctor treat?

Konstantin Lakunin: A doctor receives 50 to 60 people every day compared to the standard 30-patient quota. Their workloads have increased by about 100 percent. Doctors at hospitals have similar loads, with one doctor treating at least 20 oncology patients; this also exceeds the standard care quotas by about 100 percent.

Valentina Solovyova: Nevertheless, you continue to develop, and I see that you are receiving new equipment.

Konstantin Lakunin: Yes, we are renovating our surgery ward on a large scale, and we have already received the new equipment for it under the federal programmes. It is already here, including an operating table for the new operating rooms. So, we believe we will see new successes in our work.

Valentina Solovyova: You are facing serious personnel shortages. What is your question?

Konstantin Lakunin: Here is my question and proposal: it would be appropriate to discuss the issue of drafting a special federal programme for attracting human resources to the new regions, to healthcare and social sectors. This might imply housing projects, the provision of land plots or low interest mortgage loans. It is necessary to attract qualified people here through various methods.

Valentina Solovyova: Do you offer competitive wages?

Konstantin Lakunin: Our current wages are very competitive; to be honest, specialists come here and sign up because of the salary. We can’t say that nobody is coming, they do come, but these measures are obviously not enough.

Valentina Solovyova: Thank you very much. So, this is our question.

Vladimir Putin: The question is clear. You know what was pleasant to hear? When the doctor said that we lack professionals, doctors, all across Russia, he said. That is, he considers his region part of Russia. From this point of view, I would like to note this question.

The problem is clear. The proposal to create a special federal programme that would help purchase housing, etc. I do not know whether it is necessary to create a special programme, but I agree that we need to pay attention to this issue. We have preferential two percent mortgage for these regions, it is more than preferential and even better than for families with children overall.

But what is the problem there, as I understand it? The problem is that the preference only works for new housing, and there is not much new housing being built there. So, it is necessary to extend it to the pre-owned property market as well, like in the Far East; it will then work quickly and take effect immediately. This is the first thing.

Second, regarding the creation of additional incentives. If the salary is competitive, as the doctor said, what do we need?

(Addressing the audience and commenting on the poster.) Shumbrat. Shumbrat is “hello” in Mordovian. Yes, I will answer your question in a minute.

So, what is it necessary to do? It is necessary to increase the relocation allowance for participants in the County Doctor programme, like in the Far East. Increase it to two million rubles for doctors, and one million rubles for paramedics. I think this would be a good incentive.

I will definitely discuss this with the Government; the budget has already been adopted but we still can give it some thought and come up with solutions for the short term.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Mr President, we see that our colleagues cannot even wait until you finish your answer. Let’s give the floor to…

Dmitry Peskov: Mr President, you said “shumbrat,” right?

Vladimir Putin: Yes, I promised. You are from Mordovia, right?

Dmitry Peskov: Let us give the microphone to the young lady in red, please.

Anastasia Vidyayeva: Mr President, good afternoon.

Vladimir Putin: Good afternoon.

Anastasia Vidyayeva: I am Anastasia Vidyayeva from the Mordovia State Television and Radio Broadcasting Company, branch of VGTRK. I represent our multi-ethnic republic.

I want to invite you to visit our pavilion at the Russia exhibition.

Vladimir Putin: Thank you.

Anastasia Vidyayeva: First, I want to thank you for this idea; the feedback is amazing, Mr President. A poll has been held recently: 97 percent of Russians pride themselves [in Russia’s achievements] after visiting this expo. Of course, the regions have a lot to be proud of.

Thanks to your support, Mordovia has been developing innovative production. It includes import substitution, the production of fibre-optic and other cables, as well as pharmaceuticals, and the calling card of Mordovia, our black diamond – fumed oak. We harvest it from the bottoms of rivers and create beautiful things from it.

Mr President, this expo is not only an opportunity to see beautiful things, but also to discuss various issues, resolve issues with the business community, etc. So, I invite you to visit it and I would also want to be there myself. Every girl, even a grown-up girl, dreams of a New Year miracle. So, I think you will not refuse the invitation.

Vladimir Putin: Ok. Thank you very much for the invitation. It is true, Mordovia is a very beautiful republic. I very much like how the local people treat their traditions and their culture, national dress, and the traditions in the broad sense of the word.

As for the regions and the regional part of the exhibition, it is really a success. Regional expos at VDNKh are probably one of the most interesting places for visitors. I agree with you, and I will try to visit the exhibition.

Thank you very much.

Dmitry Peskov: Before we go back to answering people’s questions, here is another one from the media, Match TV. I would guess it has something to do with sports, judging by the channel name.

Maria Korobova: Good afternoon,

I am Maria Korobova from Match TV. Obviously, my question is about sports as there is something to be asked and addressed.

A week ago, the IOC introduced very strict eligibility conditions for Russian athletes to take part in the 2024 Olympic Games. Meanwhile, no special restrictions or requirements were introduced for, say, Israeli athletes. Given this, is it worth going to the Olympics at all? And overall, what are the developments around elite sports in our country?

And another one we cannot omit, as we receive many questions from the regions. Amidst the challenging situation, will efforts continue to implement the programme for the development of physical fitness and sports, particularly in Russia’s remote areas? Thank you.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Mr. President, before you respond, let me say that you are a person that engages in sport, calling judo your first love. This is so, indeed. We have many requests from parents, coaches and even kids, who say they have the will to compete and win – but that there is no place for training and that the conditions are simply poor.

Let’s watch a video message from Crimea.

(Video is shown.)

Artemy Doroshenko: Mr President.

We are people from Crimea; we live in the village of Solnechnaya Dolina in the urban district of Sudak. We are athletes who play football and field hockey; we have competed in several events, including regional and national events, and have always won medals, cups, certificates and even first place.

The gym in the club building has always been our workout place, but this year training there has become completely impossible for us. The gym has not seen any upgrade for over 40 years and now has long-rotted floors, walls covered with mold, broken windows, and water dripping from the ceiling. It is even colder in the building than outside. Our coaches have sent requests to various authorities, but the local and other officials ignore them. Now, in December, we are holding our training sessions outside.

We are asking you to provide assistance in renovating our gym, and help us to be heard and receive help. We are willing to grow up strong and healthy to defend and support our Motherland. We wish you victory!

Vladimir Putin: Good. I will now answer these athletes, of course.

As for the IOC and comparisons with other athletes such as Israelis and others, first, everything international officials are doing towards Russian sports totally contradicts and distorts the words spoken by Pierre de Coubertin, “Oh sport, you are Peace!”

This is why the Olympic movement was created in the first place: to unite people, not separate them. Today, international officials have become too consumed by the business aspect of sports movements, having become vastly dependent on sponsors. The latter care about the cost of ads per minute on TV and so on. They have enough problems of their own. If they continue acting this way, they will bury the Olympic movement. The very idea of Olympism has been tarnished.

You have mentioned Israel and Israeli athletes in this connection, despite the events in Gaza… If I supported this in any way now, I would have been like those international sports officials. Sport should be beyond politics, it is designed to unite people.

That is why we, just like… You know, we say that it is not nice to count money in other people’s pockets. The same goes for this case as well, it is not nice to point your finger at other athletes. There are problems there, as your Turkish colleague and I have spoken about just now. But what do athletes have to do with this? Let them go and take part in competitions without any restrictions. And the same should be done with regard to Russian athletes.

But this isn’t happening; yielding to the influence of Western elites, they adopt decisions that suit them but are not beneficial to global sport. Likewise, European politicians adopt decisions that benefit the United States and its economy but are detrimental to themselves. The same is happening in this sphere as well.

So, should athletes take part in these competitions or not? There is one more detail here. It is necessary to take a close look at what the conditions are, including the flag and the anthem. I always said that athletes train for years and should be given an opportunity to take part in major tournaments, including the Olympic Games. Everyone knows whose flag it is, and everyone knows that these are our athletes. This is obvious. And this is why I supported, in principle, the idea that our athletes should take part in such competitions.

But today we must scrutinise the conditions the IOC is pushing. If these artificial conditions are politically motivated, artificial conditions that are designed to cut off our leaders, our athletes who are capable of winning gold, silver or bronze medals, to decapitate our national team, in this case… For example, our athletes from CSKA or Dynamo could be unable to compete because they are allegedly connected with our Armed Forces, even though CSKA has no relation to our Armed Forces now, it is a private organisation.

They can invent any reasons, but if their goal is to cut off our leading athletes and to show that Russian sport is not progressing or is even deteriorating, our Ministry of Sport and the National Olympic Committee of Russia should analyse the situation and adopt a balanced decision.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Mr President, you promised to respond to the video address from Crimea.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, from Crimea, I certainly will do that.

I have taken note of their address, and I would like to tell them that we must develop sport and all our programmes. Incidentally, I believe that about 1.5 billion rubles, or even more, 1.7 billion rubles, were allocated from the federal budget in the past years for the development of regional and municipal sports. This year, the [sports] budget is less than 700 million rubles.

But we must certainly resume this funding, which will be done, incidentally in the next presidential programme. We must do this by all means, and we will do this.

As for this particular question from Crimea, I will discuss the matter with Mr Aksyonov, and we will provide federal assistance. We will definitely address this issue in a targeted manner.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: There are many such questions here. Here is a whole stack of them, including some regarding hockey in the Tyumen Region and other sports.

Mr Peskov, back to you.

Vladimir Putin: Their question has reached us, and we will help them.

Dmitry Peskov: The Russian Popular Front will be tasked with processing all these requests throughout the following year, as we have said.

Friends, I see Dmitry Kulko, who is also a frontline correspondent. Seeing him wearing a suit and a tie is quite unusual. Can he have the microphone, please?

Dmitry Kulko: Dmitry Kulko, frontline correspondent for Channel One. Good afternoon, Mr President.

Vladimir Putin: Good afternoon.

Dmitry Kulko: I have several questions from fighters deployed in the special military operation zone, if I may.

First, do you think that the system for paying military personnel has been running smoothly? Can it be improved? I know people who have not received money for months.

My second question deals with the wounded and the Defenders of the Fatherland foundation. Its purpose is to support the families of those killed in the special military operation and its veterans. What is your assessment of the way this foundation has been working?

Mr President, if you will allow me, I would like to submit a proposal. As a matter of fact, today fighters who get wounded and get hospital treatment must then return to their units in order to be examined by a military medical commission. This means that they must return to the special military operation zone after suffering severe wounds. This applies to those who, sadly, have lost arms or legs. This is a major challenge for them. It would be better to have these men undergo this examination where they get their treatment or rehabilitation.

My last question is about drones. There is still a deficit of drones on the frontline, Mr President. The fighters have been pleading for more all the time, and we have been running fundraisers to make it happen. People have been willing to donate – and I would like to thank them for their effort. Still, there is not enough.

For example, we have recently held a fundraiser together with the Popular Front and delivered several dozen drones to the 4^th Brigade, which is fighting courageously in Kleshcheyevka right now. Regretfully, in less than a month, they only have a half of the drones left. The troops have to sacrifice the drones they have all the time: operators have to fly them during assault operations regardless of rain or electronic interference, since it is our men, our youngsters down below. There is no way we can leave them without the intelligence they need. When will we see any improvements?

Thank you very much.

Vladimir Putin: You surely must have noticed some improvements. Things are getting better, are they not?

Dmitry Kulko: They are, but in present-day warfare…

Vladimir Putin: This is a fact, but you are right, of course, we do not always have enough, and not everything works out the way it was supposed to.

As I have already said, the frontline is almost 2,000 kilometres long, you know. And it may well be that we are not always able to supply all of it on time. In fact, this is what is happening. But the production volumes have been growing. By the way, private actors have been buying many drones, including abroad. The state, the Defence Ministry, manufacturers are also proactively involved in these efforts, of course.

You also know that there are many new things in terms of electronic warfare too. You know these designations probably better than I do. We currently install the Lesochek systems on almost all combat vehicles as far as possible. Of course, we will expand their use.

As concerns public response and the Popular Front and its work, an entire movement was created called Everything for Victory. You know, of course, the state could do without this sort of support, but it cannot be stopped. With all my heart, I want to thank our citizens who are so passionate about the needs at the front and our people fighting for Russia’s interests.

People have donated more than ten billion rubles. Of course, the state has this kind of money, especially now when our economy is on the rise. But the fact that people send their own money, weave nets, knit mittens and socks and send all this… Three million children have sent letters to the front, three million! And you know how much these letters warm our fighters’ hearts. We will support this in every way possible. I want to express gratitude to all volunteers.

Perhaps glitches happen occasionally. You know it, we meet with you on a regular basis, I mean with war correspondents, and you monitor the situation there. I hope that these contacts will continue, and you will, along with the Defence Ministry, communicate any problems to me.

As for the fact that wounded soldiers have to return from hospitals to military units for paperwork, I have seen these questions in letters. The situation has changed though. Either you have outdated information or I have inaccurate data. The Defence Ministry told me that paperwork can be obtained in rehabilitation centres rather than at hospitals, because after hospital, they are immediately sent to rehabilitation centres. I was told the process is running well.

I will certainly check that all is working well when it comes to housing and benefits, as well as paperwork, so they do not have to return to their military units. But if this is still happening, I will certainly speak to the Defence Minister. Changes must be made.

As for the Defenders of the Fatherland foundation, it operates well. There is a strong team of people. I met with the director, Anna Tsivileva, and visited a regional branch [in Veliky Novgorod]. These people are wonderful and very passionate about this positive work. Their responsibilities are limited though. Under the foundation’s constituent documents, they have no direct involvement formally. For example, I have always been against them managing any funds. But I think they should have broader rights with respect to controlling allocations and controlling the result of allocations, including funding for rehabilitation.

I do not want to go into detail, but I know that State Duma deputies are also dealing with this matter after my visit to one of the branches. We will be improving this foundation and ensure that it becomes an effective tool for protecting the interests of our people involved in combat operations.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Mr President, you mentioned earlier the enormous role that volunteers play in the current circumstances, and their generous spirit. They have submitted many questions.

Marina Makeyeva from the Moscow Region has the following question for you. Today, people are widely engaged in helping the armed forces by sending humanitarian aid, building materials, supplies, and transport. Why are ordinary people doing this rather than the state?

Vladimir Putin: I just covered this and think I answered this question. The state accounts for 99.9 percent of these efforts. But people do so of their own volition. We welcome this and will not put any restraints on it. I just want to thank them for that.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: You said a few words about electronic jamming devices. Wounded assault unit member Andrei Nikishin from the Omsk Region asks you to provide electronic jamming devices against drones. They simply do not have them.

Vladimir Putin: Give me the specific information later. What location is in question? We will check. There may be a shortage at some point in a particular unit. Again, the contact line is over 2,000 kilometres long, and there is a force of 617,000 deployed in the combat zone. So, yes, of course, there may be setbacks somewhere. Please give me the specifics, and I would like the war correspondents, whom I meet with regularly, to update me on his matter as well. We will definitely look into it.

Pavel Zarubin: And let us follow up on an important video call. Sergei Sobolev from the Novosibirsk Region.

Sergei Sobolev: Mr President,

Sergei Sobolev here. On November 13, 2022, I signed a six- month contract with a private military company. Upon returning home, I contacted the military commissariat of the town of Iskitim to obtain a combat veteran certificate, but my request was turned down. I then reached out to the Defenders of the Fatherland Fund, but was turned down again. I contacted the Social Support Centre of the town of Iskitim and was turned down this time, too.

Please help me sort this matter out as most of my comrades-in-arms also served in this private military company.

Pavel Zarubin: There are many questions like this.

Vladimir Putin: You know what the problem is all about? There is a problem. I think these are setbacks that the Defence Ministry should have prevented.

The problem is that formally and legally there are no private military companies in Russia. They are not provided for by law; that is the problem. This is my first point.

Second, the military who participated in the hostilities as part of private military companies, so to speak private military companies, did not conclude contracts with the state. This is the main problem. Commanders of these private military companies were in some kind of a relationship with the state. Unfortunately, payments were also made in cash. And that is also a big problem. It is very difficult to even establish any lists of the personnel serving in these military units.

However, all these people, I know these people firsthand, children of some of my close associates fought in private military companies. Among the people around me who work with me, there were family members, some of whom have given their lives for the Motherland fighting as part of this private military company.

By all means, their rights must be reinstated. They are entitled to the kind of social benefits and support from the state that other participants in hostilities enjoy. There is no doubt about it; it is my absolutely principled position.

I will not delve into details now, but it needs to be done. The Defence Ministry is aware of this, and the Government is aware of this approach. If needed, and maybe this is the only way to go, we will have to amend the law, and we will amend it, we will definitely make it happen. In any case, I promise, we will do our best to make it happen.

There are lines appearing on the screens, and one just read, “Yelpatyevo, Yaroslavl Region: please connect us to gas.” We will definitely consider this. Perhaps, we need to return to the issue of gas supply infrastructure. I already marked Yelpatyevo, Yaroslavl Region.

Pavel Zarubin: Let's make a video call now. Yulia Bereza, village of Rysaikino.

Ms Bereza, if you can hear us, please ask your question.

Yulia Bereza: Mr President, good afternoon, sir,

I am an active military member, and I am not in Rysaikino right now, but in Lugansk. Junior Sergeant Yulia Bereza, medical motor rifle battalion.

Ever since the beginning of the special military operation, I have been making every effort to go to Donbass as a volunteer, like my husband. On May 10, 2022, I signed a voluntary mobilisation paper at the enlistment office in Donetsk and was enlisted in the rifle regiment of the People's Militia of the DPR. I will say right at the outset that both of us joined up due to our convictions – to defend our Motherland and people, to protect our loved ones, as well as to uphold truth and justice.

However, because we were mobilised in the DPR, and not in the Russian Federation, I could not apply for benefits as a special military operation participant. I wanted to ensure benefits for my mother who is still in Rysaikino. In particular, I have obtained a war veteran identification card in the DPR, but it is valid only in the DPR. When I tried to login to my military member profile to apply for benefits, I found there was no such service member with the number on my personal file. My husband is in the same situation.

Therefore, I am appealing to you to facilitate the procedure for obtaining benefits for our mothers. Thank you very much.

Vladimir Putin: Thank you for your question.

Here is the problem. As you are saying, you were enlisted in the People’s Militia of the DPR. The People’s Militia, so that everyone understands, is mostly the same as the Armed Forces – they have been active on the line of contact and they still are.

But the problem is that you signed your contracts before the Lugansk People's Republic and the Donetsk People's Republic became part of the Russian Federation. As far as I understand, Comrade Senior Sergeant is a citizen of the Russian Federation, but it is an even bigger problem for those who did not have Russian citizenship.

The papers you have entitle you to benefits in the DPR or LPR. One way to change this could be to have them recognised in the Russian Federation. But there is another way to solve the problem – to issue relevant documents directly on behalf of the Russian Federation.

Relevant commissions have been set up in the Donetsk and the Lugansk republics, and these commissions are considering such issues. As far as I know, about 4,500 people in the DPR have had their rights confirmed, and 17,500 more in the LPR. In Donetsk, several thousand ID cards have already been issued, about 2,000, I think, and another 1,700 in the Lugansk Republic.

We are already moving in this direction and we will step up the work to restore and confirm the rights of war veterans. You should have no doubts about that. If something is still pending, I am sure that we will get it done. But if you have any difficulties with contacting your commission, you just need to tell us what these difficulties are, and we will resolve them.

Vladimir Putin: I suggest that we go with “the North.”

Darya Shuchalina: Good afternoon, Mr President.

I am Darya Shuchalina from the Komi Republic. I represent the municipal newspaper Panorama of the Capital and am a member of the Civic Chamber in our region.

I am passing on a question that people in our northern territories – Inta and Vorkuta – instructed me to ask. You know, unfortunately a very important programme for resettling people from the far north and areas with the same status is being carried out too slowly. This concerns the whole country, not only our region. We have six such municipalities in Komi. Naturally, people who have spent their entire lives developing the North and are now in well-deserved retirement would like to spend their pension time in areas with a milder climate.

I will cite only two figures. People in our republic received only 129 housing certificates this year, but there are 21,000 people on the waiting list. Obviously, it would be unrealistic to ask you to resettle every applicant instantly, so I will suggest two alternatives.

Option one: give priority to two categories on the waiting list – people with disabilities and pensioners. These two categories in our region should really enjoy priority.

Option two: either find the possibility of additional funding in our already tight federal budget for next year or, if this is too difficult, our region is prepared, if our authorities receive a budget loan a with a low interest rate, to resettle Inta and Vorkuta residents within the region, for instance, in Syktyvkar, our capital, or south of Komi were the climate is more or less acceptable.

Is it possible to consider one of these two alternatives? Maybe there are some other options. Thank you.

And thank you for resolving our issue of transferring the Vorkuta Airport complex to the federal authority. This was a long-awaited, very important decision. Thank you very much for that.

Vladimir Putin: The important thing is that it develops.

Darya Shuchalina: Yes.

Vladimir Putin: Because it happens that when we transfer something to a region, it all gets stuck there and then the region comes and asks us to give it federal money for development.

Darya Shuchalina: The administration of our republic is very proactive and, considering that Mr [Vladimir] Uyba asked you about this, all the decisions have already been taken.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, I know.

Mr Uyba is a very proactive and well connected person. He worked in the federal government, and he can do a good job in his current position.

Can you repeat your proposal, please? You suggested focusing attention during the relocation programme on two…

Darya Shuchalina: Yes, on two groups of people waiting to be relocated – people with disabilities and pensioners. There are two possibilities, as we see it.

The first one is very simple: to request additional funding from the federal budget.

The second option, which we can implement with regional funding, is to relocate the people who are taking part in this programme within Komi. To do that, we need a government guaranteed loan at a low interest rate, so that we can give these people housing in Syktyvkar or in the south of the republic. Komi is a large republic, and relocating people from the north to the centre or the south is an acceptable solution.

Vladimir Putin: You know, if the Finance Minister was with us today, he would say that there is no money available. The Finance Ministry never has money available. However, we can and should consider expanding this programme, of course. Indeed, those who have been working all their lives in the north want to move to regions with a milder climate at a certain period in their lives. This is understandable.

First of all, we will continue the programme. This is the key point.

Second, regarding the allocation of additional funds, this issue needs to be analysed. The budget for next year has been approved. I hope there will be additional revenues. It is this part of the budget that we should look at.

As for relocation within the republic, it is a possible solution. We will discuss this matter with the head of the republic. I will also talk with the Government. Loans are a complicated thing, but it could be a simpler way to help the region and not so burdensome on the Finance Ministry, although it will be a burden, nevertheless. But we should consider this option and try to implement it.

As for focusing attention on people entitled to benefits, it is the right decision. We will discuss it with the Government by all means. Thank you for your proposal.

Dmitry Peskov: Mr President, if I may, can we come back here, please? I suggest that we give the microphone to the young man over there. I think he is in the third row. Please, introduce yourself.

Vladimir Seroukhov: Vladimir Seroukhov, RBC. I have a currency-related question, if I may.

Javier Milei was elected President of Argentina the other day, and one of his main campaign promises was to replace the peso with the US dollar. Russia, on the contrary, has adopted a policy to dedollarise its economy by moving away from both the dollar and the euro in its international settlements.

What do you think about this process? Do Russia’s settlements with its economic partners in rubles and national currencies of countries friendly to us make any sense and offer us any benefits? Since we are talking about the ruble, what are the factors that affect the rate of the ruble the most, pushing it up or down? What are the main driving forces today?

Vladimir Putin: Allow me to begin with Argentina, so that we do not have to come back to this question later. Indeed, we all know about the idea that Argentina’s President-elect had to introduce the dollar in his country. Every country makes its own sovereign decisions, of course.

However, inflation in Argentina stands somewhere around 143 percent, I think, which creates a lot of challenges, as the country’s preceding leaders told me, in terms of repaying the loans Argentina contracted here and there. So the logic here is quite clear.

But this means that the country loses much of its sovereignty. If today’s leaders in Argentina do not see any other solution for addressing the country’s financial and economic woes, this is their decision to make. Still, this would substantially undermine their sovereignty.

There is also a socioeconomic aspect here. You are from RBC, right? Your channel specialises on these matters, so you have specialists who will understand what I am about to say, and ordinary people will also understand because this is not rocket science. You see, even pegging your national currency to the dollar can have serious socioeconomic consequences.

There was a time when Argentina faced major financial challenges, and people went as far as to attack banks. But what will happen if they switch to the dollar or peg their currency to the dollar? Any government seeking to solve its economic issues always thinks about honouring its social commitments.

I can note with satisfaction that the Government of the Russian Federation has been able to fulfil its social obligations in full despite the fact that defence spending and security costs have increased to a certain extent. Of course, some may say that this is not enough and that we must do more, like in Komi, for example, as I have just said, where we need to allocate more funds for relocating people, and so forth. That said, whenever the state promises something, it delivers on its commitments and honours them.

As for the dollar peg, there is non-discretionary spending: pensions, salaries for public sector employees, social benefits, and the like. Quite often, a state does not have enough money to cover these expenses. So what happens when you peg your currency to the dollar?

If they have a national currency – the peso, they have a tool to slightly increase inflation. True, this is certainly not very good, but still, it is a tool for balancing between a healthy economy and the fulfilment of social obligations.

But if you do not have a national currency, you cannot print more money. This leaves the government with only one option – to cut social spending, slash wages, pensions, benefits, spending on medicine, on roads, other things, and on internal security. There are no other options. And in this regard, any government puts itself in a very difficult position in terms of domestic political stability. If our partners make this choice, it is their right; any country can determine what it should do and how it should be done.

As for us, you said that we were the ones who rejected these settlements, but we have not rejected anything. The situation is that they have been creating problems with foreign currency settlements for us. By the way, in doing so, they are once again shooting themselves in the foot. Why are they seeking to restrain the dollar and the euro’s standing as universal currencies, as international reserve currencies? First of all, the dollar, of course.

In 2021, if I remember correctly, we used 87 percent of foreign currency to service our exports, including the dollar and the euro. The ruble, I think, accounted for about 11–13 percent, and the yuan, about 0.4 percent. As of September 2023, the ratio was as follows: the ruble, 40 percent; the yuan, 33 percent; and the dollar and the euro combined, 24 percent. Their share dropped from 87 to 24. Why did they do this? I repeat: they shot themselves in the foot.

Is this bad for us or not? Not really. Actually, the more we use the national currency in economic and financial transactions, the better. This boosts our sovereignty and our capabilities.

What does the exchange rate depend on? We have a floating exchange rate and it depends on market conditions, on the prices of our export goods, on growing demand within the country – and demand is growing. There is one more aspect – the Executive Order that was designed to regulate the foreign currency situation has played a role, and that, too, partly influenced the exchange rate.

What is the reason for this? In previous years, there was no need for any restrictions, because we received enough information from the countries that imported a significant volume of our goods, and we could track the movement of capital. Now we do not get any information from them because they cut off access. The Government and the Central Bank have no way of seeing what happens with the money that our exporters receive. The Central Bank and the Government have a legitimate interest in observing the ruble amounts accumulating, coming and going. In this sense, the Executive Order did introduce a few controls. But I believe that things will return to normal, so this is a temporary situation.

Overall, the financial market is generally stable. It is our priority to ensure this stability and predictability. And I believe we are succeeding in this.

Dmitry Peskov: Let’s take one more question from the hall.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, go ahead, please. The sign reads “Kuban.”

Maxim Zhmutsky: Good afternoon, Mr President.

Vladimir Putin: Good afternoon.

Maxim Zhmutsky: I am Maxim Zhmutsky, TV Channel ‘Krasnodar,’ Krasnodar Territory.

Mr President, this year, the resorts in Kuban have broken yet another, this time, historical record – 17.5 million tourists spent their vacations in our region. This was in the summer alone. Now we are having an intensive winter period. Of course, this is a huge burden on the infrastructure, primarily transport, especially in view of the closed airports.

Mr President, are there any federal plans for developing transport accessibility to the south of the country? Maybe high-speed roads or railways?

I am bound to ask you the following question: literally yesterday, there was a report that a test flight will take place tomorrow, on December 15 from Moscow to Krasnodar Airport, and if, God willing, everything goes well, our Krasnodar Airport will be opened. How true is this?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: As for opening airports, the main criterion here is passenger safety. Passenger safety is the top priority when making a decision to open an airport. This applies to the Krasnodar Airport as well. Although it is far from the area of hostilities, the Defence Ministry has been instructed to continuously monitor the situation and eventually make the decision. If they are getting close to it, they will report to me and we will act then. It is necessary to look at this situation and analyse it again.

As for the development of other means of transport – air service, railways and autos, they are all making progress. You mentioned a high-speed railway. Yes, we are planning to build this. The first stage will be Moscow – St Petersburg, and later it will be possible to go south. I mean it is not just possible but we are planning for it. But right now we must do the main thing – create an effective, capable structure that can take charge of this and that will draft a good business plan and a development model.

This is all possible. The Government and the initiators of this process are thinking about it and offering solutions. I am referring to Sberbank, the Moscow Mayor’s Office, and the Government, I repeat, is getting involved in this work.

Of course, if it takes two hours and 15 minutes between Moscow and St Petersburg – people spend more time getting to work in Moscow – this will be a completely different story, a completely different development. The same applies to the south of the country: Krasnodar, Kuban as a whole, the Stavropol Territory, the Rostov Region and Crimea as well. So, we are working on this. I hope it will be effectively continued.

Now, regarding the development of transport and passenger volumes. They are growing. Air service is seeing record numbers of passengers, increases of more than 16 percent; I think 16.4 percent in one year. Railway growth is second – plus 10 percent – 10.4 percent, and roads – cars and buses – plus about 7 percent – 6.4 or 6.5 percent. To sum up, passenger transport volumes are growing substantially.

Of course, everyone involved in this process should think about the next tourist season and do all they can to meet the interests of travellers. Domestic tourism is being developed at a good pace. I would like to thank all those who work in this area, including those who work in Kuban, for upgrading the quality of their performance. I hope, they will continue working like this in the future.

Dmitry Peskov: Let us take another question. Please, pass the mic over here, the first row. “Life” is sitting right there, the very bottom, first row.

Alexander Yunashev: Good afternoon, Mr President. Alexander Yunashev, Life.

We realise that we are living in unusual times. There are so many war correspondents in the audience, one could say, it is wartime, and much is required from everyone, triple the usual amount. There are the Criminal Code articles that were written in the 1990s. According to them, murder can get you 12 years, while the Prosecutor's Office may seek 14 years in prison for online extortion. Like, for example, for a seriously ill journalist, Alexandra Bayazitova, accused of being paid to block “negative” content about banker [Alexander] Ushakov who, it should be noted, works at a bank servicing the state defence order. She did not use a soldering iron in a garage to extort money from him, did she?

Vladimir Putin: So, are you trying to justify what she did?

Alexander Yunashev: I'm not trying to justify anyone. I am just stating the facts. To what extent do her actions match these extremely high sentencing requests made by the Prosecutor's Office? Is it not time, perhaps, to rewrite some of the Criminal Code articles? Maybe the threshold for particularly large amounts needs to be revised? Where is the line that separates bringing actual wrongdoers to justice and launching a witch hunt?

Vladimir Putin: You are taking this too far, what witch hunt are you talking about? I am not familiar with the details, but why a witch hunt? Did she do something so big that she now needs to be hunted down? Is she a major opposition figure? What did she do that she must be hunted down now? I am sure no one is after her.

All lawyers know: dura lex, sed lex – the law is harsh, but it is the law.

You know when you say such things – I know there are 14 to 15 year sentences for economic crimes… Frankly, I was stunned when I heard about it, I know about it, it is clearly too much. But in many countries, economic crimes, tax crimes, and crimes in the antitrust sphere, the fight on cartels, they add up these sentences, and perpetrators get time that is beyond belief, like a hundred years.

But why does it happen? Because society and the lawmakers proceed from the assumption that at some point of the development of society or the economy, the public danger of such actions is so great that it calls for an appropriate, as the legislators believe, response to put a stop to this unlawful activity.

This specific case (or other cases of similar nature) raises questions with me as a citizen. I am not sure it is necessary to put a person behind bars for 14 years. Or, they tell me about a former minister who was given more than 19 years for certain violations. He or that woman did something wrong. Do they need to spend 19 and a half or 14 years behind bars? The lawmaker should give it some thought. True, this needs to be thought about. As long as the law exists, it must be followed.

Remember the wonderful film that we all love, Belorussian Station? In it, the actor Anatoly Papanov plays an accountant at a major Soviet enterprise, and he is constantly pestered by a young director who pleads with him to break some rule. Papanov's character responds to him: you are a young and energetic person, and maybe you are right. But if you are right and so full of energy, go and get this rule changed, but as long as it remains in force, I will follow it.

There is something to that. It is about the stability of the legal system and how it is appraised in public opinion and what society thinks about the committed crime. But it does not mean that you should be stuck with it forever and not change anything. I agree with you, and I will ask lawmakers, the State Duma, to reassess this and to respond accordingly. I agree with you in general.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Mr President, we have been live for almost two hours. I suggest having a little fun, in the good tradition of Direct Line.

Vladimir Putin: Please.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Our people send various questions that do not fit into the usual topics. For example, Yaroslav from St Petersburg: “Today our country and you personally are being denigrated and insulted in the world. Do you think that in the future someone from some German town will say: “Damn, Putin did everything right.” Or, for example, one more question to follow. “How do you cope with stress when the entire rotten world is against you?”

Pavel Zarubin: There is also: “Do you play chess? If so, who did you play with last time and who won?” and “What do you recommend Russians do on long holidays, such as New Year’s?” Lots of questions, yes.

Vladimir Putin: So, a German city… And then what?

Pavel Zarubin: How do you cope with stress when the entire rotten world is against you?

Vladimir Putin: Stress. Next?

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: How do you stay motivated to do everything?

Pavel Zarubin: Do you play chess? If so, who did you last play with?

Vladimir Putin: Chess.

Pavel Zarubin: And what do you recommend Russians do during the long New Year holidays?

Vladimir Putin: Holidays.

Why just a German city? I not only believe, I know that not only in German cities, but also in many other cities in Europe, and in the United States, not to mention other regions of the world, many people believe that we are doing everything right. We are not afraid to fight for our national interests without encroaching on others. And a lot of people support this. First.

Second, we have a huge number of supporters in the world for the way we protect our traditional values. And the number of them is increasing exponentially.

A sense of duty is what helps me survive stress, or the fact that we are being attacked, I can say this without fanfare. Over many years, I have taught myself that I need to strive to choose the most important thing and do everything to achieve my goals, without paying attention to all the fluff. Of course, this field of vision must nevertheless be wide; everything must be understood and analysed. But you need to confidently move towards your goal if you believe in what you are doing, and I believe in what I am doing.

Regarding chess. You know, I recently asked a young man: “Want to play a game of chess?” He says: “Sure.” I ask: “Do you think I will win?” He looked up at me and said: “Doubt it.” What does this mean? This means one needs to constantly work on himself. I will try to do this.

New Year. You know, I think that on New Year you must think more about your family and loved ones, do something together, and find something common to do: exhibitions, theatres, sports, of course, and have an active lifestyle. I think it would be good to spend it with your family.

Pavel Zarubin: There has already been a quick response to the issues that were raised in the course of our programme. People from Crimea who study at the school of governors have already called the Direct Line centre. They are ready to go and repair this gym in Crimea.

I believe people are expecting a similar quick response to the following question as well. Price increases are not a new subject, but this year there are definitely more signs of this problem – many, many complaints about price increases on a particular product. This is what people are saying: “It is very sad to buy eggs in our country,” grieves Andrei Samoilov from the Tomsk Region. Anastasia Plastinina from Ivanovo asks: “Are these eggs laid by golden hens or what?”

And a video question from the Krasnodar Territory. Let’s watch.

(Video demonstration.)

Irina Akopova: Good afternoon, Mr President, my favourite President,

My name is Irina Akopova and I would like to ask you to intervene. Ten eggs in our region cost between 180 and 220 rubles. Where and when have we ever had such prices? Chicken breasts were 165 rubles per kilogramme, and now it is 350 rubles. Wings were 165 rubles and now they are 250 rubles.

Mr President, have pity on pensioners. Our pension does not run into the millions. Put things in order. There is nobody else we can ask for help. It is not good that you conduct this only once a year, but this is the website we have. We should have such lines three times a year so people can talk to you.

I am very grateful to you and hope you can help.

Vladimir Putin: Ms Akopova,

You said, “once a year,” but believe me, I spoke to the Minister of Agriculture recently and asked about the egg situation. They told me everything was fine. I told him, and I am being frank with you – this was my direct response: “But our citizens have problems. The price of chicken eggs has increased by 40 percent and even more in some places. Prices are much higher for chicken meat as well.”

This is what happened. As I said, we had a slight increase, but still an increase in income, the level of salaries and so on. The demand went up. This is a relatively cheap source of protein; it is popular with people. I am happy to eat scrambled eggs myself, and at one time, I could easily gulp down ten at once in the morning. But what happened? Demand grew but production did not. This is the first point.

The second point. Imports were not started soon enough or in the needed volumes. Incidentally, some Turkish companies are now offering us additional imports. We are developing our economic ties, including in agriculture, very well. Other countries, including Belarus, also have proposals. But we didn’t start our imports on time. We should have resolved these problems within the EAEU.

Decisions were made, I think the other day, but at any rate they must be made in December, so the situation is bound to improve – there is no doubt about this. I am hoping for this very much. Because these conversations with the Ministry of Agriculture took place at least two weeks ago.

I am sorry about this and want to apologise for this problem. This is a setback in the Government’s work. Although they say this is not the case, I still think it is – the problem is related to a failure to increase imports enough. Apparently, they hoped to make more money, but they promised to fix this soon.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Mr President, housing and utilities prices are also of concern to our citizens. They write with such bitter irony that the light at the end of the tunnel has become more expensive. But in reality, of course, this is no laughing matter. Many point out that pensions will be indexed by 7.5 percent, but utility prices will be set higher. They see this as unfair.

Let us watch the video message.

Vladimir Leontyev: Mr President!

In 2024, our pensions will be increased by 7.5 percent. At the same time, from June 2024, our city of Novosibirsk plans to hike our utility bills from 9 to 14 percent, which will effectively eat up the 7.5 percent indexation of our retirement benefits. Please take note of this.

I am enclosing the draft resolution by the Governor.

Best regards.

Vladimir Putin: Our interlocutor did not introduce himself, did he?

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Vladimir Leontyev.

Vladimir Putin: Mr Leontyev, I agree. I will look into the utility prices in Novosibirsk (I can see them on the screen). We will definitely look into this situation and analyse it.

Indeed, the plan is to index pensions by 7.5 percent, and I hope that this will not be below inflation. But I would like to point out that we indexed retirees’ benefits by 10 something percent for previous years very recently, in December 2022. Last spring, again, we added more than 4 percent to compensate for inflation, and in January 2024, there will be another indexation of 7.5 percent. Utility prices, on the other hand, have not been raised since last July, and will be only increased in July 2024. That is a year and a half. Over this period, there will be three indexations of pensions, by a total of over 23 percent. Right? Approximately.

I know how important the timing is, and utility bills must grow comfortably over time, while people's incomes must grow at a faster pace.

There is one more point here. There is a law that says, if a family's utility bill exceeds 22 percent [of income], the family is entitled to a subsidy. Hundreds of thousands of people took advantage of this opportunity last year. In some regions, this threshold is even lower than 22 percent – if a family spends 15, or maybe 20 percent, they can apply for a subsidy.

Again, I will need to look specifically at the ratio of these figures in the Novosibirsk Region. We will definitely do so, I promise.

Pavel Zarubin: Is it right that you also have to pay a bank commission for such a basic service, paying utility bills? There are many such questions.

Vladimir Putin: This is certainly wrong, especially when it comes to pensioners. The decision has just been made: Retirees will not be charged any bank fees when paying their utility bills.

Pavel Zarubin: That is news. Big news.

Dmitry Peskov: We have forgotten about the audience a bit. BAM, please.

Irina Voroshilova: Blagoveshchensk, Amur Region, gateway to China. Irina Voroshilova, Amurskaya Pravda.

Mr President, our question is this. Next year will mark the 50^th anniversary of The Construction of the Century – this is what the Baikal-Amur Mainline was called. But today, you see, there is an injustice. Today the BAM is divided between the Far Eastern and East Siberian railways. Don’t you think it’s time to return the BAM to the map of Russia? Today we have construction projects along the BAM; the BAM-2 and BAM-3 are wonderful projects that are very important to our country in today’s situation.

Vladimir Putin: Please explain what you mean, “return it to the map of Russia”? What does that mean?

Irina Voroshilova: There is no single BAM. There used to be a Baikal-Amur Mainline; it was there. It was later divided and removed in the 1990s. Today the BAM is also divided: part of the BAM route belongs to the East Siberian Railway, and part to the Far Eastern Railway. There is no single section called the BAM. And now the BAM Association (this organisation includes hundreds of thousands of people from the post-Soviet space) proposes creating a Baikal-Amur Railway from Taishet to Sovgavan as part of Russian Railways. BAM veterans believe this would speed up the implementation of the BAM-2 and BAM-3 projects and would kickstart the construction of new railways in the east of Russia.

Vladimir Putin: You know, to be honest, I have never paid any attention to this; this is the first I’m hearing that such a problem exists, that it is divided between different sections of the railway. After all, it is still all part of Russian Railways, one way or another. Oleg Belozerov, head of Russian Railways, has never mentioned this to me. Nevertheless, I will talk with him, and with Minister Savelyev, and I will ask Mr Belozerov if they think it is necessary to merge it, if so, they can do it, I have nothing against it.

Irina Voroshilova: On the contrary, single out the BAM, the Baikal-Amur Mainline.

Vladimir Putin: I understand that it is necessary to create one line, as you said, from Taishet to Sovgavan.

Irina Voroshilova: This includes funding, projects; everything at once.

Vladimir Putin: I see, but this should be initiated by Russian Railways or the Ministry of Transport. No one has ever raised this question. Please. I will talk to them: I will talk to Minister Savelyev, and to the head of Russian Railways. If it makes sense, they should do it; I would not object. This is the first time I am hearing about this.

Will this help new construction? I do not really understand how this would help with our projects there. They constantly have, excuse the bad manners, tiffs about whom, how much and who will build, and on what terms. This is something Deputy Prime Minister Khusnullin is working on. I am generally aware of what is happening. I hope these projects continue on schedule.

It continues in difficult conditions too, but our goals will be achieved. I definitely promise you that I will look into this. It is just that this is the first I am hearing about this problem, but we must treat it with respect, especially since it’s coming from BAM workers. We will definitely look into it. And, of course, we should properly celebrate the 50^th anniversary of the BAM.

Here's BRICS, Tatarstan. What do we have?

Artur Khalilullov: Artur Khalilullov, Tatar-Inform.

Mr. President, as we know, the BRICS [summit] will be held in Kazan. I have two related questions.

First, what impact will the summit have on changing the world order based on so-called rules, primarily Western rules, as we understand, right?

And the second question. Is the choice of Kazan related to the fact that the capital of Tatarstan has recently become a kind of diplomatic hub in relations with eastern countries and countries of the Muslim world? Thank you very much.

Vladimir Putin: No, it is simply because Tatarstan is developing well, and Kazan is one of the best examples of such development. The conditions are good. Both the former President and the current one Minnikhanov have been doing good work, and we can see the results.

I remember when I visited Kazan with Mr Mintimer Shaimiev, we went to people's homes. Do you know what pleased me then? You could hardly call them houses – they were actually dugouts. It was in the early 2000s. Dugouts in the full sense of the word. But they were so clean, we went into the house – it was clean, everything was tidy. I still have this feeling of respect for people who lived in such modest conditions and kept everything at such a level, you know? That level of internal culture of the people is not what strikes you, but it inspires respect. I think that this is the reason for the confident development of Tatarstan, the capital of Tatarstan – Kazan, first of all.

The city is in good condition, the infrastructure is developed. Kazan has held a number of major international events, both sporting and general political events. It is naturally becoming a center of attraction, if you prefer the word ”hub“ – here you are, hub. Tatarstan is a multi-ethnic, multi-religious republic, relations between different faiths are properly arranged, a good example in principle for the whole country. And this is why Kazan was chosen.

As for the rules-based world order, there are no such rules in reality. They change every day depending on the current political situation and the immediate interests of whoever is talking about it. How will this affect the situation? It will affect it in the right direction. It will show that there are quite a large number of forces in the world, powerful countries that want to live not by these unwritten rules, but by the rules prescribed in fundamental documents, including the Charter of the United Nations, and those that are guided by their own interests and the interests of their partners. They do not impose anything on anyone, do not create any military blocs, but create conditions for joint effective development.

This will be the focus of Russia's work as BRICS chair next year.

Pavel Zarubin: What planes will we fly to this summit on? After all, among the hardest hit by Western sanctions is aviation, and it quickly became clear that our airlines, which, in previous years, you literally forced to buy Russian planes, and they, frankly, were not eager to comply, have now queued up to buy the Russian-made planes. So far, we have been mainly flying foreign aircraft, and people now have safety concerns. Any news about an aviation incident now causes much more of a stir.

I suggest that we take a video call now. Maxim Saltykov from Moscow. Maxim, go ahead with your question if you hear us.

Maxim Saltykov: Good afternoon, Mr President. My name is Maxim. I am a cadet at a civil aviation flight school.

What will become of our civil aviation in the current geopolitical circumstances, sanctions, where our airlines are unable to purchase Western-made planes? The domestic MС-21 and Il-96 are undergoing a certification process and will not be mass-produced anytime soon. And the service life of the planes currently operated by Russian airlines will eventually come to an end.

In this regard, there is one more issue. A fairly small percentage of flight school graduates find jobs with our airlines, despite the fact that training schools undertake good-faith and consistent effort to prepare us for feats of labour.

To sum it up, will we fly, Mr President, and what on?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: We will, of course, we will.

Regarding foreign-made aircraft, indeed, Pavel [Zarubin] mentioned the fact that I had unending disputes with our companies, which were making unchecked – with reservations, of course, but nevertheless – too many, if you ask me, purchases of foreign-made aircraft, backing their decision up with valid reasons, such as efficient engines, compliance with international noise standards, and so on – they came up with multiple arguments. However, they would be better off now had they made timely moves to create a market for domestic aircraft.

We have been talking about this all the time and managed to create this market. But, indeed, our aircraft fleet is overstocked with foreign-made planes. I think our companies did the right thing and chose not to respond to the unlawful moves by leasing companies. Nonetheless, the process is ongoing: no one wants to lose revenue, and we are buying back some of these planes and they become the property of Russian airlines.

We must expand our own aircraft manufacturing. I hope that all our plans – we plan to produce more than 1,000 aircraft by 2030, our own aircraft, MC-21, and to re-equip existing aircraft with the domestic PD engines. Now, we need to move on and make the next more powerful engine – PD-35 – with a powerful thrust. This will help us increase the number of long-haul aircraft, including the Il-96–400. By the way, it is already in service as a cargo version. It has a longer body, almost 12 metres longer. So we need to work on it. We have all we need to implement all our plans.

To reiterate, I hope all these plans will get implemented, and both pilots and passengers will have something to fly on. Of course, we should also work on small aircraft for regional flights.

Pavel Zarubin: The audience is close to the boiling point.

Mr Peskov, please.

Dmitry Peskov: One more question from the audience. I actually saw the New York Times. Pass the microphone, please.

Vladimir Putin: No, let Xinhua go first, and then the New York Times.

Liu Kai: Good afternoon, Mr President.

Vladimir Putin: Good afternoon.

Liu Kai: I am delighted by this opportunity to ask you a question. China News Agency Xinhua. My name is Liu Kai. I have two questions for you.

First. As we know, Russia will take over the BRICS chairmanship next year. What do you think is the significance of interaction and coordination between China and Russia in BRICS, and in general?

And the second question: what are your expectations for the expansion of Chinese-Russian relations next year?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: We know – just to repeat, since I must – that the level of our cooperation with the People’s Republic of China is unprecedented. We have said many times that we hope to reach US$200 billion in trade next year. We will actually get there this year, not next year, over US$200 billion this year. We will do the calculations in the first quarter, and I think we will have US$220–230 billion. This is a very decent level. Last year, we achieved a 31 percent increase in trade, and we will see a 30 percent increase this year.

We are steadily deepening our economic ties across the board. I am also pleased at the diversification of our relations. We are expanding ties in infrastructure, building bridges and roads, and cooperating in high-tech industries, and we will continue in the same vein.

Chinese President Xi Jinping’s visit last March gave a significant boost to our relations, and the progress continued thereafter. We have agreed that we will consistently expand ties in eight core areas. Relevant documents have been signed. The governments of Russia and China are deeply involved in achieving the goals that we set together, my friend President Xi Jinping (also Russia’s friend) and I. The work is progressing rapidly, steadily and confidently.

As for BRICS and our role, I will not say anything new here either, but this axis is obviously strengthening, namely, Russia-China relations constitute a major factor in guaranteeing global stability.

We see what is happening around Russia and China. We see the West’s attempts to redirect NATO’s activity to Asia and towards Asia; these attempts clearly go beyond the statutory goals of this organisation, the North Atlantic bloc. It is called the North Atlantic bloc – what business can it have in Asia? But no, they are looking to interfere in Asia, using provocations, escalating the situation, creating new military-political blocs with various members.

I would rather not repeat what everyone knows: Russia and China are not doing anything of the kind. Yes, we are engaged in military, economic and humanitarian cooperation, but we are not creating any blocs. And our friendship is not directed against third countries – it is aimed at benefiting ourselves, but not at harming anyone.

Unlike us, the West is always trying to use its friendships against third countries. We are closely monitoring their actions and will be sure to respond together, effectively and promptly. No one should have any doubt about this.

Dmitry Peskov: We promised to give the floor to The New York Times.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, The New York Times, go ahead.

Valerie Hopkins: Valerie Hopkins, The New York Times.

For almost a year now Western journalists have been unable to take part in events like this. I am very happy that we can attend [this news conference] today. Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: It is Mr Peskov’s fault. (Laughter.) I am an open person with democratic beliefs and views.

Valerie Hopkins: We will talk about this. Let me please ask a question in English.

Vladimir Putin: You are welcome.

Valerie Hopkins: My colleague, a Wall Street Journal correspondent Evan Gershkovich, has been held in Lefortovo prison without a trial for 37 weeks. The extension on his detention was today, again, upheld. Paul Whelan, another US citizen, has been in prison for nearly five years.

A spokesman for the US State Department, which considers both men wrongfully detained, recently said that Moscow had rejected what it called a substantial offer to return both of them to the United States. Is that true? What will it take to bring them home? And do you think that finding an agreement with the United States to bring them home to their families can be a way to improve the severely strained relations between the United States and the Russian Federation? Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: You mentioned your colleague from a journal. Which one is it?

Valerie Hopkins: The Wall Street Journal.

Vladimir Putin: You said that he was kept in jail without trial, and at the same time you said that his detention term had been extended. But if his detention term was extended it was done under a court ruling. So, it is incorrect to say it was done without trial.

Regarding the possibility of extraditing these people to their native countries, you said: “Why not let them go back to their countries?” I’d say, why don’t they avoid violating the law in the Russian Federation? But this is all just rhetoric. It is not that we have refused to send them back – we have not, but we want to come to terms [with the American side] and we want these agreements to be mutually acceptable to both sides.

We keep in contact on this issue with our American partners, and we are maintaining a dialogue on this issue, and it is not an easy one. I will not go into detail now but, generally we seem to be speaking a language that is clear to each other. Hopefully, we will find a solution. However, I want to repeat that the American side should hear us and take an appropriate decision – one that considers Russia’s point of view.

Of course, humanitarian considerations should underlie these decisions. I could not agree more with you on this point.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Mr President, I have a season-related issue: winter, low temperatures, everyone is sick (we are jumping from subject to subject, but this is the format).

Rospotrebnadzor is recording the incidence of influenza and coronavirus simultaneously. In addition, there is a record incidence of measles this year: 300 times as high as last year.

Vladimir Putin: 30 times?

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: 300 times as high.

Vladimir Putin: 300?

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Yes, for measles. And our citizens, quite reasonably, associate this with a shortage of vaccines.

For example, we received the following message from the Samara Region. “The Samara Region has lacked vaccines for measles, rubella and mumps for more than four months now.” And a few words about medicines for good measure: we receive a great number of requests from our citizens who need Western medicines that have left the Russian market. Not all analogues are suitable; sometimes, unfortunately, they have the opposite effect. How is our pharmaceutical industry adapting in this regard? How are these things going?

Vladimir Putin: As for immunisation medicines against measles, the mumps and rubella, unfortunately, there is also a technical failure here. What’s the reason? Oddly enough, this is also due to the lack of eggs, because chicken eggs are the raw material for measles vaccines. We need to have enough high-quality eggs to produce medicines. But we just failed to resolve this problem in a timely manner. This is the first point.

Second. The decisions have been made regarding this issue, and I believe that the problem will no longer be relevant soon.

You mentioned mumps and rubella.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: A three-component vaccine.

Vladimir Putin: Well, this is a vaccine against three diseases at once. I believe this problem will be resolved in the near future. In general, we have no problems with vaccinations and vaccines. One issue arose, but it will be resolved soon. That’s first.

Second. By the way, there is a wave of measles in the world every four years. Why is this? Unfortunately, this is due to low immunisation in the native countries of labour migrants, as well as in Ukraine, because millions of people have also moved to Russia from Ukraine. But Ukraine had a very low immunisation rate, and it is probably even lower now. This is also a real problem, as is our technical failure. I hope all this will be resolved soon, as our experts have told me.

Yes, a number of companies left our market, and this is a problem. However, if I am not mistaken, there are only 14 vital medicines on the list. But the industry is actively working at this, and we have not suspended any imports. Our Health Ministry and the Government see these problems; a special commission on import substitution was created, and is functioning. They assure me that they do understand what is happening, and that they are doing and will ultimately do their best to satisfy the needs of people who require certain medicines.

As for replacement, yes, sometimes something goes wrong, and it is necessary to look for alternatives; and industry must operate, and doctors must work on this, too. It often happens that psychologically a person has grown used to a certain medicine; but this is important, even the psychology is very important. A person either believes in a medicine or does not, I understand that. We will both purchase imports and produce our own, and the volume is growing.

Pavel Zarubin: Medicine and the state of primary care remains a hot topic; there are many questions coming even from large cities on how impossible it is to get access to specialists, that there are not enough doctors and nurses; and there is a flood of requests from towns and villages.

Let us call Yegor Perminov from the Sverdlovsk Region, the urban-type settlement of Reftinsky. Yegor, if you can hear us, please ask your question.

Yegor Perminov: Good afternoon, Mr President.

My name is Yegor, I am from the urban-type settlement of Reftinsky in the Sverdlovsk Region. Our trouble and problem is with healthcare, or rather, the lack of it. The authorities are actively working on landscaping, but not the hospitals, which lie in ruin: lack of equipment; salaries leave much to be desired; most of the renovations took place back in the Soviet time; and everything is falling apart before our eyes. We cannot receive normal medical care in these conditions. We are asking you to help. Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Where is this?

Pavel Zarubin: The Sverdlovsk Region.

Vladimir Putin: I will definitely look into this; what exactly it is about and what specific settlement.

Pavel Zarubin: Reftinskyб it is not far from Yekaterinburg, as far as I remember.

Vladimir Putin: Give it to me later; I will write it down now: Reftinsky, right?

Pavel Zarubin: Yes.

Vladimir Putin: We have a programme to modernise primary care, with very substantial funds allocated. I think 14,000 vehicles alone were provided. Paramedic centres are being built and upgraded. This is probably not enough. And, by the way, we will definitely extend the programme to modernise primary care; this will also be part of the future presidential programme.

Pavel Zarubin: You can see footage from this settlement right now.

Vladimir Putin: A lot has been done, in fact; but judging by what we see now, it is clearly not enough. I would like to say again: we understand this problem; that’s why we created a special programme for primary care, and we will carry it on.

Here, it is very important to pay special attention (it is envisaged in the programme, by the way) to rural areas and settlements, of course. A little more than half of all funds allocated for the development of primary care go there. This is what we will continue to do. And, of course, we will work on specific facilities.

Dmitry Peskov: Let’s come back to journalists. Mr President, RT is here. Let’s give them the floor because they are sitting on the very edge and nobody will notice them.

Murad Gazdiyev: Thank you.

Mr President, I am from the Russia Today TV Channel, my name is Murad Gazdiyev. This question is particularly painful for us as an international channel and for our country as a multi-ethnic community. Mr President, what do you think about the growth of nationalism in Russia and the rest of the world, and not only nationalism but also anti-Semitism?

I will simply say that we don’t have this problem at the front. A Jew, a Christian and a Muslim can sit in one trench or a tiny dugout and they are all fine. But once you come out of it, this is a growing problem in both Russia and the whole world for some reason. What should be done in this respect, Mr President?

Vladimir Putin: You know, I think the latest VCIOM studies show that 96 percent of the Russian citizens believe that inter-religious and inter-ethnic accord in our country is a greatest competitive advantage over other parts of the world. It is enormous. This is indeed the case.

This is so primarily because we (I will now turn to our traditional values from this side) cherish traditional values. And traditional religions are making a big contribution to the preservation of this situation and relations between representatives of different ethnic and religious groups.

As for the growth of Islamophobia, anti-Semitism, Russophobia and other similar manifestations, they really exist and tend to grow. Do you know what it is linked with in my opinion? This is because people encounter some injustice.

Look what is happening in Gaza – there is a definite reaction to these events in the whole Islamic world and the number of people with radical ideas is going up. This growth is obvious. The number of such people is on the up. There is nothing good in this and yet this is a result of the policy pursued by certain elites, a failure to resolve issues for decades and the absence of a solution to the Palestinian problem. The reaction of the Islamic world is followed by the growth of these anti-Islamic phobias. This is very bad.

As I have already said, religions and our appeal to our traditional values are playing an enormous role in our country. But our balanced policy at home and in the international arena is also playing an important role. After all, we are doing all we can to achieve justice in all of these areas. And I believe people still appreciate this. This is exactly why we are in this situation.

As for Russophobia, it is one of the vectors of struggle against Russia, one of the areas. Yes, it exists in the world. At home, we must do everything we can to prevent anything like this and nip in the bud any attempts to shake our society from within. This is what we will do.

TF1. Is it a French company?

Jerôme Garro: Thanks.

Jerôme Garro, for TF1, the French TV.

Mr Putin, you have been in contact for a very long time with Emmanuel Macron. Could you tell us, how do you perceive France and its President today? Do you plan to meet him once again?

Vladimir Putin: Yes, we used to have fairly good and friendly working relations. As you know, I have been to France, and Mr Macron has visited Russia. We have always had a busy bilateral and international agenda to work on. We are ready to continue to interact with France.

However, at some point, the President of France stopped communicating with us. It was not us, not me who stopped talking with him. He did. If there is an interest, we are ready to resume our relations. If there is no interest, we will manage without it. That is all; there is nothing unusual here. We are not avoiding contacts. If European countries, and the President of France, in particular, do not wish to communicate with us – so be it, no means no. We have things to work on and to keep ourselves busy. If there is an interest, we are ready to reciprocate.

Please go ahead. Let us pick the Magadan Region.

I have a request to make. Try not to announce ourselves so loudly, otherwise everything gets lost in the cacophony.

Alexander Orlov: I apologise. But, as we know from practice, sometimes it works.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, it helps.

Alexander Orlov: Alexander Orlov, Kolyma-Plus, Magadan Region.

Good afternoon, Mr President.

Vladimir Putin: Good afternoon.

Alexander Orlov: I would like to begin by saying that the Magadan Region fully feels the support of the Government, partly because we see federal projects being implemented in our region, which is good for its development and is also good for the image of the President among our people. Frankly, that includes me as well. We all support your decision to run for president next year.

Vladimir Putin: Thank you.

Alexander Orlov: Because, as long as I can remember, you have always been at the helm, so to speak.

Vladimir Putin: Thank you very much.

Alexander Orlov: Perhaps, I should now move on to the questions.

The first question. The connection with the mainland is very important for our region. Few people from the Far East and the Magadan Region (I think my colleagues from the Far East will agree) spend their vacations at home.

This is where we start running into difficulties. Magadan has three subsidised flight destinations including Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky, Blagoveshchensk, and Moscow. However, such important destinations as Khabarovsk, which is nearby, and Novosibirsk, are not on the list of subsidised destinations. Because of this, one flight to a destination can take more than a day, and it can also set you back a hefty sum, because it is much cheaper to fly to Moscow than to Khabarovsk, which is close by.

For residents of the Magadan Region, like me, who have neither children nor disabilities, and are ineligible for discounted ticket – I am 22, and I cannot fly as a young, promising person.

Vladimir Putin: Start a family then.

Alexander Orlov: I agree with you. I am working on it.

Vladimir Putin: That is the way forward to solve the problem and have access to flat rates.

Alexander Orlov: Yes. But we have Far Eastern rates.

Vladimir Putin: You are a young, active, handsome young man. What are you talking about?

Alexander Orlov: Is it possible to expand the list of subsidised flights for passengers from the Far East, given that it can also help promote tourism in our region? To fly across the Far East using subsidised rates. This is my first question.

And second. I believe everyone in the Arctic regions and the Far East knows that we also receive northern supplements to our salaries; this is no secret. Each region has its own way of calculating the maximum coefficient. But in general, you need to work about five years to get the maximum. The problem is that we, the people who were born and work in the Far East, are just as likely to earn this coefficient as the visiting specialists, but without getting it right away. Is it possible to bring back the law that was in effect before? That is, those who were born in the Far East and the Arctic used to receive all the coefficients at once. Is it possible to bring back this law? Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: You know, your question is clear. This is being discussed in the Government, and I would do this. I would not wait for a certain period of time to pass, to live, to work. This would help keep people in the Far East, which is beneficial to the country, and which is necessary for Russia. This is a question of fiscal capacity and the possibilities in terms of the federal budget. But we will think about it. And I will once again ask the Government to put this back on the agenda.

As for flat airfares. First, I want to say that this will be extended. This is usually done at the end of the year, after my consultations with Aeroflot, and primarily with the other companies and the Ministry of Transport. We will certainly extend the flat airfare directive.

Of course, I understand this, it would be good to extend it. This is also just a matter of additional budgetary funding. We'll see, okay? But we will extend it, that's for sure.

Although I understand that the region is huge, it's simply breathtaking. The Far East is a separate world. And of course, it's not easy to travel such large distances, even internally, I understand. We'll take a look, okay?

Thank you very much.

Vladimir Putin: Veliky Novgorod. The girl holds the poster as if she has nothing to do with it. (Laughter.) She was surprised.

Natalya Khmelyova: It’s the first time I was lucky.

Natalya Khmelyova, Novgorod Regional Television.

We have a question on the healthcare sector. The situation in our region has been improving in recent years: equipment is being purchased, and measures to support young specialists are also being taken. But still the key, a very significant part of mortality rates is cardiovascular disease.

In this regard, we also have a question about the federal program: maybe we can create a federal program for the construction of cardiac centers in the regions? This would be very helpful in our region. I think that other regions would also support us, but unfortunately, we will not be able to do this without federal assistance. Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Thank you.

I will, of course, talk to Andrei Nikitin, the Governor, and the Ministry of Health. I don't know whether it is necessary to create a separate programme specifically for cardio. Yes, we have a separate program for cancer, and it works well. Cardio is really one of the problems and one of the causes of a high mortality rate – vascular, cardiovascular diseases. We will certainly look into it. But the first thing we need to do is extend the programme for the development of primary healthcare. And maybe there should be a separate area that would ensure health maintenance for people subject to certain risks, timely detection, dispensary and subsequent decision-making. Let’s take a look. The Ministry of Health deals with cardiac diseases very intensively. I think the number of fatalities is decreasing.

But I heard what you said. We will see.

Dmitry Peskov: Alexander Gamov, Komsomolskaya Pravda.

Vladimir Putin: Go ahead.

Alexander Gamov: Thank you very much. Alexander Gamov, Komsomolskaya Pravda internet radio station and newspaper.

Thank you very much for having supported the initiative of war correspondent Sergei Zenin, who is in Donbass now. He suggested that the authority, knowledge, experience and heroic deeds of participants in the special military operation be used for peaceful purposes, so that all of this is not lost in the work being carried out to promote the patriotic education of our youth, our children.

I have the following question. First, why, in your view, Mr President, did we need a new history textbook? History is following its own course. Does it matter to history what type of history textbook we write?

Second, next year we will mark the 80^th anniversary of lifting the siege of Leningrad and ten years since Crimea returned to its native harbour as you put it. In 2025, we will mark the 80^th anniversary of Victory in the Great Patriotic War. What does each of these events mean to you personally?

Well, in passing, since I am already holding the microphone, we invite you to the celebration of the 100^th anniversary of Komsomolskaya Pravda, which will be marked in 2025. Maybe you can tell Mr Peskov to enter this date on your schedule, and we will look forward to seeing you.

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Thank you for your invitation. 2025 is a long way off.

Alexander Gamov: It is just around the corner.

Vladimir Putin: Well, around the corner from the historical perspective but it is quite a lot of time in one’s life. Anyway, I will do my best, with God’s help, and everything will be alright.

Regarding the anniversaries you mentioned, I believe that they are of immense moral and ethical importance not only to me but to all Russian people and even to all peoples of the former Soviet Union. They also have a personal dimension for almost every Russian family. For example, as you know, my older brother lies in a mass grave at Piskarevskoye Memorial Cemetery in St Petersburg; of course, I have never seen him because I was born much later but, nevertheless, it also means a great deal to me personally.

What was the first part about?

Alexander Gamov: I just thanked you on behalf of Komsomolskaya Pravda for supporting Sergei Zenin, a popular frontline reporter for the VGTRK state television and radio company, who is now in Donbass. And he said that this human capital, these men now fighting in the special military operation – that capital should be used for peaceful purposes, they should teach at schools. I remember my military instructor at school, a Great Patriotic War veteran, who embodied the state programme for patriotic education.

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: I already touched on this, there is nothing to add. Wars are won by teachers, and education – especially at the hands of those who directly took part in combat operations and risked their own lives, who fought for the Motherland – is of particular importance.

When I studied law in Leningrad, we had professors who had fought in the Great Patriotic War, and we listened with attention and special respect to what they had to say and looked up to them. They were the best role models. We will certainly use these men the same way.

Pavel Zarubin: This is definitely new for your news conference and Direct Lines…

Dmitry Peskov: Excuse me. (Addressing Alexander Gamov.) You also asked about the textbook.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, about the textbook, why we needed the new textbook.

Alexei Gamov: Yes, why do we need a new history book?

Vladimir Putin: I got it. There were more than 60 versions, 65 versions of textbooks I think, and Russian audiences will know what I mean… We have just talked about our anniversaries related to the Great Patriotic War, among other things. Many of those books mentioned all kinds of things – the importance of the second front and the opening of the second front – but never mentioned the significance of the Battle of Stalingrad, or mentioned it only in passing. Is this normal?

Of course, we need a fundamental state-approved version of history that all those who read this textbook will need to know. Today’s child is tomorrow’s citizen; you must realise that. This is extremely important. So, yes, we did need a new textbook.

I know that there have been questions and even criticism, which is normal. It is up to the academic community and the teaching community – preferably with the involvement of the parent community – to think this over, to finalise and amend the book taking into account the current reality. All the complicated historical issues – like any country, Russia has had its share of historical and internal problems – need to be treated with gentleness, benevolence and patience. We all need to be tactful and good-natured about all this. But still, all these textbooks must tell the truth, they must be accurate, and not serve anyone’s interests, as used to be the case.

Pavel Zarubin: Well, this is certainly something new for Direct Line and for news conferences generally – people have almost stopped complaining about the condition of Russia’s federal roads and are even happy with them.

We are expecting the opening of the Moscow-Kazan motorway very soon, and an extension is planned. The Rostov-on-Don bypass and the motorway to St Petersburg have been completed. In general, a lot has been completed in this area.

But people do have questions about the new toll roads. Why are they so expensive? Why are the tolls to use them so high? We are calling Sergei Gvozdev-Karelin from Moscow.

Mr Gvozdev-Karelin, ask your question.

Sergei Gvozdev-Karelin: Good afternoon, Mr President. I am from Moscow.

My question is on the tolls for using the long-awaited M-12 Moscow–Kazan motorway. The toll for a recently opened section of this road is seven rubles per kilometre on average. So, we expect a trip from Moscow to Kazan to cost about 6,000 rubles, which is, of course, very expensive for most drivers. A year ago, Avtodor cited a toll of four rubles per kilometre and the cost for the whole trip would have been between 3,000 and 4,000 rubles. I think this was more reasonable.

Mr President, please consider the possibility of instructing the relevant departments to reduce the tolls for the M-12 to make it affordable for a broad range of people. Thank you very much.

Vladimir Putin: Mr Gvozdev-Karelin, frankly, I don’t know where you got this figure – 6,000 rubles for the trip from Moscow to Kazan. Has this been publicly…

Sergei Gvozdev-Karelin: Look at this: Moscow–Arzamas is 2,800 rubles. Double it and you get 5,600 rubles for the Moscow–Kazan trip.

Vladimir Putin: Maybe, the toll will not be the same for each section because I know that the cost should be 4,000 or 4,500 rubles. I will check it. But it seems to me that such simple arithmetic probably doesn’t apply here. I will check. I will certainly look at it.

Sergei Gvozdev-Karelin: Thank you.

Look, it costs less than 4,000 rubles to drive to Crimea even though it is such a long way. It costs less than 4,000 rubles to get to St Petersburg. So it would be nice if Kazan does not become an exception in this respect.

Vladimir Putin: It is so nice to see Muscovites feel concern for Kazan. You see, everything is developing harmoniously.

Sergei Gvozdev-Karelin: A lot is connected to Kazan, thus our concern.

Vladimir Putin: But let me repeat – I don’t quite understand why you’re saying 6,000 because in reality they promised to charge 4,000.

Sergei Gvozdev-Karelin: I said about 6,000, sorry about that.

Vladimir Putin: I understand. According to my information, it is supposed to be no more than 4,500. I will definitely check it out, Mr Gvozdev-Karelin.

Sergei Gvozdev-Karelin: All right, thank you very much.

Vladimir Putin: But generally, according to the law, there can only be toll roads when there are alternative roads available. So, there is always an opportunity to avoid a toll and drive free, though there may be other issues.

Nevertheless, the road authorities try to avoid imposing an excessive financial burden. You mentioned Kazan, I think to the south of Kazan they have built a bridge, and until now there was a ferry. The ferry cost 300 rubles, and driving across the bridge will cost around 260–270 rubles, which is a bit cheaper. I will definitely keep pushing the service contractors and the appropriate services on this. But I will check the Moscow-Kazan motorway.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Mr President, now that we are talking about roads, as Pavel and I were coming to this event through the peak hour traffic congestion, it was impossible not to see a huge number of Chinese-made vehicles, like a real invasion. Analysts say that literally 60 percent of our market has been taken by Chinese cars. They are by no means cheap, but domestically produced cars are not much cheaper. Many people write and ask a very reasonable question: why have AvtoVAZ prices have gone sky high?

Vladimir Putin: Not “sky high,” but I do think they went up around 40 percent.

Pavel Zarubin: There are very few mid-class cars left, it is impossible to buy a car under 1 million rubles.

Vladimir Putin: Right, I agree. But 40 percent is also a lot, I understand.

What is the reason for this? I do not think an explanation is really needed as everything is clear to everyone. However, if you still have a question, I will talk about it.

Obviously, when the European, Japanese and South Korean brands left Russia, several issues cropped up. They left with all their components. Developing the capability to make these parts and components on our own became an urgency. I will say that AvtoVAZ manages to produce enough vehicles, but the higher the output, the lower the price will be.

Certain costs are still caused by the fact that the manufacturer has to dig and scrape for these imported components one way or another, but at a different cost, and this leads to an increase in prices, and small quantities at this point. The higher the volume, the cheaper the product, and AvtoVAZ is following this path. I hope that this will lead to lower prices. But it is instrumental that we create our own platforms and develop them. This is what AvtoVAZ and other carmakers are doing, but this effort takes time. I do hope and I am even certain that this will materialise and will lead to lower prices.

The second crucial goal is to create our own parts and component industry, because we put too much faith in our “partners,” and almost lost our auto parts and components industry, and now need to recreate it. The Ministry of Industry and Trade is working on it. You know, I am trying to speak cautiously.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Not to get anyone’s hopes up.

Vladimir Putin: Correct. If I say tomorrow, and they will not get it done by tomorrow, people will say: see, he promised and failed to deliver on his promise. But rest assured, the Ministry of Industry and Trade is working hard on it, and the manufacturers are working hard as well. I am sure they will deliver.

Pavel Zarubin: LADA Granta seems to be available for under a million.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Yes, you can find it at that price.

Vladimir Putin: But still, the growth is around 40 percent.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: If you read the incoming messages, you could get the impression that everyone wants to drive nothing but Aurus. There were several messages saying that.

Vladimir Putin: Aurus is a very expensive vehicle produced in limited quantities. It is now produced abroad as well. There is an Aurus assembly line in the Emirates. Our friends in the Emirates like this car among others. We have a whole line of Aurus vehicles including limousines, sedans, SUVs, and a minivan is coming up.

All of this exists, but these vehicles need to be mass produced and prices will go down immediately. But this takes time. In any case, here is what I would like to emphasise: I think those who thought that everything in Russia would collapse are disappointed. Nothing collapsed.

As for Chinese cars, our Chinese friends are aware of what is going on. This is typical not only of Russia. Chinese manufacturers have a prominent presence on the global markets and have already begun to push out European manufacturers, including on the European market. Look at what is happening in the automotive cities in Germany: their situation is deteriorating.

More and more electric cars are being sold. US factories are opening there. It is not clear how this meets the interests of European, especially German, manufacturers. At some point, a few years ago, an attack was launched in the United States against Volkswagen. So what? They have caused enormous damage. How does the government protect the car manufacturers? The traditionally powerful German and other European car makers? It does not. They have left them hanging, and that is all there is to it.

The Chinese government is working hard to support its car manufacturers, and they are ousting Europeans from the market. This is happening not only in Russia. Price considerations matter as well. And the quality is improving. The quality for price allows our motorists to choose what they want. We will work as a team.

The young man opposite me has his hand raised. Go ahead, please.

Andrei Klimenyuk: Andrei Klimenyuk, GTRK Slavia, Novgorod Region, Veliky Novgorod.

My question concerns the region’s power grid. Most power lines were built in the post-war years; they are now obsolete. The current level of power line wear is about 70 percent. The slightest snowfall can lead to blackouts in entire districts in the Novgorod Region, affecting thousands of residents. A major outage occurred in December 2021, when several districts had no electricity for two or three weeks.

Governor Andrei Nikitin asked you to help improve the reliability of power grids. You supported his appeal. Six months later, in the summer of 2022, an agreement was signed between the regional government and Rosseti. The plan was to allocate 6 billion rubles to upgrade power lines and purchase the necessary equipment.

It has been a year; nothing has changed. So, I would like to know how soon power companies will begin to carry out your instructions, and the Novgorod Region will have an upgraded power grid.

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Rosseti is quite active throughout the country. To be honest, I do not know about the 6 billion rubles or what Rosseti was planning. I will find out. I will look into this and definitely talk to the management of Rosseti and the governor. We will try to support the region and help with the implementation of these plans.

The power grid sector in Russia is huge, due to our vast territory. But this is the European part, and there have been failures. We also have heavy snowfall now, and that also puts a heavy burden on it.

I will find out how much they planned to allocate – they have plans for regions and territories, and Mr Nikitin and I will certainly discuss this. I will try to help and support you.

Young man over there, please.

Alexander Zarubin: Good afternoon, Mr President.

My name is Alexander Zarubin, but a multi-million audience know me as Alexander Stone. I am an actor at Gazprom Media Holding and a resident of the Insight People production centre. I represent the blogosphere.

This sphere has been developing rapidly, especially recently, gathering momentum very fast. There is various information and widely different news, with new platforms opening and old ones closing. I would like to ask your opinion about the future of the blogosphere and what I personally can do for it to continue working, developing and producing new ideas, and for our operation to be fully transparent so that there are no questions to us.

Vladimir Putin: If there are no questions, what is there to talk about? But the blogosphere is a free and extremely democratic area. The main thing is for the state not to interfere with your work. If it does interfere, tell us about it, and we will try to help. But if everything is developing as you said and as you want, bless you. We will continue working to create this atmosphere and such conditions for the operation of the blogosphere.

The only thing I would like to say is… We understand that those who work in this sphere have a colossal responsibility exactly because the state is not controlling them. But there must be corporate ethics and self-restraint. You know what I mean because the matter concerns morals, ethics, and the safety of children. This is obvious. Therefore, the best option is for the professional community [in this sphere] to be organised on the same principles as in the sphere of high technologies and so on. But if there is anything you need help with, please formulate your wishes and we will try to help.

Alexander Zarubin: There are very many issues and many different opinions. Many young people become popular very quickly, and there is no one around them who has life experience or business experience to help with simple things such as how to pay taxes or register a sole proprietorship. Regrettably, there are many young people in this sphere who are not aware of this responsibility, as you have pointed out. It would be good if the majority of people working in this sphere could receive advice and recommendations, so that we adopt a responsible attitude to our work and continue working creatively.

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: They need somebody they can rely on who could give them competent and professional recommendations. Very good. Incidentally, this is very important. You have highlighted an issue that should certainly become a priority for the state. I have taken note of that.

Thank you very much.

Dmitry Peskov: I suggest that we take one more question from the audience. I see Mir – so Mir it is. After all, this media outlet covers the vast CIS space.

Elina Dashkuyeva: Thank you.

Good afternoon, Mr President. Good afternoon, colleagues.

Elina Dashkuyeva, Mir Interstate Television and Radio Company.

Russia will be presiding over the CIS in 2024. On October 13, you said in Bishkek that Russia is committed to upholding its efforts to preserve and enhance the CIS as a prominent platform. But Moldova has been talking about possible withdrawing from the CIS, while Prime Minister of Armenia Nikol Pashinyan has been a no-show at all the leaders’ summits held by the CIS, the EAEU and the CSTO lately.

To what extent does Yerevan’s position matter for the CSTO? What is your general assessment of the integration associations in the post-Soviet space?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: We, I mean Russia, designed all our integration plans based on our unwavering commitment to the principles of voluntary and mutually beneficial cooperation for all those participating in them.

EAEU countries have been steadily expanding trade between them. We are opening up our markets, including in terms of labour, capital, and mutual cooperation. We also make efficient use of our shared infrastructure, including in the transport sector, but not only, inherited from the Soviet era, which is also an advantage. We also have a language we can all use to enable our people to communicate with one another. President Tokayev came forward with the initiative to create an international institution for promoting the Russian language, and we are grateful to him for this proposal. All these factors make us more competitive on international markets and help us not only deliver on our economic agenda but also to meet our social objectives and improve the wellbeing of our people too.

If Moldova does not want to be part of this process, and this is what Moldova’s leadership chooses, so be it. Moldova is one of Europe’s poorest countries. Only recently, it was the poorest of them all. Today, Ukraine holds this title. But if one of Europe’s poorest countries which has been buying our energy resources at a price that was quite low wants to follow in Germany’s footsteps, go ahead. Today, Germany buys its energy resources from the United States and pays 30 percent more compared to what it imported from the Russian Federation. So, if they have some extra money to spend over in Moldova, let them go down this road. The same goes for other sectors, for example in agriculture: farmers in Moldova are quite active on the Russian agricultural market. But if they do not want to work with us, they do not have to. But where will they sell their products?

You can see that in Europe, in countries pretending to be Ukraine’s allies, people are blocking roads to stop Ukrainian agricultural products from entering their territory, even transit shipments. They just blocked access. They have their own interests and those willing to fight for them. Where will the Moldovans go with their goods?

There was a moment when they started talking about giving up on Russian gas imports, but as a matter of fact they are not giving up on anything. Let them do as they please. For us, Moldova’s CIS membership does not create much added value, but we are ready, and we are not turning our backs to anyone or pushing anyone out. If they want to work with us, be our guests. If not, this is their choice, not ours.

As for Armenia, there are complex processes underway over there, connected with Karabakh. We can all relate to these issues. However, we were not the ones who left Karabakh to its devices. It was Armenia which recognised Karabakh as being part of Azerbaijan. They did so on purpose, to tell you the truth, without warning us that they were about to take this decision. This is just a way of presenting facts, since there are both pros and cons here. This is how it goes – there are complex processes underway in Armenia’s domestic politics. I do not think that withdrawing from the CIS, the EAEU, or the CSTO would be in Armenia’s best interests. But, at the end of the day, it is up to Armenia to choose.

As for Armenia’s Prime Minister’s attendance at these summits, we do know, or as far as we know, that this is attributable to certain developments inside Armenia and cannot be viewed as their willingness or unwillingness to continue working within these integration structures. Let us wait and see how the situation unfolds.

Pavel Zarubin: There are a lot of questions. We need to move faster.

Small and medium-sized businesses have also been instrumental in helping Russia to withstand the blow from sanctions. Let us watch a video sent by Vasily Babintsev from Izhevsk.

Vladimir Putin: Let’s do it.

Vasily Babintsev: Mr President, good afternoon.

My name is Vasily, I am from Udmurtia and I represent the Bungly Boo brand.

We make clothes for adults and children, for example, like these beautiful and stylish jumpsuits that mothers and children love. Recently, we won the Znai Nashikh contest organised by the Agency for Strategic Initiatives. The prizes we received were just what we needed to promote our products on marketplaces and enabled us to boost sales considerably. I would say we were lucky to win just the right prizes.

I have a similar example involving my colleagues – the Splav company, which manufactures clothing for tourists. After the start of the special operation, they, too, were able to increase sales due to a new category of consumers – the military and the mobilised. Again, we can say that it was a fortunate coincidence.

So here is my question. Is it possible, in today’s circumstances, to build a comprehensive support system for domestic brands and entrepreneurs to help them grow instead of relying on a chance luck?

Vladimir Putin: Look, you have just said that you have achieved success, and not you alone. You mentioned a contest held by the Agency for Strategic Initiatives; in fact, it was co-organised by VEB (Vnesheconombank), which is a state agency. The Agency for Strategic Initiatives, although an independent agency, is also supported by the state. Those two agencies held that contest of national brands after it was agreed upon and supported by the state.

The presence of our local brands in our domestic market has grown by more than 30 percent, 31 percent, I think. But you are right that this process should continue and that it must be comprehensive.

In this regard, we certainly need to involve not only federal agencies but also regional agencies in this work. I am now addressing the heads of the regions – colleagues, we need to take this under review and promote regional brands in every possible way. This should significantly diversify our market, make it more vibrant, rich, and more attractive to consumers.

We have a lot to be proud of in our regions. One of my colleagues here, I think from Mordovia, spoke about the Mordovia pavilion at VDNKh and invited everyone to visit, to see what is being manufactured in the regions. We need to promote this. Each region needs to have its own programme to support small and medium-sized companies, to support and promote our brands.

Pavel Zarubin: We are closely watching the development of artificial intelligence and one must admit that many people are quite apprehensive about it.

Arina Simonova from the Volgograd Region has a question.

(a video comes on)

Arina Simonova: Good afternoon, Mr President.

My name is Arina and I am eight. I was told at school that in the future, humans may be replaced by robots. What if they replace me, my mum, dad and my grandparents? Should we be scared of robots?

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Mr President, before you answer, we have another, very impressive, video on this topic. Let’s have a look.

Video question: Good afternoon, Mr President.

I am a student at St Petersburg State University. I am curious: is it true that you have many doubles?

Also, what do you think about the risks that artificial intelligence and neural networks bring into our lives? Thank you.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: The young man from St Petersburg did not introduce himself.

Vladimir Putin: I see that you can look like me and speak in my voice but I have thought about it and decided that only one person should look and speak like me. And that person is me. This was a joke by one prominent figure.

As for artificial intelligence, yes, this is my first double, so to speak.

Answering Arina’s question, I can say one thing for certain: Arina, remember that nobody can replace your grandma. It is impossible.

Should we be afraid of artificial intelligence? Preventing the evolution of artificial intelligence, including superintelligence that has feelings, can recognise scents and has cognitive functions and self-development capability – preventing this is impossible. You cannot prevent development. It means we should take the lead. At any rate, we must do everything to become leaders in this industry. Nobody knows the outcome. This is the reality, at least today.

Yes, there may be potential restrictions and self-limitations but it is important for leaders to reach agreement so as not to create any conditions that could jeopardise humanity.

Back in the day when nuclear energy was transformed into a nuclear bomb and people realised that those possessing this weapon are facing growing threats, people started to negotiate. This threat and this damage become unacceptable. People started to negotiate. It will probably be the same with AI: when leaders of the industry realise that threats have emerged, they will probably begin to negotiate. It is unlikely any tangible agreements can be reached before that stage. Although we should start thinking about it today.

Dmitry Peskov: Let us return to the auditorium and the journalists.

Vladimir Putin: Please.

Dmitry Peskov: Mr President, I suggest we have two questions at this end: we’ll give the mic to RIA Novosti and next to the Republika Srpska, our friends.

Yelena Glushakova: Good afternoon, I am Yelena Glushakova, RIA Novosti.

Generally, the grand agenda includes extensive discussions on both the special military operation and the new regions. In principle, today’s news conference reflects this agenda.

But there are regions facing no less difficult problems and complications. Yet, they are not much of a talking point, they are mentioned less frequently. I am referring to the Belgorod Region and the Kursk Region, which are exposed to [Ukrainian] shelling and have to exist under very difficult conditions.

I talked to my colleague from the Valuyskaya Zvezda newspaper, and she said that the shelling was a regular feature of their daily life, their normal everyday existence.

Do you think enough is being done to support the residents, protect their rights, and rebuild their houses?

My second question is about the businesses that continue functioning over there. There is a huge factory in Shebekino, there are businesses in other areas and districts of the Belgorod Region that regularly comes under artillery fire. Do you think the Government is doing enough to help them? Is it at all necessary to continue to work and promote business enterprise over there, given that the special military operation is still in progress? Thank you.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Mr President, we happen to have a video from Shebekino with questions from entrepreneurs.

Vladimir Putin: Ok.

(A video is being screened.)

Oksana Kositsina: I am Oksana Kositsina, factory director, Shebekino.

Last June, many businesses in Shebekino came under terrorist attack from the armed forces of Ukraine and were seriously damaged.

In this connection, we want to ask and draw your personal attention to this problem. Please help us to receive federal grants that will help us restore what has been destroyed and preserve over three thousand jobs. The grants will also contribute to reviving unique manufacturing facilities for food products, which are currently on the sanctions list. We produce these food products in the Russian Federation, in particular in Shebekino. It is also necessary to create a special economic zone in Shebekino for at least the next three to five years to help restore businesses after Ukraine’s terrorist attack.

Vladimir Putin: I will answer briefly. I think we should support the idea to create a special economic zone in Shebekino. I will ask the Government to submit their proposals in this regard in the nearest future. It is necessary to preserve jobs there and restore the economy within a brief timeframe, including in the zone you have mentioned.

(Addressing Yelena Glushakova.) This seems to be an answer to your question, as well.

Dmitry Peskov: I promised to Republika Srpska…

Vladimir Putin: Just a second. While this question was being asked, I read another question on the big screen on the left here. It is a very important question. A family with children, with two children, and the preferential mortgage programme is almost over… It is true that the family mortgage programme is ending. I believe it will end next July, and the Government is thinking about extending it. Of course, the Government must also consider the real possibilities of the federal budget, but I think it would be reasonable to think about extending the family mortgage programme. The programme stipulates the lowest possible down payment, only 20 percent, and the annual interest rate is 6 percent. If a family has three children, as I have pointed out, the family gets a subsidy of 450,000 rubles.

Therefore, we must certainly think about [extending it], and I will definitely give an instruction to the Government to prepare and submit proposals regarding this.

Dmitry Peskov: Let us give the floor to Republika Srpska and after it, to some other region.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, good, let us do this.

Darinka Petrovic: Good afternoon, Mr President. My name is Darinka Petrovic, I am a journalist at Alternativna TV, Republika Srpska.

You have spoken just now about the serious situation in the world, with conflicts raging on an area from Ukraine to the Middle East. All this also has an impact on the Balkans, further complicating the already serious and complicated situation there, especially in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Republika Srpska.

You know very well about the political situation in Bosnia, which is actually a Western protectorate. There is an illegitimate Office of the High Representative. The Serbs have been accused of supporting Russia, that is, for having good, fraternal and friendly relations [with Russia]. Russians, as well as our citizens and the Government of Republika Srpska have been accused of promoting the malicious Russian influence, as they put it. So far, there are no Russian media outlets or NGOs in the republic. At the same time, Western media and other organisations are mushrooming there.

I would like to ask you about your vision of the future of Republika Srpska and the region as a whole and to comment on the situation considering that all the biggest wars began in the Balkans.

I have many other questions, but I will not take up my colleagues’ time. I will leave my questions for the day in the future when you can grant an interview to us.

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Thank you. I will try to give a brief answer. We are aware of the situation in Republika Srpska and in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and our views on this situation coincide with the opinion of your political authorities. This is the first point.

Second, the regarding Russian media. It is true that none of them have a presence there, which is regrettable. I do not know if you can watch RT in your republic. You cannot? We must think about this; I will ask our colleagues, Mr Dobrodeyev at the VGTRK, to think about what can be done in this sphere.

As for the future, it is for the people who live there who must determine their future. No matter what decisions from the past or present day are forced on the people who live there or in any other territory, the bottom line is that if we want to live in a balanced world where the interests of all people are respected, primarily the people who live in a particular area, we must take their sentiments, plans and wishes into account. Our policy towards that region, including Bosnia and Herzegovina and Republika Srpska, will be based on these principles.

Vladimir Putin: LPR, DPR, please, go ahead.

Yevgeny Murilev: Good afternoon, Mr President.

Vladimir Putin: Good afternoon.

Yevgeny Murilev: My name is Yevgeny Murilev, Lugansk 24.

Thank you so much for giving me the floor. Let me be honest: we came here without a question, since we do not have one. I believe that today the Lugansk People’s Republic has nothing and nobody to complain about.

We came here just to thank you personally for the fact that today Donbass is part of the Russian Federation. I would like to thank the Government for the work it is carrying out. The integration and the related processes are all running as smoothly as possible. I have a special thank you for our sponsor regions. They have done a great deal and have been working day and night. Our children can finally play outside and have new playgrounds, as well as modern kindergartens and schools.

Thank you so much. Please accept our deepest gratitude and a friendly handshake on behalf of Donbass in its entirety. Thank you very much.

The question I have is in fact very short: When will you come visit us?

Vladimir Putin: Thank you very much. I will be happy to visit you. To be honest, I have already been there, even if in a somewhat confidential manner. Still, I did have a tour of Lugansk and saw the city.

Let me reiterate what I have already said. You know that it all looks quite modest compared to Moscow. But Moscow is one of the world’s best megacities, and this is how it looks today. Lugansk is a much more modest place, but everything is tidy and clean, and very neat, which tells you a lot about the way people who live and work there behave. I do not have to explain what kind of people live in Donbass, including in the Lugansk People’s Republic. They have been fighting for all these years, never giving up, and now they are winning the field. I am certain that victory will be ours, and this will be our shared victory.

I would like to thank you and people in Donbass and to wish you every success.

Pavel Zarubin: We are still getting so many questions. I suggest that we take a look, please.

Vladimir Putin: Hold on, there is a man standing over there.

Mikael Minasyan: Good afternoon.

My name is Mikael Minasyan. I am a volunteer from the Donetsk People’s Republic.

For the past nine years, we have always been there for Donbass, ever since hostilities started there.

During a humanitarian mission, I lost some of my friends, who were also volunteers. I was wounded myself and saw them die. Mr President, we are hanging between life and death every day while performing our humanitarian missions. There are volunteers from other regions who join us, and when they arrive, they are issued insurance policies, so that if they die or get wounded, their family members can get the insurance money.

There have been no insurance programmes of this kind for LPR and DPR residents so far, which means that we are risking our lives just like the men from other regions, but the only difference is that we are doing this in our home region. In this context I would like to ask you to guarantee equal treatment for all volunteers from across our vast country.

Vladimir Putin: I fully agree with you. I have already expressed my views on a similar topic. Everyone must be treated equally. Does it make any difference where a person lives? Even if a person was not a Russian citizen when he or she was wounded, it does not matter, and it matters even less in your case. This has special importance for volunteers who chose to help our men and civilians on these territories and are willing to risk their lives and health. Of course, we must do this. We will definitely move in this direction. I will make sure that we enact the corresponding regulations.

Mikael Minasyan: Thank you very much.

Vladimir Putin: And thank you very much.

Pavel Zarubin: We are receiving a great number of calls and video messages. Just a second please, I beg your pardon, these are very important questions, including those coming from rural communities. Let us see one more.

Vladimir Putin: Just a second, may I?

Pavel Zarubin: Yes, of course.

Vladimir Putin: I read on the large screen: “When will microfinance institutions be closed?” But is it necessary to do this?

Yes, there may be a lot of problems there but they occupy a certain niche and help many people. It is different if they abuse people’s confidence or do things that they should not do, then they must be brought to their senses, it is true.

I will raise this issue once more – I have talked many times with our financial authorities about how these microfinance institutions work. We will look at this again.

Pavel Zarubin: Now, a question from rural residents.

Vladimir Putin: Go ahead, please.

Dmitry Panin: Mr President,

My name is Dmitry Panin, and I am the head of the Sokol Agro-Industrial Company, a Don Cossack from the village of Serebryansky, Volgograd Region.

For several years now we have been working to kick-start a cattle farm for the meat and dairy sector. Basically, all is going well. As I see it, farms with 100 to 200 livestock are the best option for developing the meat and dairy industry in the future.

In this context, I have the following question: Does the Agriculture Ministry plan to come up with new programmes to support farms like this?

My second question is about the lack of roads, which makes it immensely difficult to transport milk, as we must use tractors. I would like to ask you whether I shall be so happy as to live to see the road they have been promising to build for many years.

In the conclusion I would like to send my regards to our fellows, soldiers from our Cossack village. We are waiting for them – our entire host – to return as soon as they win.

Long live Russia!

Pavel Zarubin: May I add another question to this one?

Vladimir Putin: Where was this question from?

Pavel Zarubin: This question was from the Volgograd Region.

There is another question, which has also been asked by rural residents: “Would it be right to say that the issue of food security in the country, as far as staple foods are concerned, has been resolved?”

Vladimir Putin: First, I will answer Mr Panin’s question.

To begin with, the Ministry of Agriculture has many programmes to support agriculture, and the state has been investing heavily in this sector. That said, we would have achieved nothing if not for the active and dedicated efforts by our farmers in the rural areas. The overall results are quite positive.

As for smaller farms, they account for 40 percent of the funds allocated by the government to support agriculture. True, farmers supply more and more agricultural products – if I am not mistaken, it is 15 percent of the total – to the domestic market, which is quite a lot. This is my first point.

Second, their produce tends to diversify our domestic agricultural market. This is very good.

I would like to address everyone who works in rural areas, at large agribusinesses and small farms, to all farmers: I would like to thank you for the results of this year’s work.

This year, Russia again saw a record harvest – more than 150 million tonnes of grain. This is its bunker weight though, before drying and cleaning; the clean weight total will be about 146 million tonnes. This includes the so-called new regions, which will produce about 5–6 million tonnes. The result is very good.

I have mentioned the leadership of the Agriculture Ministry when we talked about eggs and poultry shortages here today. They deserve criticism in some areas of their work, but on the whole, the sector’s performance exceeded expectations again this year, and therefore deserves approval and praise, as do the Agriculture Ministry’s efforts.

The Government is providing assistance to small livestock companies – there are a number of support programmes they can take advantage of. If something is missing, we can talk about it later. I will even ask the Ministry officials to contact this particular company and discuss this. There are other options for supporting such farms. Do they need more? They just need to take advantage of what is already in place. But again, I want Mr Panin to know that we will continue this work. The top officials at the Ministry will contact you and talk about this.

So, we can say in all confidence that Russia has ensured its food security. There are a few problems with seeds, for a variety of crops. There is a lot to work on here; we need to develop several seed breeding projects. We have a seed programme, until 2030 I believe, and it is being implemented. The necessary financial resources are being allocated for this purpose. This is a problem that we must resolve. It is being addressed, and we will resolve it once and for all.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Mr President, next year is the Year of Family in Russia. It is a wonderful occasion to once again think of our families and friends. You once said that there is nothing better than a family with many children. This year, I became a mom myself, my daughter turns 6 months today.

Vladimir Putin: Congratulations.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: But, you know, the issue of having children is very sensitive. It happens that when a woman finds out that she is pregnant, she has her personal, serious reasons to terminate the pregnancy. The abortion issue is currently a very hot topic in the country; our citizens are concerned about it.

I will read out several messages from Moscow: “Please stop the mayhem with banning abortions. The ban on conducting terminations at private clinics will lead to an increased load on state clinics, whose number is being reduced due to healthcare reforms,” “Bans will lead directly to back-alley abortions and increase the mortality rate among women. It is simply irresponsible.”

What is your position on this issue?

Vladimir Putin: Well, do we have a ban?

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Not yet. But it is possible that the number of abortions performed by private clinics will decline.

Vladimir Putin: So why are they talking about some mayhem, bans? There are no bans.

As for bans, I just recalled the ban on alcohol. We remember what it led to: people began drinking surrogate alcohol, make moonshine themselves and get poisoned by these surrogates. As regards abortions, we also need to act very carefully.

Naturally, I know the position of the Church; it cannot have any other position. The Church fights for the life of each person, and it has its own stance on abortions, which is understandable. But at the same time, I just spoke about the sad results of the alcohol prohibition campaign, and we need to keep them in mind.

But the state is interested in dealing with the demographic problem so that women, after learning about their pregnancy will decide to keep their baby. This is obvious. But, I reiterate, the rights and freedoms of women also must be observed.

I think that the solution to this problem lies in at least two areas. The first has to do with addressing our traditional values, which include, first of all, a large family. They teach us that children are a gift from God for both women and men. And the other area is the financial wellbeing.

We spoke about primary healthcare earlier. But in addition to that, it is necessary to pay attention to women’s health clinics: there is much to be improved, and it is necessary to do so. We need to think about in what way and how fast it is necessary to improve maternity wards in regional hospitals and outpatient clinics. This area requires our attention.

And the third thing: it is necessary to find more ways to support families with children. This includes mortgage, subsidies and the further improvement of all the measures developed by the state over the past years to support families with children. This is my approach in brief.

Dmitry Peskov: I suggest returning to the regions and the journalists again.

I see Pivot to the East in the middle row. Please introduce yourself and the media outlet you represent.

Pavel Zaitsev: Hello, Mr President,

I am Pavel Zaitsev, Obshchestvennoye TV (Public TV) of the Primorye Territory. I am not as young as my colleague from Magadan, but hopefully I am no less energetic.

Mr President, Pivot to the East is a global strategy that was discussed in the previous period. Today, however, it is being implemented in a planned and consistent manner, particularly in the economy.

You have already broached many issues and fields, including rail and air transportation, the automotive industry, and so on, which is a matter of great concern for people who live in the Russian Far East. One of the main indicators has to do with Russian natural gas supplies to friendly countries in Asia.

You have also mentioned gas infrastructure development. This is another essential issue, including for the Russian Far East. What promise does the Asian market hold for our country? What possible advantages are there for the Russian Far East?

At the same time, I would like to ask this. Many Russians, including Internet users, wonder why one of our most important resources, natural gas, continues to be supplied to the West, given the immense sanctions pressure brought to bear on Russia in the current geopolitical situation. You mentioned Moldova as well as the Ukrainian transit to Europe…

Wouldn’t it be easier to focus on friendly partners in Asia and on developing gas infrastructure in Russian regions? Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: First of all, we have been expanding gas infrastructure for some time now. I already addressed this point and can repeat what I said: 450,000 households have been connected to gas mains and another million have been technically enabled to do so. This work will be continued.

Why do we supply gas to Europe? Gazprom is a reliable partner. It has contractual obligations, and it has always met its contractual obligations and is meeting them now.

The fact that Europe receives less gas than it needs is their problem. Strange as it may seem, they attempted to blame us for this shortfall in deliveries. This is absolute nonsense, because it was not us but Poland that shut down the Yamal-Europe pipeline and not us but Ukraine that shut down the second gas pipeline running through its territory. Neither did we blow up the Nord Stream 1 and part of Nord Stream 2 pipelines. More likely than not, this was done by the Americans, or by someone else at their instigation. It is not we but Germany that failed to open the Nord Stream 1 pipeline, because at least one pipe in this system is in a working condition. Germany is reluctant to do that – let them, we couldn’t care less. They are facing price rises, and whole industries are shutting down: glass-making, chemical, metals industry and all related branches are being affected as well. They are confronting real problems.

Most likely, the German economy will slip into the red, slightly but it will. It is their decision, not ours. Gazprom fulfills all its obligations, including obligations concerning gas transit via the territory of Ukraine.

We also receive money. Of course, Ukraine receives transit fees. We may not be supplying gas to Ukraine directly but in fact, they are consuming our gas.

Do you know how Ukraine’s gas network works – and it has since Soviet times? It is linked to the main gas pipeline running to Europe. So, when gas enters the territory of Ukraine, it is immediately distributed across the country. And the gas that Ukraine accumulated over the summer in the underground storage facilities at its Western border goes to Europe as if directly from Gazprom. This is how obligations to consumers are fulfilled.

First of all, Southern Europe. Why would we punish Hungary or Slovakia? We have no such intention; moreover, they pay us like clockwork – and pay decent money. So, we have never done anything for political reasons and are not going to.

As for turning east, I have said it many times, it did not happen because of the escalation around Ukraine. No. It started a long time ago. The Power of Siberia pipeline was not built because of Ukraine. We started building it earlier. Why? Because we can see development trends in the world economy. New centres of economic growth are being created and it is where our primary consumers are emerging. We send our supplies where our oil, gas and coal are bought. I hope all the economies consuming our energy and paying us do well. We are thinking about expanding supplies to China and looking to other countries as our potential customers.

By the way, Japan has not refused our supplies. And it is welcome to take them. We do not mind. In the Arctic, Novatek is still developing relations with certain European partners in addition to partners from Asia. China is also present there, actively involved and intending to work further. We welcome that. So, our situation is stable and is not based on the current political conditions. In fact, Russia is seriously interested in, and oriented toward the world’s emerging economic centre.

Pavel Zarubin: To be sure, we cannot help but mention one more issue that is making people quite worried, specifically, labour migration. Heavy snowfalls have now hit largest megacities, and many people are grateful to migrants who helped with snow removal (local residents are highly unlikely to work in this field). However, to put it very mildly, there are people concerned about the number of migrants and the consequences of this migration. Some regions are even restricting the work of migrants. What do you think about this issue?

Vladimir Putin: This is a complicated issue. It is typical of many countries, including Russia. According to various estimates, over ten million labour migrants live here. As I said at the beginning, the national labour market features low, 2.9 percent unemployment rates, meaning there is almost no unemployment, while the labour market has its needs. But this does not mean that we should address economic issues at any price and solve labour market problems to the detriment of the local population. Is it necessary to attract migrants here? Yes, it is. Of course, we are mostly interested in skilled workers. It appears that we cannot do without unskilled workers too. However, we need to start working with our partners in countries (where these workers come from) well in advance. One should say that our friends from these countries wholeheartedly support this approach. They open Russian-language schools, as well as affiliates of our higher education institutions and universities. We welcome all this, and we will do our utmost in every way. They are in need, and they are asking us to send our teachers, to expand these programmes and curricula and to supply them with textbooks. We need to prepare for this in advance. This is the first thing.

Second, all migrants should, without reservation, respect our laws and traditions of the peoples of the Russian Federation, and the relevant institutions of state authority should monitor compliance with these requirements, and they should respond to violations on time.

Third, it is necessary to create normal human conditions for these migrants. I saw a question on the screen here: How much will we spend on resolving social issues of migrants’ families? Yes, of course, I realise that this is a sensitive issue. However, the situation would hardly be better were we to leave these people, these children, and the wives of migrants to their own devices. How will things develop? We are better off influencing them.

Yes, all aspects of this issue are not that simple; they are not painted in white or black. More and more children of migrants enrol at certain schools, and their number exceeds that of local children. However, we need to address these issues in advance, we need to work with them, instead of pretending that these problems are emerging only now.

Quite possibly, we need a special agency, not just the Interior Ministry, which deals with technical legal issues. We need a special agency that would analyse this entire issue, and that would find timely solutions for every aspect of this issue.

This amounts to large-scale work. However, we should be guided by the interests of the local population, citizens of the Russian Federation, in the first place. I would like to draw the attention of representatives of all branches and levels of authority to this aspect.

Pavel Zarubin: Incidentally, Yekaterina and I have noted that there are very many messages and requests for Russian citizenship from citizens of various European countries and the United States.

Yekaterina Beresovskaya: We received some from Italy, Sweden, and Germany, and the stories they have reported are absolutely horrible. For example, a family in Sweden was evicted from its own house when the special military operation began. These people want to return to Russia and to live here permanently.

Vladimir Putin: We have rules and legal regulations on granting Russian citizenship. We will welcome such decisions and all law-abiding citizens of other countries who decide to move to Russia, to live and work here, and to tie their fate and that of their children with Russia.

The number of such people is probably not as large as the masses of migrants from Africa and the Middle East moving into Western Europe or from Latin America into the United States. This is changing the ethnic composition there and will soon change it irreversibly. The balance of ethnic groups in the United States will inevitably change, and the share of Latin Americans there will inevitably increase. We should monitor this situation closely. As for the people you are talking about, those who knowingly want to move to Russia, and not even for economic reasons, we will welcome their decision, but we will also act in accordance with our laws.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Mr President, we have been talking more than four hours now.

Vladimir Putin: It is time to end this.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Maybe a few blitz questions?

Vladimir Putin: Yes, please.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: What did you dream of becoming as a child?

Vladimir Putin: I have already spoken about this. Every person’s view of the values surrounding them change in different periods in their lives. I wanted to be a pilot. But when I was in high school, I mostly wanted to become an intelligence officer, and, as you now, I became one.

Pavel Zarubin: A New Year question then: What do you like more, dressed herring or Russian salad?

Vladimir Putin: It depends on what you are drinking.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: What is the best present you received from Father Frost?

Vladimir Putin: The best present? I think that very many people in this room and those who are watching us will agree that the best present is our children and the children of our children. They are a gift from the Almighty.

By the way, regarding presents. It is not the presents we receive but the presents we give that please us the most, because we look at ourselves in the mirror and pat ourselves on the back. I am sure that people, especially the male part of this audience and the country, like to give presents more than to receive them. On the other hand, both instances are pleasant.

Pavel Zarubin: What advice would you give to young people?

Vladimir Putin: Well, we have folk wisdom, sayings, very many of them. One saying is “a good name is sooner lost than won.” You know, that would be my general advice. One should think today about what will happen tomorrow.

I would also add, always set ambitious goals. Set goals that may look unachievable. Having set such goals, a person will strive to achieve them and will certainly succeed.

Yekaterina Berezovskaya: Mr President, what are you reading these days?

Vladimir Putin: I will re-read the Criminal Code because some people believe that for some insignificant, as your colleagues think, wrongdoings, punishments are too harsh.

I have little time for reading. I have a Lermontov book on my nightstand. I love it. He was a brilliant young man. I am very curious about the way of thinking of such geniuses of that time. I would like to learn more about their values and what makes them relevant today. Lermontov was a genius. I am really enjoying his works.

Pavel Zarubin: Mr Peskov.

Dmitry Peskov: We have gone over four hours. Mr President, shall we finalise it by taking journalists’ questions?

Vladimir Putin: Sure. Buryatia. Buryats do not back down, I remember.

Yekaterina Yelistratova: Yes, Buryats do not flee, as you said.

Vladimir Putin: I did not say that.

Yekaterina Yelistratova: No. Our hero did.

Hello, Mr President.

My name is Yekaterina Yelistratova. I am from Ulan-Ude, Buryatia. Tivikom television company.

As you know, there is a unique oriental medicine centre in Buryatia. It is the only centre in Russia that uses traditional and even some non-conventional diagnostic and treatment methods based on oriental practices. The centre currently produces medication and provides enormous support to special military operation veterans in their rehabilitation. We really wish the centre could expand its capacities because the demand is high and we want more military personnel to receive proper treatment, more fighters to undergo rehabilitation. There have been cases of extraordinary recovery. We would like to ask you to support construction of a new building for this oriental medicine centre and grant the centre the status of a research institute. We need your support.

Vladimir Putin: I need more specifics: what centre is it and where is it located?

Yekaterina Yelistratova: The Oriental Medicine Centre. There is only one in Buryatia.

Vladimir Putin: Alright, I took a note. Ok, ok.

Dmitry Peskov: We will get all the details.

Vladimir Putin: We will try. Please get the details. It’s a deal.

Yugra.

Lolita Kurbanova: Hello, Mr President.

Following the August meeting with members of the Government, you issued an instruction to consider building a railway connecting Yugra with Siberia, Yakutia, and China. How realistic do you think this project is and when can Yugra residents expect it to be completed?

Vladimir Putin: This project is in demand. The Government and Russian Railways are considering possible options. This has to be coordinated with RZD’s investment programme. Of course, its current priority is the development of the Eastern Operating Domain, and they have to focus their efforts on this project, but again, it is related, in one way or another, to our trunk line plans. I do not want to get it wrong, so I will just ask Oleg Belozerov and Andrei Belousov, who is in charge of all these projects at the Government. Let us get back to that and look at it again, okay?

Next, Siberia.

Yelena Belyayeva: Good afternoon.

Yelena Belyayeva, GTRK Irtysh, Vesti Omsk.

Today we have talked about the pivot to the east. Naturally, we have a certain economic interest there, as the Omsk Region is located at the intersection of major transportation lines. As you know, we have the Trans-Siberian Railway, the navigable Irtysh River, the federal motorway that connects eastern and western Russia, so most of the cargo traffic from Europe to Kazakhstan and Central Asia goes through the Omsk Region.

But there is a problem. A rather long section of the busiest Tyumen-Novosibirsk highway – for us, towards Novosibirsk – it is a two-lane road. It is mostly worn out and unsafe; I also use it and see trucks in roadside ditches. So are there any plans to expand this motorway? This is my first question.

And the second question. To attain the logistics objectives that the country has set for us as efficiently as possible, for the benefit of the country, we need a large, up-to-date and world-class airport. Can we count on federal support?

Vladimir Putin: Look, at the beginning of our conversation, we talked about the road to Kazan, and then also the ones to Tyumen and Novosibirsk. We want to build a ring road there. We have the funds for this; they have been allocated, and we will implement these plans. These projects are already underway. But we will need to look at this particular area.

I will definitely speak with Mr Khusnullin about this. But this requires a lot of investment, so we need to see. We need to implement our current plans, the ones the builders are already focusing on – the routes have already been approved, and so on. All right, I will tell the Ministry of Transport and the Deputy Prime Minister in charge. We will think about it.

Dmitry Peskov: Friends, one final question, because we have already exceeded four hours.

Please, Andrei Kolesnikov, you will conclude this part of the news conference.

Andrei Kolesnikov: Good afternoon.

Kommersant newspaper.

Mr President, you said that the world will never be the same again. What would you say to Vladimir Putin from 2000 if you had the chance? What advice would you give? What would you warn him against? Do you have any regrets?

Vladimir Putin: What would I say? I would say: you are on the right track, comrades.

What would I warn him against? Against naivety and excessive trust in our so-called partners.

As for tips and advice, I would say this: We must have faith in the great Russian people and nation. This faith provides a pathway to reviving, shaping and developing Russia.

Thank you.

Please do not get angry with me if I haven't answered all of your questions. Indeed, one needs to know where to stop.

Thank you, and all the best!

Press statements following Russian-Brazilian talks

2022-02-16T22:24:05+04:00

Following Russian-Brazilian talks, Vladimir Putin and President of Brazil Jair Bolsonaro made statements for the press.

President of Russia Vladimir Putin: Mr President, colleagues,

I would like to begin by thanking the President of the Federative Republic of Brazil, Mr Jair Bolsonaro for accepting my invitation to come to Russia on an official visit. This is the President’s first visit to Russia.

Let me note that relations between Russia and Brazil have traditionally been based on friendship and understanding. The strategic partnership between the two countries includes many diverse areas. Together, we want to develop political, economic and cultural ties, and cooperate closely on the global stage, at the UN, in BRICS, and in the G20, among others.

And today we have had quite substantive and constructive talks. Following the talks, we adopted a joint statement that sets the guidelines for the further development of Russian-Brazilian cooperation.

Our countries are definitely interested in progressively expanding economic interaction. Brazil is one of Russia’s leading trade partners in Latin America and the Caribbean, accounting for one third of all our trade with this region.

Last year, bilateral trade grew by 87 percent despite coronavirus-related complications. The intergovernmental commission plays an important role in strengthening bilateral trade and investment ties. The latest session was held in autumn of last year in Brasilia. At that time, under personal instructions from President Bolsonaro, key Brazilian government ministers in the economic sector, responsible for energy, the mining industry and agriculture, visited Russia.

In addition, we plan to soon hold a meeting of the High-Level Russian-Brazilian Commission co-chaired by the Russian Prime Minister and the Brazilian Vice President.

The Russian-Brazilian and Brazilian-Russian Councils of Entrepreneurs are working well together; they have timed a series of meetings of business representatives to the current visit by the President of Brazil, and tonight Mr Bolsonaro will speak with the business leaders on these councils.

Let me emphasise that Brazil is always widely represented at the St Petersburg International Economic Forum. Last year, Mr Bolsonaro greeted the participants of the SPIEF plenary session via videoconference, which we highly appreciated. Once again, I would like to thank you, Mr President, for your attention to our event in St Petersburg.

We expect that this year’s 25^th forum, scheduled for June 15–18, will be attended by a high-profile delegation of Brazilian politicians, business leaders and public activists.

We note with satisfaction that our bilateral industrial cooperation is successfully expanding. And I would like to highlight the projects involving the Russian corporation Power Machines to modernise the Brazilian hydropower industry, as well as the Severstal and AVISMA projects to supply components for Brazilian high-tech industries.

Russia’s Rosatom exports fuel for Brazilian nuclear power plants and radioisotopes for medical purposes. Rosatom is also interested in participating in the construction of new power units in Brazil, including low-capacity nuclear power plants, both land and floating plants, because it has unique and extensive experience, and technologies that are not available elsewhere in the world.

Cooperation in the chemical industry and the production of environmentally friendly mineral fertiliser is progressing at a good pace. In 2021, Russian companies supplied almost 10 million tonnes of fertilisers worth about $3.5 billion to the Brazilian market.

Roscosmos and the Brazilian Space Agency are working on the implementation of the agreement on cooperation on the BRICS Remote Sensing Satellite Constellation. Three GLONASS stations have already been built in Brazil, as well as an electronic optical orbital debris spotter, and there are agreements to deploy two additional stations.

Russian-Brazilian cooperation in medicine and pharmaceuticals has been gaining momentum of late. Our companies ChemRar and BIOCAD are active in promoting coronavirus and cancer drugs in the Brazilian market. A project to localise Sputnik V vaccine manufacturing in Brazil is being implemented with support from the Russian Direct Investment Fund.

During our talks with President Bolsonaro, we naturally discussed the issues of cultural interaction. We agreed to continue promoting bilateral education, cultural and sports exchanges.

For example, a range of initiatives are being worked out now for Russia to participate in the celebrations of the bicentenary of Brazil’s independence later this year.

I will also mention that Russia provides assistance to Brazil in personnel training. We have about 400 Brazilian students in Russia, about 80 of whom are studying tuition-free.

A Russian-Brazilian inter-cultural school has recently been opened in Rio de Janeiro where classes are taught in Russian and Portuguese. You may also recall that a Bolshoi Theatre school has been operating for over 20 years in the Brazilian city of Joinville. Over 250 young people from different areas of Brazil and other Latin American countries train at this unique school, the only one of its kind outside Russia.

While sharing opinions on regional and global issues, the parties stated that Russia’s and Brazil’s positions on many issues are close or overlap. The foreign and defence ministries maintain contact. Actually, the foreign and defence ministers of the two countries had their first ever meeting in the 2+2 format in Moscow this morning.

Our countries advocate the development of a multipolar world order based on international law with the central coordinating role of the UN. Given that, we are firmly committed to the principle of multilateralism and the political-diplomatic settlement of conflicts.

In view of Brazil’s status as a non-permanent member of the UN Security Council in 2022–2023, we are set to pursue our interaction more intensively across all current issues on the UN agenda.

And we will, of course, continue to cooperate with our Brazilin partners within BRICS – a respected international association that holds an important place in the contemporary multipolar world and plays an important role in the global economy.

To conclude, I would like to thank Mr Bolsonaro for our meeting. I believe that today’s talks will serve to further strengthen Russian-Brazilian relations to the benefit of our two peoples.

And finally, Mr President, I know of yesterday’s disaster in Brazil: heavy rains caused destruction and claimed lives. I want to express my condolences to you and to all the people of Brazil over this tragedy and to wish a speedy recovery to the injured.

Thank you for your attention.

President of Brazil Jair Bolsonaro (retranslated): Mr President,

We talked for almost two hours; the agenda was extensive and of great interest to both our countries. I am grateful to you for your condolences. People in Petropolis and Rio de Janeiro were affected by this natural disaster. Thank you.

Mr President, we share common values: faith in God and protecting family values. We stand in solidarity with all countries that seek and do all they can to achieve peace.

We work together closely at such international venues as BRICS, the G20 and the UNO where we defend the sovereign right of nations to self-determination in line with the UN Charter and international law.

We noted the return of bilateral trade to pre-pandemic levels. Brazil is a major player in agriculture and we are pleased to see that there is interest in fertiliser supplies. We also see interested in supplies of animal-based products.

We have vast potential for developing cooperation in the sphere of oil, petroleum products and natural gas. We are striving to strengthen our high-level dialogue on oil exploration and production in deep-water deposits. We are interested in small nuclear power plants.

We are pleased to note the holding of the first military-political consultations between our foreign and defence ministers.

We are very happy that the Amazon is part of humanity’s heritage and we are grateful to you for your words in defence of our sovereignty. Thank you very much.

President Putin and I consider very important the efforts to create new dynamics in the technological alliance between Brazil and Russia. We are paying significant attention to nanotechnology, biotechnology, IT and medical research.

Brazil and Russia have the world’s biggest forests and we decided to establish a dialogue on forest protection.

Our meeting that lasted for almost two hours, I repeat, was very productive. It shows that two big powers have enormous potential for progress for the benefit of our nations.

Let me repeat that the world is our home and God is above us. We stand for peace and are ready to support all those who do the same. We support all.

Mr Putin, thank you very much for the warm welcome, the issues we discussed at today’s meeting and the trust placed in our country.

Thank you very much.

Vladimir Putin’s annual news conference

2021-12-28T11:55:21+04:00

The President’s annual news conference was broadcast live by Rossiya 1, Channel One, NTV and Rossiya 24 television channels, as well as Mayak, Vesti FM and Radio Rossii radio stations.

President of Russia Vladimir Putin: Good afternoon, colleagues.

I think that we can get down to work.

There is quite a distance between us, but I do hope that our technical staff have made all the necessary arrangements so that you can hear me well. I also hope that I will be able to hear you clearly.

Mr Peskov, I think that we can begin without any lengthy introductory remarks, since this would be more useful and interesting for everyone.

During this meeting, I will try to answer your questions, and, without any opening remarks, satisfy your curiosity and inform you on the outcomes of this year, as well as what we expect in the near future, and what we will strive to achieve in our work.

Mr Peskov, please.

Deputy Chief of Staff of the Presidential Executive Office – Presidential Press Secretary Dmitry Peskov: Let us begin.

To start with, I would like to give the floor to the true doyen of the Russian journalistic corps – one of the Interfax agency leaders, Vyacheslav Terekhov.

Please pass the microphone to the first row.

Vyacheslav Terekhov: Good afternoon, Mr President.

The sound will be somewhat muffled, a mixed sound, as radio operators say.

You just said you will talk about further economic development – the world has been waging a global war on the coronavirus for the past two years, and now we will be fighting the Omicron variant, of course. How has this war affected the Russian economy? It has indeed affected almost everyone in some way. What are the ways out of this economic crisis, out of this pit, what drivers are there? Do we have to wait until everyone gets vaccinated before we can discuss the possibility of economic growth?

And the most important question, of course: how do you assess the work of your ‘general staff’ – the Government and the Central Bank – during this ‘war’?

Sorry, when I mentioned the Central Bank just now, I remembered that my questions have always referred to the Central Bank, during the past three or four news conferences, except the most recent one – it just happens.

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: If I provide full answers to all your questions, even if I succeed in this task, I believe we could round up this news conference after that. These are very broad questions. In fact, they touch upon our main efforts, as well as those of the entire world, which, as you have mentioned, has been fighting the coronavirus.

This struggle continues, and we are aware of the dangers that Omicron, this new strain, poses. I think that we will have an opportunity to get back to this topic during today’s meeting.

As you may know, a group of Russian scientists and experts is now in South Africa, where their colleagues actually discovered this new strain. They are working there, and are quite successful at that. Once again, I would like to thank our colleagues from South Africa.

As for the impact this situation has had on the Russian economy, and what we are to expect in the near future, we have spoken about this, in general terms, many times.

Faced with the challenges posed by Covid-19 and the restrictions the economy and the social sector have had to face in this connection, it is obvious that the Russian economy has been better mobilised and prepared to withstand these shocks compared to many other developed economies around the world, if we look at the top five, six, seven or ten major economies, or even twenty. I will discuss this in more detail later during our news conference today.

The Russian economy declined by three percent, which is much better than many of the world’s leading economies, and we recovered faster than many others.

You know the numbers. Even last year, we could see the trends, and today I even have a chart here with me, and will share this information with you in order to be precise. GDP growth is expected at the level of 4.5 percent this year. It has added 4.6 percent as of the end of October, while manufacturing increased by 5 percent, and the processing sector grew by 5.2 percent.

Crop yields will be slightly lower in 2021 compared to the previous year, which is due to the weather. We had 133.5 million tonnes in 2020 and now have 123 million tonnes. Still, this is a very robust result which not only enables us to satisfy our needs, but also provides for a substantial export potential.

Fixed capital investment was up 7.6 percent as of November. We expect this indicator for the entire year to come in at 6 percent, up from a 1.4 percent decline in 2020.

The construction sector performed quite well, with a record high of 90 million square metres built. This is the first time we have achieved this figure in Russia’s contemporary history. I would like to congratulate all those involved in the construction sector, from the top executives to on-site construction workers, with this milestone.

Thank goodness, average wages have started to grow in real terms. There are also changes in terms of real disposable income. We had a 2 percent decline in 2020, but this year we expect this figure to rise.

Of course, we will talk about inflation. We expect the inflation rate to be 8 percent.

It is much higher than the forecast. But, even adjusted for inflation, real income has still increased by 4.1 percent. Our experts estimate that real income will show a 3.5-percent annual growth. Of course, this will not be true for all categories of citizens. Naturally, it is an average rate and I want to stress this once again, when people watch this and listen to this, they might say: it’s an average again. But we have to talk in average numbers since they serve as a certain benchmark. I think we will cover the topic of personal income in more detail today.

We set a goal of returning to the pre-pandemic unemployment rate – and it did go down. The unemployment rate before the pandemic was around 4.6‒4.7 percent. The current rate is 4.3 percent. It may go up a little to 4.4 percent by the end of the year. This is a very good indicator for the performance of the economy in general even though there are certain difficulties and challenges related to the labour market such as, for example, the number of people working at the construction sites we have just mentioned. It is a serious issue.

Now, I would like to speak about the trade surplus. Last year, despite all the difficulties, Russia’s trade surplus amounted to 94 billion [US$]. This year, the figure has almost doubled, reaching 184 billion, which is also an excellent result.

Russia’s foreign debt has slightly decreased. It is the lowest level of foreign debt in the world, around four percent.

What other important indicators speak for the quality of governance and the performance of the entire state, the Government and the Central Bank, in particular? Our international reserves have grown from US$595 to US$625.5 billion. The National Welfare Fund is growing as well and currently amounts to US$185.2 billion. All these figures are an indication of stability and good macroeconomic results.

There are issues that cannot but cause concern, including life expectancy, which has slightly decreased from 71.5 to 70.1 years. We will most likely cover this topic today as well. It is one of the negative consequences of the coronavirus pandemic.

Right. So, on the whole, I believe that both the Government and the Central Bank deserve – let us be modest – an acceptable score. The results are positive.

Now, about the growth drivers. Your question was about the potential growth drivers, and about vaccination – if we need to have the entire population vaccinated or not.

Look, we have already spoken many times about the growth drivers for our country based on the specific situation that has developed over a fairly extensive period. We can even consider the entire post-war period, since 1945. What are our challenges and what are the drivers, accordingly?

I have just spoken about an unfortunate decrease in life expectancy, an increase in mortality in our country, and in this regard, one of the most important problems, one of the most important challenges that we face is getting more acute – I am referring to demographics. It is a challenge both from a humanitarian point of view and from the geopolitical perspective as well, I mean the country’s population – 146 million for such a vast territory is definitely not enough; economically too, we have a workforce shortage.

As far as I know, the working age population is now just above 81 million. We must drastically increase this figure by 2024, by 2030. This is one of the factors of economic growth, let alone – I would like to emphasise this once again – the geopolitical and humanitarian components of this most important matter.

Therefore, preserving the people that Solzhenitsyn wrote about is becoming one of our most important tasks and one of the drivers of growth.

Second. What other growth drivers? The next driver is infrastructure, infrastructure development.

In this regard, I can say that we are making very strong efforts on this track. You know that we are channeling 500 billion rubles of federal funds directly towards the development of infrastructure. Then there are the National Projects; we started with 260 billion, I believe, then more than 400 billion, and next year, we will allocate 460 or so. We plan to allocate another 2.5 trillion rubles from the National Wealth Fund in the next few years – 2.5 trillion overall.

Of course, the third growth driver is increasing labour efficiency but this includes a whole set of programmes from education and digital transformation to healthcare, which we have already mentioned. This includes an entire set of programmes. Most of them are ready, so we know what to do. We have earmarked the resources needed to move in this direction, and we provide for regular allocations. The funds to this effect are available. All we need to do is set up this work properly and achieve maximum returns on every ruble we invest in delivering on these objectives.

Finally, one of your questions was about vaccinating the entire country. Unfortunately, in Russia the vaccination rate is low, just like in many other countries – take, for example, some European countries where the low level of vaccination is also a matter of concern. This is the case for Germany with its developed healthcare, but even there the healthcare system, one of the most effective in Europe, faces a lot of criticism.

What is the vaccination rate in Russia? As of today, or maybe yesterday, it was 59.4 precent. I had no doubt that this would be one of the main topics during today’s news conference, so I talked to Ms Popova and Ms Golikova. The figure of 59.4 percent is where we are in terms of achieving herd immunity in Russia. This includes both those who have recovered from the coronavirus infection, as well as those who have received the jab. Some 70 million people have received the first dose, and a little over 70 have had both.

This is not enough. We need about 80 percent of our population to be immune to achieve herd immunity. I hope that next year, at least by the end of the first quarter or in the second quarter, we will have reached this level. Some countries are already talking about the need for 90–95 percent to be immune in order to achieve herd immunity.

This is how things stand, more or less.

Thank you.

Dmitry Peskov: Thank you.

Moving on, I suggest that we go through Russia’s major news agencies.

TASS news agency, please, go ahead.

Veronika Ichetkina: Good afternoon.

Veronika Ichetkina, TASS News Agency.

In a way, I would like to follow up on social spending by the state and the budget.

The state has recently increased its social spending. Judging by the budget for the next three years, as adopted recently, the state will continue doing so. It is curious that there was a lot of talk some time ago about social spending cuts next year.

Can you comment on these allegations? Overall, how would you describe the new budget? Can it be called a development budget or a budget with a social focus?

If you will allow me, I would like to finish my question. May I? Are any further increases in social spending possible during the pandemic? If this does happen, have you assessed the risk of inflation spiralling out of control, considering that it is already quite jumpy.

Thank you.

ladimir Putin: First, about the characteristics of the budget. Of course, it is a socially-oriented budget. Naturally.

I extensively discussed this matter with my colleagues from the Government yesterday. If you look at healthcare and social spending, the healthcare expenses, for example, are, obviously, growing. The federal budget expenditures, the compulsory healthcare insurance budget and the regional budgets amount to 1.5–1.7 trillion in total.

Moreover, I think we planned to allocate around 3.6 trillion for healthcare from two sources, the federal budget and the compulsory healthcare insurance system. This year we are about to reach 3.9 or 4 trillion in spending. Next year the plan is 4 trillion, and, obviously, the actual amount will be higher.

These are completely objective figures. And I did not include regional expenses, which vary from region to region and from year to year. They currently amount to 1.6–1.7 trillion, which is quite significant.

If we speak about the social sphere, there has been an apparent increase in spending. Even during the pandemic, when we were developing support measures for the most severely affected sectors of the economy (and the numbers were huge, 4.5 percent of the GDP last year and another percent of the GDP this year, which makes 5.5 percent in total), we did not just give away money randomly. Our support for the hardest hit industries focused on preserving jobs and supporting people with low incomes who are particularly vulnerable in these circumstances.

Who are these people? First of all, young families with children. I think I do not have to list all the measures, but I will mention some that are widely known.

We added more categories of families to those receiving state support – for example, all families with children aged three and younger.

We started paying maternity capital for the first child. Then, we began paying benefits to pregnant women who are experiencing hardship. We paid additional benefits for children aged three to seven. We paid one-time benefits of 5,000 and 10,000 rubles to different categories – primarily people facing financial difficulties.

It is an entire toolkit of measures – worth 4.5 trillion rubles last year, and we continued this kind of support into 2021. Again, we did it all to either directly support people, or support them through businesses – we provided financial support to companies that kept people on board and maintained a certain level of wages.

Among other things, as you know, we have recently increased the minimum wage and subsistence level. At first glance, this might not be a significant increase, but the idea is to have social benefits indexed immediately, and this affects millions of people. All social benefits are calculated on the basis of the minimum wage or subsistence level, and by the way, this also leads to indexation of certain pensions.

Therefore, without a doubt, this budget can be described as socially focused.

Answering your colleague's question about growth drivers, I have mentioned some of our absolutely unprecedented, grandiose infrastructure development plans. Look at the massive resources to be invested: we plan to allocate 2.5 trillion from the NWF alone; 500 billion has already been allocated; and 460 [billion] will be additionally allocated next year.

We will also invest hugely in labour productivity and digitalisation in all industries, practically from top to bottom.

Therefore, as I am saying, this budget is socially focused, but it is also focused on development. This much is absolutely obvious if you look at the figures.

Veronika Ichetkina: May I clarify something?

Vladimir Putin: Yes, of course, go ahead.

Veronika Ichetkina: I have also asked how higher social spending will affect inflation.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, right. Sorry.

You are absolutely right, and this is one of the key issues with maintaining macroeconomic stability, because many of the world's leading economies have relaxed their macroeconomic policies and have significantly accelerated their money printing presses. This is an obvious thing, and it has led to a fairly high inflation in the leading economies – this much is also obvious. Everyone sees this – these are the numbers everyone can see.

Budget deficits are growing in all leading countries, all of them, higher in the United States, slightly less in the eurozone, but still, this is a significant and unusual change.

For example, the inflation rate in the world’s leading economy, the United States, is 6.1–6.2 percent, if memory serves, whereas the target figure was 2 percent. In other words, the inflation rate is three time above the target figure.

Inflation is high in Russia as well, 8 percent, while the target was 4 percent. Our inflation rate has grown twofold, whereas it has tripled in the United States. This is serious. I believe that the FRS [US Federal Reserve System] will have to do something about this.

This soft monetary policy is having an impact on macroeconomics and ultimately cancels out the positive goals of this policy, including support for the economy and the citizens. We have this problem as well, because 8 percent is too high, and we certainly need to attain the target rate of 4 percent.

Of course, we can criticise the Central Bank. I am aware of this, because I maintain daily contact with our colleagues from the real economy sector, and I know that they are criticising the Central Bank, and I know their arguments. Trust me, we meet nearly every day, although this is not reported on television. They sit three metres from me, and we discuss problems. Television only shows a small part of my contacts and meetings, when we work in front of cameras. I hold such meetings and conferences nearly every day. They just sit down further away from me, just about three metres away. But we discuss things every day.

I know that the real economy is not happy with increased interest rates. But if we do not do this, the situation will be like in Turkey. This is the problem. It is a serious matter and a major challenge. Of course, this instrument should be used carefully, but the Central Bank has an independent policy. This may seem strange to you, but I do not interfere with the Central Bank’s operations. However, I have a positive view of them, and I believe that we usually manage to find a middle ground.

Why? What are the risks of raising interest rates? This can hinder growth. We must grow faster that the world’s average, by 3.4–3.5 percent a year in the near future, not even as high as now – by 4.6 percent. The target of 4.4–4.5 percent would be great. But increased interest rates are decreasing the possibility of attaining this goal.

We cannot see this now, because the lending volume is not decreasing, and banking possibilities are growing. Sberbank will report 1 trillion rubles’ worth of profits this year. In other words, we have found a middle ground, by and large.

Dmitry Peskov: Let us move on.

I suggest that we turn to RIA, the third of Russia’s major news agencies. Mic to the central sector, please.

Yelena Glushakova: Yelena Glushakova, RIA Novosti.

Mr President, just now you were talking about social support measures, but the business side of the question is of no less importance.

In your opinion, how can we balance anti-COVID restrictions with the need to keep the economy going? Not only major corporations suffer from restrictions, but small businesses too: retailers, small restaurants, cafes, small shops, the cinema industry, and the entertainment sector.

If you allow me, I have a second question in this connection. How well did the governors perform? They received a lot of authority during the pandemic but used it in different ways, introducing various restrictions. In your opinion, how well did they perform? What grade would you give them for their efforts?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Let me start with the question on businesses and how we have been supporting them.

You said that major corporations are not the only ones to suffer, and that small enterprises suffer as well. In fact, it is primarily small businesses that suffer, even if major corporations also felt some negative consequences. We devised support measures for these sectors, in fact, for all major sectors of the economy, if you remember, for all major corporations. I specifically asked the Government last year, at the very beginning of the year, and the Government complied.

Our key industries and major corporations have clearly benefited from a number of measures. After all, they operated without any or virtually no interruptions, and in some cases even increased their output. This is the case for the defence industry, which reported higher production volumes.

As for small and medium-size enterprises – catering, gyms, cinemas, and even theatres, museums, etc., all the enterprises in the service sector – of course, they were the first to suffer. However, they were also the first to receive our support. There was a whole range of measures. I do not know whether I need to list them all. This included subsidised loans, direct support to save jobs and wages, reduced interest rates, loan payments in installments, lease subsidies, etc. By the way, some of these measures are still in place, and you know this.

We have allocated and continue to allocate large sums of money from the federal budget to this effect. The Government is doing this intentionally and understands what is going on. That said, it may well be that some things should have been done in a more sophisticated and responsive manner. Still, I would like to praise my colleagues’ work. After all, this is all happening in direct contact with the business community.

As you know, I recently attended events held by the Russian Union of Entrepreneurs and Industrialists and had meetings with the heads of other business associations, including those working with SMEs. Overall, these people have expressed their understanding and overall were quite positive about the Government’s efforts to support businesses.

Incidentally, the result was not bad at all. As I have said, we overcame the crisis faster than many other world economies. Our fall was not as bad and we came out of the crisis quicker. This is a result after all.

Now, as regards… what is the second part of the question?

Yelena Glushakova: About regional governors.

Vladimir Putin: Assessment of the heads of the regions.

You know, I have said many times and I would like to reiterate – I think you will agree with me: many countries have followed our path. Indeed, we were the first to say that ours is a large country and the situation in various regions is different and is developing in different ways. So, with overall guidance from the federal centre, and a government commission was set up for this purpose, we must still give the regions the opportunity to regulate the situation locally, considering the subtle nuances. Is it possible to compare, say, Chukotka and Moscow? They are completely different, and the epidemiological situation has been different from region to region because of our vast territory.

Let me repeat, like any complex issue, some things could probably have been done better and with more urgency, but in general, the heads of the regions showed the utmost responsibility and were not afraid to make difficult decisions.

In turn, the Government and the federal centre has always supported the regions that made the required decisions and needed assistance, say, from the federal centre. Assistance for the regions has been increased many times over.

Cooperation between the federal centre and the regions has produced positive results, the results we needed.

Dmitry Peskov: All right, let us go on.

Let someone from the regions speak. There is a girl in a yellow blouse there. It says: “A City for Life.”

Go ahead, please.

Lyudmila Danilkina: Good afternoon,

Veliky Novgorod, Lyudmila Danilkina.

Our city that you, Mr President, have visited more than once, is not big but it is very beautiful and has an ancient history. I am talking about the city for a reason because my question is part personal and part business, about the urban environment.

Which city would you personally choose to live in, except St Petersburg and Moscow? This is the first, personal part of my question.

The second part is about Novgorod Region. Our region is very fortunately placed between the two capitals, which is, of course, a plus for our territory. But we would develop much faster if there were a high speed railway not far from Novgorod. There is a lot of talk about it now at both the federal and regional levels.

I would like to know the prospects for the development or, to be more precise, implementation of this project on our territory.

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: As for my place of residence, you said “other than Moscow and St Petersburg.” Why did you exclude Moscow and St Petersburg? These cities are part of the Russian Federation as well, and I was born in one of them. It is my hometown, so when you asked this question, my first thought was about St Petersburg.

Our cities, large and small alike, are developing at a fairly fast pace, although we should focus primarily on developing small cities. We have been discussing this lately and are making efforts to expand infrastructure, primarily, to ensure transport connectivity both by rail and road, as well as by air, sea and river transport. I have already spoken about this, it is one of the growth drivers in which we plan to invest enormous resources.

Much depends on connectivity, because one can and should be able to live in a favourable environment – I am not talking about myself – and to commute to work or change where you work. Increasing mobility of the population is one of our goals.

So, it is possible, and I would, of course, think of St Petersburg first and foremost as my hometown.

Krasnodar in the south of Russia is developing quite well. Look at how the coastal area and Crimea are developing.

Now, speaking of infrastructure, we are talking about developing the Eastern Operating Domain, but not only. Let us say, Moscow–Kazan, and we plan to extend it further to Tyumen and then make it a loop.

All of that makes the people feel they live in a favourable environment with easy commutes from their places of work to their homes, where they can meet with their friends and go to places catering to other aspects of life, such as cultural centres with internationally recognised museums, and so on.

I think we have many beautiful and worthwhile places where people can and should feel comfortable.

High-speed rail is a separate topic that is still in the works. First, if there is to be a high-speed railway, I think Veliky Novgorod should feel its presence, because even though it is high-speed rail, the train must stop somewhere. Veliky Novgorod is one such place where the train can make a stop. Moscow–St Petersburg air service will clearly cease to exist, because it will take just three hours to get from central Moscow to central St Petersburg, whereas now it can take up to 90 minutes to get to the airport in Moscow. So, air service on this route will no longer make sense.

We need to weigh everything, think it over and have a look at high-speed rail in other countries. For example, the People's Republic of China has many such railway systems. Until recently, they were all operating at a loss, even in China with its population of 1.5 billion people. This is economics, and numbers must be taken into account.

This is important for our country and can provide a solution for traveling certain distances. Air travel is a better solution in some places. These things are still being studied at the expert level.

Thank you.

Dmitry Peskov: Alexander Gamov, Komsomolskaya Pravda, please.

Alexander Gamov: Thank you.

Mr President, thank you very much for coming here today. Dmitry Peskov said it was your idea.

If you do not mind, I would like to go back to the topic you and Mr Terekhov touched upon in the beginning.

You meet with our academicians and experts. In your opinion, what is the reason for the new COVID-19 waves? Every new wave seems to be worse than the one before it.

Just how confirmed is the effectiveness of vaccination really? How do scientists explain the fact that people contract this virus again even after vaccination and booster jabs?

Why is the mortality rate so high? I do not think that the number has been mentioned today. The fact is that around 1,000 people in Russia die of coronavirus every day.

I made a horrific discovery the other day. I looked at the global mortality rate, which was around 6,700 on that day. I realised that one in every six or seven deaths happened in Russia. Can we really allow this to continue?

Mr President, I am saying this because, for example, in democratic Austria there are fines for those who refuse to get vaccinated. Perhaps we should introduce some criminal charges for those who campaign against doctor visits?

You know, it occurred to me: you often say that Russia is having a hard time; that we are surrounded by enemies. I think we never could, and especially today, we simply cannot afford to lose one thousand people every day.

Thank you very much.

Perhaps, what we need is the political will of the country’s leadership. Mr President, we will support you. You know what I mean.

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, I know what you mean.

As for being surrounded by enemies, have I actually said that? True, there are military bases around us. To the east and to the south, and the north of Russia, new military systems have been installed, including at sea, to say nothing about the west. I think we will talk about this in the international relations section. Encircling a territory like ours is not an easy thing to do, although modern tools probably make it feasible in theory. Well, this is a separate topic.

Speaking about new coronavirus strains and waves, what causes them is the virus’s ability to mutate, nothing else. The answer is simple. Ever new strains emerge where there are problems in the healthcare system and low immunity. For example, in Africa, there is a high incidence of immunodeficiency, the human immunodeficiency virus – hence new coronavirus strains. It is not surprising at all.

This is why I keep saying it is important to mutually recognise vaccines and make them available around the world as soon as possible in sufficient amounts. Otherwise, we will not be able to tackle this problem on a global scale and humanity will always live with this virus and sustain huge losses. We even have a new term: excess mortality.

You know, this is simply terrible, but it is difficult to estimate the number of COVID deaths, and not because somebody is trying to hide the facts. Not at all. On the contrary, I have encouraged our healthcare system and the Government to keep everything as open as possible, clear and transparent, and also – I am absolutely sincere about this – because people must see the importance of vaccination. Why is the death rate so high? Vaccination coverage, herd immunity is quite low in the country, only 59.4 percent. Our neighbours are talking about the necessity of increasing the rate to 90–95 percent, while our figure is 59.4 percent, which explains the current situation.

Should we try to prosecute people? No, I don’t think so. The point at issue is not political will. The fact is everything has an equal and opposite reaction. When you apply pressure, our people, who are very ingenious, immediately devise methods to evade it, and they will do so in this case as well.

We must pursue an alternative. We must respect people, whatever their position, and we must patiently explain the importance of taking specific measures.

Take vaccination. You asked about the reason for COVID reinfection, etc. It is true that reinfection can and does happen. But do you know the reinfection rate among those who have recovered from the disease? People do get reinfected – your colleagues in this room, and our international media are writing about such cases. They write that those who have recovered from the virus can fall ill again. Yes, they can fall ill. But how many do? Only 1 percent of those who have recovered from COVID. And how many of those who have had the jab fall ill? Only 3 or 4 percent. And the number of vaccinated people in intensive care is much lower compared to non-vaccinated people. These are objective figures, and we simply need to tell people about them, to keep them informed.

I have mentioned this before, but back in the Soviet era nobody asked your permission for vaccination. They just gave you the shot, and that was it. Those who stood at the helm of our big country in the Soviet period and contributed to its dissolution are now among the leaders of the anti-vaccination campaign. They are doing this to increase their popularity among the part of our people who are questioning the necessity of vaccination. This is a dishonest position. If they are competent and clever people who act responsibly with regard to their electorate, whom they must protect, they must take a principled stand rather than sit on the fence and try to gain popularity on the nation’s health.

It we act in a principled manner, trying to explain the necessity of vaccination to the people consistently, intelligibly and respectfully, I believe we will attain the desired effect. Any other method will be counterproductive.

As for tightening accountability and so on, they are doing this in Germany, yet the vaccination rate is low. So, why do it?

We must fight crime rather than law-abiding people. For example, there are falsified vaccination certificates. Over 200 such cases have been initiated, most of them under two articles: forgery and malfeasance. I believe that over 270 such cases have been opened. This is what we must fight. But on a more fundamental scale, we must explain and persuade.

BBC, please.

Petr Kozlov: Good afternoon, Mr President.

Petr Kozlov, BBC Russian Service.

Vladimir Putin: Good afternoon.

Petr Kozlov: Alexei Navalny’s Anti-Corruption Foundation and headquarters were designated as extremist organisations and disbanded this year. He is in prison now, after being poisoned, conducting an investigation into the poisoning and claiming to have identified the individuals involved.

Over 100 media outlets have been put on the foreign agents’ registry. Most of them were listed this year, actually, during the past six months.

What happened in Russia recently for the number of those who the authorities consider extremists, undesirable organisations or foreign agents to have grown so fast?

Let me say a few words about history. You often talk about history, and you know it. Probably, you remember that each time power in Russia was concentrated in the hands of one person in the absence of active opposition, when Russia was in a state of active, acute confrontation with the West, ultimately this situation prompted a response which plunged the country into the abyss of wars and revolutions. Do you not think that you, possessing all the power, are now laying the foundation, perhaps, for such wars and revolutions?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: First of all, speaking of history, as a reminder, our opponents have been saying throughout the centuries that Russia cannot be defeated, but can only be destroyed from within, which they successfully accomplished during World War I, or rather, after it ended, and then in the 1990s, when the Soviet Union was being dismantled from within. Who was doing it? Someone serving the interests of others that run counter to the interests of the Russian and other peoples of the Russian Empire, the Soviet Union, and the Russian Federation today.

You mentioned the person who was allegedly poisoned. The Prosecutor's Office of the Russian Federation has sent multiple official inquiries asking to provide at least some materials corroborating that he was in fact poisoned. There are none. How can this be explained? Not a single thing about Novichok or whatever you call it.

We suggested that our specialists go there and join the investigation. I spoke with the President of France and the Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany, asking them to allow our specialists to come, take samples and verify things, so that we can at least have some grounds to open a criminal case. No response whatsoever. We ask them: how can this be explained? Silence. So, there is no need to discuss it, let us turn the page if there is nothing to say in response.

As for inmates, every country has always had them, and that is never going to change. Do not commit criminal offences under the guise of political activity.

Next, regarding the list of media acting as foreign agents and media outlets designated as foreign agents. I agree with you, it’s not good. But let me remind you once again that this law was not invented here; it was invented in a state that – you represent the UK here, and the UK is the closest ally of the United States – a state everyone considers to be the beacon of democracy.

The United States adopted this act back in the 1930s, but this is not the point. What is important is that it is in effect now. It is in force today. About 0.034 [percent] organisations have been labelled foreign agents there. Is this surprising now? We have the same share of foreign agents, 0.034, the same number. What is the difference? The difference is that in the United States, if you have not shut down, you face criminal liability, up to five years in prison. Even if you stop any activity and close the organisation it does not exempt you from criminal liability – five years.

We do nothing like that. We do not prohibit the work of these organisations; we just want organisations that are engaged in internal political activity in Russia to clearly explain and disclose the sources of funding for their operations. That is all, they can continue doing what they are doing. Our law is much more liberal. If you think this is not enough, if, like your colleague here, you think we need to introduce liability, administrative or criminal, for failure to get vaccinated – why don’t we introduce criminal liability for foreign agents’ operations if the organisation fails to close, like in the US? But we do not even demand termination of their operations – we just want them to be honest about their sources of funding.

There may be questions about the understanding of ‘political activity.’ I agree with you here. There may be questions about regulating this kind of activity. We have 74 organisations designated as foreign agents of 200,000 registered NGOs – that’s 0.034. Just like in the States, but we do not have such severe penalties, which include criminal liability.

Now, regarding keeping power in the same hands. We have distinct branches of power – the executive, legislative and judicial authorities. Clearly, the delineation of authority between these branches can have minor variations depending on the specific country at a specific stage of its development. We will strive to ensure that they are independent, so that the country is cohesive, efficient and forward-looking. And in the end, it will be up to the Russian people to choose their system of society and state, not up to those who you serve today.

Next, please.

Dmitry Peskov: Let us continue. I suggest giving the floor to the television channels

Vladimir Putin: Of course.

Dmitry Peskov: I see NTV, Irada Zeinalova. You do not need to introduce yourself.

Irada Zeinalova: Good afternoon, Mr President, colleagues.

Since we were talking about history, I would say that things are happening almost according to [Alexander] Gorchakov, who said, “Russia is focusing.” Of course, we would like to focus on our internal problems, to address our internal affairs.

However, over the past few weeks the global media have been fuelling tension, saying that the Russians are coming, Russia is planning to attack Ukraine and wants war. Serious people call you, and you talk with them and explain our position, but they do not calm down. As a result, we send our proposals, establish our ‘red lines’ and, roughly speaking, explain the rules of the game, which, you must agree, did not exist before. For the past 30 years, we have been living in a swamp and have been told that we do not meet certain standards.

We have set our red lines, and we know that we have outlined our security priorities and interests. But we also remember from history that any agreement reached during negotiations can remain on paper, the way it happened many times in the past. The smallest provocation after such talks can lead to a big war, and the agreements remain on paper or are forgotten again.

So, here is my question. Mr President, what should we prepare for? What is a realistic outlook, and since the word “war” has been said out-loud, have we estimated the probability of war even as the result of a provocation?

Vladimir Putin: You brought up Gorchakov and the end of his phrase, “Russia is focusing.” You may also recall that the first part of the phrase – in reply to a question about whether Russa was angry – was, “No, Russia is not angry, Russia is focusing.”

I will try to give a short answer, yet I will have to begin at the beginning. The aggravation began in 2014. Before that, even though the Soviet Union had ceased to exist and part of historically Russian territories with a historically Russian population, primarily in Ukraine, had found themselves living outside Russia, we accepted that as a fact of life and felt more or less comfortable about it. We even helped those new republics to get back on their feet, and we worked, were ready to work and are still working together with their governments, whatever their foreign policy priorities.

Suffice it to recall our relations with President [Viktor] Yushchenko and Prime Minister [Yulia] Timoshenko, who indicated, like the current Ukrainian leadership, their absolutely pro-Western position. But we worked with them anyway. It is true that we argued over gas, and there were conflicts, but eventually we came to an agreement, and we worked, and were ready to continue to work together, and we never even thought about doing anything about Crimea.

But what happened in 2014? A bloody coup, people were killed and burned alive. I am not talking now about who was right and who was to blame. Obviously, Ukrainian citizens were rightfully indignant and displeased at what was happening in the country. The then president, Yanukovych, had agreed to everything. Three foreign ministers – of Poland, Germany and France – guaranteed the peaceful development of the situation and the peace process. I talked with the US president at that time at his initiative. He asked me to support this process as well. Everyone agreed but then a coup took place in a day or two. What for? There is no answer. Why was it needed? President Yanukovych agreed to everything anyway. He was ready to give up power anytime. The elections and the victory of the opposition were inevitable. Everyone knew this very well. Why was it done then?

Then Crimea happened. But how could we turn down the request of Sevastopol and Crimea, the people who lived there, to take them under our protection, under our wing? It was not possible. We were simply put in a situation where we could not have acted differently. Or were we supposed to just look on passively at what was happening in the southeast, in Donbass, which has only ever thought of itself as part of Russia, even during the formation of the USSR in 1922–1924? But Lenin and his comrades wedged Donbass in there by force. At first, they decided to make it part of Russia and then said the decision had to be revised.

They revised it and created a country that had never existed before. We will not talk about it now, but this is what happened then. They crammed in there the historical lands of people whom nobody asked how or where they wanted to live. All right, this is what happened, we agreed. But we had to do something in 2014 and this led to the crisis that is unfolding today.

All right, the Ukrainian authorities twice attempted to resolve the Donbass problem by force although we persuaded them not to do this. I personally persuaded Mr Poroshenko: Anything but military operations! Yes, yes, he said and then resorted to force. What was the result? Encirclement, losses and the Minsk agreements. Are they good or not? I think they are the only possible way out. So, what is the problem? There is no desire to implement them. They adopted a law on indigenous people and announced that the Russian people who lived on this land, on their own land, were not indigenous. Incidentally, the same was done to Poles, Hungarians and Romanians. Hence the disputes in Ukraine’s relations with these countries. They exist. They do not get a lot of attention, but they are there.

Language came next. The Russians and the Russian-speaking population are being forced from their historical lands – that is what is happening. All right. Everyone says: Russia must abide by the Minsk agreements. We agreed. But they, the government suddenly submitted to parliament a law on a transitional period. How does it tally with the Minsk agreements? Instead of amnesty, this law provides for a ban on amnesty, all but criminal liability for amnesty. Instead of elections, this law introduces military government, and instead of amnesty – lustration. What is all this about? And they got it approved by the Venice Commission. So, how are we supposed to react to all this?

This is the domestic policy component. But then we hear: war, war, war. You could get the impression that maybe a third military operation is in the making. Moreover, they are warning us in advance: “Do not interfere, do no protect these people. If you do interfere to protect these people, certain sanctions will follow.” It may well be that they are preparing for this. This is the first option we need to respond to, and act, while keeping this in mind.

The second option is, in general, to create, as I said in my article, an anti-Russia of sorts on this territory by constantly stockpiling the latest weapons there and brainwashing the local population. Just imagine how Russia must live and carry on, from a historical perspective? Do we have to live, while constantly keeping an eye on what is going on over there, and what new weapons’ systems were delivered? Under the cover of these new weapons’ systems radicals may well decide to settle the Donbass issue, as well as the Crimean issue, by military means. Why did they support the Crimean Platform? On the sidelines they keep saying: “Fine, let’s forget about Crimea.” But no! They mean to get even there.

After all, we have to be mindful of our own security, not just for today and not just for next week, but in the short term. How is Russia to live with all this? Do we always have to stay on guard, watching what happens there and when a strike might come?

This is a serious matter. I have just spoken about our plans for infrastructure development, social policy, and healthcare. But what does it all mean if we end up in the conflict you are asking about? This is not our choice, and we do not want this.

It is for this reason that I responded to President Biden’s proposal, who suggested appointing responsible representatives to lead strategic stability talks. Stability and security, ensuring security on this territory and in this area is one of the key matters on today’s agenda. We must understand how to ensure our security. With this in mind, we spoke out clearly and directly against any further eastward expansion by NATO. The ball is in their court. They need to respond in one way or another.

In this connection, I would like to emphasise that the overall response we have been seeing has been quite positive. Our American partners are telling us that they are ready to launch this conversation by starting talks early next year in Geneva. Both sides have appointed representatives. I hope that the situation develops in this very direction.

Dmitry Peskov: Let us take questions from regional media.

Vladimir Putin: Mr Peskov, allow me. I see China.

Dmitry Peskov: Xinhua, I assume?

Vladimir Putin: I do not know. It says “China.” Please.

Dmitry Peskov: Please, pass the mic. Xinhua, please raise it higher.

Vladimir Putin: I meant that person though. But alright. They are not giving you the floor.

Dmitry Peskov: I apologise.

Vladimir Putin: I am sorry, they are not giving you the floor. Bureaucracy is to blame.

Ao Li: Good afternoon, Mr President.

Vladimir Putin: Good afternoon.

Ao Li: Xinhua news agency, China.

You recently held talks with President of China Xi Jinping via videoconference. You remarked that Russia‒China relations are a true example of cooperation between states in the 21^st century.

Today, in view of the current complicated international situation, how should we understand this description?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: That is exactly how you should understand it. There is no hidden meaning. Indeed, the relationship between the People’s Republic of China and the Russian Federation has evolved to be as I described it. Perhaps you noticed that President Xi Jinping and I always address each other as “my friend.” And it is true: we have a very trusting personal relationship that helps our professional relationship as well.

In terms of the economy, first of all, Asia is a rapidly and successfully developing region, and China is the absolute leader of both the global and Asian economy. It is only natural that we are developing our economic relationship with China. Bilateral trade currently exceeds US$100 billion, which is above the pre-pandemic level. China is our biggest trade and economic partner with which we cooperate in many different fields.

In terms of energy, both China and Russia committed to achieve carbon neutrality by 2060. But before that deadline, we will be supplying all types of energy resources to China. We are willing to continue beyond the deadline because life will not stop in our countries in 2060, and there are many ways to achieve carbon neutrality, even while still using hydrocarbons, provided that they are used appropriately.

We continue to cooperate in nuclear energy, high technology and space – in almost every industry, including technology-intensive sectors.

Our people-to-people cooperation includes organising mutual years of youth exchanges, years of science, education, culture and so on. These initiatives, of course, bring people together at the most basic level, in humanitarian sphere.

We cooperate on security. The Chinese army is extensively equipped with the most advanced weapons. We even develop some technologically advanced weapons together. We cooperate in space and aviation, on both airplanes and helicopters. Finally, we promote cooperation between our armed forces through joint military exercise and international military games, joint maritime and air patrols. Ours is an overarching partnership of strategic nature that has no precedents in history, at least not between Russia and China.

This daily hard work benefits both the Chinese and Russian people. It is, of course, a strong stabilising factor in the international arena.

There is a sign saying “Children”, so we will not go further into international affairs. “Protection of children”.

Dmitry Peskov: Yes, the sign saying “Protection of Children.”

Shamil Guliyev: Good afternoon, Mr President.

I am Shamil Guliyev from Tobolskoye Vremya.

The problem of harmful content that children find on the internet remains a pressing one, as you have said before. This results in bullying at schools and various types of incitement, among other provocations.

Some time ago, the introduction of registration on social media with passport data was discussed. Could you please say if this will happen eventually? And what other measures might be taken to protect teenagers from potentially dangerous content that they might come across on social media?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: I totally agree with you, Shamil. This is a problem not only for Russia.

Look, this topic is being debated almost in all countries, both in the media and in representative bodies of power. This issue is being debated in the US Congress, and representatives of these global networks and global platforms are summoned there.

What does this mean for us? Business above all and, unfortunately, money at any cost. It means evading national oversight, evading the need to give some thought to children, as your question indicated. The priority for them is making a profit. Hence all the negativity associated with it: the encouragement of suicide, the same tragedies in schools over and over.

Consider it, we have prevented over 100 cases of such serious crime at educational institutions recently. Unfortunately, these tragedies happen and we have to contend with a steady stream of them. However, more than 100 have been prevented; 127 if I am not mistaken. Of course, this is an enormous problem for the entire world, including us. And it naturally results in demands to “ground” these platforms so that they have to open offices here to comply with national laws.

Speaking about ending anonymity on the internet, this is also being debated in our society and all over the world. The internet is part of our lives, and an ever bigger part of it at that. So, everything happening on the internet must comport with the general rules of human life, both moral and legal ones. Of course, all that is required is to observe the golden mean, as in many things, not to suppress freedom of expression and freedom to distribute information on the internet, while also protecting our society from possible negative effects, which you have just mentioned.

I hope that the golden mean will be found and we will also continue to insist on working with global platforms so that they follow our laws. As you know, a lot of countries slow down traffic; there are also other ways, including essentially blocking them completely. We are very reluctant to take such extreme measures, but if we are forced to, we will have to make greater demands on those who work in this area and neglect the interests of the Russian society.

Dmitry Peskov: By the way, I saw some bloggers on the list of accredited journalists. Are you here? Show me please, if there are any bloggers present. Please introduce yourself.

Anya Khilkevich: Good afternoon.

My name is Anya Khilkevich. I represent a social network called Yappy. I heard what my colleague said, and I have a question. The development of all these digital services opens up enormous opportunities, including in education. Teaching and communicating information to young people is possible through entertaining and game-based content. Yappy is a convenient app for viewing and creating original videos, for trying creative ideas.

So my question is: what do you think about interacting with young people through this kind of environment? Or do you think the younger generation is degrading?

Vladimir Putin: Why degrading?

Anya Khilkevich: I mean they are not developing, evolving.

Vladimir Putin: Of course not. Humankind is always evolving and children are always better and smarter than their parents. It is an obvious fact because more information is accumulated and communication improves. People have more and more opportunity to be creative. They do not just run faster or jump higher but also think in less conventional and more creative ways. What is the core of education today, especially for younger children? Games.

Of course we must use the opportunities you are talking about. This is why, by the way, we are working to expand the broadband internet network to the entire country. We have a specific plan and funding. We are about to finish connecting schools to the internet and will soon start with rural areas. I believe we have allocated about 24 billion rubles for this project, and Russian Post will be involved. Despite the debate about whether a commercial organisation like Russian Post should be supported, I think it should. Then people living in rural areas will be able to use its facilities and enjoy the opportunities you mentioned.

This is not a problem. The problem is that the content should be useful. Young people should not become addicted to the internet. Browsing the internet from dawn until dusk should not be a substitute for real life. There needs to be some kind of movement, a full life, with sports, museums and theatres.

The internet opportunities you mentioned and the various networks must complement real life rather than cause people to plunge into a virtual world and live a virtual life all the time. That would indeed lead to degradation. To prevent this, representative government bodies, parliaments, public organisations and non-profits must work together to develop certain rules of behaviour.

Dmitry Peskov: Maybe we should give the floor to foreign media.

Sky News.

Diana Magnay: Thank you for taking my question. I am afraid it is in English.

You have talked a lot about security guarantees, and now we have seen your proposals. You also say you have no intention of invading Ukraine.

So, will you guarantee unconditionally that you will not invade Ukraine or any other sovereign country? Or does that depend on how negotiations go?

And another question: what is it, do you think, that the West does not understand about Russia or about your intentions?

Thank you

Vladimir Putin: Regarding your question about guarantees or whether things depend on the negotiations, our actions will not depend on the negotiation process, but rather on unconditional guarantees for Russia’s security today and in the historical perspective.

In this connection, we have made it clear that any further movement of NATO to the East is unacceptable. Is there anything unclear about this? Are we deploying missiles near the US border? No, we are not. It is the United States that has come to our home with its missiles and is already standing at our doorstep. Is it going too far to demand that no strike systems be placed near our home? What is so unusual about this?

What would the Americans say if we stationed our missiles on the border between Canada and the United States, or between Mexico and the United States? Haven’t Mexico and the US had territorial disputes in the past? Which country owned California? And Texas? Have you forgotten? All right, nobody is talking about this now the way they are talking about Crimea. Very well. But we are trying to avoid talking about the creation of Ukraine as well. Who created it? Vladimir Lenin did, when he established the Soviet Union. This is set out in the 1922 Treaty on the creation of the Soviet Union and in the 1924 Constitution. True, this happened after his death, but in accordance with the principles he formulated.

But the matter at hand concerns security, not history, but security guarantees. This is why it is not the negotiations themselves but the results that matter to us.

We remember, as I have mentioned many times before and as you know very well, how you promised us in the 1990s that [NATO] would not move an inch to the East. You cheated us shamelessly: there have been five waves of NATO expansion, and now the weapons systems I mentioned have been deployed in Romania and deployment has recently begun in Poland. This is what we are talking about, can you not see?

We are not threatening anyone. Have we approached US borders? Or the borders of Britain or any other country? It is you who have come to our border, and now you say that Ukraine will become a member of NATO as well. Or, even if it does not join NATO, that military bases and strike systems will be placed on its territory under bilateral agreements. This is the point.

And you are demanding guarantees from me. It is you who must give us guarantees, and you must do it immediately, right now, instead of talking about it for decades and doing what you want, while talking quietly about the need for security guarantees to everyone. This is the point. Are we threatening anyone?

Now to your second question. Repeat it, please.

Diana Magnay: What is it that you think that the West does not understand about Russia or about your intentions?

Vladimir Putin: Does the West understand or fail to understand something? You know, sometimes I get the feeling we live in different worlds. I just talked about things that are obvious. How can you not understand them? They told us: there will be no expansion, but they expanded. They promised us equal guarantees for all under several international treaties. But this equal security has failed to materialise.

Look, back in 1918, an aide to US President Woodrow Wilson said that it would be a relief for the entire world if instead of one huge Russia, that a separate state in Siberia and another four countries in the European part be created.

In 1991, we divided ourselves into 12, I believe, parts, and we did this ourselves. Still, it seems that this was not enough for our partners. They believe that Russia is too big as it is today. This is because the European countries themselves turned into small states. Instead of vast empires, they are now small states with 60 to 80 million people. However, even after the Soviet Union collapsed, and we were left with just 146 million, it is still too much for them. I believe that this is the only way to explain this unrelenting pressure.

Take the 1990s, for example. The Soviet Union did everything to build normal relations with the West and the United States. I have said this many times, and I will repeat it, so that your listeners and viewers understand. I do not recall what media outlet you represent, but this is not the point. We had representatives from American intelligence services at our nuclear, military facilities; monitoring Russia’s nuclear weapons sites was their job. They went there every day and even lived there. Many advisors, including CIA staffers, worked in the Russian Government.

What else did you need? Why did they have to support terrorists in the North Caucasus and use organisations of a clearly terrorist nature in attempts to break the Russian Federation apart? But they did this, and as former Director of the Federal Security Service, I know this all too well. We worked with double agents, and they reported to us on the objectives set for them by Western intelligence services. But why? They should have treated Russia as a potential ally, and made it stronger, but it all went in the opposite direction; they wanted to break it down even further.

And then they started expanding NATO eastwards. Of course, we told them not to do this, arguing that they promised not to. But they asked us: “Do you have any paper record? No? If not, go away, we don’t care about your concerns.” This continued year after year, every time we showed our teeth and tried to prevent something and voice our concerns. But no: they did not want to hear anything, saying that they would do what they considered necessary.

There were one, two, three, four, five – five waves of expansion. What is it they don’t understand? I don’t know. You can say that this is all abundantly clear. I do believe that it is clear as daylight: we want to ensure our security.

Dmitry Peskov: Regions. I see you, Kaluga.

Tatyana Zimushina: Good afternoon, I am Tatyana Zimushina from Kaluga Region, Nika TV.

I would like to go back to the topic of coronavirus. The danger this virus poses has already been mentioned here but other diseases have not vanished into thin air. Therefore, it is important to also think about regular healthcare. It is being affected by a shift towards designating more hospital beds for Covid patients, and there are also other restrictions. Regular healthcare is being cut and, judging by media reports in other regions, it was suspended altogether in some municipalities during the pandemic. Can we avoid this outcome? Or will we see more closures in the event of another serious new wave of the disease? Can this be rectified?

My second question is about post-Covid medical screening. It was announced last summer and it has also been launched in our region. Are you keeping track of it and are you being updated on its outcomes? Has this medical screening proved to be effective and did it help many people?

Vladimir Putin: As for regular healthcare, indeed, it was severely affected during the early stages of the coronavirus pandemic. But it was expected, as we had to modify some hospitals and clinics to free up beds for Covid-19 patients. This is my first point.

The second, as it was necessary to have enough healthcare professionals, or doctors, some of them had to undergo retraining, including general practitioners and specialists, to learn how to fight Covid-19. They were also in short supply.

Now, in connection with this, the scheme of referring patients for treatment had to be changed, that is, if some healthcare institutions switched to Covid treatment, patients were referred to other hospitals or clinics to make sure that routine medical care is provided without interruption. Some clinics ended up closing for good, while others closed for cleaning after treating Covid patients. There were quite a few problems.

During the initial phase there was a shortage of masks, medical gloves and the necessary clothing. This put an even greater strain on the healthcare system.

I hope we have dealt with all the challenges. I hope we will no longer have any shortages, although we recently had some issue with oxygen. But the Armed Forces and industry have helped us with this challenge. Once again, I hope that none of this will happen in the future.

Volunteers have joined us, university professors and senior students, too. On the whole, we have rallied together and got a grip, to be able to effectively respond to these threats.

One thing we focus on besides preventive measures is post-COVID rehabilitation. We have allocated the necessary resources. How is this work going? Unfortunately, not as efficiently as we would like. I don't remember whether I already said this or not – only 1 million Russians have taken advantage of this check-up system. This system should actually work steadily and systematically, unaffected by any COVID restrictions, difficulties or other challenges. But post-COVID rehabilitation, post-COVID check-ups are quite effective.

Here, too, there are certain difficulties and prejudices, maybe. People are often afraid to visit medical centres like this, afraid of new infections. I want to say that our specialists, doctors are doing everything they can to ensure the health safety of people who come in for rehabilitation, for a medical examination, as well as to provide help because people who have had COVID really need it very much. We all know that COVID hits all body systems – the vascular system, the internal organs – the heart, the kidneys, the liver and brain can be affected, so patients need rehabilitation. A very good system has been created and tested. I hope it will expand, I really do. The conditions have been created for this.

Dmitry Peskov: Let us continue. Channel One, please.

Pavel Krasnov: Thank you.

Pavel Krasnov, Channel One.

Mr President, the issue of gas is dominating minds, above all in Europe, of course. We are seeing an extremely acute gas crisis. However, when it broke out and prices soared, we started to hear endless accusations directed at Gazprom and Russia in general with ever increasing frequency. Another round of accusations on restricting supplies via the Yamal-Europe pipeline came the other day. Generally speaking, the accusations are contradictory: we are accused of monopolising the market, while also not supplying enough gas.

Yesterday, our Ukrainian neighbours made some news. Naftogaz again asked the European Commission for nothing less than to compel Gazprom to offer more gas for sale. This seems funny, of course, but the Europeans are not in a laughing mood. The situation in Europe is very difficult: gas prices set an absolute record – more than $2,000. This never happened before and was impossible to even imagine. But is Gazprom to blame for this?

Mr President, here is my question: is there at least a tiny grain of truth in these accusations against Gazprom?

Vladimir Putin: Certainly not. There is no truth to them. This is like trying to say that down is up.

Our colleague here asked what the West does not understand. They lie all the time. This is why they are muddying the waters. Gazprom supplies all the gas requested by our counterparties under their contracts. Moreover, it has even increased supplies by almost 12 percent, I think, or by about 20 percent if we exclude Russia’s immediate neighbours. Overall, it is increasing supplies to Europe as well.

In my opinion, this is the only country, the only global company that behaves like this. I have already said at many meetings, including international events, that American suppliers withdrew considerable amounts from Europe, from the European market, I believe. I think the total amounts to 14 million tonnes of LNG. They took it to premium markets, first to Latin America, to Brazil, and then to Asia: China, South Korea and Japan. Because they pay more for this gas. The Europeans thought they had premium markets, but no. It appears that these markets are in other places as well. Prices began to soar. There are many factors: bad weather, a long and cold spring last year, a shortage of gas in underground storage facilities and windmills failing to work. All this contributed to the shortage.

In the process, government authorities are harassing their oil and gas companies, which do not invest enough in expanding production as a result. This is how the shortage emerged. They did not pump enough gas into underground storage facilities and now they are taking it out in a big way. Of course, this is a problem. Now some Western operators are storing their gas in Ukraine’s underground facilities. They are actively withdrawing it and using it in their own countries. This is understandable since the gas from underground facilities is many times cheaper than on the market.

We were saying – and I want to repeat it – that there was no point in destroying long-term contracts. The European Commission was telling us: no, it is necessary to move to market relations, the market will set it right. This is how the market made its adjustment – over $2,000 for a thousand cubic metres. Take it. No!

You are correct, just yesterday they were shouting: help, this is Russia and Gazprom expanding and taking over the market. We are not taking over anything. Indeed, we supply a lot, but we are not the only suppliers to the European market. However, we are probably the only ones who are increasing our supplies.

We are being told to pump to cover the needs of the spot market, since they need to first meet the demand of their counterparties under long-term contracts.

Look at what is happening. Germany is our largest consumer in Europe. I might have my numbers off a little, but they take about 50–51 billion cubic metres a year. We supplied an extra 5.6 billion cubic metres there, which is more than 10 percent. Listen, this is a decent amount. We supplied an extra 4.4 billion cubic metres of natural gas to Italy.

You just mentioned the Yamal–Europe natural gas pipeline. I see Russia and Gazprom accused of Gazprom failing to book capacity for gas supplies to Europe via the Yamal–Europe route for the second or third day in a row. That is disgusting, how should I put it… Well, okay. This is just totally out of line. After all, it failed to book capacity, because its counterparties and companies, mostly German and French, who buy gas from this route, failed to submit bids for purchase. What is there to transit if Gazprom has not received purchase requests? What did they do then? They turned on this route in reverse mode and have been pumping gas from Germany to Poland for several days now.

I think everyone would find it interesting. Why? Because we supply gas to Germany under long-term contracts at prices that are three, four, six, or even seven times lower than on the spot market. Should you resell even 1 billion cubic metres of gas, you will make almost a billion dollars, 900 million plus. This is business. This is my first point.

They have stocked up on gas, having received from us 5.6 billion cubic metres on top of what is provided under long-term contracts, and are now reselling it. But there is more to it. After all, they are pumping gas in reverse mode, so how can it be supplied in the other direction? Gas cannot move in both directions in one pipe at the same time. So, they: a) failed to place an order; b) turned it on in reverse mode.

But this is only a portion of the information.

There is a connecting pipe that connects the Polish pipeline system with the Ukrainian system. The volume is about 3 million cubic metres per day. This is exactly the amount that Germany is supplying to Poland. I have every reason to believe that this gas is eventually supplied to Ukraine. Consumers in Europe and Germany should know what is really happening, and, perhaps, ask certain authorities to clarify their stance.

Instead of supplying gas to Poland and then to Ukraine in an effort to help someone tide over, it would be better to continue supplies to Europe, Germany, for instance, and to reduce the spot price, because the more product on the market, the lower the price. No, they began to pump in reverse. This is the problem. How is Gazprom involved in this?

So let them tend to their business and address their issues in time and not think that they are so smart and that God fell asleep on them. They should address the problems of their own making, and we are willing to help them do so, which is what we are doing. I think I just made a convincing case for it.

Dmitry Peskov: Let us continue in this sector.

Mir Channel, please.

Guzel Kamayeva: Good afternoon, Mr President. Good afternoon, colleagues.

Guzel Kamayeva, Mir Television and Radio Company.

Mr President, your meeting with the President of Belarus is scheduled for the end of this year. You are going to meet for the sixth time this year.

When will the citizens of Russia and Belarus feel some tangible results of the Union State roadmap? Free mobile roaming maybe, a unified document flow, as an option?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: We actually have a long list of cooperation options to bring our economies closer together and to make them more competitive. There is more than just roaming, although it definitely should be on the agenda. I certainly agree with you – people should actually feel the changes.

But we have already done a lot, especially on social matters. I am referring to free movement, the labour market situation, and even social security in a number of areas.

At present, we are trying to synchronise taxes, customs procedures, and laws. This is extremely important to ensure a uniform understanding of how we should work together to achieve the best result. These are, in fact, fundamental things – the fiscal policy, laws and customs.

It has been a long and difficult process of coordinating our approaches. I must say that Mr Lukashenko and his entire team are not easy negotiators, but we have generally reached an understanding of the pace we should move at and the steps we should take in this direction. This concerns access to the procurement market for goods and services organised by the state, by Belarusian economic operators. This concerns transport and many other matters.

Therefore, I am sure that our citizens will feel it, feel the impact on their lives. You know, it is not going to just fall from the sky, like manna from heaven, all of a sudden. But there are obvious things that ensure our competitiveness.

We are building the Union State. But the level of integration is still far lower than in the European Union; it is simply incomparable. I am not even talking about a single currency, never mind that. Perhaps it will be a subject for the future if our respective economic services come to an agreement on this score.

But first, we need to synchronise our economic laws including antimonopoly laws, and tax and customs regulations. We have agreed on this; we have agreed, and now we will start working. I am sure that there will be results.

I see a sign that says “Rubbish.” It is such a mundane thing but it concerns millions of people, and we should talk about things that people are concerned about.

Kristina Burmakina: Good afternoon, Mr President,

Good afternoon, colleagues,

Kristina Burmakina, Online47, Leningrad Region.

Here is my question. The Leningrad Region is actively reforming its waste management system: local officials are shutting down landfills and selecting sites for waste recycling facilities. But there is a problem: the same activists who advocated shutting down landfills are now protesting against recycling plants. Whatever spot you show them on the map, they will say: “Anywhere else, on the Moon – but not here.”

So the question is: how can we persuade people and what should be our communication strategy?

Vladimir Putin: You should address this question to the governor of the Leningrad Region.

I want to say that overall, the so-called rubbish reform is moving forward, despite the difficulties. Of course, the main goal is to resolve this issue in general but one of the essential midway tasks is to set up operators. By now, they have been set up in almost every Russian region. They are operating and the number of sites has increased multiple times over.

One of the first steps was to ensure that different types of waste are collected and stored separately. In some regions, we are ahead of schedule on this task. The current progress is around 40 percent, according to the reports I have. This is ahead of schedule.

The same goes for waste recycling facilities. The same goes for new modern landfills. Rubbish has to be disposed of somehow. There are options such as recycling, burning and other methods of disposal. There is waste that is impossible to destroy at this point so it has to be kept in landfills – but these should be modern landfills that are properly equipped and are located far away from residential areas. We are working on all these options and working fast, ahead of schedule. It is not a bad result.

Of course, there is always the issue of explaining to people that building waste management facilities is a reasonable solution for economic and environmental considerations. We need to show people how these facilities operate. Modern waste recycling facilities do not have to be located far from St Petersburg or major residential areas in the Leningrad Region. They can be located in big cities. Take Japan, for example: their waste recycling plants are located in the middle of cities with millions of residents, with hardly any negative impact on the environment or living conditions.

We simply need to show this. Instead of doing it on the sly, explain it to people beforehand. There may be other advantages to it like more jobs and higher wages. This is the way to go and the way to reach consensus.

Dmitry Peskov: Let us hear from Volgograd, the very top.

Vladimir Putin: Wait, I see the FSIN [Federal Penitentiary Service] sign here. Let that lady have the microphone.

Kseniya Sobchak: Mr President, after it was published…

Dmitry Peskov: Please introduce yourself.

Kseniya Sobchak: Kseniya Sobchak, Ostorozhno Novosti.

Vladimir Putin: I cannot see you; you are too far away.

Kseniya Sobchak: That is why I am wearing red.

Vladimir Putin: Fine. Go ahead.

Kseniya Sobchak: After the Gulagu.net website made the archives of torture public, you fired the head of the Federal Penitentiary Service by executive order. My team and I have just returned from Irkutsk. We continue following the video archives, and people there are talking a lot about General Leonid Sagalakov, who is the head of the regional FSIN.

He was promoted to general not long ago. Clearly, you sign lots of executive orders like that, but I would like to know if you are getting objective information about these people? Because there is much evidence that this person took part in the torture, according to available testimony. Here, too, it is important who is bringing you files to build a case for promotion.

More recently, a draft law was introduced to the State Duma to expand the notion of “torture” and toughen punishment for practicing it. Mr Peskov has already said, I quote: “No presidential initiative is anticipated with regard to this draft law.” What does that mean? Do you agree that torture in Russian prisons has become systemic? How can we deal with this state of affairs?

You have seen or have been shown for certain or were told about these video archives. Do you have your own personal and emotional attitude towards this problem? The number of inmates who have been raped or tortured to death is high, more than 300 people at the most heinous SIZO-1 detention centre in Irkutsk alone.

The law enforcement officers whom we communicated with told us there are different ways to overcome this problem, one of which is to strip the pre-trial detention centres of the preliminary investigation function, because they are just torture chambers with developers assigned to them. The developers are people who should be convicted on serious felony charges, but have been instead making a home at these pre-trial detention centres for years and engaging in torturing inmates. Each of these torture chambers is assigned to a particular department in order to improve crime solving statistics from the Investigative Committee and so on.

Tell us about this; what will be done and will you personally supervise this issue?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Regarding torture and, in general, degrading and cruel treatment of inmates, unfortunately, this is not just Russia’s problem. If you look at what is going on at correctional facilities in other countries, you will see that they have as many problems as we do. This is a worldwide problem. Probably, there are countries and facilities where things look problem-free. However, there are lots of facilities in Europe, France, for example, or the United States, which, I think, do not exist even in third world countries. This is my first point.

Second, we are talking about developing the penitentiary system and the construction of new facilities. Take the Kresty prison in the Leningrad Region; we did build new blocks. Incidentally, this was done, in part, after I visited it – a long time ago though – and issued instructions. This must be done, because even the exterior of prisons is important.

As for the essence of the question, what information am I using? I use information from various sources. Not that someone brings me a document that makes me happy and I sign it. No, I analyse proposals like this based on the information that comes from different sources – I would like to emphasise this, after which I put my signature on it.

Are mistakes possible? Yes, it happens sometimes; life is complicated and diverse, and nothing can change this. But in this case, and considering what you have told us, the assessment of this situation must be based on information acquired during an investigation. Seventeen criminal cases have been opened and are being investigated. You have mentioned one or two persons, but I believe that over a dozen people have been fired and are being investigated. Let us look into the matter and figure it out.

I can assure you that not a single investigator has a personal interest in that case. This is the reason we separated the Investigative Committee from the Prosecutor’s Office. They are not connected, these two organisations, let alone prisons, which are subordinate to the Justice Ministry, not even the Interior Ministry, although it has been said many times that the penitentiary system should return to its old place to ensure effective investigations.

Yes, there is a problem. We should work at it calmly with a scrupulous and comprehensive investigation, at least an investigation of crimes that have been committed, and what we are talking about is definitely a crime. And the investigation must be brought to its logical conclusion, so that everyone can see that punishment for such crimes is inevitable. I believe that in this case we can reach a positive result.

Of course, we must also use the capabilities of human rights organisations. These questions are always raised during my meetings with members of the Human Rights Council, and I try to respond to them accordingly. This includes prison conditions, healthcare in prisons, and treatment of inmates.

I would like to point out once again that of course, people in prisons are criminals, and the inmates in pretrial detention centres are suspected of having committed crimes, but they are Russian citizens, they are human beings and must be treated humanely.

Let’s work together to improve this situation.

Dmitry Peskov: This is to remind everyone that it is probably time to replace your facemasks. Let us follow doctors’ recommendations and replace our masks.

Ekho Moskvy, please.

Maxim Kurnikov: Maxim Kurnikov, Ekho Moskvy.

Mr President, I would like to continue with the topic that my colleague from Sky News began. She asked for some guarantees, and you said we would not give any guarantees. But you have already spoken with Biden several times, at least twice, as far as we know, and I want to understand how you see this situation. Do you have the same vision for the future of Donbass, and the future of the Minsk agreements? Because when later we hear statements from the White House, and statements from Mr Peskov, it sounds as if many things coincide, or seems to coincide, and yet the word ‘war’ is heard increasingly often.

Here we are, discussing the possibility of war. But at this very moment, Ukrainians are probably watching us and spitting at the screen, because war already came to their land in 2014, and they actually hold you and me responsible for it. They might not be aware of the details of who issues which orders, but they actually believe Russia is already at war with Ukraine.

You refused to give guarantees. How do you see it?

I received calls from listeners the day before yesterday, and we talked about how their families were discussing a possible war with Ukraine. And actually, it is shocking enough just to say the words. How do these thoughts appear inside your head, what do you think about this, is it possible? How can one give an order to a Russian soldier to shoot at a Ukrainian one, and vice versa?

And one more short remark. There are people who could not attend this news conference, and my colleague from Novaya Gazeta, Dmitry Muratov, a Nobel prize winner, gave me a question for you. I will read it out, so as not to miss a single word: “Mr President, do you personally know the names of those who ordered the murders of Politkovskaya and Nemtsov?”

Vladimir Putin: Let us start with the last part. I made every effort to see these cases solved; all the necessary instructions, directives and orders were given to every law enforcement and special service. As you know, people have been convicted and incarcerated for the crimes they have committed. Some say they are contractors, not the employers – the latter got left out of the equation, went into hiding or were given shelter, but investigative bodies have no knowledge of this. They have made every effort to expose the perpetrators of these crimes, and some of them died while being apprehended. I think you are aware of this.

And in general, I think that this score-settling is not just unacceptable, it does nothing but harm our country. So, I am absolutely sure that, even if there were some political motives, that can also be accommodated in the minds of those who do not understand what they are doing. But they must understand that the state will fight this kind of crime. We will continue doing everything within our power. If it was really ordered by someone that we do not know about, we will look for them. This is my first point.

Now, the first part of your question, the future of Donbass. The future of Donbass must be determined by the people who live in Donbass. There is no other way. We see ourselves as mediators for creating the best conditions in which the local population can determine its own future. Are there problems? Yes, because, according to the Minsk agreements, Russia is to act as a mediator but somebody else wants to make us a party to this conflict. There is no such provision in the Minsk agreements and it is not something we agreed to.

Speaking about those who may be spitting at the screen while watching this or any other event, there will always be people to spit at the screen, whether it is showing today’s event or what is happening in Ukraine: horrible poverty and the prospect of a harsh winter. When Verkhovna Rada deputies visit regions, they meet pensioners who ask them: “Why are you killing us?” Of course, they spit at the TV when they hear the bragging of the current Kiev regime. No matter the cause, there will always be people who spit, on both sides.

How can someone issue orders to shoot? You should ask the political leaders of Ukraine how they bring themselves to issue orders to fire on Donbass every single day.

You know, some time ago we reached agreement that only senior officials, all the way up to the relevant ministries, are allowed to issue orders to retaliate if either party fires. In one case it is Donetsk and Lugansk, and in another it is Kiev.

Why that decision? To make sure that attacks cease. The Kiev officials later back-pedalled and authorised field commanders to issue this kind of order. The shooting resumed. Ask them why they did that and how they brought themselves to issue orders to shoot at their own citizens since they consider Donbass residents Ukrainian citizens? Their own citizens. Not some other country.

As for the future, the Minsk agreements state that the Ukrainian Constitution must be amended to grant these regions autonomy, to hold elections and grant amnesty. As I said, what do we see in the draft law on transition period? A military government instead of elections. Lustration instead of amnesty. Returning troops to their permanent bases instead of elections and political solutions to political issues. This is the reality. What does it mean, returning troops to their permanent bases? It means sending troops to the territory without any political process or elections.

Look, as I have already said, there is a requirement in the Minsk Agreements to amend the Constitution. Where are these amendments? It is written there that these amendments must be coordinated with the representatives of the LPR and the DPR. They must be coordinated. I remember this perfectly well because I took part in drafting these solutions. Far from coordinating anything or making any proposals on amending the Constitution, they are refusing pointblank even to talk with Donbass representatives, although when these agreements were signed in Minsk, they insisted that Donbass representatives sign this document. And they did. Frankly, they were refusing to sign it. We had to talk to them to persuade them to do it. They did but now nobody is even talking to them. They are called terrorists and any possibility of talking with them is rejected. Can you explain why? Because instead of responding to the call for peace in Ukrainian society, which Zelensky exploited to come to power, he chose not to keep his promises, having fallen, like previous leaders, under the influence of radical elements that are called “natsi’ in Ukraine.

What is the problem for us? I think I have said about Donbass. We want to build friendly relations with Ukraine, moreover, we want to achieve this at any cost and will go to practically any lengths. But how is it possible to develop relations with the current leaders, considering what they are doing? It is practically impossible.

However, we are ready to work with those who would like to develop relations with Russia in the spirit of friendship. What is happening with these forces? Extrajudicial executions, sanctions against Ukrainian nationals in violation of Ukrainian law and Constitution, or simply killings in the street. Nobody is looking for the murderers.

You just asked me about murders that sadly took place in our country. You asked, where are those who ordered the contract killing? People are in prison. Whether they ordered it or not, they are in prison in any event. And what happens there? If a murder takes place in the street, nobody searches for the culprit at all. People were burned alive in the Trade Union House in Odessa – has anyone lifted a finger to find the criminals? Not in the least.

In other words, we do not have any chance of working with those people who want to move relations forward. The people who want to work with us are being destroyed – this is the gist of the problem.

Now about my agreements with President Biden. Yes, I have already said that he suggested appointing official representatives for discussing strategic stability issues including our concerns over the growing threat from Ukraine. He made an offer, we countered, and I think it was a very constructive and quick deal. Incidentally, I told him during our conversation: I promise you that we will send you our proposals in the near future. And we did this, we sent them to both the United States and NATO. We are ready to discuss them at the OSCE platform as well. I hope this first positive reaction and the announcement that work will begin shortly, in the first days of January, will allow us to move forward.

Dmitry Peskov: Moving on to the central section…

Vladimir Putin: Can you put it there? Lift it: “Tatars,” right?

Go ahead, please.

Kirill Shlykov: Good afternoon, Mr President!

Vladimir Putin: Good afternoon.

Kirill Shlykov: Kirill Shlykov, KazanFirst internet publication, city of Kazan, Republic of Tatarstan.

Like many other regions of Russia, Tatarstan has a programme to allocate plots of lands for families with many children – I am sure you know about it. The programme is working, plots are allotted, and everything is going well with this.

But now it is necessary to develop these areas. They need hospitals, kindergartens, schools and roads. Families with many children are eager to have a separate federal programme that would provide for the development of these areas because, unfortunately, the regions do not have enough funds for developing these “villages with many children.”

Maybe, it is worth drafting a separate federal programme, a subprogramme under a national project? Is it possible to do this? What do you as President, as the head of state, plan to do for developing the programme on allocating plots to families with many children and providing facilities for these areas?

Thank you very much.

Vladimir Putin: You raised a very important question, Kirill.

I said in the very beginning that we allocate huge funds for developing infrastructure. It is simply necessary to include these requirements in the projects you have just mentioned and in the infrastructure development projects for the surrounding areas.

I made a note for myself and I will certainly set this task for the Government and the regions, so that the regions submit their applications for the development of the regional road network among other things. For the time being, the level of the regional road network is below that of the federal network. I am referring to its compliance with standards.

But we have plans, for every year, on how we should bring these roads in line with standards. All this is supported by funding, and it is only necessary to tie in the problem you mentioned with our development plans. I will certainly raise this issue before the Government.

Thank you for telling me about this. You are absolutely right.

Kirill Shlykov: Yes, thank you, Mr President because society…

Colleagues, just a minute. I wanted to add that the army of families with many children is a big part of society.

Vladimir Putin: I understand.

Kirill Shlykov: We tell our audience about them and write about them all the time. They are raising these problems. They say practically every day that the state is giving them plots but, unfortunately, without developing the surrounding area.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, I understand.

These 500 billion that have now been allocated for developing infrastructure, plus another 460 billion under national projects and plus the money from the National Welfare Fund must not be just spent but used for comprehensive solutions, including support for families with many children.

I made a note for myself. This is absolutely correct. I fully agree with you.

Kirill Shlykov: Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Can you move further up? Some of our colleagues are sitting far up, I cannot even see them.

Dmitry Peskov: Let us go to the back row. Volgograd is here, correct? Raise it higher, it is a dark red sign.

Go ahead.

Anna Korokhova: Good afternoon, Mr President,

My name is Anna Korokhova, Volgograd municipal television.

Our hero city is a major centre for patriotic education. You have repeatedly focused on the significance of the Battle of Stalingrad, the need to preserve historical memory, and the exploits of our ancestors during the Great Patriotic War. Preservation of memorials is an important part of this work.

The Motherland is Calling sculpture on Mamayev Kurgan had been renovated in time for the 75^th anniversary of Victory. However, many sites at Mamayev Kurgan need attention badly, including the Battle of Stalingrad Museum-Reserve and its sites.

Is it possible, in the lead up to the 80^th anniversary of Victory in the Great Patriotic War, to receive federal support in order to renovate these sites?

One more question, if I may. It is really important. It is about an exoskeleton. The Volgograd researchers have developed Ekzar-34 – an exoskeleton that helps with rehabilitation of patients with severe musculoskeletal disorders.

I will give you an example. Alexandra Agafonova, a person with a Group I disability, was struggling with congenital arthrogryposis for a very long time. She was even unable to hold a spoon. She is now a four-time Paralympic Swimming World Champion. People came to us for rehabilitation from other Russian regions and foreign countries. Unfortunately, it is very difficult to organise this work locally.

We would like to ask you to help us create the first all-Russian centre for building endoprostheses in the Volgograd Region.

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Let us start with your last question. Of course, we need to give it some thought. After all, we have programmes that provide people with disabilities with the necessary technical devices, and money is allocated to this end. Of course, the most effective, modern and expensive equipment must be purchased, and it is being purchased also from abroad.

I am absolutely sure that the people you mentioned and their invention, of course, are priced several times lower than the equipment that is purchased abroad. If it is as effective as you are saying, I will definitely let the Government know about this and we will see where it goes from there. First, we will see how to support them additionally and review the possibility of creating this centre. I am sure you understand that I cannot say right off the bat whether we need this centre or not. They do already have something that allows them to work, they have already done it.

If it is so effective, support can be provided in different ways and in different areas, including by providing support to small and medium-sized businesses, under social policy projects and through supporting people with disabilities. Different tools can be used here. I will issue an instruction to think about which of these tools can be used in order to support them. This covers your first question.

Second, federal support for cultural sites. Of course, in the run-up to important dates such as this, even more so in Volgograd, we should focus on the monuments that you mentioned. I made a note for myself.

We are providing this kind of support, I have no doubt that it is being provided in Volgograd as well, but I will double check it. If this is not enough and if something extra needs to be done in time for these significant dates, we will, of course, do it.

Dmitry Peskov: I saw Mari El.

Anastasia Petrova: Thank you.

Good afternoon, Mr President, colleagues.

My name is Anastasia Petrova and I represent the Republic of Mari El, the Mariyskaya Pravda (Mari Truth) newspaper.

Mr President, you suggested declaring 2022 the Year of Folk Art and Non-Material National Heritage. The Republic of Mari El is a multinational region where many talented people, like in many other regions of the Federation, are developing our culture. Our newspaper, Mariyskaya Pravda, regularly writes about them. By the way, it is among Russia’s top ten newspapers this year.

Here is my question. Mr President, do you think it is worth drafting and adopting some support measures in the law on folk crafts so that the development of folk art is supported on a regular, permanent basis?

And one more thing. I hope the administration and my editor-in-chief forgive me, but for the first time in 20 years I am asking you a question and am very happy about it. I will allow myself a small personal request.

Mr President, you know that the train from Yoshkar-Ola goes only to Moscow. I took the train yesterday at 7.26 pm, which is the only one, to come to the news conference today. It would be great if we could travel from Yoshkar-Ola to Nizhny Novgorod, Samara or Vladimir. You know, I went to Nizhny Novgorod in May. I do not have a car so I ordered BlaBlaCar and received fake links asking me to transfer the money. I am from the younger generation and I understand that customers of this service can be scammed. Unfortunately, older people who would like to go to Nizhny Novgorod or Vladimir from Yoshkar-Ola may get scammed into sending money. Maybe it is worth expanding the railway to make it possible to go from Yoshkar-Ola not only to Moscow but also to Nizhny Novgorod and Vladimir, as I have already said.

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Anastasia, I will surely talk today or tomorrow to Mr Belozerov, the head of Russian Railways, and he will definitely be instructed to look into the connectivity of these neighbouring areas.

Naturally, every company including Russian Railways works in market conditions, always looking at the economic component: will there be enough passengers. But I agree with you that if nothing is done, nothing will change, so let them try it. I am sure he will hear me, it is not even necessary to call him but I will call him nonetheless and talk with him. We will see what can be done. I hope that it will be possible to do something about this. Given the vast expanses of our country, the issue of connectivity is very important for Russia for both economic and individual reasons.

Now about folk crafts. I think we have still made a number of decisions recently concerning training for those who are involved in folk crafts and want to continue working in that field. That said, I have to agree that we have not done enough. After all, Mari El and other adjacent republics are unique in their own way. I remember my visit there. I looked at how people lived there, using all they inherited from previous generations, and how careful they were with all of it. Of course, it always evokes a desire to support all this.

You know, I made a note for myself and we will try to do what can be done additionally. Thank you for raising this issue. This is very important for our diverse multi-ethnic country. It is extremely important to support the languages and cultures, the authentic cultures of the peoples of Russia.

Dmitry Peskov: We should not forget those who do not have signs. Please, young man, go ahead but, first, introduce yourself.

Artem Vilovatykh: Hello, Mr President.

Artem Vilovatykh, Krasny Sever newspaper, Vologda Region.

I have the following question: you know that the Vologda Region is the homeland of Father Frost. Of course, you have been to Veliky Ustyug. Yesterday, a resident of St Petersburg sued our Father Frost for failing to grant his wishes over the previous 23 years.

Mr President, what do you think about how some of our compatriots recently seem willing to use any topic to gain public attention, or, as they say now, hype themselves. This is my first question.

Accordingly, my next question is about your relationship with Father Frost. Does he grant your wishes? Do you have New Year wishes this year?

We are going to celebrate the New Year before long, so it is time for a funny and light-hearted question.

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Is this an adult person?

Artem Vilovatykh: He is a lawyer from St Petersburg. If he says Father Frost has failed to grant his wishes for 23 years, he must be quite grown up.

Vladimir Putin: He is a lawyer from St Petersburg, an adult. I am also a lawyer from St Petersburg – there are some similarities.

What can I say about this? Here is how I would answer: since I am also a lawyer, I can act as Father Frost’s legal counsel and remind the plaintiff that Father Frost only grants wishes of and gives presents to good girls and boys. He should take a look at his behaviour and he might find out what is keeping Father Frost from lavishing New Year gifts on him. That would be the main line of defence.

As for hype, what is most important is that it is not for wicked reasons. As long as there is a dash or element of good humour, there is nothing bad about it.

Artem Vilovatykh: Still, what about your relationship with Father Frost? Does he grant your wishes?

Vladimir Putin: So far, we have maintained cordial relations and I am grateful to him for the opportunity to meet with you today in my current role. I am even more grateful to the people of the Russian Federation for entrusting me with this high office. Hopefully, Father Frost will not only give presents to each of us but, most importantly, make sure that the plans of the whole country and every citizen of the Russian Federation are realised.

Artem Vilovatykh: Thank you.

Dmitry Peskov: Rossiya 24.

Vladimir Putin: Excuse me, Mr Peskov, it is clear that Rossiya 24 is always on duty, but I see a girl holding a poster saying “Relocation.” It is always a painful issue.

Darya Shuchalina: Good afternoon, Mr President, colleagues.

I am Darya Shuchalina from Syktyvkar, the Republic of Komi. I represent the newspaper Panorama Stolitsy. I have been a social activist for 11 years. I am head of the Housing and Utilities Control centre in Komi too, and I am also a journalist.

One of the issues people bring to me has to do with relocation from dilapidated housing.

I would like to use this occasion to express gratitude to you, because our country has accumulated unique experience of using budgetary funds to finance this method of settling our people’s housing problems.

Vladimir Putin: I think no other country is doing this.

Darya Shuchalina: Yes, this is true.

A second nationwide programme is underway now for all regions.

First of all, I have a proposal for you. Mr President, we are asking you to consider the possibility of extending this programme. The current programme was launched in 2019 for five years. If possible, we suggest that its funding should not be reduced, because more houses are being identified as dangerous every year simultaneously with the relocation of people from dilapidated buildings. In other words, our housing stock is becoming dilapidated even despite major repairs. This is our proposal.

As for the question, I would like to ask your opinion of relocation conditions set by the federal centre for the regions. Do you think they are achieving the desired result? Will you tighten or simplify them? We would like to ask you to pay special attention to relations between relocated people and banks, because many people took out mortgages to buy flats in the houses that have been declared substandard, and it is not always possible for them to coordinate reduced lease payments with the banks or to find some other solution.

Vladimir Putin: Just a minute, what do mortgages have to do with this? What is the connection between relocation from dilapidated houses and mortgages?

Darya Shuchalina: Many people bought their housing with mortgage financing several years ago, and it has recently been declared substandard. This means that until the next programme is adopted, if it is adopted, they will have to continue making mortgage payments while living in dilapidated housing. They do not understand what to do with their flats, which cannot be sold, because they have to wait until the next relocation programme, and in the meantime, they will have to pay off their mortgages to the banks. Very many people are concerned about this detail.

A large-scale inspection of housing was held this year, because our municipal authorities have been inspired by the first two programmes. This took place not only in the Republic of Komi. I have talked with my colleagues in other regions, who said that all municipal authorities inspected their housing stock to identify substandard houses, mostly wooden ones. But they will not be included in the current programme, which only covers houses that were declared dilapidated prior to January 1, 2017.

Therefore, we are pinning our hopes on a new programme, which would include the houses that have been declared substandard this year. At the same time, we need to settle the problem of people with mortgage flats, which are their only housing.

Vladimir Putin: Indeed, our first programme focused on the housing that was recognised substandard until a particular time period, and then recognised as substandard prior to January 1, 2017. I have mentioned this many times before and I will say it again: we must get people out of this situation and out of the slums they are living in now.

Flats or houses that had been bought with a mortgage and were later recognised as dilapidated housing are a special case. This is about bad construction quality. We need to decide what to do with the builders, the construction oversight authorities, and so on. But, of course, we need to help people as well.

In this regard, the first question is about joint participation in this work and co-financing by the regions. I understand that the regions prefer to minimise their share of participation, this is understandable, and to have the federal budget assume the bulk of expenses. We need to look at this depending on the region and the financial circumstances of a particular region. In the grand scheme of things, people do not care much about relations between the Finance Ministry and the corresponding regional financial body. They need to have the problem solved. The state power, if it claims to be called such, must, first of all, be guided by this super goal which is to meet the people’s interests. Of course, we will be setting this mechanism up, bearing in mind that the regions’ financial capabilities are growing, and the regional budgets’ revenues are up significantly. The Finance Ministry has these numbers. So, our efforts will be grounded in the actual state of affairs.

Anyway, I will bring this to their attention. We are dealing with it all the time, believe me, we are watching it all the time and discuss it in the Government. Your question is a reason to revisit this issue. We will definitely discuss this issue and give it a thought.

It is necessary, of course, to look into the situation where people live in hazardous flats they have bought with a mortgage. I do not have an answer to that right now, but we will look for one. If this problem exists, we will look for an answer. Frankly, this is the first time I have heard this. I have always thought that dilapidated housing is about buildings dating back many years, to the 1950s, which are crumbling and people need to be relocated from these slums as soon as possible. However, if the problem exists, we will look into it.

The most important part of your question is whether these programmes will continue, that is, will housing be recognised as substandard after January 1, 2017, and will the appropriate fund be allocated? The answer is yes. A programme to this end is being drafted.

Dmitry Peskov: Mr President, Rossiya 24.

Vladimir Putin: Let us take Spas TV first.

Sorry, Rossiya 24 will go next. All right?

Dmitry Peskov: Rossiya 24 will go next.

Veronika Ivashchenko: Good afternoon.

My name is Veronika Ivashchenko, Spas TV channel.

Here is my question. Mr President, you started talking about demographics today, specifically, about large families.

The question is, we all know that demographics are the biggest unsolved problem with Russians. Why? Because at this point Russia no longer wants to have children. Living standards are going up, everything is fine, things are good outwardly, but for some reason, people decide against having children, and if we look at divorce statistics, we can see they have also forgotten how to build relationships.

What do you think the reasons are? These ailments, one might say, are not of economic, but of spiritual nature. This is something we used to be proud of, my great-grandparents had seven to ten children, I mean, in my family, we have always had many children and we have always respected the traditions of a strong family. What measures could be taken, apart from economic ones, such as the maternity capital and other benefits – what measures do you think could help change this situation? Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: You mentioned the Russian tradition of having large families. I can tell you that both my parents also come from large families, and their parents' families had many children, nine to ten, both boys and girls. Incidentally, almost all of them – not all, but nearly all – perished during the Great Patriotic War. That was a huge tragedy and a crushing blow to our demographics.

As a reminder, Russia suffered one demographic gap in 1943–1944 and another in 1991, after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Why? Because the planning horizon narrowed dramatically, and oddly enough, in 1991, after the collapse of the USSR, people apparently had the same sentiment as during the Great Patriotic War. The family planning horizon narrowed to a few days, and this is what happened.

As for Russia no longer wanting to have children or not knowing how, we recorded far more births in 2004 and 2006 than in 1991, and later too, the birth rate began to grow. And, prosaic as this might sound, that had to do with an improvement of the economic situation and the expansion of the planning horizon.

Getting children on their feet is no easy business and quite a challenge from a financial standpoint. It is for this reason that in everything we do, including during the pandemic, we seek to support families with children. I already mentioned this at the beginning, and I would like to say it one more time. I will not repeat everything, because there is even more to it: our objective is to develop an entire motherhood and childhood support framework for accompanying children from the moment they are born right until they graduate from school. This must be done soon, next year and the following years.

We will enact the relevant support measures at every stage. They already exist, but there are certain age gaps. We will bridge them within the next 18 months. I do hope that this will play a positive role in terms of improving the demographic situation.

Of course, there are also delicate issues that lie far below the surface and are hard to understand at first sight. In fact, all post-industrial nations face the same demographic problem. Just look at Europe: it is the same everywhere. What is causing this? It is not that people are not interested, but they, including women of childbearing age, have other priorities: education, post-graduate education, careers, and only then kids, but by then they are already 30 years old. There is hardly any time left for the second child. This is a general trend, and quite a delicate issue. Demographers study this professionally and have been working on this subject their entire lives, but even they lack definitive and clear answers to these questions. This is how things stand, more or less.

As for the spiritual side of the question, you are right of course that careers and wellbeing are important, but we need to drive home the message that the happiness and the joy of fatherhood and motherhood are more important than the financial wellbeing you may enjoy today. We need to impress this on the people gradually and calmly, without imposing anything on anyone.

Let me reiterate that we must refrain from imposing anything on anyone, but we still need to give positive publicity to the idea of a large, friendly, good-spirited, and beautiful family, and show that happiness is about having children, in order to convince people that there is nothing in the world or in life that can bring more happiness. However, this requires a creative, talented approach that must also be eye-catching and sophisticated. This effort must include the mass media, artists and NGOs. We need to offer financial support to people who decide to have children. Let us all come together and move in this direction.

There is a young lady raising a poster with the word “Pain” on it. What happened?

Asya Gukasyan: Good afternoon,

Asya Gukasyan. Tivikom TV and Radio. Republic of Buryatia.

There is a very urgent issue in our region. Our infectious disease hospital is in a very bad shape. It is 80 years old and has undergone major repairs only once. It has only about 200 beds and now during the pandemic the problems have become even more pressing. This is why we decided to ask you for help. We need a new building. Both the Republic and municipal authorities are working on this problem and have already found a site for a new building but, unfortunately, construction is very expensive. Our Republic’s budget does not have such funds for this.

Vladimir Putin: This is Buryatia?

Asya Gukasyan: Yes, Buryatia.

Vladimir Putin: The money is, of course, there but it is always tempting to save it. Well, your bosses did the right thing by prompting you to ask this question. I promise you that I will certainly look into what can be done to resolve this issue. It is a very pressing one and is connected not just with the current pandemic but with potential future events.

In previous years, when everything was fine, we withdrew some funding from this sector of healthcare and many things were ruined. But I will certainly look into it and try to respond.

Thank you very much.

Asya Gukasyan: May I ask you one question? We had a big utility accident in Ulan-Ude, the capital of Buryatia, recently. You probably heard about it – a fire at a heat and power station. I can give the floor to my colleague with your permission. She would like to talk about this problem.

Vladimir Putin: In other words, you want to replace Mr Peskov? All right, go ahead, be the press secretary.

Bayarma Radnayeva: Sain baina, Mr President,

Sain baina, colleagues. Hello!

Vladimir Putin: Good afternoon!

Bayarma Radnayeva: My name is Bayarma Radnayeva, Buryad TV.

The problem is that we had a utility accident in Ulan-Ude at 3 am. There was a fire at a heat and power station and almost half the city’s population was left without hot water and heating. Now we are counting the losses. But we already know that major repairs are ahead, and it is likely that there will not be enough funds for that. The administration of our region is asking for help in resolving this problem.

And I have one more question. There was a recent discussion about Baikal becoming a special federal territory. We already have an example of the Tunka National Park where local residents have constant problems with legalizing their land and other issues with life-sustaining activities. Is there any news on the fate of Baikal? Will it become a federal territory? Will Baikal ‘move’ further away from the residents of Buryatia in this sense?

Thank you very much.

Vladimir Putin: As for the heat and power station, we will look into what is going on there. I promise you we will close this issue right now. After the news conference, I will find out what is happening there and what assistance is required. This is the first point.

As for Baikal, I have not even heard of it becoming a federal territory or that this is being discussed. I would like to emphasise that in any case it will not be less accessible to the people. If somebody has raised this idea (frankly, I am hearing about it for the first time) they are certainly referring to the allocation of additional funding, or a way to allocate funds to preserve Lake Baikal’s unique ecosystem. That’s it. The goal is to develop economic activity without interfering with anyone’s life and help people organise their life and work there.

I would like to emphasise that if those who live near Baikal have any doubts they should forget about them. They should have no apprehensions. There is only one reason to raise this issue – to help preserve the unique ecosystem of Lake Baikal and to assist the people who live there.

Let's go to the back rows again. Mr Peskov, can you see anyone there?

Dmitry Peskov: I can. Raise the blue poster higher.

Go ahead.

Indira Asanova: Good afternoon, Mr President, colleagues.

Indira Begaydar, Kazakhstan TV channel.

Mr President, which items on the regional and international agendas will Russia prioritise in the near future in its dialogue with Kazakhstan?

As far as we know, this year you planned a visit to Kazakhstan, which did not take place due to the unfavourable epidemiological situation. Are you planning to visit our country next year?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Here is what I would like to say. Kazakhstan is one of our closest allies. We have a unique relationship with Kazakhstan which was laid down by its First President Nursultan Nazarbayev, and the new President [Kassym-Jomart Tokayev], with whom I have very close and friendly relations, picked up these policies and maintains the quality of our relations.

Indeed, the pandemic prevented Kazakhstan from carrying out the planned activities, but I hope that the President of Kazakhstan and the First President of Kazakhstan will accept my invitation and come to St Petersburg next week for the traditional, informal meeting of the EAEU and CSTO member states. I am very much counting on this, and the leadership of Kazakhstan has preliminarily accepted the invitation.

Our cooperation focuses, primarily, on the economy. Relations with Kazakhstan in the economic sphere cover a variety of areas but changing the structure of our economic ties and focusing on high-tech areas are among our key goals. This includes, above all, digitalisation, and other important areas such as genetics and medicine, as well as joint space exploration since we continue and will continue to work together at Baikonur. There are many areas of focus between us.

Nevertheless, I agree with the way our Kazakhstani friends framed the question, namely that if we work together, Kazakhstan should be more than a platform for launching spacecraft, it should be involved in broader and more meaningful space exploration and develop its own competencies in this area. I share this approach, and we are now exploring options. I am confident that we will get to implementing these plans.

We have deep ties in culture and education. I am grateful to the leadership of Kazakhstan for their efforts to support and develop Russian language studies. You are aware that many people in Kazakhstan are studying Russian. This is a Russian-speaking country in the full sense of the word. The number of schools where children studying the Russian language and university branches that teach Russian, is on the rise, and the number of applicants applying for admission to these education institutions is quite high.

We cooperate with Kazakhstan as an active member of the CSTO as well. Notably, military equipment and materiel are supplied to Kazakhstan mostly at domestic Russian prices. And, the First President of Kazakhstan was the one to initiate the creation of the Eurasian Economic Union.

So, I very much hope that the pace we have gained and the quality of our work will be maintained.

Dmitry Peskov: If Buryatia gave me back my responsibilities for a short while …

Vladimir Putin: That’s not me, it is Buryatia that his given them back to you. You should thank them for it.

Dmitry Peskov: Thank you, Buryatia.

Now we have Rossiya 24.

Vladimir Putin: Rossiya 24, of course.

Anastasia Yefimova: Rossiya 24 is here.

Good afternoon, Mr President.

My question concerns the situation with RUSNANO. According to some experts, it is unfolding under a negative scenario, let me quote, “Little information, a lot of debt.” In fact, the company itself considers the debts to be exorbitant and talks about restructuring them.

Meanwhile, Fitch believes that the developments around RUSNANO is a kind of a test for the government referring to the loans issued to the company with state guarantees. Consequently, the state now must act on them. But will it back up such high-risk investments?

What would your answer to this question be? In other words, will the state somehow settle RUSNANO’s debts and, overall, what do you think about the company’s prospects?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: This is indeed a challenge. I will not quote the figures now – some say the debt amounts to 140 billion, others say 102 billion. These problems are assessed differently in terms of value by the Government and the company itself.

You know that the company’s new leadership has set to work. They have a free hand in conducting an objective evaluation and engaging the best experts to assess the real situation in the company. There is indeed a fairly big volume of guarantees provided by the Government of the Russian Federation for their projects.

I have to say that RUSNANO is actually a venture company. I will not hide that I was among the proponents of establishing this company. Back in the day I also pushed the Government and its finance and economy block towards funding the creation of our constellation of satellites and the GLONASS constellation. Otherwise, we would have been in zugzwang, like when satellites were being decommissioned after a protracted operation on the orbit due to their technical capabilities, and with the existing funding volumes we would never have created a fully operational constellation that would have allowed us to resolve the issues facing GLONASS. However, we did it. Our GLONASS appeared straight after GPS, before our Chinese friends launched BeiDou. And the company is operating and developing, albeit not without problems. The same is true of RUSNANO.

Obviously, they were largely blazing a trail. Clearly, some of the projects were fulfilled successfully whereas some of them, regretfully, could not be finished. Those are risky investments. This is why the state decided to provide its guarantees to ensure this work. But we have to look into the real state of affairs. The company, not the government, should work with its creditors, with the banks.

Sberbank, for instance, got rid of most loans; it sold them away. Sberbank’s top management probably had some insider information but they did it somehow.

The state guarantees, nevertheless, exist, and they must be enforced which does not mean the company should not work with banks or work to enhance and improve its economic performance.

By the way, as far as I know, the company recently satisfied some of its obligations, its securities, with its own funds. It means that overall the company is viable. It is just a process that should continue steadily in view of the economic situation and the projects and programmes which must certainly bring a profit because the company must operate in the market. We will definitely support the process.

Dmitry Peskov: We have so many regions represented here…

Vladimir Putin: There was a sign that said “Coal” over there. Can we? It is important.

Go ahead, please.

Alexandra Cherdantseva: Good afternoon, Mr President. Thank you for the opportunity to ask a question.

My name is Alexandra Cherdantseva, PolitSibRu news agency, Barnaul, Altai Territory.

I will not speak at length about the issue of coal, as you are perfectly aware of it. The Altai Territory, along with probably many other regions, faced problems when municipal authorities were unable to start the heating season on schedule, some due to fuel shortages, while others due to fuel price hikes. The municipal authorities have somehow overlooked this issue.

My question is not about assigning guilt; the question is what is to be done. What can federal authorities do to help the regions live under these new conditions, with new coal prices?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: I would very much like to hear from you more details about what is happening and where. Why? Because both regional and federal authorities reported to me recently that everyone is completely ready for the heating season.

Where did the failures occur, can you name the places?

Alexandra Cherdantseva: No, at present everyone is ready, the heating season is in progress. There was a period when municipalities claimed it was too expensive to buy coal. The heating season is under way, everything looks fine, but the prices remain high and the municipalities will have to find that money somewhere.

Vladimir Putin: Naturally. You see, we have subsidies for that.

By the way, you know, I will approach this issue from another angle. It was no accident that we introduced an amendment to the Constitution that all levels of public authority are a single system. And if municipalities lack something, it does not relieve the region’s authorities from responsibility; they must respond adequately. Regardless of the price hikes, the required volumes should have been provided for so as to start the heating season on schedule and go through its autumn-winter maximum.

Coal prices went up – that is all well and good, but purchase volumes and work with companies should have been addressed in proper time. I assure you that the companies which make good profits from exports and pay good wages to their workers, would certainly have arranged a proper pricing policy for the regions where their workers actually reside, provided they had been asked about it. So this is just an oversight – both by the municipalities and the region.

You do not want to name the exact municipalities. I do not mean to force you but will you please write to me, and I will figure out what happened there.

Alexandra Cherdantseva: At the regional level coal reserves are quite good, but the population faced this problem.

Vladimir Putin: That’s what I am asking – where exactly, which municipality?

Alexandra Cherdantseva: There were many complaints from Loktevksy District. People say buying coal is too costly and they just cannot afford it.

Vladimir Putin: There is a simple way out – subsidies. We provide subsidies including for the autumn-winter season. This should just be addressed in due time, that is all there is to it. There is nothing unusual or difficult about it.

Let me reiterate: in the run-up to the heating season all the regional and federal authorities reported that the country is ready for the start of the heating season.

Apparently, some failures are possible. I shall check how things are in different places. Agreed.

Alexandra Cherdantseva: Thank you.

Dmitry Peskov: Let’s ask the only person sitting without a banner. Introduce yourself, please.

Murad Gazdiev: Murad Gazdiev, RT.

My question is about system-wide problems in Western society that you spoke about recently. This is cancel culture, rejection of usual concepts like “mum,” “dad,” “family” and even “gender.” You might have heard that Joan Rowling also got her share when even Harry Porter actors ganged up on her because of her radical stance that a woman is a woman and a man is a man.

What do you think of the new ethic? Will this “caravan of values” arrive in Russia and will the state’s fighting for traditional values turn into a fight against youth subcultures and organisations, the way it was in the USSR?

Vladimir Putin: First, it is inevitable that the “caravan” will travel. It is inevitable in the contemporary world with the internet and modern communications. It is very much like the coronavirus pandemic. New strains keep popping up, and we can’t get away from it. What we need is to look for a proper antidote.

If someone thinks that a man and a woman is the same, let it be. However, there is still some common sense in the world.

I may be wrong although it is unlikely, Ms Sobchak asked a question about penitentiaries, I think in the US – and if I am wrong do not be annoyed with me, – a prisoner convicted of rape declared himself a woman and demanded that he be transferred to a women’s prison. So they did. And he promptly raped his female cellmate. But there should be some semblance of common sense in everything.

Or take athletes. A man declares himself a woman and competes, say, in weightlifting or some other sport. Women’s sport will cease to exist completely. There must be some common sense. I uphold the traditional approach that a woman is a woman, a man is a man, a mother is a mother, and a father is a father. I hope that our society has an inner moral protection dictated by the traditional faiths of the Russian Federation.

The strength and power of our thousand-year-old society lie in the fact that Russia was formed as a multi-ethnic and multi-faith state, and we have learnt to treat each other with respect. With respect. What does that mean? It means that we respect the foundations of our traditional spiritual culture. All the peoples of the Russian Federation – I want to stress “all” – have a certain inner moral protection against the obscurantism you mentioned. Let them do whatever they want over there. We must take the most progressive and the best which helps us develop, move on, be leaders in technology, in the economy, humanitarian areas – I mean healthcare or, say, education.

But I hope that our peoples, Russia’s ethnicities have enough deep immunity and protection systems against this obscurantism, as I said. And it should be countered not by direct instructions, slapdowns or accusations but rather by upholding our traditional values, which I always keep saying.

Dmitry Peskov: Let us move over here to make sure we do not leave the federal media out. Please give a microphone to Life.

Alexander Yunashev: Good afternoon, Mr President,

Alexander Yunashev, Life.

Let me follow up on the domestic agenda. Early on, you said that the Government is working satisfactorily. I would like to go person by person. Who among the ministers is your favourite, who got a bonus from you already? I wonder how much. Who got the most from you, and who did you give a dressing down to behind closed doors? We all saw you and Shoigu taking a break in the taiga. Why do you not take Mishustin with you? Why is that?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: If we take Mishustin along … Remember the old Jewish joke: “Who will stay in the shop?” Who will work?

So, once in a while Mr Mishustin goes on holiday as well. To everyone’s knowledge or not, each of us … In any case, the Prime Minister, who is vastly responsible for the situation in the country, calls me and tells me – as is customary – where he is going … He is always in touch.

As for the trips to Siberia, I have been doing this since the early 2000s. For me, this is a part of my life. I was asked about where I would like to live: St Petersburg or Moscow? I really like Siberia as well, with its unique ecosystem and unique people. Really. You know, Siberians with their values and moral qualities are Russia’s gold fund. There are all sorts of people, but I am saying this in general.

As for who I criticise and who is a favourite … You see, I cannot have any favourites, and I never had any. I have been working with many people for many years and I know them well. But if I see that someone is either underperforming, or is trying to cut corners, I always point this out to my colleagues regardless of our personal relationship and push for a proper approach towards the issues that we are working on or discussing.

As for the bonuses, yes, I think that based on the results of the efforts to overcome the pandemic, some members of the Executive Office and the Government deserve a bonus. But here, I believe, the approach should not be differentiated, and we should rather assess the work of the Government overall. So, singling out people or giving big bonuses to some and punishing other people by paying them the proverbial five kopecks… I think that since this is a bonus, you need to evaluate the team work rather than the work of each individual, although this needs to be done, and, believe me, I do it.

However, as you understand, saying that this person is good and that one is bad is impossible and wrong, because it is not about who is good and who is bad, it is about how we manage this process and whether we succeed in making sure that everyone works effectively. And if we do not, including myself, it means that we are not doing enough.

Dmitry Peskov: Let us continue with a dash of foreign media. I see Rai, our colleagues from Italy. Please go ahead.

Sergio Paini: Thank you.

Sergio Paini, Rai, Italian television.

Good afternoon, Mr President.

How much change has the Russia-Italy relationship undergone with Prime Minister Mario Draghi in office? Do you think Italy can act as a mediator in Russia's relations with the European Union?

Vladimir Putin: As far as I can tell, if not exemplary, Italy-Russia relations are good and stable, and transcend partisanship.

Regardless of the forces that are currently at the helm in Italy, the Italian Republic and its Government, we are following in the tracks of what was laid down by Mr Berlusconi, who initiated stronger relations between Russia and NATO, among other things. He came up with a number of long-term projects, including, by the way, in the sphere of small and medium-sized businesses.

All of that continues regardless of the political forces that, at any given point, find themselves at the top of political power. I believe that this supra-partisan nationwide consensus is key in Italy-Russia relations. Of course, Italy is a NATO country and an EU member, but this does not keep us from working in the way I just mentioned. I hope that it will remain like that as we go forward.

Mr Draghi and I have spoken on the telephone several times. We communicate in a very friendly and meaningful manner on a number of issues that are of interest to the Italian Republic in terms of expanding our economic ties. Bearing in mind our good and friendly relations, Italy could play its role in normalising Russia-EU relations even as part of the Russia-NATO talks that are being planned.

Dmitry Peskov: Thank you.

I see a small poster with the letters SMA. It means spinal muscular atrophy, right?

Vladimir Putin: Mr Peskov, I saw someone holding a heart. Maybe they will say something nice?

Dmitry Peskov: We will get back to you. Thank you.

Please raise the heart up.

Vladimir Putin: Please, you have the floor.

Gulnuz Khaibullina: Mr President, I came from the Republic of Bashkortostan. My name is Gulnuz Khaibullina.

Mr President, we love our city, the capital of the Republic of Bashkortostan. You recently signed an executive order on holding events to mark the 450^th anniversary of our city. We would like to know what support the federal centre will provide for the development of our city. Everybody knows that when celebrating a birthday, we dress up. So we want to celebrate this date on a grand scale. But I am not speaking about round dances and concerts, given the pandemic. We would like to have new social facilities, good roads and many beautiful buildings. So we want to know what support we will receive from the federal centre. As the President, what surprise will you prepare for us, and will you come visit?

Vladimir Putin: Thank you so much for the invitation. I will try to come.

Ufa is a wonderful place, one of the best cities in the Volga region. Ufa has been one of the centres of the Islamic world in Russia.

As for anniversaries, it was no accident that my colleagues and I developed the relevant document. During the preparations, we will set the priorities together with the leadership of the republic.

I would like to get back to what your colleague said, the issue related to large families. We do not need to allocate additional resources here; we need to use those resources that have been set aside for the development of infrastructure, roads, the social sphere and culture. They need to be distributed properly, or even redistributed, to a certain extent, so that Ufa can prepare for the anniversary the way it deserves.

We could think about additional funding. We will make a decision together with our colleagues from the republic.

Gulnuz Khaibullina: Zur rakhmat [thank you], Mr President.

Can I suggest one more thing? How about holding the world hockey championships in Ufa? We are famous for our Salavat Yulayev club and would be happy to host such an event.

Vladimir Putin: Salavat Yulayev is a great hockey team, no doubt about it, a top-notch team.

As for the championships, I am not ready to answer this question yet. I believe the next world event will be held in St Petersburg, and they have been already getting the relevant facilities ready. But it is not only up to us, but the International Ice Hockey Federation. St Petersburg is quite far from Ufa. I am not sure it would be possible in terms of logistics.

But Ufa can undoubtedly hold international competitions at the highest level. We will think about this suggestion. Thank you.

Dmitry Peskov: Shall we give the floor to SMA? Spinal muscular atrophy is an important issue.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, please. I agree.

Dmitry Peskov: Introduce yourself.

Albert Musin: Good afternoon.

Albert Musin, Channel 4, television, Yekaterinburg.

In fact, there are two issues. SMA is the second. The first one with which we originally planned to come to Moscow is about supporting the Universiade, or rather, a request to make sure that the 2023 Universiade, which is supposed to be held in Yekaterinburg, actually takes place. We even brought you a ball signed by prominent athletes from the Sverdlovsk Region, including fighters, gymnasts and racers, in a word, everyone. Regrettably, the security guards did not let it through, such are the rules. But I hope it will find its way to you.

Vladimir Putin: Now that you said it, it certainly will.

Albert Musin: That is exactly why I mentioned it.

SMA is my second issue, because something important happened in early December. Zolgensma, the so-called golden jab that costs more than 100 million rubles, was finally registered in Russia.

Here is a brief overview for our colleagues. Spinal muscular atrophy is a genetic disease that creates critical developmental disorders in children who die before they reach the age of 2 or 3 years. Now that Zolgensma has been registered, many families with children affected by SMA have a chance to receive support from the Government. However, they do not understand how it will be organised. Either it will be done through the Circle of Kindness Foundation, which was set up earlier this year and also helps raise money for children affected by SMA.

So, I would like to ask you to have a clear arrangement worked out so that the parents of these children who have months, rarely years, left, know where to apply and how to get this help, and, in general, whether all these children will have the chance to get a life-saving injection. There are more than a hundred children with SMA in Russia, with 33 of them residing in our region.

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: First of all, it was to help more such people, such children that the Circle of Kindness Foundation was established.

You probably remember, yet I would like to remind everyone, and those who do not know should be told this, that the source of funding for this is the increased personal income tax levied on those who, let us put it this way, who earn slightly or considerably more than the country’s average. The tax on their windfall profits has been increased, and we said at the very beginning that these funds would be used to support people with severe life-threatening diseases, including spinal muscular atrophy. Before that, support from budgets at different levels was only provided to 74 people across the country, but the current figure is above 100 and, as far as I know, is approaching 1,000. I am not sure about the precise figure, but this is not the point. What is important is that the number of people who receive such support has increased severalfold. The treatment is very expensive.

I can tell you frankly that I discussed this matter with our colleagues only yesterday. They believe that since the very first days after the foundation’s establishment – I will not go into detail now about organisational or decision-making issues, because we did not want, and I did not want this either, this project to be assigned to state agencies. We wanted it to be implemented by absolutely independent people who are respected in society. So, I was told yesterday that the project is running smoothly. Information should be available on the Public Services portal, and it can also be provided by the relevant medical staff in the regions. This is not the point. These technicalities can be easily dealt with, and I believe that you, Albert, as a person who is involved in this matter and feels for these families and these children, I believe that you and people like you can help them find their bearings in this situation.

What does matter now is the age of support recipients. As of now, it is available to people aged up to 18, but we hope that the use of this treatment and other medicines that will certainly be invented in future will help to extend the life span and improve the quality of life for people with this and similar diseases. We must start thinking already about how to help people with these diseases after they turn 18, because so far, the project is only designed for people aged up to 18. But we are considering the matter, and we will certainly not forget about this problem.

Alexander Fedorchak: Good afternoon, Mr President.

Alexander Fedorchak, Krym 24 television channel.

Thank you for the opportunity to ask a question.

On behalf of our republic, I would like to thank you for the ongoing transformations. Our infrastructure has changed a lot over the past seven years, with roads, kindergartens, and so on under construction.

Regrettably, however, mobile communications have remained where they were, and major Russian telecom operators have so far been unable to do business in Crimea. How can this matter be resolved at the government level? Can we expect major telecom operators to come to Crimea any time soon?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Clearly, this is because of the sanctions that our Western partners have imposed on Crimea and its residents.

As I mentioned earlier, the situation is quite odd. If someone believes that Crimea is occupied, then its residents are victims of aggression. Why punish them even more then? And if they joined Russia, and returned to Russia of their own volition by way of a referendum, then it is a manifestation of democracy. Is it that someone out there is fighting democracy? No answer. There may be only one answer: they spit on the interests of the Crimeans, Russia and democracy. All they are doing is addressing their geopolitical issues.

However, being aware of this, we must respond accordingly, and we will continue to do so, just as before. Perhaps, not completely, but I am sure we will resolve issues with water supply, just as we have resolved the issue of energy supply and power supply, in general, the development of infrastructure, not just the Tavrida Motorway. I asked the Government to plan for exits from this motorway to the coast, and I know they have been planned and exits to the coast will be built.

We will certainly engage in expanding urban infrastructure, including in off-the-coast cities of Crimea. Just like you said, we will continue to build hospitals, kindergartens and schools, and we will renovate housing, including structurally unsafe buildings.

By the way, Crimea and Sevastopol joined the programme for housing renovation and relocation from structurally deficient buildings later, so they are lagging a little behind. Crimea and Sevastopol are a little behind this programme, but we will definitely address, on a systematic basis, every problem that Crimea is facing, including relocating residents of dilapidated buildings.

With regard to mobile communications, just like in other matters, we will find ways to ensure the people’s interests. I will not get ahead of things and will not share our plans with you and everyone in this audience so as not to hinder the process. But we will think it over and hopefully overcome this challenge.

There are also issues with individual incomes and high prices – I am aware of that – and we will gradually resolve them. Gradually, but surely. I hope that the people in Crimea and Sevastopol feel it already today and will feel it tomorrow.

Dmitry Peskov: We have not had any questions on sports so far, but I do recognise Dmitry Guberniyev.

Vladimir Putin: Go ahead, Dmitry.

Dmitry Peskov: You have a sports-related question, right?

Dmitry Guberniyev: Good afternoon. How did you guess?

First, I would like to wish you all a happy New Year, and wish you good health, luck and patience, which we really need. Just remember: our athletes will defeat them all.

It is so tempting for me to ask a question on biathlon, a sports discipline that unites us all. If practice is any guide, we will fight for medals in every race, including at the Olympics. My question, Mr President, is about the Olympics, where you will travel to attend the opening ceremony in Beijing.

However, considering the political boycott many leaders already announced, including the President of the United States, why is this happening, in your opinion? China and people heading there to compete in a fair and clean way are being pressured. Doesn’t this remind you of what was going on ahead of the Sochi Olympics?

Thank you very much.

Vladimir Putin: This is an unacceptable decision, a mistake. I had this conversation with one of the former Presidents of the United States – you can go ahead and guess who that was. That was quite a while ago. He told me that the boycotts of the Olympics in Los Angeles and in Moscow were big mistakes, including on behalf of the United States.

The United States just keeps making the same mistake. Where does this diplomatic and political boycott of China come from? From attempts to contain the development of the People’s Republic of China. There are no other reasons whatsoever.

Just like art, sports must bring people together instead of causing problems in people-to-people and state-to-state relations. When sport is unable to live up to its core values, this hurts the entire international community. In fact, this shatters the last remaining scarce opportunities to restore, maintain and develop relations between nations, and this is being done for the sake of momentary political gain. This is a mistake.

That said, what can we do about this? Everyone makes mistakes. However, some keep making them. There is only one reason for this, which also applies, for example, to Russia. There are no other reasons, trust me. This is not about the surname of the country’s leader, or any current issues or challenges. There is only one reason for this. This is an attempt to contain development and deprive someone of the opportunity to rise above the possible competitors.

I have already talked about the situation with NATO’s eastward expansion. Why did they have to do this? Take, for instance, Egon Bahr. He was a politician from the Social Democratic Party of Germany and proposed building a new security architecture in Europe after the Soviet troops left Germany and Eastern Europe: keeping NATO without expanding it to Central and Eastern European countries, and creating a new system of equal security with Canada, the United States and Russia. According to the archival documents on his talks with the Soviet leaders, including Falin and others, otherwise the virtual Berlin wall will keep moving east, leaving us with the same problems. This is precisely what happened. Why? This was an attempt at containment. However, this is an erroneous policy, just like the attempt to use sports for momentary political gain.

There is no way they can contain China’s development. Eventually this will dawn on them. No way they can contain China. Today, China has a bigger economy than the United States in terms of purchasing power parity. As years go by – 2035, then 2050 – China will inevitably emerge as the world’s number one economy in terms of all other indicators as well. We need to understand this. Who knows? Maybe they do understand this, but are still acting this way. But this is a mistake.

As for us, we always have stood against using sport for political aims.

Dmitry Peskov: I saw the Far East Federal District there, am I right? Go ahead.

Irina Trofimova: Good afternoon, Mr President.

We are always glad to see you in Vladivostok.

Vladimir Putin: Thank you. And I am always glad to come to Vladivostok, especially after it hosted the well-known international events of APEC, and after Vladivostok’s revival and transformation began. I hope that everybody who lives in the Far East can feel and see it. Still, a lot has to be done.

So, your question, please.

Irina Trofimova: This is true, the transformations are tremendous, of course.

However, I wanted to ask you about the following. My first poster reads: “One-room flat for eight million.” It does not mean that I want to sell it. The thing is that housing prices in the Far East have reached unprecedented highs. Given that we have a good level of construction, we are building a lot of housing, more and more rapidly, and many problems are being solved. Meanwhile, the price of a one-room apartment has reached eight, nine, ten and even 12 million rubles. It means that we are practically approaching Moscow prices.

It has been greatly influenced by the Far East mortgage loans, which were a lifeline to many people, but it has had a major impact on the price increase. It is a real problem for the Primorye Territory. We are now among the top three regions for population outflow, the top three regions. That is, people are fleeing from the Far East.

Mr President, something has to be done about it. A special mechanism to restrain housing prices is needed; otherwise Primorye, for instance, will find itself without young people.

Vladimir Putin: Indeed, Irina, we have established an entire line of support measures for housing construction. Two-percent interest for the Primorye Territory and the Far East. Three percent for agricultural mortgage loans, and six percent for families with children. We have also extended the concessionary mortgage loan at a seven percent rate for another year.

Of course, having a certain level of construction technology, although it is constantly growing, and building materials production, that is supply, it all affects the prices. However, high prices are not the only thing that matters. We have introduced the two-percent rate to make them lower and, in general, that worked. Depopulation happens not only because of rising housing prices. Of course, we are thinking about it, and for the country as a whole, because cheap mortgage loans lead to a price rise. Still, we built 90 million square metres. The positive effect is evident. The number of families improving their living conditions has been increasing many times over. It also concerns the construction of single-family homes. The present support is not enough, but we will push it further.

The Far East has special needs that require a comprehensive approach. The goal is not only to put an end to depopulation, but, on the contrary, to make life there attractive in today’s conditions. What do we need to do for that? Primarily, we need to develop the economy and create new modern, high-tech, interesting and high-paying jobs so that work becomes interesting. This is my first point.

Second, we must develop the social sphere, strengthen the university on Russky Island, and other education institutions, as well as build schools and kindergartens to make life there comfortable. We have drafted an extensive programme for this, including the creation of priority development areas, the provision of low-cost lending, and so on.

Entire clusters are being built towards this end. As you know, there is Zvezda plant not far from Vladivostok which is an unprecedentedly large shipbuilding company that even the Soviet Union did not have. One of the largest dry docks has been built there. Now, we can – if necessary, of course – build large naval warships there, but we can also build, and we are already building, special-purpose civilian vessels for servicing offshore areas, working at sea, etc. This is all happening. Did you know that people from European Russia go to work there? Why? Because it is an interesting job, salaries are good. These jobs are for people with high skills.

This is the way to go in all other areas in the Far East, including further strengthening and creating the town of Tsiolkovsky and a new spaceport for civilian purposes. The automotive industry must be developed there, and not just large-scale assembly, but also on our own base, which is also happening.

In general, we need to work in all these directions, and then life there will become attractive. There are plans in place; these are long-term projects. Still, work is underway and the situation is improving. If something needs to be done additionally, and if you have specific proposals, go ahead and draft them, and then send them to us. We will be happy to review and study them, okay?

Thank you very much.

Dmitry Peskov: Mr President, we are working on this…

Vladimir Putin: I think everyone must be bored, so it is time to end. Let’s do the following: one question each from this side, the centre and the other side.

Dmitry Peskov: Let’s do that. Dagestan.

Please.

Magomed Magomedov: Good afternoon, Mr President. Magomed Magomedov, Dagestan republican news agency.

During a meeting with you, the head of our republic, [Sergei Melikov], invited you to Dagestan for the Year of Rasul Gamzatov and the poet’s birth anniversary, which we will be celebrating soon.

The republic is now facing an energy crisis in nearly all spheres: in water, in electricity and in gas supplies. The problems have been accumulating for decades; they did not appeared out of nowhere. We can see that you, the head of our republic and the Federal Assembly are aware of this problem, but no solution has been found so far because it is mostly connected with the commercial organisations that are working in the republic.

Mr President, we need your help. In 1999, Dagestan was an important part of and played a major role in Russia’ modern history. Today people in our republic need your influence more than ever, so that the officials at different energy companies, but primarily those that are subordinate to Rosseti, Gazprom and RusHydro, focus their attention on the problem and not just collect dividends in the republic but also invest in the infrastructure, so that people can live a befitting, high quality life in the republic.

I would like to once again invite you to the Republic of Dagestan in the commemoration Year of Rasul Gamzatov. We know about your attitude towards Dagestan, and you know that Dagestan loves you.

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Just a second, Magomed. I would like you to be more specific about the energy problems you are facing.

Magomed Magomedov: Mr President, this is what I can tell you. The trouble is that our energy infrastructure is either worn out or unable to keep pace with the increasing demand.

Of course, the regional authorities are implementing a number of projects, but they cannot do everything that needs to be done, while the people believe that the commercial organisations that are working in the republic are not fully aware of the problem. System operations depend on them much more.

The vertical power system means that these organisations are controlled from the federal centre rather than in the republic, and we have no mechanisms to influence them.

This is the problem.

Vladimir Putin: Which companies? Just name them.

Magomed Magomedov: Electricity supply companies.

Vladimir Putin: Grid companies?

Magomed Magomedov: Yes, grid companies.

Vladimir Putin: Rosseti?

Magomed Magomedov: Most likely the companies subordinate to Rosseti. I am not sure.

Vladimir Putin: Alright, I will look into the matter. Anything else?

Magomed Magomedov: Moving on, some water utilities are owned by private Russian companies, and are probably also part of RusHydro.

Natural gas distribution to villages is another major challenge.

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: I will definitely look into this, you have my word on it.

As for Rosseti, they probably have their divisions there.

On the question of water supply, we need to investigate this and the way the regional government organised all this. It is the regional government that oversees water distribution and wastewater disposal, or this function is assigned to a private operator. We need to get to the bottom of this. The same applies to RusHydro. We must examine this.

I cannot answer each of the questions you have raised right now, but I do have a very clear understanding of what this is all about. We will look into it. Is that okay with you?

Magomed Magomedov: Thank you, Mr President.

Vladimir Putin: Please convey my best wishes on the upcoming New Year. In fact, Dagestan has a very special place in my heart.

You can see that working in Dagestan promotes the careers of its leaders to new heights. For example, Mr Vasilyev became the head of United Russia’s parliamentary group in the State Duma.

Magomed Magomedov: Mr President, we feel your attention, and that you are always there for us, for which both the journalists and the people of Dagestan are grateful. Happy New Year!

Vladimir Putin: Thank you so much. All the best to you too.

Let’s turn to the middle of the room. I see a young lady in green.

Yes, go ahead please.

Yuliya Izmailova: Good afternoon.

Yuliya Izmailova, Editor-in-Chief of Molodoi Leninets newspaper, Penza.

Vladimir Putin: Penza, you said?

Yuliya Izmailova: The city of Penza.

Mr President, next year pensions are expected to be adjusted for inflation at the rate of 5.9 percent, which is significantly lower than the actual inflation rate. In fact, prices are growing at a much faster pace. Do you have any plans to offset the difference for retirees? Under the law, pension increases must correspond to the rate of inflation. Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, I fully agree with you, and we must not forget this. The Government of the Russian Federation must do everything it can to deliver on the promises it made over the past years. Until now, we have been able to do this, in general, and we will definitely do it now. This is the first thing I want to say.

Second, for reference, please note that next year we will take the corresponding decisions on law enforcement and defence agencies to provide for a more even income distribution to people working in law enforcement and defence agencies. This also must apply to military pensions.

Dmitry Peskov: Let’s give the floor to Public Television of Russia (ORT).

Vladimir Putin: Yes, go ahead, please.

Olga Arslanova: Good afternoon, Mr President.

I am Olga Arslanova, Public Television of Russia.

My question is prompted by our viewers that call us live. We know that large cities are carrying out serious and expensive infrastructure projects. Meanwhile, the countryside remains archaic in our country even in the 21^st century. It lacks the simplest things. It happens that schoolchildren go by bus to a neighbouring village 20 km away because their school at home is in critical condition. It happens that buses do not run because the road has fallen apart. Sometimes, the situation becomes ridiculous. There is no toilet or water in a village, but it has internet installed. Is the state going to implement infrastructure projects in rural areas instead of just filling some gaps?

Thank you very much.

Vladimir Putin: Most certainly. First, this is being done under a relevant programme for the social development of the countryside, which will receive the required funds. This is the first point.

Second, the projects, including the national projects I have already mentioned today are largely oriented to focus primarily on rural areas. Our villages have been doing really well in the past few years. This should certainly have an impact on the social wellbeing and social attitudes of the people that are giving us this level of production and confidence in providing the country with the necessary set of basic food products.

Thus, I think we have already mentioned the programme for renovating existing schools and building new ones. These programmes will be primarily implemented in rural areas. This is what I requested and what will be done.

As for the internet, there is a reason you said it is installed in rural areas whereas some basic amenities are missing. Of course, it is possible and necessary to think about basic amenities, but it is also important to have the internet up and running. It enables rural residents to get an up-to-date education and use many services online even in remote areas and small communities. As for small communities, additional funds are set aside for this purpose. In general, this is, of course, a big comprehensive goal that requires, in part, the development of infrastructure. A significant part of the funds planned for infrastructure development will be spent on the development of rural areas.

And now the final question. Mr Peskov, let’s have the final question.

Dmitry Peskov: Alright. Valery Sanfirov, another veteran of the presidential pool.

Valery Sanfirov: Mr President, just a small clarification. There was a quiz about a president who said that boycotting Olympic Games was wrong. Was it Trump?

Vladimir Putin: No.

Valery Sanfirov: I see. It must have been George Bush Sr.

Vladimir Putin: Precisely.

Valery Sanfirov: Very good.

My question concerns next year, 2022. It does not seem to promise anything good, which means that it will be quite dull. You will continue to keep everyone wondering if you will run for one more term in 2024. The pandemic will most likely continue, and there will be some restrictions again. The WHO will likely find another reason for refusing to recognise Sputnik V. And our Olympic team will again perform without the national flag and anthem.

In this connection, what do you think can bring us real optimism and happiness next year, not just flashes of it, as a famous writer and you have said? Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Once again, what will next year bring?

Valery Sanfirov: What will bring us real happiness and optimism next year, not just flashes of it?

Vladimir Putin: Happiness and optimism? Carrying out our plans, what else? This is the essence of our work – to make life better for people.

As for possible political, domestic political events, such as elections, I do not believe that this is what we should think about. A girl, your colleague, asked about serving pensioners’ interests. This is what we should think about. The inflation rate has increased. Can we bring it down? And how can we adjust pensioners’ incomes? Yes, they are increasing, but we must ensure that they keep pace with the inflation rate, like we promised.

This is what all of us must aim for, all levels of authority – the federal, regional and municipal authorities must think about increasing living standards and improving the quality of life for the people. We have ambitious plans, and huge funds are allocated for implementation, and we must use them effectively, so that people can see that life is changing for the better. Happiness or not but this is what we must do.

I will encourage the national authorities to work in this spirit so as to attain our goals and fulfil these tasks in the interests of Russian citizens.

The final question must come from a woman. Let’s give the mic to a young lady.

Dmitry Peskov: Mr President, do you see anyone yourself?

Vladimir Putin: No.

Dmitry Peskov: Maybe Rossiya-Kultura?

Vladimir Putin: Go ahead.

Yana Muzyka: Good afternoon. Yana Muzyka, Rossiya-Kultura television.

Mr President, there are more and more administrative and even criminal cases related to promoting extremism and accusations that someone’s feelings were insulted. Creative professionals from the theatre, film or book industries can easily face charges, and even more so ordinary people for simply posting an image online. I wanted to ask about the line between protecting someone’s feelings, moral standards, and the right of an artist to enjoy the freedom of artistic expression. Where should we draw this line?

Vladimir Putin: You mentioned posting photos and artistic rights. Can uploading an image of Hitler or Himmler to the Immortal Regiment’s website be seen as creative freedom?

Let’s consider this issue from that perspective. Of course, we need to ensure artistic freedoms, and freedom in general. After all, without it there is no progress, no doubt about that. The future would be quite grim, bleak and without any promise. Still, we need to understand that this freedom can defy its own purpose when it runs into the freedom of another person.

You represent a media outlet, for example, and quite a respected one. Kultura is a very good channel. But why offend the Prophet Muhammad? Is this an act of artistic freedom? I do not think so. This is a violation of the freedom of worship, which offends the rights of the people who practice Islam, which leads to other, even more radical and extremist manifestations. Take, for example, Charlie Hebdo – they went to Paris and killed an entire editorial staff. We must make sure this does not go that far, right? This freedom needs to come from within and be rooted in respecting all those who might be affected by any extreme actions.

I have said that Russia emerged as a diverse state from an ethnic and religious perspectives, so we have grown used to respecting each other’s interests and traditions. This gives Russia a very solid foundation as an ethnically diverse state. We can see that other countries lack this culture of dialogue. So why import this deficiency onto our territory, and into our society? This would be like compromising one’s immunity.

However, this must be a question of self-regulated restrictions. For example, the heads and owners of Russia’s major social networks came together, established an organisation, and devised their own rules on how to operate in a way that does not hurt people, harm teenagers, kids, etc. This is the way forward, in my opinion.

And the final question, please. Go ahead.

Zokhra Ishmukhametova: Mr President, good afternoon.

Vladimir Putin: Good afternoon.

Zokhra Ishmukhametova: Zokhra Ishmukhametova, Sputnik news agency.

A question about Afghanistan. On August 15, we all watched as the Taliban took over in Afghanistan after President Ashraf Ghani, now the ex-president, fled. The question is, does Russia recognise the Taliban government? What is the outlook for Russian-Afghan relations?

Vladimir Putin: I would like the relations between Russia and Afghanistan to develop in the best possible way. I am referring to our mutual interests in stabilising the region. For us, this is not idle talk, since we have open borders with the Central Asian republics, the former members of the Soviet Union, and naturally, the possibility of extremist infiltration raises understandable concerns. Among other things, there is the continuing flow of drugs from Afghanistan; some 90 percent of the opiates on the global market are Afghan-made. This is another alarming factor, of course.

As for recognising it, generally, we need to proceed from reality, assuming that the forces that now lead Afghanistan are setting their minds on having all ethnic groups represented in the country's government. I think this is the only alternative that can, hopefully, pave the way for stabilisation in Afghanistan.

What do we need to do now? We definitely need to help the Afghan people. This should primarily be done by those countries that have caused such enormous damage, such harm to the Afghan economy and Afghan society. Those who have been there for 20 years, have destroyed the local economy – they must be the first to provide assistance.

For our part, we will do everything that depends on us. But the first thing to do here is to unfreeze Afghanistan’s assets, the money it had in foreign, primarily American, banks, in order to provide the required assistance to the Afghan people. Otherwise, the country could plunge into famine; there will be grave consequences that will affect the neighbouring states as well.

As for recognition, we are working collectively with all parties in international communication. We have our own position, and I have explained it clearly enough just now. But we will strive to achieve a consolidated approach.

Is that it?

Dmitry Peskov: Maybe, we will listen to one more woman? In the middle, the woman in red. Ms Sobchak, that’s not you; you have already done your part.

Ilona Ozerova: Good afternoon,

Ilona Ozerova from Avtoradio.

Finally, I would like to ask you a personal question related to the pandemic.

First, do you feel that you are short of personal communication? Maybe, you feel the lack of emotions and impressions. You said you are talking to your subordinates at a distance of three metres. Is it worth talking without an-eye-to-eye contact? Or maybe videoconference is a more advanced means of communication, sometimes even more effective and, in any case, quicker?

And a second question.

Vladimir Putin: Just a second, let me answer the first one.

A distance of three metres does not matter. We are at a greater distance now, but we can freely talk with each other. And when my colleague sits next to me, there it makes no difference at all. Plus, there is communication via modern channels. In general, those in charge of communication have done a good job.

But, of course, I miss communication with my family, my friends and colleagues, those I need to meet with and sit next to. I think this affects me like anyone.

Ilona Ozerova: And one more question about exercise. Are you managing to exercise during the pandemic? Are there any changes in your routine? If so, what are they?

And the last question – about your leisure time. Again, the pandemic continues and you have a busy personal schedule. Do you ever have time to follow new theatre plays or cinema premiers? Do you follow the posts of any bloggers? Do you sometimes watch television dramas that are in the news?

Vladimir Putin: Frankly, I do not follow bloggers. I have long stopped watching anyone since I quit my job as the Director of the Federal Security Service.

As for sports and leisure, I have almost no leisure time, but I do get some exercise because I consider it my duty. I must be in good shape because otherwise it is difficult to work with my busy schedule, fulfilling the instructions of the Russian people.

Happy New Year to all of you! I wish you all the best!

Interview to NBC

2021-06-15T01:55:31+04:00

Vladimir Putin answered questions from NBC correspondent Keir Simmons. The interview was recorded on June 11 in the Kremlin.

Keir Simmons: Mr President, it's been a long time since you sat down with an American television network. Almost three years, I think. Thank you for your time. There's a lot to discuss. I hope we have time to get to all of the issues.

But I want to begin with some news from the US just today. In the US it's reported that Russia is preparing, perhaps within months, to supply Iran with an advanced satellite system, enabling Tehran to track military targets. Is that true? (COMPLETE MISTRANSLATION TWICE – ABOUT HACKING AND GIVING IRAN TECHNOLOGY FOR ITS NUCLEAR PROGRAM)

Vladimir Putin: Would you mind repeating the question again, that we are preparing to hack what kind of facilities?

Keir Simmons: No. It's in the report today that Russia is preparing to give or to offer to Iran a satellite technology which will enable Iran to target military, to make military targets. (Laughter.)

Vladimir Putin: No. We don't have that kind of programmes with Iran. No, it's just nonsense all over again, yet again. We have cooperation plans with Iran, including military and technical cooperation. And all of this fits the framework of the decisions that were agreed upon in our programme, in regard to Iran’s nuclear programme in the context of UN decisions together with our partners in the preparation of the JCPOA whereby some point sanctions, including in the area of military and technical cooperation, should be lifted from Iran. We have certain programmes which concern conventional weapons, if it gets that far. However, we haven't even gone to that stage yet. We don't even have any kind of real cooperation in the conventional weapons area. So if anybody is inventing something regarding modern space-based technology, this is just plain fiction. This is just fake news. At the very least, I don't know anything about this kind of thing. Those who are speaking about it probably know more about it. It's just nonsense, garbage.

Keir Simmons: So, presumably you'd agree that giving Iran satellite technology that might enable it to target US servicemen and women in places like Iraq or to share that information with Hezbollah or the Houthis in Yemen so they could target Israel and Saudi Arabia, that giving Iran that kind of satellite technology would be dangerous?

Vladimir Putin: Look, why are we talking about problems that don’t exist? There is no subject for discussion. Somebody has invented something, has made something up. Maybe this is just a bogus story so as to limit any kind of military and technical cooperation with Iran. I will say once again this is just some fake information that I have no knowledge about. For the first time I'm hearing about this information from you. We don't have this kind of intentions. And I'm not even sure that Iran is even able to accommodate this kind of technology. This is a separate subject, a very high-tech subject.

We don't rule out cooperation with many world nations in space. But probably everybody knows very well our position in terms that we are categorically against space militarisation all together. We believe that space should be free from any and all kinds of weapons located in near-Earth orbits. We don't have this kind of plans or any plans, especially concerning the transfer of technology of the level that you have just described.

Keir Simmons: Ok. Let's move on to your summit with President Biden.

The context for the summit is that he's meeting with the G7, a group that you used to belong to, with NATO, with European leaders. President Biden has defined his first trip to Europe as quote, ”about rallying the world's democracies.“ He views you as a leader of autocrats, who is determined to undermine the liberal democratic order. Is that true?

Vladimir Putin: Well, I don't know. Somebody presents it from a certain perspective. Somebody looks at the development of this situation and at yours truly in a different manner. All of this is being offered to the public in a way that is found to be expedient for the ruling circles of a certain country.

The fact that President Biden has been meeting up with his allies, there is nothing unusual about it. There's nothing unusual about a G7 meeting. We know what G7 is. I have been there on numerous occasions. I know what the values are in that forum. When people get together and discuss something, it's always good. It's better than not to get together and not to discuss. Because even in the context of the G7 there are matters that require ongoing attention and consideration because there are differences, strange as it may seem. There may be differences in assessments of international events on the international arena and among them. And very well then, let’s get together and discuss it.

As far as NATO, I have said on many occasions, ”This is a Cold War relic.“ It's something that was born in the Cold War era. I'm not sure why it still continues to exist.

There was a time and there was some talk that this organisation would be transformed. Now it has been kind of forgotten. We presume that it is a military organisation. It is an ally of the United States. Every once in a while, it makes sense to meet up with your allies, although I can have an idea of how the discussion goes on there. Clearly everything is decided by consensus. However, there is just one opinion that is correct. Whereas the other opinions are not quite that right, putting it in careful terms. Well, there we go. Allies are getting together. What's so unusual about it? I don't see anything unusual about it. As a matter of fact it's a sign of respect to the US allies before a summit between the US and Russian presidents. Probably it is being presented as desire to find out their opinion on the key issues of the current agenda, including those issues that President Biden and I will discuss. However, I'm inclined to think that despite all of these niceties, the United States, as far as their relationship with Russia, will be promoting what they consider important and necessary for themselves, above all for themselves, in their economic and military interests. However, to hear what their allies have to say about – it probably never hurts. This is working procedure.

Keir Simmons: So let's talk about your meeting with President Biden, the summit that will happen after those meetings. President Biden asked you to meet with him. He didn't make any preconditions. Were you surprised?

Vladimir Putin: No. We have a bilateral relationship that has deteriorated to what is the lowest point in recent years. However, there are matters that need a certain amount of comparing notes and identification and determination of mutual positions, so that matters that are of mutual interest can be dealt with in an efficient and effective way in the interests of both the United States and Russia. So, there is nothing unusual about it. In fact, despite this seemingly harsh rhetoric, we expected those suggestions because the US domestic political agenda made it impossible for us to restore the relationship at an acceptable level. This meeting should have taken place at some point. So, President Biden launched this initiative. Prior to that, as you know, he had supported the extension of the START treaty, which of course was bound to meet with support from our side. We believe that this treaty in the area of containment of strategic offensive weapons has been worked through and thoroughly, and meets our interests, and meets the US interests. So this offer could be expected.

Keir Simmons: Will you go into the summit agreeing to begin more arms control talks immediately after the summit? Because as you mentioned, President Biden has extended New START by five years. Washington would like that to be the beginning, not the end of that conversation.

Vladimir Putin: We know what matters and what problems Americans want to discuss with us, we understand these questions, matters and problems. We're prepared for this joint work. We have certain if not differences than different understandings of what pace – at what pace and in what directions we need to be moving. We know what constitutes priorities for the US side. And this is, generally speaking, a process that needs to be advanced at the professional level along the lines of the Foreign Ministry and Defence Ministry on the Russian side, the Pentagon and State Department of the US side. We are prepared for this work.

We've heard signals that the US side would like to see these negotiations resumed at the expert level of professionals. We will see if the conditions for this have been created following the summit. Of course, we are not saying no. We are ready to do this work.

Keir Simmons: President Biden wants predictability and stability. Is that what you want?

Vladimir Putin: Well, this is the most important thing. This is the most important value, if you will, in international affairs.

Keir Simmons: Sorry to interrupt you. But he would say that you have caused a lot of instability and unpredictability.

Vladimir Putin: Well, he says one thing. I say another thing. But maybe at some point in certain ways our rhetoric varies and is different. But if you ask my opinion now, I am telling you what it is. The most important value in international affairs is predictability and stability. And I believe that on the part of our US partners, this is something that we haven't seen in recent years. What kind of stability and predictability could there be if we remember the 2011 events in Libya where the country was essentially taken apart, broken down? What kind of stability and predictability was there?

There has been talk of a continued presence of troops in Afghanistan. And then all of a sudden, boom!, the troops are being withdrawn from Afghanistan. Is this predictability and stability again?

Now the Middle East events. Is this predictability and stability, what all of this will lead to? Or in Syria? What is stable and predictable about this?

I've asked my US counterparts, ”You want Assad to leave? Who will replace him? What will happen when he's replaced with somebody?“ The answer is odd. The answer is, ”I don't know.“ Well, if you don't know what will happen next, why change what there is? It could be a second Libya or another Afghanistan. Do we want this? No. Let us sit down together, talk, look for compromise solutions that are acceptable for all the parties. That is how stability is achieved. It cannot be achieved by imposing one particular point of view, the ”correct“ point of view, whereby all the other ones are incorrect. That's not how stability is achieved.

Keir Simmons: Let's get to some other issues. I want to just talk a little bit more about your relationship with President Biden. This will not be the Helsinki summit. President Biden is not President Trump. You once described President Trump as a bright person, talented. How would you describe President Biden?

Vladimir Putin: Well, even now, I believe that former US President Mr Trump is an extraordinary individual, a talented individual, otherwise he would not have become US President. He is a colourful individual. You may like him or not. And he didn't come from the US establishment. He had not been part of big time politics before, and some like it, some don’t like it but that is a fact.

President Biden, of course, is radically different from Mr Trump because President Biden is a career man. He has spent virtually his entire adulthood in politics. He has been doing it for a great deal of years and I have already said that and that is an obvious fact. Just think of the number of years he spent in the Senate, and how many years he was involved in the matters of international politics and disarmament, virtually at the expert level. That's a different kind of person, and it is my great hope that yes, there are some advantages, some disadvantages, but there will not be any knee-jerk reactions on behalf of the sitting US President, that we will be able to comply with certain rules of engagement, certain rules of communications and will be able to find points of contact and common points.

Keir Simmons: Well, President Biden said one time when you met, you were inches away from each other, close to each other. And he said to you, ”I'm looking into your eyes, and I can’t see a soul.“ And you said, ”We understand each other.“ Do you remember that exchange?

Vladimir Putin: As far as soul, I'm not sure. One has to think about what soul is. But I do not remember this particular part of our conversations, to be honest with you. I do not remember. We all, when we meet, when we get together, when we talk, when we work and strive and achieve some solutions, we all proceed from the interests of our nations and our states. And this is fundamental and is the bedrock of all our actions and intentions. And this is the driving force and the motive for organising meetings of this kind. And as far as soul goes, that's something for the church.

Keir Simmons: Yeah. You are a religious man. President Biden is saying he told you to your face, ”You don't have a soul.“ (Laughter.)

Vladimir Putin: I do not remember this. ”Something is wrong with my memory.“

Keir Simmons: He says it was about 10 years ago when he was vice president.

Vladimir Putin: Well, he probably has good memory. I do not rule this out, but I don't remember this. In personal encounters, people try to act appropriately. I do not remember any inappropriate elements of behavior on the part of my counterparts. I don't think that anything like that has happened. Perhaps he did say something, but I do not remember.

Keir Simmons: Would you have felt that was an inappropriate thing to say?

Vladimir Putin: Well, that depends on the context. It depends on what form they're said in. One can say this in different ways. It can be presented in different ways. But generally, people meet up in order to establish a relationship and create an environment and conditions for joint work, with a view to achieving some kind of positive results. If one is going to have a fight with somebody else why bother and have a meeting? One's better off looking into budget and social policies domestically. We have many issues that we have to resolve. What's the point then? It's just a waste of time.

Of course, one can present this for domestic political consumption, which I believe is what has been done in the US in the last two years, where the US-Russia relationship was sacrificed for the sake of a fierce political strife inside the US.

We can see that. We know it very well. We have been accused of all kinds of things: election interference, cyberattacks and so on and so forth. And not once, not one time did they bother to produce any kind of evidence or proof. Just unfounded accusations. I'm surprised that we have not yet been accused of provoking the Black Lives Matter movement. That would have been a good line of attack. But we didn’t do that.

Keir Simmons: What do you think of the Black Lives Matter movement?

Vladimir Putin: I think that, of course, this movement was used by one of the political forces domestically in the course of election campaigns. But there are some grounds for it. Let's remember Colin Powell who was Secretary of State, was in charge of the Pentagon. He even wrote in his book that even he as a high-ranking official had felt some kind of injustice towards himself his entire life as someone with a dark complexion.

Even from the Soviet days, we in Russia, we have always treated with understanding the fight of African Americans for their rights. And there are certain roots to it. And there is a certain foundation for this. But no matter how noble the goals that somebody is driven by, if it reaches certain extremes, if it spills over into… if it acquires elements of extremism, we cannot approve this. We cannot welcome it. So our attitude to this is very simple. We support African Americans' fight for their rights, but we are against any types and kinds of extremism, which unfortunately sometimes, regrettably, we witness these days.

Keir Simmons: You mention cyberattacks and deny any involvement by Russia. But Mr President, there is now a weight of evidence, a long list of alleged state-sponsored cyberattacks. Let me give you five.

There's a lot, but it makes a point. The US intelligence community says Russia interfered with the 2016 election. Election security officials said Russia tried to interfere with the 2020 election. Cybersecurity researchers said government hackers targeted COVID vaccine researchers, hacking for COVID vaccines.

In April, the Treasury Department said the SolarWinds attack was the world's worst, including nine federal agencies. And just before your summit, Microsoft says it has discovered another attack with targets including organisations that have criticised you, Mr Putin.

Mr President, are you waging a cyber war against America?

Vladimir Putin: Dear Keir, you have said that there is a weight of evidence of cyberattacks by Russia. And then you went on to list those official US agencies that have stated as much. Is that what you did?

Keir Simmons: Well, I'm giving you information about who said it so you can answer.

Vladimir Putin: Right. You are conveying information to me as to who said that. But where is evidence that this was indeed done? I will tell you that this person has said that, that person has said this. But where is the evidence? Where is proof? When there are charges without evidence, I can tell you that you can take your complaint to the International League of Sexual Reform (SIC).

This is a conversation that has no subject. Put something on the table so that we can look and respond. But there isn't anything like that.

One of the latest attacks, as far as I know, was against the pipeline system in the US. Right, yes. So what?

Keir Simmons: But this is… but you mention…

Vladimir Putin: Just a moment. As far as I know, the shareholders of this company even made a decision to pay the ransom. They paid off the cyber gangsters. If you have listed an entire set of US special services (powerful, global, respectable), after all they can find whoever the ransom was paid. And once they do that, they will realise that Russia has nothing to do with it.

Then there's the cyberattack against a meat processing plant. Next time they will say there was an attack against some Easter eggs. It's becoming farcical, like an ongoing farcical thing, never-ending farcical thing. You said ”plenty of evidence,“ but you haven't cited any proof. But again, this is an empty conversation, a pointless conversation. What exactly are we talking about? There's no proof.

Keir Simmons: You've moved on to this question of ransomware and criminals. Russian-speaking criminals is the allegation, are targeting the American way of life: food, gas, water, hospitals, transport. Why would you let Russian-speaking criminals disrupt your diplomacy? Wouldn't you want to know who's responsible?

Vladimir Putin: You know, the simplest thing to do would be for us to sit down calmly and agree on joint work in cyberspace. We did suggest that to Obama’s administration…

Keir Simmons: In September.

Vladimir Putin: In October. We started in September, and during his last year in office. In October at first they didn't say anything. Then in November, they came back to us and said that, yes, it was interesting. Then the election was lost.

We restated this proposal to Mr Trump's administration. The response was that it is interesting, but it didn't come to the point of actual negotiations.

There are grounds to believe that we can build an effort in this area with the new administration, that the domestic political situation in the US will not prevent this from happening. But we have proposed to do this work together. Let's agree on the principles of mutual work. Let's find out what we can do together. Let's agree on how we will structure counterefforts against the process that is gathering momentum. We here in the Russian Federation have cybercrimes that have increased many times over in the last few years. We are trying to respond to it. We are looking for cyber criminals. If we find them, we punish them.

We are willing to engage with international participants, including the United States. You are the ones who have refused to engage in joint work. What can we do? We cannot build this work, we cannot structure this work unilaterally.

Keir Simmons: Well, I'm not the government, Mr Putin. I'm just a journalist asking you questions.

Vladimir Putin: I understand that.

Keir Simmons: But if you clearly want to negotiate, you must have something to negotiate with. You don't ask for a truce unless you're fighting in a war.

Vladimir Putin: You know, as far as the war, NATO, and I'd like to draw your attention to that, has officially stated that it considers cyberspace a battlefield, an area of military action, and it conducts exercises in that battlefield.

Keir Simmons: And you are involved in that field.

Vladimir Putin: No.

Keir Simmons: Russia is fighting on that battlefield. Correct?

Vladimir Putin: No, no, that is not correct.

Keir Simmons: Really?

Vladimir Putin: That is not current. Really. If we wanted to do that… NATO said that it considers cyberspace an area of combat. And it prepares and even conducts exercises. What stops us from doing that? If you do that, we will do the same thing. But we don't want that, just like we don't want space militarised, in the same manner we don't want cyberspace militarised. And we have suggested on many occasions, agreeing on mutual work in the cybersecurity area in this area. But your government refuses to.

Keir Simmons: It isn’t, I mean. I saw your proposal from September, from just in September. Isn’t what you're proposing? That if you can come to an agreement over hacking and election interference, then you'll call off the hacking and the election interference if America agrees not to comment on your elections and your political opponents?

Vladimir Putin: What we count on is that nobody should interfere in domestic internal affairs of other countries, neither the US in ours nor we in the USA's political processes or any other nations. All nations of the world should be given an opportunity to develop calmly. Even if there are crisis situations they have to be resolved by the people domestically, without any influence or interference from the outside.

I don't think that this call by the US administration, today's administration is worth anything. It appears to me that the US government will still continue to interfere in the political processes in other countries. I don't think that this process can be stopped, because it has gained a lot of momentum. However, as far as joint work in cyberspace for the prevention of some unacceptable actions on the part of cyber criminals, that is definitely something that can be agreed upon. And it is our great hope that we will be able to establish this process with our US partners.

Keir Simmons: If you were in America, what would you fear might happen next? The lights being switched off the way they were in western Ukraine in 2015?

Vladimir Putin: You mean if I were in America, what I would be afraid of? Is that the question?

Keir Simmons: What should Americans worry about? What might happen next if there's no agreement on cyber?

Vladimir Putin: You know, this is just like space militarisation. This is a very dangerous area. At some point, in order to achieve something in the nuclear area in terms of confrontation in the area of nuclear weapons, the USSR and the United States did agree to contain this particular arms race. But cyberspace is a very sensitive area. As of today, a great deal of human endeavours rely upon digital technologies, including the functioning of government. And of course interference in those processes can cause a lot of damage and a lot of losses. And everybody understands that. And I am repeating for the third time: Let's sit down together and agree on joint work on how to achieve security in this area. That is all. What's bad about it? I don't even understand.

I'm not asking you. I'm not trying to put you on the spot. But for me as an ordinary citizen, it would not be clear and understandable, why is it that your government refuses to do it? Accusations keep coming, including up to interference, involvement in a cyberattack against some kind of a meat processing plant. But our proposal to start negotiations in this area are being turned down. This is some kind of nonsense, but that's exactly what's been happening.

I repeat one more time. It is my hope that we will be able to start engaging in positive work in this area.

In terms of what's to be afraid of, why is it that we suggest agreeing on something? Because what people can be afraid of in America, are worried about in America, the very same thing can be a danger to us. The US is a high-tech country. NATO has declared cyberspace an area of combat. That means they are planning something. They are preparing something. So obviously this cannot but worry us.

Keir Simmons: Do you fear that American intelligence is deep inside Russian systems and has the ability to do you a lot of damage in cyber?

Vladimir Putin: I'm not afraid, but I bear in mind that it is a possibility.

Keir Simmons: Let me ask you about human rights, an issue that President Biden will raise. Mr President, he'll raise the issue of Alexei Navalny, targeted for assassination, now in a Russian jail. Mr President, why are you so threatened by opposition?

Vladimir Putin: Who says that I feel threatened by opposition or we are threatened by opposition? Who told you that I’m scared by opposition? It's just funny.

Keir Simmons: Well, a Russian court has just… Excuse me, I’m sorry. A Russian court has just outlawed organisations connected to Mr Navalny. Literally every non-systemic opposition figure is facing criminal charges. In journalism Meduza and VTimes have been hit with ”foreign agent“ labels and face collapse. Mr President, it's as if dissent is simply not tolerated in Russia anymore.

Vladimir Putin: You are presenting it as dissent and intolerance towards dissent in Russia. We view it completely differently. You have mentioned the law on foreign agents, but that's not something that we invented. That law was passed back in the 1930s in the United States. And that law is much harsher than ours, and it is directed and intended, among other things, at preventing interference in the domestic political affairs of the United States.

Keir Simmons: But Mr President…

Vladimir Putin: And on the whole, I believe that it is justified.

Keir Simmons: Look, I’m just going to…

Vladimir Putin: Do you want me to keep answering?

Keir Simmons: In America, we call what you're doing now ”whataboutism.“ ”What about this? What about that?“ It's a way of not answering the question. Let me ask you a direct question.

Vladimir Putin: Let me answer. You've asked me a question. You are not liking my answer, so you're interrupting me. This is inappropriate. So there we go. In the United States, this law was adopted a long time ago. It's working, and sanctions under that law are much harsher than here, up to imprisonment.

Keir Simmons: There you go, still talking about the United States.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, yes. Again you are not letting me… But I will revert to us. I will go back to us. Don't worry. I will not just be focused on US problems. I will revert and go back, and comment on what's happening here.

Keir Simmons: Mr President, I thought your belief was that nations shouldn't intervene in other countries' domestic affairs, shouldn't comment on other countries’ politics. But there you are, doing it again.

Vladimir Putin: No. If you muster patience and let me finish saying what I mean to say, everything will be clear to you. But you are not liking my answer. You don't want my answer to be heard by your audience. That is the problem. You are shutting me down. Is that free expression? Is that free expression American way?

Keir Simmons: Please, answer.

Vladimir Putin: Here we go. The US adopted this law. We passed this law very recently in order to protect our society against outside interference. When in some of the states, a foreign observer comes to a polling station, the prosecutor says, ”Come a few feet closer, and you'll go to jail.“ Is that normal? Is that democracy in the modern world? But that is an actual practice in some of the states. We don't have anything like that.

When I talk about these laws, about non-interference or attempts at interference, what do I mean as applied to Russia? Many entities of the so-called ”civil society“ – the reason I say ”so-called civil society“ is because many of those entities are funded from abroad. Specific relevant action programs are prepared. Their core members are trained abroad. And when our official authorities see that, in order to prevent this kind of interference in our domestic affairs, we make relevant decisions and adopt relevant laws. And they are more lenient than yours.

We have a saying: ”Don't be mad at the mirror if you are ugly.“ It has nothing to do with you personally. But if somebody blames us for something, what I say is, ”Why don't you look at yourselves?“ You will see yourselves in the mirror, not us. There is nothing unusual about it.

As far as political activities and the political system, it is evolving. We have 44 registered parties. Well, 34, I think. And 32 are about to participate in various electoral processes across the country in September.

Keir Simmons: Those are the registered.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, yes.

Keir Simmons: We only have a limited amount of time, Mr President.

Vladimir Putin: There is also non-systemic opposition. You have said that some people have been detained. Some people are in prison. Yes, that is all true. You mentioned certain names.

Keir Simmons: Those are the ones that are being…

Vladimir Putin: Yes, yes. I will talk about it. Yes. I will not leave any of your questions unattended.

Keir Simmons: Alexei Navalny is his name.

Can I just ask you a direct question? Did you order Alexei Navalny's assassination?

Vladimir Putin: Of course not. We don't have this kind of habit, of assassinating anybody. That's one.

Number two is I want to ask you: Did you order the assassination of the woman who walked into the Congress and who was shot and killed by a policeman? Do you know that 450 individuals were arrested after entering the Congress? And they didn't go there to steal a laptop. They came with political demands. 450 people…

Keir Simmons: You're talking about the Capitol riot.

Vladimir Putin: …have been detained. They're facing a jail time, between 15 and 25 years. And they came to the Congress with political demands. Isn't that persecution for political opinions? Some have been accused of plotting to topple, to take over government power. Some are accused of robbery. They didn't go there to rob.

The people who you have mentioned, yes, they were convicted for violating their status, having been previously convicted, given convent, given suspended sentences which were essentially warning to not violate the Russian laws. And they completely ignored the requirements of the law. The court went on and passed and turned the conviction into real jail time. Thousands and thousands of people ignore requirements of the law – and they have nothing to do with political activities – in Russia every year and they go to jail. If somebody is actually using political activities as a shield to deal with their issues, including achieve their commercial goals, then it's something that they have to be held responsible for.

Keir Simmons: There you go again, Mr President. ”What about America?“ when I've asked you about Russia. Let me ask. You mentioned Congress. Let me ask you another direct question that you can answer. And it's an allegation that has been made, an accusation that has been made again and again now in the United States. The late John McCain in Congress called you a killer. When President Trump was asked, was told that you are a killer, he didn't deny it. When President Biden was asked whether he believes you are a killer, he said, ”I do.“ Mr President, are you a killer?

Vladimir Putin: Look, over my tenure, I've gotten used to attacks from all kinds of angles and from all kinds of areas under all kinds of pretexts and reasons and of different calibre and fierceness. And none of it surprises me. People with whom I work and with whom we argue, we are not bride and groom. We don't swear everlasting love and friendship. We are partners. And in some areas, we are rivals or competitors.

As far as harsh rhetoric, I think that this is an expression of overall US culture. Of course, in Hollywood, because we mentioned Hollywood at the beginning of our conversation, there are some deep things in Hollywood macho which can be treated as cinematographic art but more often than not it’s macho behavior that is part of US-political culture where it's considered normal.

By the way, not here. It is not considered normal here. If this rhetoric is followed by a suggestion to meet and discuss bilateral issues and matters of international policies, I see it as desire to engage in joint work. If this desire is serious, we're prepared to support it.

Keir Simmons: I don't think I heard you answer the question, the direct question, Mr President.

Vladimir Putin: I did answer. I will add, if you let me. I have heard dozens of such accusations, especially during the period of some grave events during our counterterrorism efforts in North Caucasus. And when it happens, I'm always guided by the interests of the Russian people and Russian state. And sentiments in terms of who calls somebody what, what kind of labels, this is not something I worry about in the least.

Keir Simmons: Let me give you some names. Anna Politkovskaya, shot dead. Alexander Litvinenko, poisoned by polonium. Sergei Magnitsky, allegedly beaten and died in prison. Boris Nemtsov, shot moments from the Kremlin, moments from here. Mikhail Lesin died of blunt trauma in Washington, DC. Are all of these a coincidence, Mr President? (Laughter.)

Vladimir Putin: Look, you know, I don't want to come across as being rude, but this looks like some kind of indigestion, except that it's verbal indigestion. You mentioned many individuals who indeed suffered and perished at different points in time for various reasons at the hand of different individuals.

You mentioned Lesin. Lesin used to work in my administration. I liked him very much. He died, he perished or died in the United States. I'm not sure if he perished or died. We should ask you how exactly he perished. I regret to this day that he is not with us. In my opinion, he's a very decent person.

As far as the others, we found some of the criminals who committed those crimes. Some are in prison, and we are prepared to continue to work in this mode and along this avenue, identifying everybody who violate the law and by their actions cause damage, including to the image of the Russian Federation.

However, just piling everything together is meaningless, inappropriate and baseless. If one sees it as a line of attack, then very well. Let me listen to it one more time. But I'd like to repeat that I have heard it many times. But this doesn't baffle me. I know which direction to move in to secure the interests of the Russian state.

Keir Simmons: Let's move on to Belarus and Ukraine, two issues that will certainly come up in your summit with President Biden. Did you have prior knowledge that a commercial airliner would be forced to land in Belarus and that a journalist would be arrested?

Vladimir Putin: No, I did not know about this. I didn't know about any airliner. I didn't know about the people who were detained there subsequently. I found out about it from the media. I didn't know, I didn't have a clue about any detainees. I don't know. It is of no interest to us.

Keir Simmons: You appear to have approved of it judging by your meeting with President Lukashenko soon afterwards.

Vladimir Putin: Not that I approve of it. Not that I condemn it. But, well, it happened. I said recently in one of the conversations with a European colleague, the version of Mr Lukashenko who told me about it was that information had been given to them that there was an explosive device on board the plane. They informed…

Keir Simmons: And you believe that?

Vladimir Putin: …the pilot without forcing the pilot to land. And the pilot made a decision to land in Minsk. That is all. Why should I not believe him? Ask the pilot. It's the simplest thing. Ask the chief pilot. Ask the commander of the aircraft. Did you ask him if was he forced to land? Because I have not heard or seen an interview with the commander of the aircraft that landed in Minsk. Why not ask him? Why not ask him if he was forced to land? Why don't you ask him? It's actually even odd. Everybody accuses Lukashenko, but the pilot hasn't been asked.

You know, I cannot but recall another similar situation where the plane of the President of Bolivia was forced to land in Vienna, the order of the US administration.

Air Force One, a presidential plane, was forced to land. The President was taken out of the aircraft. They searched the plane. And you don't even recall that. Do you think it was normal, that was good, but what Lukashenko did was bad?

Look, let us speak the same language and let us use the same concepts. If, well, Lukashenko is a gangster, how about the situation with the Bolivian President? Was it good? In Bolivia, they viewed it as humiliation of the whole country. But everybody kept mum not to aggravate the situation. Nobody is recalling that. By the way, this is not the only situation…

Keir Simmons: You’re recalling it.

Vladimir Putin: This is not the only situation of this kind.

Keir Simmons: With respect, you’re…

Vladimir Putin: If it’s him, you gave him an example to follow.

Keir Simmons: …recalling it, but it is a completely different example, Mr President. We are talking about (Laughter.) a commercial flight. Shouldn't people be able to take a commercial flight across Europe without fear of being shot down like in the case of MH-17 or forced down so that a dictator can arrest a journalist?

Vladimir Putin: Yes. Look, I will tell you one more time. What President Lukashenko told me, I don't have any reason not to believe him. For the third time, I'm telling you: Ask the pilot. Why don't you ask the pilot: Was he…

Keir Simmons: But you…

Vladimir Putin: …being scared? Was he being threatened? Was he being forced? The fact that information appeared that there was a bomb on the plane, that individuals, people who had nothing to do, who were passengers, who had nothing to do with politics or any kind of domestic conflicts, that they could perceive it negatively, could be worried about it, of course that's a bad thing. There is nothing good about this. And obviously, we condemn everything that has to do with this, and international terrorism, and the use of aircraft. Of course, we are against this. And you've told me that the landing of the aircraft of the President of Bolivia is a completely different matter.

Yes, it is different except that it is ten times worse than what was done, if anything was done in Belarus. But you just won't acknowledge it. You are ignoring it, and you want millions of people around the world to either not notice it or forget about it tomorrow. You won't get away with it. It won't happen.

Keir Simmons: In the case of neighbouring Ukraine earlier this year, the European Union said you had more than 100,000 troops on the Ukrainian border. Was that an attempt to get Washington's attention?

Vladimir Putin: Look, first, Ukraine itself constantly – and I think is still doing that – kept bringing personnel and military equipment to the conflict area in the southeast of Ukraine, Donbass. That's one. Two is that we conducted exercises in our territory and not just in the south of the Russian Federation but also in the Far East and in the north, in the Arctic.

Simultaneously, military exercises were being held in different parts of the Russian Federation. At the same time, the US was conducting military exercises in Alaska. Do you know anything about it? Probably not. But I'll tell you that I do know. And that is in direct proximity to our borders. But that's in your territory, on your land. We didn't even pay attention to it.

What is happening now? Now, at our southern borders, there is a war game, Defender Europe, 40,000 personnel, 15,000 units of military equipment. Part of them have been airlifted from the US continent directly to our borders. Did we airlift any of our military technology to the US borders? No, we did not.

Keir Simmons: Many of those…

Vladimir Putin: Why are you worried then?

Keir Simmons: But many of those exercises are a response to your actions, Mr President. Do you worry that your opposition to NATO has actually strengthened it? For six years, NATO has spent more on defence.

Vladimir Putin: Some defence. During the USSR era, Gorbachev, who is still, thank God, with us, got a promise, a verbal promise that there would be no NATO expansion to the east. Where is that…

Keir Simmons: Where is that…

Vladimir Putin: …promise? Two ways of expansion.

Keir Simmons: Where is that written down? Where is that promise written down?

Vladimir Putin: Right, right. Well done. Correct. You’ve got a point. Got you good. Well, congratulations. Of course, everything should be sealed and written on paper. But what was the point of expanding NATO to the east and bringing this infrastructure to our borders, and all of this before saying that we are the ones who have been acting aggressively?

Why? On what basis? Did Russia after the USSR collapsed present any threat to the US or European countries? We voluntarily withdrew our troops from Eastern Europe. Leaving them just on empty land. Our people there, military personnel for decades lived there in what was not normal conditions, including their children.

We went to tremendous expenses. And what did we get in response? We got in response infrastructure next to our borders. And now, you are saying that we are threatening somebody. We're conducting war games on a regular basis, including sometimes surprise military exercises. Why should it worry the NATO partners? I just don't understand that.

Keir Simmons: Will you commit now not to send any further Russian troops into Ukrainian sovereign territory?

Vladimir Putin: Look, did we say that we were planning to send our armed formations anywhere? We were conducting war games in our territory. How can this not be clear? I'm saying it again because I want your audience to hear it, your listeners to hear it both on the screens of their televisions and on the internet.

We conducted military exercises in our territory. Imagine if we sent our troops into direct proximity to your borders. What would have been your response? We didn't do that. We did it in our territory. You conducted war games in Alaska. God bless you. But you had crossed an ocean, brought thousands of personnel, thousands of units of military equipment close to our borders, and yet you believe that we are acting aggressively and somehow you're not acting aggressively. Just look at that. The pot calling the kettle black.

Keir Simmons: Moving on, the Biden administration has said that at your summit they will bring up the case of two US prisoners in Russia, Paul Whelan and Trevor Reed. They are two former Marines. Trevor Reed is suffering from COVID in prison. Why don't you release them ahead of the summit? Wouldn't that show goodwill?

Vladimir Putin: I know that we have certain US citizens who are in prison, have been convicted, found guilty. But if one considers the number of Russian Federation citizens who are in US prisons, then these numbers don't even compare. They cannot be compared. The United States has made a habit in the last few years of catching Russian Federation citizens in third countries and take them to back to the US in violation of all international legal norms and put them in prison.

Keir Simmons: It’s just that there's a limited amount of time, Mr President. Unless we can have more time, I'd be very happy to have to keep going for another 30 minutes.

Vladimir Putin: I determine the time here, so don't worry about time. Your guy, the Marine, he's just a drunk and a troublemaker. As they say here, he got himself shitfaced and started a fight. Among other things, he hit a cop. It's nothing. It's just a common crime. There is nothing to it.

As far as possible negotiations on the subject, sure it can be talked about. Obviously we'll raise the matter of our citizens who are in prison in the US. Yes, it can be a specific conversation. Sure. We're happy to do it although it doesn't seem that the US administration has raised that matter. But we're prepared to do that.

Our pilot Yaroshenko has been in prison in the US for a good, I don't know how many years, 15, maybe 20 years. And there also the problem seems to be a common crime. We could and should talk about it. We haven't been talking about this, but we could. If the US side is prepared to discuss it, so are we.

Keir Simmons: So his family will find that incredibly distressing to hear you talk about him that way. It does sound though as if you would consider some kind of a prisoner swap.

Vladimir Putin: There is nothing offensive about it. He got drunk on vodka and started a fight. He fought a cop. There is nothing offensive about it. These things happen in life. There is nothing horrible about it. It happens to our men as well. Somebody gulps down some vodka and starts a fight. So you violate the law, you go to prison. What would have happened if he'd fought a cop, if he'd hit a cop in your country? He would have been shot dead on that spot, and that’s the end of it. Isn't that the case?

Keir Simmons: And on the prisoner swap question, is that something that you would consider? Are you looking to negotiate? You're meeting with the President.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, of course. Even better would be a discussion of the possibility of entering into an agreement on extradition of individuals who are in prison. This is standard international practice. We have such agreements with several countries. We're prepared to enter into such an agreement with the United States.

Keir Simmons: Just to be clear so we hear it from you, which Russian prisoners in the US would you be hoping to bring back to Russia by name?

Vladimir Putin: Well, we have a whole list. I just mentioned a pilot, a pilot named Yaroshenko who was taken to the US from a third country and was given a lengthy sentence. He has major health issues, but the prison administration is not paying attention to this. You have mentioned that your citizen has coronavirus, but nobody's paying attention to the health issues of our citizen.

We're prepared to discuss these issues. Moreover, it makes sense, as you correctly said, and I completely agree with you, there are matters of humanitarian nature. And why not discuss them as long as they pertain to the health and life of specific individuals and of their families? Of course. Sure thing.

Keir Simmons: Just quickly before I move on, on the subject of prisons, again with Alexei Navalny, will you commit that you will personally ensure that Alexei Navalny will leave prison alive?

Vladimir Putin: Look, such decisions in this country are not made by the President. They're made by the court whether or not to set somebody free. As far as the health, all individuals who are in prison, that is something that the administration of the specific prison or penitentiary establishment is responsible for.

And there are medical facilities in penitentiaries that are perhaps not in the best condition. And they are the ones whose responsibility it is. And I hope that they do it properly. But to be honest, I have not visited such places for a long time.

I visited one in St Petersburg some time ago and that was a very grave impression that was made on me by the medical facilities in a prison. But since then, I hope, some things have been done to improve the situation. And I proceed from the premise that the person that you have mentioned, the same kind of measures will apply to that person, not in any way worse than to anybody else who happens to be in prison.

Keir Simmons: His name is Alexei Navalny. People will note that you weren't prepared to say…

Vladimir Putin: Oh, I don’t care.

Keir Simmons: …that he would leave prison alive.

Vladimir Putin: Please, listen to me carefully. His name can be anything. He's one of the individuals who are in prison. For me, he is one of the citizens of the Russian Federation who has been found guilty by a court of law and is in prison. There are many citizens like that.

By the way, our so-called prison population, the people who are in prison, has in the last few years been reduced by almost 50%, which I consider a big victory for us and a major sign of our legal system becoming more humane.

He will not be treated any worse than anybody else. Nobody should be given any kind of special treatment. It would be wrong. Everybody should be in an equal situation. This is called the most favoured nation treatment. Not worse than anybody else. And the person that you have mentioned, that applies to him as well.

Keir Simmons: Appreciate the extra time, Mr President. The team has been in quarantine for almost two weeks, so this interview is very important to us.

I want to ask you about China. China is working on its fourth aircraft carrier. It has two. Russia has one, and it's not in service at the moment. China refused to take part in arms control talks last year. You complain so much about NATO to your west. Why do you never complain about China's militarisation to your east?

Vladimir Putin: The first thing I want to say is that over the last few years, the last few decades, we have developed a strategic partnership relationship between Russia and China that previously had not been achieved in the history of our nations, a high level of trust and cooperation in all areas: in politics, in the economy, in the area of technology, in the area of military and technical cooperation. We do not believe that China is a threat to us. That's one. China is a friendly nation. It has not declared us an enemy, as the United States has done.

Keir Simmons: China hasn’t…

Vladimir Putin: Don’t you know anything about this? That's number one.

Number two is that China is a huge, powerful country, 1.5 billion. In terms of purchasing power parity, the Chinese economy has exceeded that of the United States. And in terms of trade for the previous year, last year, China has tied Europe for the first place, whereas the US has dropped to the second position. Do you know about this?

China has been developing. And I understand that what's beginning is a certain kind of confrontation with China. Everybody understands it. We can see it. Why hide from and be scared of these issues? However, we're not alarmed by it, including, among other things, by the fact that our defence sufficiency, which is how we describe it, is at a very high level, including because of this. But the most important thing is the nature and level of our relationship with China.

You said China will have four aircraft carriers. How many does the United States have?

Keir Simmons: A lot more.

Vladimir Putin: There you go. That's my point. Why would we worry about the Chinese aircraft carriers? On top of everything else, we have a hugely vast border with China, but it's a land border. It’s a land border. What? Do you think the Chinese aircraft carriers will cross our land border? This is just a meaningless conversation.

Keir Simmons: But you also have a Pacific coast.

Vladimir Putin: You are right, that there will be four of them. It is correct that there will be four of them. Right.

Coast? Well, the coast is huge. But the bulk of the border between us and China is a land border. And, yes you're right that there will be four of them because one needs to be in maintenance, one needs to be on combat duty, one needs to be in repairs. There is nothing excessive here for China.

That is why what you said, that China won't engage in negotiations on arms control, it refuses to negotiate reductions in nuclear offensive weapons. You should ask the Chinese about it, whether it's good or bad. It's for them to decide. But their arguments are simple and understandable: in terms of the amount of ammunition and warheads and delivery vehicles, the United States and Russia are far, far ahead of China. And the Chinese justly say, ”Why would we make reductions if we are already far behind what you have? Or do you want us to freeze our level of nuclear deterrence? Why should we freeze? Why we, a country with a 1.5 billion population, cannot at least set the goal of achieving your levels?“ These are all debatable issues that require thorough consideration. But making us responsible for China's position is just comical.

Keir Simmons: What do you think of China's treatment of the Uyghurs in Xinjiang?

Vladimir Putin: You know, I have met certain Uyghurs. It's always possible to find individuals who criticise the central authorities. I have met Uyghurs on my trips to China, and I assure you at the very least what I heard with my own ears, that on the whole they welcome the policies of the Chinese authorities in this area. They believe that China has done a great deal for people who live in this part of the country from the perspective of the economy, raising the cultural level, and so on and so forth. So why should I offer assessments looking at the situation from outside?

Keir Simmons: You know there are many Uyghurs who do not say that and that America has accused China of genocide. The Secretary of State has accused China of genocide against the Uyghurs. There is the accusation of a million Uyghurs in so-called concentration camps. Is that your message to the Muslim communities in the former Soviet Union? You don't think anything wrong is happening there?

Vladimir Putin: As far as the Muslim community in Russia, I need to give a message to it through policies of the Russian authorities vis-à-vis Muslims in the Russian Federation. That is how I need to give my message to the Muslim community in the Russian Federation. We're an observer in the Organisation of Islamic Conference.

About 10% of our population, probably a little more, are Muslims. They are citizens of the Russian Federation who do not have any other fatherland. They're making a colossal contribution to the development of our country. And that pertains to both clerics and ordinary citizens.

Why should I speak to and build a relationship with this part of our population by reference to the situation in China without understanding thoroughly what is happening there? I think that you're better off asking about all these problems the foreign minister of the People's Republic of China or the US State Department.

Keir Simmons: It's just a question of whether you are prepared to criticise China. China, for example, abstained on Crimea at the Security Council. China's biggest banks have not contravened American sanctions against Russia. Do you think you get 100% support from China?

Vladimir Putin: You know, we are neighbouring countries. One does not choose one's neighbours. We are pleased with the level, as I said, – unprecedentedly high level of our relationship as it has evolved over the last few decades, and we cherish it, just like our Chinese friends cherish it, which we can see. Why are you trying to drag us into some kind of matters that you evaluate as you see it fit for building your relationship with China? I will tell you completely… Can I speak…?

Keir Simmons: Please, yeah.

Vladimir Putin: Can I be completely honest? We can see attempts at destroying the relationship between Russia and China. We can see that those attempts are being made in practical policies. And your questions, too, have to do with it.

I have set forth my position for you. I believe that this is sufficient, and I'm confident that the Chinese leadership being aware of the totality of these matters, including the part of their population who are Uyghurs, will find the necessary solution to make sure that the situation remains stable and benefits the entire multi-million-strong Chinese people, including its Uyghur part.

Keir Simmons: You understand, of course, I'm just trying to question you about Russia's position in relation to China and the United States. Let me ask you in a different way. Are you splitting off from the US space programme and moving forward with China?

Vladimir Putin: No, why? We are prepared to work with the US in space. And I think recently the head of NASA said that he could not imagine development of space programmes without its partnership with Russia. We welcome this statement and we value it.

Keir Simmons: I’ll just explain. Because the head of the Russian space agency has threatened leaving the international space programme in 2025 and specifically talked about sanctions in relation to that threat.

Vladimir Putin: Well, honestly, I don't think that Mr Rogozin, that is the name of the head of Roscosmos, has threatened anyone in this regard. I've known him for many years, and I know that he is a supporter of expanding the relationship with the US in this area, in space.

Recently, the head of NASA spoke in the same vein. And I personally fully support this. And we have been working with great pleasure all of these years, and we're prepared to continue to work.

For technical reasons though, and that's a different matter, is that the International Space Station is coming to an end of its service life. And maybe in this regard, Roscosmos does not have plans to continue their work. However based on what I heard from our US partners, they, too, are looking at future cooperation in this particular segment in their certain way. But on the whole, the cooperation between our two countries in space is a great example of a situation where, despite any kind of problems in political relationships in recent years, it's an area where we have been able to maintain and preserve the partnership and both parties cherish it. I think you just misunderstood what the head of the Russian space programme said.

We are interested in continuing to work with the US in this direction, and we will continue to do so if our US partners don't refuse to do that. It doesn't mean that we need to work exclusively with the US. We have been working and will continue to work with China, which applies to all kinds of programmes, including exploring deep space. And I think there is nothing but positive information here. Frankly, I don't see any contradictions here. I don't think any mutual exclusivity here.

Keir Simmons: Let me ask you one more way just to understand the relationship between China, Russia and America. If the People's Liberation Army made a move on Taiwan how would Russia respond to that?

Vladimir Putin: What? Are you aware of China's plans to militarily solve the Taiwan problem? I don't know anything about it.

As we frequently say, politics do not require the subjunctive mood. The subjunctive mood is inappropriate in politics. There is no ”could be“ and ”would be“ in politics.

I cannot comment on anything that is not a current reality of the modern world. Please, bear with me. Don't be angry with me. But I think this is a question about nothing. This is not happening. Has China stated that it intends to solve the Taiwan problem militarily? It hasn't happened. For many years, China has been developing its relationship with Taiwan. There are different assessments. China has its own assessment. The US has a different assessment. Taiwan may have its different assessment of the situation. But fortunately, it hasn't come to a military clash.

Keir Simmons: I'm being told to wrap up. But if I could just ask you a couple more questions.

Vladimir Putin: Sure, please. Go ahead.

Keir Simmons: Our own Andrea Mitchell saw just this month the last border crossing into Syria where supplies literally keep people alive. You're threatening to close that crossing in July at the Security Council. Why would you do that, knowing that it will cause the death of refugees?

Vladimir Putin: Look, unfortunately, there are a great deal of tragedies there already. And all our actions in their totality need to be geared at stabilising the situation and bringing it into a normal course. And with support of Russia, Syria has been able, the Syrian authorities have been able to bring back under their control over 90% of the Syrian territory.

What needs to be set up now is just humanitarian assistance to people, irrespective of any kind of political context. But our partners in the West, in the West in general, both the US and Europeans have been saying that they're not going to give help to Assad. What does Assad have to do with it? Help out people who need that assistance. Just the most basic things. They won't even lift restrictions on supplies of medications and medical equipment even in the context of the coronavirus infection. But that is just inhumane. And this kind of cruel attitude to people cannot be explained in any way.

As far as the border crossings, there is the Idlib area where combatants are still robbing people, killing people, raping people. There is nothing's happening. There is the Al-Tanf Zone, which by the way is controlled by US military.

Recently there we caught a group of gangsters, bandits who came, who had come from there. And they directly said that they had specific goals as far as Russian military facilities. As far as border crossings, our position is such that assistance needs to be given just as it should be done in the entire world, as it is provided for in the provisions of international humanitarian law. Assistance should be given through the central government. It shouldn't be discriminated against. And if there are grounds to believe that the central government of Syria will plunder something, well, set up observers on the part of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent oversee everything.

I don't think that anybody in the Syrian government is interested in stealing some part of this humanitarian assistance. It just needs to be done through the central government. And in this sense, we support President Assad because a different mode of behavior would be undermining the sovereignty of the Syrian Arab Republic. And that's all.

As far as the Idlib zone, the Turkish troops there effectively control the border between Turkey and Syria, and convoys cross the border without any restrictions on their numbers in both directions.

Keir Simmons: Mr President, you extended the Constitution so that you could be President of Russia until 2036. Do you worry that the longer you are in power and without any sign of someone to replace you, the more instability there may be when you finally do choose to leave office?

Vladimir Putin: What will collapse overnight? If we look at the situation in which Russia was in the year 2000, where it was balancing on the brink of preserving its territorial integrity and sovereignty, the number of individuals below the poverty line was colossal. It was catastrophic.

The GDP level had dropped below anything that's acceptable. Our FX and gold reserves were $12 billion, whereas our foreign debt was $120 billion, if we count it in dollars.

Now, there are many other problems. The situation is completely different. Of course, somebody will come and replace me at some point. Is all of this going to collapse? We've been fighting international terrorism. We have nipped it in the bud. Is it supposed to come back to life? I don't think so. Another matter is that on the political scene, different people can emerge with different points of view. Great. Very good.

You know, I have linked my entire life, my entire fate to the fate of my country to such an extent that there isn't a more meaningful goal in my life than the strengthening of Russia. If anybody else, and if I see that person, even if that person is critical of some areas of what I have been doing, if I can see that this is an individual who has constructive views, that he or she is committed to this country and is prepared to sacrifice his entire life to this country, nor just some years, no matter his personal attitude to me, I will make sure, I will do everything to make sure that such people will get support.

It is a natural biological process. At some point, someday, we will all be replaced. You will be replaced at where you are. I will be replaced at where I am. But I am confident that the fundamental pillar of the Russian economy and statehood and its political system will be such that Russia will be firmly standing on its feet and look into the future confidently.

Keir Simmons: And would you look from that person for some kind of protection the same way that you offered to Boris Yeltsin when you took over?

Vladimir Putin: I am not even thinking about that. These are third-tier issues. The most important thing, the single most important thing is the fate of the country and the fate of its people.

Keir Simmons: Very good. Thank you very much for your time, Mr President. We've gone over, and I really appreciate it. It was a really interesting conversation, so thank you.

Vladimir Putin’s annual news conference

2020-12-20T10:41:50+04:00

The President of Russia held his annual news conference.

The news conference was broadcast live by Rossiya 1, Rossiya 24, Channel One, NTV and MIR television channels, as well as Mayak, Vesti FM and Radio Rossii radio stations. Public Television of Russia (OTR) and its site (http://www.otr-online.ru/online/) provided live sign language interpretation of the event.

Representatives of federal and foreign media worked at the World Trade Centre in Moscow. In addition, special platforms have been set up in all federal districts, where representatives of regional media could participate and ask their questions.

During the news conference the call centre continued to accept questions from individuals. Questions could be asked via the website https://moskva-putinu.ru or by using the Moskva-Putinu mobile app.

* * *

President of Russia Vladimir Putin: Good afternoon.

My greetings to all of you, here in Novo-Ogaryovo, in the call centre and across the regions of the Russian Federation, in Moscow and St Petersburg.

Today we are holding the traditional news conference to wind up this year’s results. Since COVID-19 prevented us from holding the Direct Line live, my colleagues have tried to merge these two events into a single one by introducing elements inspired by the Direct Line format into this news conference so that I can interact directly with people, hear what they have to say, what is going on in the country, and listen to their proposals on what more can be done in order to address matters in the best possible way and find effective solutions to the issues we face and deliver on our objectives.

Allow me to mention that over the past years it has become a good tradition for us to ensure that all the questions we get, and there are hundreds of thousands of them, are answered in one way or another. For that, I would like to thank my colleagues from the Presidential Executive Office, the Government, but first and foremost from non-governmental organisations: the Civic Chamber and the Russian Popular Front, the volunteers who contacted the people who took part in previous Direct Lines, talked to them, discussed the challenges pinpointed by these people, and quite often succeeded in resolving various matters that people were concerned with, and which probably remain relevant to this day.

I very much hope that we will do the same this year. I would like to ask volunteers, the Russian Popular Front to continue this wonderful practice, very useful for the country.

For me, I would like to emphasise, such events are not formal; I highly value them. Even though I have a vast flow of information about what is happening in the country reaching me through various channels, still, there is nothing more valuable than direct communication with the people, with Russian citizens, there is nothing more valuable than hearing their opinions about their lives and concerns, and again, what we need to do in order to have a better life.

You know, I would rather finish my opening remarks here. It would be a good idea to start the Q&A without wasting any more time. I would like to give the floor to Mr Peskov, who is at the call centre now. He will continue to moderate our meeting.

Mr Peskov, please.

Presidential Press Secretary Dmitry Peskov: Good afternoon, Mr President. Hello everyone.

Vladimir Putin: Good afternoon.

Dmitry Peskov: We have our participants scattered widely across our vast country, and I suggest we start from the easternmost point.

Vladivostok, please.

Once again, I urge everyone to be brief and dynamic so that as many journalists as possible have time to ask their questions.

Please, Vladivostok, help me out, for a start.

Dmitry Kaistro: Good evening. It is evening here already.

So this is Vladivostok, the capital of the country's largest federal district, the Far East. There are 50 correspondents here, and you can see how active they are. Each of them has their own established audience and their own questions for the head of state.

I suggest we begin now. We seem to have people here who really have something to say.

Mr Peskov, would you choose who will go first?

Dmitry Peskov: Could you show me the audience, please? Did I see Magadan there?

Dmitry Kaistro: Yes, the young lady in blue.

Lyudmila Shcherbakova: Good afternoon.

Magadan State Television and Radio Company. My name is Lyudmila Shcherbakova.

First of all, I would like to greet you Mr President, and all the spectators and the audience on behalf of Russia’s Far East and Magadan Region in particular.

I have the following question. We all know that this was a challenging year, to an extent that I can hardly find the right words to describe. Still, in your opinion, was this year all bad, or was there something positive as well?

Vladimir Putin: The year was… What do you mean by calling this a bad year? This is like the weather: is it good or bad? Weather is just the way it is. The same goes for the year: it had its ups and downs, as it always happens in life.

Of course, this year brought us a problem that is on everyone’s lips, and is a matter of concern for all of us: the coronavirus pandemic. However, not only Russia, the entire world has been hit by this scourge. We are fully aware of this, since over 70 million people have already been infected by the coronavirus, according to WHO data. This problem has affected all aspects of our lives.

What is a pandemic? It means lockdowns, curbed production, declining passenger and cargo traffic and all that goes with it. Unfortunately, it also means fewer jobs, and lower incomes. This has all become a reality.

At the same time, here is what I wanted to point out. First (and I will try to provide figures to back this up), despite the plethora of challenges we have been facing, and there has been plenty of problems, and we will discuss them today, since this is why we are here, the whole world has been submerged in this ocean of problems. Still, we can affirm in all confidence that we faced up to these problems with dignity and in some ways maybe even better than other countries of the world that have every right to be proud of their economies, social services and healthcare systems.

I have some prompts here (it is not my intention to delve deep into numbers since it sounds boring) to show you where we are right now. At this point in time, Russia’s GDP has fallen by 3.6 percent, which is less than in the leading European, EU countries, and less than in the United States. In some EU countries GDP has so far dropped by as much as 9 percent (I think this is the case in Great Britain).

We have industrial production down 3 percent now – mainly due to oil, because we have made the OPEC Plus deal and began to cut production, and this affected our overall performance. But there is also good news (better in some areas, worse in others, but we do have some improvements): yesterday, my colleagues from the Government reported to me that processing industries (manufacturing) showed 1.1 percent growth in November. This gives us reason to hope that this trend will continue, that we will move forward in this direction.

Over the past few years, our agricultural industry has posted good figures, and now, at the moment, it is somewhere around up 1.8. The Minister said agriculture might not even show a decline for the year, but an increase of up to 2 percent. I hope this will be the case.

Our banking sector is in a very satisfactory condition, with profits estimated at about 1.3 trillion rubles for the year. This definitely testifies to the financial system’s stability.

Real wages. I ask the country’s citizens, try not to be angry with me because what I will say now might not correspond to how people feel in real life; nevertheless, I am going to cite an averaged figure, and it also needs to be taken into account. I hope real wages will grow by about 1.5 percent by the end of the year across Russia, although unfortunately, there will be a decline in real disposable incomes. Why is this happening? What does it mean? Where does this difference come from? This has to do with the declining incomes of individual entrepreneurs, and the resulting changes. Overall, real incomes, unfortunately, will fall by around 3 percent.

Unemployment rate in Russian was 4.7 percent at the beginning of 2020; now, as you know, it has grown to 6.3 percent. We will certainly talk about this later.

Everything we do to support the economy, to support the affected industries, is aimed at maintaining employment. We have [unemployment at] 6.3 percent now, but I hope that over the next year, we will be able to bring it down to the earlier figures.

A positive trade balance can be considered a good indicator. It creates conditions for good macroeconomic development.

Our national debt had been at its lowest at $70 billion, in dollar terms. It shrank by another 10 billion since. We borrow less in foreign markets, while regularly servicing all our loan obligations. Our international reserves have grown. At the beginning of this year, they amounted to 554.4 billion; now, as of December 4, they are already about 587.7 billion. The same holds true for the National Wealth Fund. In ruble terms, it was 7.7 trillion, now it is almost 13.5 trillion. This is significant growth.

There is something I need to draw your attention to. What is an obviously positive part of our economic growth? As much as 70 percent of the Russian federal budget comes from non-oil and gas revenues now. This means, well, we are not entirely off the so-called oil and gas needle, but we are starting to get away from it. Even if someone still likes to think of Russia as a petrol station, they no longer have real grounds for that. Even though the dependence is still strong enough, and we have to bear this in mind.

Finally, this outgoing year is also associated with major national events, such as the 75th anniversary of Victory in the Great Patriotic War. Despite all the difficulties caused by the pandemic, we nevertheless celebrated it properly, with the Victory Parade on Red Square; and the Immortal Regiment march also took place, albeit online. These are all positive aspects.

But most importantly, there is something else I definitely need to mention now, and I would like to thank the citizens of our country for it: even in the most difficult circumstances, we have once again reaffirmed what underlies the Russian identity – people rallying together in the face of a threat. We have seen it all, the work of volunteers, the work of doctors – we bow down before them again as a sign of deepest gratitude – the prevailing attitude in society, people are ready to help and support their neighbours, those especially in need of help and support. That showed a nationwide unity – let alone the We Are Together volunteer campaign, which is just an external manifestation of the internal attitude in society – this, in my opinion, is something that determines our country and is a decisive factor. Once again, I would like to express my gratitude to everyone who took part in those major campaigns.

Thank you.

Dmitry Peskov: I would like to remind everyone that after asking your questions you should change the mike cover for a new one. After all, we must comply with the sanitary rules.

Let us proceed. The Kremlin pool, please, show us Novo-Ogaryovo.

We will give the floor to our largest holding, the VGTRK, Rossiya channel.

Alexei Petrov: Thank you. Alexei Petrov, Vesti news programme, Rossiya TV channel.

Mr President, face masks have become an unpleasant symbol of the times. It is obvious that the pandemic is the main event of the year. My question concerns the situation in the Russian healthcare system. How would you describe its state of readiness? How well has it responded and how well is it responding to the current challenges?

There is an important nuance here. Do you think the situation is being analysed? Are the shortcomings and drawbacks being considered? This includes the shortage and labelling of medications, something that has been spoken about many times, and our social activists have reported about this to you. What is the net result?

Another thing has to do with the primary care system reform. A lot of money has been invested in it. How will it proceed now in the light of the lessons of the pandemic?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Regarding the readiness of our healthcare system. Of course, not a single healthcare system in the world was ready for the scale of the problem we faced. There are simply no such systems. We are analysing everything that is taking place across the world, and we see that there are no such systems. But there are examples of how the pandemic response was organised in Russia. Compared to other countries, although we do have a great number, an ocean of problems, some of which you have mentioned, but compared to what was happening in the world our healthcare system has proved to be more effective.

I will now talk about medicine shortages and other problems – it goes without saying that the problems are still there, and we can see them all. It is evident from the incoming questions, and I can hear it in your question, it suggests that not everything has been resolved. But look, when the pandemic was only just starting, when the very first signals came from our friends in the People's Republic of China that there was a problem, we reacted immediately at the border, and – I have already said this many times – it bought us time to get prepared, so that when it all hit us on a large scale, we were ready.

It bought us time, we began to quickly deploy the healthcare system proper, as well as other measures to prevent a pandemic, and we did not waste any of that time. The required number of beds for coronavirus patients was 95, we are counting in millions, and the availability was only 50 percent; now we have 125 – sorry, I meant thousands – 125,000, and now we have 177,000 deployed, even 277,000 – a total of 277,000 beds deployed in a fairly short time. During that time, we have built 40 coronavirus centres: 30 of them were built quickly by the Ministry of Defence, and 10 by the regions. Overall, we will have 40, as the last one should be completed in the final days of 2020. This shows our ability to quickly respond to a problem.

Yesterday, when I was inspecting equipment, I spoke to a young woman working as a volunteer: at the time the pandemic began, we had very few doctors or specialists – 8,300, and now, there are 150,000 doctors working with this infection, and total medical staff numbers are more than half a million, some 520,000–530,000, I think.

What happened? We were able to quickly convert some of the medical institutions available for dealing with COVID and set up a retraining system for medical personnel. We introduced bonuses for people working in the ‘red zones’ in order to support our doctors, also 10,000 for senior students of medical universities, and 7,000 each for college students, as you know. We quickly expanded the production of personal protective equipment and suits, and disinfectants to sanitise premises. In some cases, the expansion was dramatic: for example, with the facemasks everyone is sick and tired of by now, we increased production 20 times, and this rarely happens.

Our healthcare system and state governance system in this area have shown that they can quickly mobilise resources, and they have done this. Incidentally, the required amount of medications has doubled. It is true that some regions have problems – I am aware of this and have just received information from the call centre based on what people say. There is a shortage of medications at hospitals, not to mention pharmacies, and free medications are not provided – I will say a few words about this as well. But these are not the same problems that we faced at the beginning. These problems have to do with logistics and purchase and delivery delays, but on the whole our industry has responded well enough.

At the beginning of the pandemic we did not know what we were facing, how to identify or test the disease, what treatment to use, and whether there would ever be an antidote, that is, a vaccine against it.

Just look now: we have moved forward a great deal in all of these areas. Russia is one of the world’s top three countries for COVID testing, and the WHO believes that mass testing is a way to deal with the problems created by the spreading infection. Take medications: we are now producing domestic medications in the necessary amount. And lastly, vaccination: Russia is the first country in the world to create and produce a vaccine, or vaccines created at the Gamaleya National Research Centre and at the Novosibirsk-based Vektor Centre. These are good vaccines, as I have said on numerous occasions, safe and effective: their efficacy rate is over 95 percent, approaching 96 or 97 percent, according to experts, and not a single case of serious side effects has been reported.

Thankfully, our foreign colleagues have changed their attitude towards us and are ready to collaborate in the areas where it is not working out for them. The Anglo-Swedish AstraZeneca is ready to work with us, and is in the process of signing a corresponding agreement. This is very good; I am really glad when top-notch specialists – this is a large and good company with a global reputation – join forces, including with their Russian partners. I have no doubt that this will have a very good result not just for our citizens, but for the world as a whole.

Everything I have said just now shows that although there are quite a few problems, our healthcare system has responded appropriately to the threats our citizens faced.

Turning to the question on primary healthcare, it is true, of course, that we had to channel the necessary resources into what I have just mentioned, fighting the coronavirus, helping doctors, volunteers, students, etc., and acquiring the required manufacturing capability as soon as possible. We have postponed the effort to upgrade primary healthcare, without forgetting about it or placing it on the back burner. Instead of launching this undertaking on July 1, we will begin on January 1, and all the resources that were to be spent on this programme will be engaged within the timeframe set out in the programme. This is 500 billion rubles from the federal budget and another 50 billion from regional budgets. Over the next three years or so, some 300 billion rubles will have been made available and used.

We have started improving some aspects of primary healthcare. This includes buying motor vehicles, for example. We need these vehicles right now, as I can see from the questions we have been receiving, but this is also part of the programme to develop primary healthcare.

Since we are on this topic, I would like to say that ensuring that all people enjoy access to medical services is what the efforts to develop primary healthcare are all about. I know that there are many issues here that need to be resolved without delay. This will be our priority. Of course, this is also about personnel training, infrastructure, etc.

As for your question on how to respond to challenges that arose in the course of the fight against the pandemic and have yet to be resolved, of course, we are looking into these issues. In this context, let me reiterate that our event today is essential since it provides us with massive feedback from all regions across the country, giving us a picture of what is being done in specific regions of the Russian Federation, and allowing us to respond to these developments and fine-tune our actions.

We can draw the obvious conclusion that we need to move towards building a better sanitary and epidemiological service and reforming it. We need to understand how many specialised hospital beds we need and in what regions, and how many specialists are required. This programme is ready by all accounts, and we will make it a reality.

Dmitry Peskov: Let’s move on. Ura.Ru.

Anton Olshannikov: Good afternoon, Mr President.

My name is Anton Olshannikov, from the Ura.Ru news agency.

The epidemic is a problem indeed, but life goes on, and in this regard, I have this compound question about life, concerning elections, the big campaign we are going to have next year.

How do you think this upcoming political campaign will differ from the last one? What will the political landscape be like in the country?

The second part of my question is about the old mainstream opposition parties. Isn’t it time for them to make way for young parties, and do these young parties even have a chance, given how they have shown themselves at the municipal elections?

And the last part of my question is about external interference. It is obviously quite possible, especially since this campaign is so important. How do you intend to block this interference?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: As for the 2021 parliamentary elections, there will be a few differences, of course, mainly because we have adopted amendments to the Constitution – this is my first point. This means that the parliament now has more powers in a number of areas, including in forming the Government of the Russian Federation. You know, I would like to repeat this again, the State Duma now in fact makes the final decision not only regarding the Prime Minister, but also on cabinet ministers and deputy prime ministers.

The President must sign the personnel decisions adopted by parliament. And this – I do not think everyone has fully realised this yet – this greatly augments the importance of the deputy corps’ work, of their responsibility to the country, including for the work of the Government. This link between parliament and the Government is extremely important, I think. This is the first point.

Second, about the new parties and whether the old political heavyweights should cede their places to them. This is not for the new parties or for the political heavyweights, that is, the traditional parties, but for our citizens, the voters to decide. They will decide at the elections which parties to support. But does our political system, which continues developing, offer an opportunity for more political forces and parties to participate in the general election campaigns? Yes, it does. I think, no, I am sure that next year up to 16 parties will be taking part in the elections without collecting signatures, as far as I am aware. This is because in accordance with our legislation they have won seats in several Russian regions and therefore have the right to try their hand on the national political stage.

I wish them every success, but I would like to repeat that it is for the voters to decide whom to elect. I would like to note in this connection that the traditional parties are well known and have been represented in parliament for many years. It should be said that different, sometimes widely different views are expressed in parliament, where heated debates are held on a number of priority matters facing the country. At the same time, nearly all these parties act patriotically in the interests of the nation while offering their own solutions to the problems the country is facing. Approaches and ways to address problems may differ, but the goal of all our traditional political parties is the same – the welfare and development of the country.

Dmitry Peskov: Let us move from Moscow to Siberia now. Novosibirsk, you have an opportunity to ask your question.

Anton Vernitsky: Mr President, you have mentioned Novosibirsk as a centre where one of our vaccines has been created. Allow me to take Mr Peskov’s place now and act as a moderator. Can I choose who will ask the question? The thing is that I have seen a poster with the word “vaccine” on it. Go ahead, please, but first introduce yourself.

Lyudmila Keibol: Lyudmila Keibol, Altai Territory.

Mr President, I would like to ask if you have been vaccinated. What do you think about compulsory vaccination if there are not enough pilot vaccine doses in the regions? The epidemiological situation is quite complicated in Altai Territory.

And one more question: will we have enough vaccine doses in Russia if we help out other countries?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Look here. I urge everyone to pay close attention to specialists’ recommendations. I see, Lyudmila, that you have put on a mask. This is great. And you have gloves as well.

Specialists are telling us that the vaccines that are now coming into civil circulation are designed for people in a certain age group. So vaccines have not yet reached people like me. Let me repeat that I am a law-abiding person in this sense, I follow the recommendations of our specialists, therefore I have not been vaccinated yet. But I will do it as soon as it becomes possible. This is the first point.

Now the second one: I hear from specialists that it is necessary to have an interval between, say a flu shot and the coronavirus vaccine. Some of them say it should be two weeks whereas others insist it should be at least four weeks. I am referring to the coronavirus vaccine.

The third point is about the need for a large-scale or universal vaccination campaign. I think it must be done. It is not only Russian virologists who say this but also their colleagues practically throughout the world. Mass vaccination is one of the few ways of dealing with all pandemic-related issues. It is this vaccination that will create nationwide, community immunity. And let me repeat once again: our vaccine is effective and safe. Therefore, I do not see any reasons for rejecting it.

Finally, the next issue that is related to aid to other countries, as you put it. First of all, as I have always said and will say it again because I want all people in this country to hear me, our task is to carry out vaccination inside the Russian Federation. There are some issues in this respect.

What are they? The vaccine itself and its components are good. But we are still short of the hardware, the equipment for producing the amount of the vaccine we need. I believe 70 million people have already got flu shots. This is large-scale vaccination all over the country. This is what we must also do to counter COVID-19. But to produce this vaccine, we need corresponding plants, companies and equipment. We will build them. I assume that all plans in this respect will be carried out. Next year, in the very beginning, we will already have millions of vaccine doses and we will keep increasing its production on and on.

With regard to cooperation with other countries, since we need time in order to boost the technological capabilities of our enterprises to produce the vaccine, nothing is preventing us from producing the components of this vaccine in other countries, which will invest their own money into expanding their production capacities and purchasing the corresponding equipment. This is what I am talking about. In no way does this interfere with vaccinating the public in Russia. On the contrary, it will even improve the final quality of the product, since increasingly it will be mass produced.

Anton Vernitsky: Mr President, let us continue the tradition Mr Peskov started here. (Addressing Lyudmila Keibol.) We would like to present you with a microphone windscreen. The fact is that you used the microphone without wearing a mask. Now you have it, so go ahead and use it.

Vladimir Putin: You are a perfectionist, I would say. But never mind.

Dmitry Peskov: Let us visit the call centre.

Nailya Asker-Zade: The call centre has received many pandemic-related questions, as well as questions about the doctors’ work during this challenging period. These questions were handled by a medical worker and volunteer Alevtina Kiselyova. She worked five months as a general practitioner at an outpatient clinic and saw COVID-19 patients.

Good afternoon, Alevtina,

Tell us what Russia’s citizens are complaining about.

Alevtina Kiselyova: Good afternoon,

We received many complaints about serious problems, including testing, getting a home visit by a doctor, and a lack of medications in both pharmacies and hospitals. At times, people waited over a week for an ambulance to arrive.

I also handled messages from the “red zone” doctors, which I would like to focus on.

Doctors from the town of Kola, Murmansk Region, and the town of Kachkanar, Sverdlovsk Region, have not once been paid a bonus for working with COVID-19 patients. The last time the bonus was paid to the military hospital personnel in Nizhny Novgorod and the doctors at an infectious disease hospital in the city of Tver was September.

We have received many requests from those who are risking their lives just as doctors but do not receive any additional payments for this. These are the support personnel – lift operators, cleaning staff and canteen workers. They are working in the risk zone, and the operation of the “red zone” would be impossible without them. I feel sorry for those who are at the forefront of the war against the pandemic but do not feel appreciated.

Mr President, we have a large number of questions regarding this, and we can give them to you so that you would issue instructions on dealing with every one of them. Mr President, is it possible to settle this problem?

Vladimir Putin: Thank you. Alevtina, was it you I talked with yesterday?

Alevtina Kiseleva: Yes, I talked with you yesterday.

Vladimir Putin: I see.

I have a question from the call centre, possibly from you, from the Ryazan Region: “We live in a small town, and we never have access to medications, free medications. Why do coronavirus patients have to pay for their medications? They said that confirmed cases would receive free medications, but we do not. Everyone I know is buying their own medications. Where is the money?” I would like to know this too. It is from Vladimir Korshunov, Ryazan Region.

Alevtina, this is what I would like to tell you and all those who have sent in their questions, including Mr Korshunov. We have indeed allocated 10 billion rubles to the regions for a prompt response to arising problems connected with the purchase of PPE and the preparation of medical centres and facilities for dealing with COVID. We have also allocated 5 billion rubles, or even slightly more, for the provision of free medications to those who receive treatment at home.

As for the Ryazan Region, I know for sure that all the approved allocations have been transferred from the federal budget to the region. It is not clear why these medications are not provided to the people; we will definitely look into the matter. Here is the procedure for receiving free medications: notify your outpatient clinic, which should confirm the diagnosis and provide the necessary medications.

Alevtina, we will systematise the complaints that you received, and respond to other similar complaints and requests. To reiterate, we gave 10 billion to the regions for institutions and personal protective equipment, and 5 billion to help people directly. Of course, we will investigate where this money went. All the money from the federal budget was made available to the regions. Some governors – I am in constant contact with all of them – are reporting back to me that the money is being disbursed. There may be, of course, isolated irregularities, I hope that this is the case. Judging by the number of complaints, though, these are not isolated instances, but a widespread problem. We will definitely take a closer look at it.

Alevtina Kiselyova: Thank you very much.

Dmitry Peskov: Let us go back to the World Trade Centre.

Introduce yourself, please.

Pyotr Marchenko: MIC Izvestia, REN TV channel.

Good afternoon, Mr President,

Thank you for the vaccine. Above all, thanks go to the researchers. However, talk about fighting the pandemic has overshadowed the issue of the origin of that scourge. The debate continues until now, with the United States accusing China, and China accusing the United States of the virus being man-made or non-man-made. What do we know about it? Perhaps you ordered the special services to get on it and find out the source of the problem?

Vladimir Putin: There are many rumours regarding its origin. I do not feel like discussing this in front of the entire country and the whole world, especially since we do not have any evidence to back up these accusations. I think we need to join our efforts in combating the problem rather than look for the culprits. Cooperation will be the right thing to do. This is my first point.

Secondly, some of our Western partners never stop emphasising that they adhere to humanistic principles in their domestic and foreign policies. So, we should think about how to help the people in particularly difficult circumstances and lift trade restrictions and sanctions for the countries and areas of cooperation that are critical for overcoming the pandemic fallout. Perhaps restrictions on supplying medications, medical equipment and doctor training should be lifted in the first place. This is what everyone should be thinking about rather than looking for the culprits.

I have to note that, fortunately, we are developing cooperation with many countries, including the People’s Republic of China, at the level of specialists, regional heads and at the federal level.

As for the tasks assigned to the special services: there are many various tasks, of course, but I believe this is not the right place to discuss how these tasks are fulfilled.

One of the earlier questions was about possible interference in our elections. I am sorry, I did not respond to it, but not because I do not want to answer it. I just thought there are other issues that are more important, and focused on them. But this is a general question. Of course, they will try to interfere, they always do, and not only in our elections, but almost all over the world. This is global policy. Just like there are bases all over the world, there is interference on a worldwide scale. We know about it and are getting ready for it. But we will be able to efficiently block it only if the overwhelming majority of our citizens understand that a) it is interference, b) we must counteract it, and c) it is unacceptable and we must determine our destiny ourselves.

It is very important that our society feels this. Therefore, the sentiments of internet bloggers, the sentiments of the media and their intention to protect themselves is a crucial thing, the protection of our sovereignty. At the same time, of course, we are open to cooperation with our partners and international observers.

I think there is no such transparency anywhere else in the world. In some US states, you know, there are over a dozen states where it is prohibited for any foreign observers to attend the elections. We are nothing like that. On the contrary, we are open, we will work, and observers inside the country are working actively, including public organisations, the Civic Chamber, and others, and they are allowed to take part as observers. There are more opportunities for political parties and the media to observe the political processes inside the country, as it was before. We will definitely boost this activity to make our citizens confident that the elections are open and transparent and that their results should be respected.

Dmitry Peskov: We will stay at the World Trade Centre. Alexander Gamov, one of the most prominent members of the presidential pool, go ahead, please.

Alexander Gamov: Mr President, first, thank you very much for holding this countrywide gathering, I almost called it a Union-wide one, since it is so great for us to come together at this time and get an opportunity to tell you the truth.

In general, you know that the coronavirus has dealt a heavy blow to the standard of living of many people. I come from the regions, and I get a lot of phone calls from there with people saying that they find it extremely difficult to get by, worse than ever before: poverty is on the rise, and poor people are getting even poorer, with unemployment, the falling ruble, growing prices and higher mortality. Also, I wanted to tell you that prices have been gradually increasing since about September or August. Why did it take until December to start talking about it? A minister would not sweat until cornered by the President, it seems.

Could you tell us, please, whether there is a programme for resolving the issue with growing prices within a week, as you have said? Does the President or the Government have a programme to help Russia in the coming weeks?

Thank you very much. I represent the Komsomolskaya Pravda website, radio station and newspaper. Alexander Gamov.

Vladimir Putin: As I have said at the outset, this is a challenging situation. When I said that the pandemic caused the shutdown of several manufacturers, rising unemployment and a decline in disposable incomes, these were not empty words, and not something that can be overlooked. This means that we see and understand what is going on.

You said that things have never been as hard as they are today. This is not so. In 2000, 29 percent of the population lived below the poverty line. Almost one third of the country earned less than the subsistence level. One person out of three lived below the poverty line earning less than the subsistence level.

In 2017, we had 12.3 percent of the population below the poverty line. Unfortunately, today this level increased to 13.5 percent, due to all these problems. Of course, 20 million people is still too many.

You asked me whether there is a plan. Of course, there is a plan. Reducing the number of people below the poverty line is one of our key priorities. Let me elaborate on this subject.

First, here is the plan: by 2030, we need to bring down the share of the population living in poverty from the current 13.5 percent to 6.5 percent. Having 6.5 percent of the population earning less than the subsistence level is still not good, but we need to be realistic. This is a far-reaching, but feasible goal. This is the first point I wanted to make.

Now about prices. It is true that some prices are growing for objective reasons, for example, because the cost of their component parts has increased due to changes in the exchange rate. This is inevitable. Some products are only assembled in Russia, and we are now paying more for a large share of component parts, which have become more expensive because the ruble has slumped a bit.

But when the price hike is not related to objective reasons, this provokes a painful reaction. This is what made me angry, frankly speaking. For example, although we had a record large harvest this year, the largest harvest in the past six years – it will be 131 million tonnes and possibly even 134 million tonnes this year, yet bread and pasta prices are growing. How is that? Why? This is the first thing I wanted to say.

Second, sugar. I was told in the past that we should do something about cane sugar so as to support our own producers. We did so, in a number of ways, but not because we wanted to create a shortage on the domestic market. The minister has told me that we produce enough sugar for domestic consumption. But how can it be enough if sugar prices have soared by 75 percent?

Or take sunflower oil: prices have grown by 17 percent. Is there a shortage of sunflower seeds? No. There is also plenty of that. Why did it happen then? Because prices have grown on the global market, and so our producers increased exports and started adjusting domestic prices to global ones, which is absolutely unacceptable.

This is why we had such a tough discussion. The Government has responded. The main thing now is not to go too far with disciplinary action. This should have been done before with market measures; we should have adjusted the import duty, and this would have solved the problem. These are well known instruments, but they should be used on time. I hope we will do this now.

Contracts have been signed or will be signed – I think they have already been signed – between producers and retail chains: producers will bring down their prices to a certain level, and the retail chains should do the same for basic foods.

Of course, prices need to be monitored, and we will certainly do this. I hope to see the required changes within days, or weeks at the most.

Now about what can and must be done and what we are doing to help the people in this difficult period.

To begin with, we have substantially increased unemployment benefits since the unemployment rate has grown from 4.7 percent to 6.3 percent. This is common knowledge.

But the most difficult situation is taking shape in families with children, and we have created a whole programme to support families with children: from zero to 1.5 years, from 1.5 to three years and from three to seven years old. We have introduced an allowance for toddlers from zero to 1.5 years, and the rules are as follows: if every family member receives less than two subsistence minimums (at first, it was was 1.5, but later we expanded this programme and now it covers more people), such families are entitled to receive one child subsistence minimum for every child. As for children from 1.5 to three years of age, if their parents’ incomes are below these levels, they can receive the same payments but from the maternity capital: we have given them the right to receive these funds from the maternity capital. And, finally, for children aged between three and seven years we have introduced the following rule: if the income of each family member is below the subsistence minimum, they will start getting half of the subsistence minimum per each child. However, we decided from the very start to analyse this situation and see how it will affect the incomes of families. If not all families reach one subsistence minimum per member, starting January 1, that is, in two weeks from now, we will be already paying them one subsistence minimum for every child.

These are, so to speak, urgent measures to support Russian families. I did not mention lump sum payments for all children under 16.

And then there is support for the labour market. We will probably talk about it later on, and I will speak about it separately, so as not to drag out the answer to your question. However, this is certainly one of the key issues, therefore I allow myself to devote more time to it.

But the main point, of course, is that we need to develop the economy, reach the national development goals and implement national projects that contain these goals, create new jobs, raise the economy to a new level meeting the latest requirements, as well as develop artificial intelligence, digitisation and modern production lines that would allow people to have interesting jobs and receive decent incomes. The entire package of our measures envisaged by the national projects is aimed at reaching these goals.

Dmitry Peskov: Let’s not forget about the regions.

Yekaterinburg, please. We have not had any questions from Yekaterinburg yet.

Olga Armyakova: Colleagues, good afternoon. This is Yekaterinburg, the capital of the Urals.

We are broadcasting from the office of the presidential envoy, where journalists from all over the Ural Federal District have gathered. Accreditation has been approved for 70 journalists, but only 69 are present now. We learned why just a minute ago. Colleagues, I must share this with you: a journalist from a local news agency could not come to the news conference because she had a son yesterday. I think that is a good reason, and that you, Mr President, will accept it. As for the others, you can see that they are all ready to leap into action, to ask their questions.

Mr Peskov, what will we do? Will you choose the questions yourself?

Dmitry Peskov: Can you show me the room?

Olga Armyakova: Yes, of course.

Dmitry Peskov: Show me the room, please.

Right there, in the front row, with the “Waste” poster. Let’s have your question.

Olga Armyakova: The front row, please, go ahead.

You can remove the face mask, and don’t forget to introduce yourself. And then ask your question.

Olga Balabanova: Good afternoon, Mr President. Olga Balabanova from Magnitogorsky Metall newspaper, Magnitogorsk.

I have an environmental question, about waste management reform. As everyone is aware, it was officially launched in January 2019, but in fact it began long before that, five years ago. At any rate, a concession agreement was signed and a project was drafted in my city in 2015, but it came to a halt at the government expert review level. It looks as if they have started building [the recycling plant] now.

Why is the reform, which is vitally important for the whole country, dragging on in all regions, and what can be done about this?

Vladimir Putin: I do not think it is dragging on, this reform. There are many problems with organising production but the reform itself is proceeding.

There are several large objectives.

First, we must create a new industry, full-cycle production, when waste is not taken to landfills but recycled for use in other sectors. This is the first objective.

Second, we must ensure proper waste sorting so that by 2030 waste can be separated into different groups for subsequent recycling.

Currently, one of the tasks for the organisers of all this work is to ensure that manufacturers and packaging companies carry more responsibility so that the burden of waste disposal could shift from customers to packaging producers.

Overall, this is a practice typical almost everywhere in the world, and we will adhere to this very practice. For example, in car manufacturing, we charge a recycling fee. It works in our country and in the rest of the world. The same needs to be done in these areas.

I assure you that the Government is dealing with this, as are regional authorities. And they will continue to work on this, no question about that. We allocate substantial resources for these efforts, and there is a solid plan. This money will not be reassigned to any other purpose, and this work will be completed according to plan.

Since you are from Magnitogorsk, you know, one of the questions I have here has to do with Magnitogorsk and atmospheric emissions. The person asking the question wrote about what is happening in Magnitogorsk in relation to atmospheric emissions. Frankly speaking, I was a bit surprised because I know that over the past few years, the Magnitogorsk Iron and Steel Works has invested significant resources into upgrading its production facilities with the specific intention of reducing emissions and, according to the reports I received, the emissions have indeed decreased. And then I read this.

Olga, what do you think? What is happening in Magnitogorsk in terms of atmospheric emissions?

Olga Balabanova: Perhaps, as a patriot (I work for a newspaper associated with this plant), I believe that if waste treatment facilities were built, it is not a window you can open or close, as one of my friends says. It is an entire complex of facilities. My fellow residents may tear me to pieces for my words, but I think that many people take the fog they can see over the left riverbank for smog. In fact, the tank was separated from the plant with a closed circuit system. The water there is warm and does not freeze, which often produces fog. People look at it from the right bank and think that they see smog over the left bank. There are other production facilities in the city, such as a poultry factory, that may produce the smell that people often notice. But I do not think that the situation is as critical as they like to inflate it on social media.

Vladimir Putin: Right, but this inquiry did not come from social media but from a specific person in Magnitogorsk. It is not social media.

Olga Balabanova: We read about this on social media as well. Perhaps there is a problem, but the plant is dealing with it, and I do not think these are just idle promises.

Vladimir Putin: I asked because I know that the plant has invested heavily in reducing emissions, much more than other metallurgical production centres. And in fact emissions have gone down, when measuring in tonnes. So, this came as a surprise to me. It seems that this matter does deserve some attention in general.

Speaking about the environment, we are working on deploying a network of sensors across the country where polluters are especially active. Metallurgical production centres will be first on the list, and the system will be paid for by the companies themselves. I believe we will act accordingly in Magnitogorsk, and we will closely monitor, probably in a more objective manner what is happening there.

Thank you very much.

You know, there was a question earlier, if I may interrupt our presenters, on teachers’ salaries. “A top-category teacher in a rural area working 18 hours, which is full-time employment for a teacher, earns the same salary as a cleaning lady at the same school” – this is what Sergei Stepanchenko wrote us. This is a burning issue. This is why I picked it from this folder with many similar questions.

Do you see what has happened here? I will tell you what happened and what needs to be done.

Why did this happen? We took a decision that the minimum wage cannot be below the subsistence level, which led to an increase in salaries. This led to what you mentioned in your letter: the minimum wage cannot be less than the subsistence level, so the minimum wage went up, and a cleaning lady no longer earns less than minimum wage. She now has a higher salary. This had to be accompanied by an increase in salaries for other categories, but it was not done due to budget constraints. But the government will have to do this regardless. For this reason I would like to draw the Government’s attention to the fact that this state of affairs is far from normal.

Dmitry Peskov: Let us go back to the World Trade Centre. We gave the floor to the most seasoned journalist here, now I want to give the floor to an aspiring journalist. I saw Sergei Shnurov there. Please give him the microphone.

Sergei Shnurov: Good afternoon, Mr President,

Sergei Shnurov, RTVI international channel.

I will leave the high-profile questions about Navalny to my colleagues, I will be nicer this time. Since I work for an international channel, my question is as follows: why did Russian hackers not help Trump get reelected? Have they all gone to the Silicon Valley already? No one is left behind, as you like to say. What kind of job can Trump count on now? Will you provide him with shelter if he asks for political asylum, like Snowden? This was an open-ended question coming from the channel.

Now, a question from me: how can an ordinary Russian, someone representing the majority of the population in our country, describe this life without using profane language?

Vladimir Putin: I will start with the final part of your question. Just go back to the classics of Soviet cinema. Remember, when you have a radiator section land on your foot, you should say, “you dirty so-and-so?” instead of using curse words. Russian is rich enough to let anyone get his or her message across clearly and intelligibly, without resorting to the strong language you referred to.

I want to thank you for not using it now, as you sometimes do, as I understand, from stage, addressing large audiences. Thank you very much for being courteous today.

Why did Russian hackers not help Trump get reelected? I believe that this is not so much a question as a provocation. Russian hackers did not help the incumbent president of the United States to get elected the first time around and did not interfere in the domestic affairs of that great power. This is nothing but speculation and an excuse to degrade relations between Russia and the United States. This is an excuse to not recognise the incumbent US president’s legitimacy for domestic US considerations. In this sense, Russia-US relations have become hostage to domestic politics in the United States.

I believe that, primarily, this is bad for the United States, but it is up to them, let them do as they please. We believe that the president-elect will figure out what is going on. He is a seasoned politician both in domestic and foreign affairs. We look forward to the new administration resolving at least some of the existing problems.

I do not think Mr Trump will need to look for employment. Almost 50 percent of the people voted for him, if you count the number of registered voters, not electors. He relies on a fairly large base in the United States and, as far as I understand, is not going to leave his country’s political scene.

Dmitry Peskov: Let us now turn to Novo-Ogaryovo and the Kremlin pool reporters, who are in the same room with the President.

LIFE, go ahead please.

Alexander Yunashev: Good afternoon, Mr President.

I will take the advice from the young reporter. A number of interesting investigative reports have been released lately, for example, about your daughter, your former son-in-law Shamalov and other people who are allegedly close to you. This week the Alexei Navalny investigation also came out. Could you tell us why a criminal investigation into his poisoning and who did it has not been launched until now?

Vladimir Putin. I see.

It is no surprise that these fake news stories emerge. It has always been this way and always will. There is a battle unfolding in the media space. Nothing new here. Do you remember the terrible developments in the Caucasus and efforts to fight international terrorism? How was yours truly portrayed by the international media and, unfortunately, in Russia as well? Remember how they portrayed me with fangs? I remember all this very well. Still, I have invariably proceeded from the premise that I need to be doing what I believe to be right for our country. When I do something, I do it not for the sake of pleasing someone abroad. This is the first part of my answer.

The second part has to do with my close ones. This report is impossible to read. I flipped through it, since it talks about me, it seems, but it is such a cut-and-paste job, with so many things piling up, that I was unable to finish reading it. What did I want to point out in this regard? The report keeps repeating “the president’s son-in-law” over and over again. At the end, however, he is referred to as the former son-in-law. This is the first thing I wanted to say. Still, in the text they keep driving home the message that he is my son-in-law. So this goes for point one.

The second point is about “President Putin forbidding the elite to hold overseas assets.” There is no ban preventing the elite from holding assets abroad. Public servants cannot have financial assets abroad. This was the right thing to do. They cannot hold accounts or other financial assets abroad. The company in question is 100-percent private. The state does not own a single share in it.

The next question: who received shares in this company and how? It turns out that the company released a statement on this matter and what it thinks about these allegations. The company had a compensation scheme for its senior executives, and Mr Shamalov received stock just like all other senior executives. There are also other programmes for executives at a different level, and they received stock following a different scheme. Nothing special here.

But ultimately, in my opinion, the most important thing is this: just now, aspiring journalist Shnurov asked about our hackers. What is written in the beginning? Note that it says that an unknown, anonymous person is pursuing goals we do not understand and then, apparently, this anonymous person is tracked down. What do I mean? It is said that what happened is similar to the events in 2016 when outlawed Russian hackers associated with Russian military intelligence hacked US Democratic Party members’ emails. Here is your anonymous person. I think we know who that is. Who called these hackers outlaws associated with Russian military intelligence? It was the US Department of State and US intelligence agencies, which are in fact the authors. At any rate, it is completely obvious that it was done upon their instructions. This is the first thing.

The second is that the reference to the insinuation that our hackers, as they believe, interfered with US domestic policy in 2016 means that the purpose of this is clear. The purpose is to take revenge and try to influence public opinion in our country in order to interfere, of course, with our domestic politics. This is absolutely obvious. It is absolutely obvious to me and, I think, it will also become clear to the majority of readers if they pay attention to the things I have just mentioned.

But to this end, I would like to emphasise the following:

One should be driven by… now I want to address those who ordered these publications, not those who actually wrote them. I know that if they get an assignment from intelligence services they have to write it. But those who order these kinds of articles, should not be driven by revenge or act on the assumption of alleged exceptionalism; instead, they should develop relations with their international partners based on mutual respect and the fundamental standards of international law. Then we will be able to achieve shared success in the areas that are essential to all of us.

Now, with regard to the patient of a Berlin clinic. I have already mentioned it many times, and can repeat only certain things. Mr Peskov told me just yesterday about the latest speculations in this regard concerning our special service officers’ data and so on. Listen, we are perfectly aware of what this is all about. It is about legalisation the first time around and now. This is not about an investigation. This is about legalising the materials from the US special services.

Do you really think we are unaware of the fact that they are tracking locations? Our special services understand this well and are aware of it. Officers of the FSB and other special services are aware of it and use telephones whenever they believe they should not be hiding their location, etc. But if this is so – and rest assured that this is so – it means that this patient of a Berlin clinic has the support of the special services, those of the United States in this particular case. And if this is the case, then it gets interesting and the special services should, of course, be looking after him. However, this does not mean at all that he must be poisoned. Who cares about him? If they really wanted to, they would have, most likely, carried it through. His wife addressed me, and I gave the green light to have him treated in Germany that very second.

There is one important thing that the general public is not paying attention to. It is a trick to attack the people at the top. Those who perform it thus propel themselves up to a certain level where they can say: see who I am talking to? I am a person of the same calibre, so treat me as a person of nationwide importance. It is a well-known trick that is used in political dealings around the world.

I think, though, that something else, not these tricks, should be used to gain people’s respect and recognition. You need to prove your worth either by doing something important or by putting together a realistic programme with specific goals that can be implemented in a particular country, Russia, in this particular case.

I urge the opponents to the current government and all political forces in our country to be led not by personal ambitions, but by the interests of the people of the Russian Federation, and to come up with a positive agenda in order to overcome the challenges facing the country. And we have many of them.

Dmitry Peskov: Moving on to Rostov-on-Don.

Go ahead, please.

Aina Nikolayeva: Good afternoon, Mr President. Good afternoon, colleagues.

We are here at Don State Technical University. This is where the staff for the region’s major manufacturers like Rostselmash is educated. But today we have people with a humanities bent, mostly my colleagues, journalists. If you allow me, I will not waste your time anymore and pass the microphone to them.

Sofia Brykanova: Good afternoon.

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to ask a question.

Mr President, I have what has become a traditional question for your news conferences, about Donbass. It is invariably relevant to our region.

Aina Nikolayeva: Please, introduce yourself.

Sofia Brykanova: I am sorry. Sofia Brykanova, Don-24 news agency.

I have the following question: what prospects do you see for settling the conflict in Donbass and what, in your opinion, does the future hold for Russian-Ukrainian relations?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Regarding the future of Russian-Ukrainian relations, this largely depends on the Ukrainian government, rather than Ukraine itself, I would say. After all, all the preceding heads of state, just as the current one, Vladimir Zelensky, came to power with slogans on unifying the country, which, at the end of the day, included building a relationship with Russia. But they have not been able to deliver on this promise so far. In fact, on their way to power they garner support from a majority of the people and voters, but when they get there, they hesitate and start looking back at the extreme nationalist forces. I think they simply lack the political courage. And the process stalls.

This is what is happening right now, more or less. Thank goodness, when we met in Paris within the Normandy Format, we agreed on ending hostilities. This is holding, which is a major achievement. An exchange of detainees has taken place.

However, there has been no progress in removing economic and social restrictions. In fact, nothing has been done to advance a political settlement. Moreover, officials in Kiev have said time and again that they do not intend to abide by the Minsk agreements and have suggested revising their key provisions.

I would like to draw your attention to the fact that the Minsk agreements have been confirmed by a UN Security Council resolution, which means that they are international law. As such, they cannot be subject to unilateral revision. They have to respect the other side that signed the agreements, namely Donbass representatives.

For these reasons, I believe a settlement is inevitable. It will happen sooner or later. The question is when. Let me reiterate that this largely depends on the current Ukrainian government.

Russia will keep supporting Donbass as it has been. We will even increase our support. This includes supporting manufacturing, resolving social and infrastructural issues, etc. We will calmly proceed in this direction. Make no mistake, we understand the complicated situation in Donbass. Again, we will remain proactively involved not only on the humanitarian front, but also through direct cooperation.

Dmitry Peskov: Now let’s take a question from Nizhny Novgorod. Nizhny Novgorod, please.

Yevgeny Khvan: Good afternoon, Mr President, Mr Peskov.

This is Nizhny Novgorod, the capital of the Volga Federal District. We have more than 70 journalists in our studio today. Of course, I can see everybody holding colourful posters. But allow me, as moderator, to choose a question based on the format of this news conference. Mr Peskov, will you allow me or will you choose yourself?

Dmitry Peskov: Of course, go ahead.

Yevgeny Khvan: Please, colleague with the poster saying “Online.” Since this is an online conference; don’t forget to introduce yourself.

Oleg Kashtanov: Good afternoon, Mr President.

Oleg Kashtanov. Izvestia Mordovii, Saransk.

My question is about online education. This is a widely discussed matter. Last spring, our schools and universities had to switch to distance learning. I would like to know your opinion: do you think our higher education system and our schools tackled this challenge successfully? And could you be very specific? Because people are asking if this online education system is here to stay. And in this difficult time, could it be that the quality of education is declining? And, as a result, are graduates less qualified?

Vladimir Putin: Oleg, look, there should be a distinction between online education in schools and online education in colleges and universities. We have 39,900 schools in the country and only 2 percent are teaching online while a small part are using a mixed format and a major part are operating as normal. As for universities, all of them were asked to consider switching to remote classes.

Regarding schools, I have plenty of notes here on their preparedness and technical capability to administer online learning, and I will talk about this in more detail later when I answer the written questions. But, of course, there are problems. There are problems with hardware because many people don’t have computer equipment. There are also problems with internet access and even access to phones. These difficulties exist, especially in small towns.

What are we going to do? In 2021, all schools in the Russian Federation will be provided with access to high-speed internet. Some schools already have the internet, but in 2021, all schools must have it. This is the first thing.

As for higher education, we have allocated support for universities twice this year, in July and in the autumn, with financial resources to support remote activity. And they are supposed to expand their capabilities in online learning, as independent economic entities, with the government support I just mentioned. This support has been provided twice this year.

Now, on the quality of education. Of course, the online format will never replace a direct face-to-face interaction between students and teachers. At any rate, it will not happen for a long time. I think I do not need to go into detail as everybody understands what I mean. Nevertheless, an online format of education will be used; it exists and, of course, will be developed further both at schools and at universities.

You know, just yesterday I spoke to some colleagues of mine. What can we project for the future? For example, it is not always possible for an expert in a very specific area to be present in several places at once, at several schools. Besides, this expert may be busy with his or her own research. But he or she can teach online. And we should certainly use this opportunity.

The Sirius educational centre in Sochi, which is known around the country, is using it. Many other educational centres, universities and schools are using it as well. This will need to be done in the future as well. People want it, it has become a part of our life, and we need not be afraid of it.

However, these capabilities should not be overstated, either. Mass online education is not here for the rest of our lives, not forever.

Now, with regard to quality.

I think that your real question – I believe you do have a sort of covert question – I said that e-learning will never replace in-person contact. Probably, the quality… In some respects, there is an upside where you can listen to internationally renowned scholars, but in some respects, the quality may suffer. Therefore, a mixed system would be best.

There is another aspect, a sensitive one. I am aware that it is important for the students who, in some cases, even go to court complaining that they paid for in-person training, and online classes cannot provide the same quality. I know what they mean and, to a certain extent, I share this view. But there is another side to the coin. If a teacher, a professor or an assistant professor delivers lectures for a certain number of hours, offline or online, he or she gives them anyway, why should they be paid less? You see, this is a big question.

If we look at the cost structure of a higher education institution, about 70 percent of it is wages. Therefore, higher education institutions have almost no “extra fat” that they could use to reduce online tuition fees. Otherwise, we would have to close some higher education institutions. Some experts believe there are too many of them, especially in the capital cities, so they need to merge. This question has long been raised by higher and secondary education specialists.

I am taking a very careful approach to this matter now: nothing should be overstated here, and you should not get ahead of yourself, either. However, if a university can afford to tweak its finances, then, probably, they can reduce tuition where training is provided mostly online. The state, as I have said, provided financial support twice this year. We are prepared to continue to do so in the future relying on the actual state of affairs in higher and secondary education.

Thank you.

Dmitry Peskov: Tula. The camera in Tula is pointing at a young lady holding a sign that reads “I’m pregnant.”

Young lady, go ahead and ask your question.

Alexandra Bezukladova: Good afternoon, Mr President.

Alexandra Bezukladova, Moskovsky Komsomolets in Ryazan.

Mr President, we always hear that this official is corrupt, that one does not do a good job. Still, there are many positive examples around the country with officials ready to sacrifice to serve the interests of our country. In fact, my question is on one of such officials.

On October 7 (your birthday) there was a fire at a military post in the Ryazan region where 46,000 tonnes of ammunition exploded. The fire swept through nearby communities, and people there were in hell, which is not an exaggeration with the shrapnel and shells flying around and fires everywhere. Many locals were simply unable to leave their homes and apartments on their own and needed help, and a local official saved seven people. At first, he saved two elderly people, getting a blast injury in the process, and later he returned to save a mother and her two kids, eight and five months old, as well as two more seniors. And all that was happening with shells flying around.

Mr President, people from our region have collected signatures under a petition to award the title of Hero of the Russian Federation to this man. His name is Igor Grekov. Mr President, Emergencies Minister Yevgeny Zinichev was at the site of the explosion and saw everything with his own eyes.

Mr President, does Igor Grekov deserve, in your opinion, to be awarded this title for saving human lives in a time of peace while risking his life?

Vladimir Putin: Sasha, I will answer your question, but first I have one for you. What does this have to do with the fact that you are pregnant? I did not understand this.

Alexandra Bezukladova: Mr President, let me fill you in on the context. It just so happened that last year I came to your news conference two weeks before giving birth, and I did not get a chance to ask a question. This year, God willing, I am once again pregnant, so I decided to try my luck, and it worked. I thought that if I made a bright poster saying I was pregnant, it would be noticed. And it worked, thank you.

Vladimir Putin. I see; you tricked us. Ok, it’s not such a big deal.

Regarding Igor Grekov: it was truly a heroic deed. If in time of peace a person risks his life to save others, he definitely deserves a state decoration. We will see what kind of decoration this should be. Thank you very much, Sasha, for drawing our attention to this. This means that you are a caring, warm-hearted and good person. This does you credit, no doubt about that. And your children will grow up in a positive environment. I wish you all the best.

We will definitely look into the situation with Igor Grekov as you said. Is that okay with you?

Alexandra Bezukladova: Thank you, Mr President.

I cannot help but note one thing. The Russian Popular Front Forum scheduled for this year was postponed. A colleague of mine submitted a video for the forum; for some reason the video was leaked online. Now my colleague has been ostracised. Being journalists, we would like to know that, if you report a socially important problem in the region, it will not become public before the event. Journalism is becoming unsafe, to put it mildly.

Vladimir Putin: Why did this harassment begin? I am not sure I understand.

Alexandra Bezukladova: My colleague reported a heating supply problem at the Novo-Ryazanskaya Power Plant, which has the monopoly in the region. And I do not know who or how leaked it. My colleague and the Russian Popular Front Executive Committee were the only parties that had the video, but it ended up on social media. What followed was paid videos involving journalist Andrei Karaulov. These videos are all over social media and public groups; they contain insults, libel and so on and so forth, down to defamation and personal insults.

Dmitry Peskov: Excuse me. This volunteer next to you will write down the details.

Alexandra Bezukladova: Thank you very much.

Vladimir Putin: Just a moment, Mr Peskov. Let Sasha talk.

So your colleague reported about the Novo-Ryazanskaya Power Plant, is that correct?

Alexandra Bezukladova: Mr President, my colleague is right here. He can answer all your questions, if you like.

Vladimir Putin: Give him the microphone, please.

Anton Nasonov: Good afternoon.

Anton Nasonov, Editor-in-Chief of 62INFO, Ryazan.

I am one of the winners of the Russian Popular Front’s national competition, Truth and Justice. I prepared a video report on the city’s problems related to the Novo-Ryazanskaya Power Plant. The video, which was only available to me and to the Russian Popular Front in Ryazan and in Moscow, was leaked on social media. As Alexandra said, I am being insulted, accused of corruption, etc.

Vladimir Putin: What kind of corruption? Anton, listen, I cannot figure out who is accusing you. You are fighting for the interests of the public. Who is accusing you? What kind of corruption? Who did you sell out? I do not understand. You did not poison or kill anybody. What kind of corruption are you talking about? What did you sell? I do not understand.

Anton Nasonov: They think my criticism of the Novo-Ryazanskaya Power Plant is unfair.

Vladimir Putin: I see. Fine. I think you understand, Anton, that your work involves certain risks. There is no getting around this. On the contrary, I think that this outcry, which was part of a paid-for campaign, as I see it, should have taught you that you are on the right track.

As for the Novo-Ryazanskaya TPP, I do not know what the problem is there, and I have not seen your reports, but I will ask my colleagues from the relevant agencies to look into this. They will definitely do so.

Is this a private TPP? Who does it belong to?

Anton Nasonov: It is a private entity that leases capacity and equipment from the city of Ryazan.

Vladimir Putin: Ok. Fine. I will definitely look into this and ask the relevant agencies to review your reports.

Thank you very much. Cheer up and be brave. There is nothing extraordinary here. This is how life is. There is a lot of nonsense in the media about me as well. What can I do?

Ok, all the best to you. Good luck.

As for Igor Grekov, who is he? What kind of official is he? Sasha, where does he work?

Alexandra Bezukladova: He is Deputy Governor of the Ryazan Region.

Vladimir Putin. Deputy governor. Very well, he did a good job.

Thank you, Sasha.

I have another paper, this time from Volosovo in the Leningrad Region. This is what Anatoly Terekhov writes. He had a conversation with an official (probably in Volosovo). Anatoly came to ask a question, and the official told him: “Did Putin promise you this? Then go and ask Putin. I did not promise anything.” This is followed by a question: “Why do officials behave in such an ugly manner in their offices?” There are people of this kind.

Mr Terekhov, I would like to draw your attention to what Sasha has said. There are people like Igor Grekov, and there are those like the official you are talking about. There are different kinds of people in every sphere of activity. In fact, there is a rotten apple in every barrel. As for the fact that someone has treated you poorly, we will try to figure it out. Anyway, I will ask the governor to get in touch with you and get everything straight.

Mr Peskov, let us move on.

Dmitry Peskov: St Petersburg, we have not been to St Petersburg yet.

Olga Knyazeva: Mr President, Mr Peskov, good afternoon. Greetings from St Petersburg.

We have journalists here from all over the Northwestern Federal District. Please note, our signs are modest, nothing flashy, just a taste of refined St Petersburg. Shall we begin? Can I pick a journalist?

Dmitry Peskov: Yes, of course.

Olga Knyazeva: I really like this explicit question from the daily, Sankt Petersburgskiy Dnevnik: when will the borders open? I read it out loud, I am sorry. I could not resist.

Vladimir Putin: I see. Is that the question?

Kirill Smirnov: Good afternoon, Mr President.

Kirill Smirnov, Sankt Petersburgskiy Dnevnik.

Yes, my question is when will the borders re-open? You know, just a few weeks ago St Petersburg was recognised as a top international tourist destination. It out-ranked Paris, New York and Rome, which are serious competitors.

Opening borders is important from the viewpoint of budget revenue. We are aware that work is underway to resume passenger flights. There are countries that few Russians have ever been to, but air transport has been resumed with them. The tourism industry is the missing link in the revenue structure. It is important to know, even though the pandemic is a very important now, is there a chance that the borders will re-open any time soon? Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Kirill, you and I love St Petersburg. I think that most people in our country also think highly of our hometown. To those who have not yet been to St Petersburg, I highly recommend doing so, as it is one of the best world capitals, without a doubt. Of course, it is a tourist magnet. We are helping St Petersburg in every possible way, including with visa services for visitors, including those coming by ferry. We are trying to create other favourable conditions so that the tourism industry expands throughout the country and in St Petersburg as well.

My congratulations to St Petersburg on wining this international competition. No doubt the city deserves it, not just because of its marvellous world-class architecture by the best architects from around the world like Rastrelli, Trezzini, etc., but also because today’s St Petersburg is a vibrant city that created new urban environments, overpasses and roads. It is proactive in infrastructure development, with outstanding new buildings, including culture and sports venues, Gazprom-Arena, and other landmarks. This is all very well. St Petersburg can host competitions at the highest level, and is already doing so. In fact, it has been quite good at it, serving as a model. All this, of course, attracts people to St Petersburg.

Is the closing of the borders in any way related to attempts to impose restrictions on St Petersburg? What is the current situation with COVID-19 in the city?

Kirill Smirnov: Of course, the incidence rate is high, even in terms of the averages. This is why the restrictions that we have in the region were introduced, including for the New Year holidays.

Vladimir Putin: This is what I am talking about. About 85 percent of COVID-19 hospital beds in the country are filled, and St Petersburg has an even higher figure. This is what these restrictions are all about. We need to protect the lives and health of St Petersburg residents. As soon as doctors give the green light, the borders will open.

In general, it would be great if Russian nationals explore domestic tourism opportunities more. They can benefit from the related government support measures and go to St Petersburg. There is no need to open borders for this. But as soon as it becomes possible, we will do it.

Air travel has been among the affected sectors. In this sense, it is definitely important to enable airlines to serve Russian destinations and for our companies to operate overseas routes. We have 32 million people flying abroad every year. Let’s redirect this passenger flow to St Petersburg. These people spend $35 billion abroad every year. If we can attract them to domestic destinations and thus promote domestic tourism, this would be great. St Petersburg deserves it. I am certain that we will succeed. It will happen as soon as it becomes possible.

Dmitry Peskov: Could you show the journalists in Novo-Ogaryovo, please?

Channel One has not yet asked a question.

Konstantin Panyushkin: Good afternoon.

Konstantin Panyushkin, Channel One. I would like to go back to pre-pandemic times early this year when you and the Government did not have to deal with manual anti-crisis control. At that point, you were talking about a big step forward and it seemed to journalists that the Mishustin Government had things in place to reach this goal. However, many big, ambitious plans had to be suspended and, as we see, even the implementation of certain national goals was delayed until 2030. Hence, some questions.

As for the national goals, is the coronavirus to blame for this delay or was Alexei Kudrin right when he said the national projects would not help achieve our national goals by 2024?

What about the Government? Do you think Mishustin’s team is meeting expectations? There were some replacements recently, and it is rumoured that there will be more.

And the last question – about the leap forward. When will this be on the agenda again? Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Our strategic goals have not gone anywhere and have not been suspended. Of course, the coronavirus made its adjustments. I have already said that we had to delay some programmes by half a year, for instance, the development of primary healthcare because we had to find the resources for promptly resolving the problems of countering the coronavirus and supporting our people and badly affected economic sectors.

Look, 838 billion rubles have been spent on direct support for people alone. These are huge funds, and we had to use them for this purpose, as well as for the support of affected industries. But nobody has cancelled our strategic goals. And the Government is doing well.

Now we are considering retail prices. I know that your channel showed our discussion with some Government members in this context. I think some Government officials missed this moment and did not react in a timely manner. But in general, especially considering the pandemic, the Government has been very effective and very busy. I can say without exaggeration that they work day and night. And, of course, we can and should thank them for this.

As for position changes, this is up to the Prime Minister. He has the right to select his own team. I approve these changes; I do not see any other. The Prime Minister is not initiating anything further in this respect. It seems to me it is necessary to ensure the smooth operation of the established team, and stability is required. This is my answer to part of your question. Nothing else is planned at this point, no more personnel changes.

As for our strategic goals – yes, the Government was formed to carry them out. I believe it is doing well with these goals. Let me repeat that all of our goals have been determined. Obviously, there was criticism in the beginning: are we able to reach these national development goals using the instruments we call national programmes and national projects? Overall, yes, there are questions that require additional attention and analysis, but generally, we discussed all of them with the regions. And, despite this pandemic we will continue developing the country. Again, the example of primary healthcare: we planned to spend 500 billion rubles, plus 50 from the regions, on this, and this is what we intend to do. We are not using these funds for anything else. Everything will proceed according to plan.

Dmitry Peskov: Okay, let’s continue in the middle. NTV.

Vladimir Putin: Excuse me, I just promised to listen to that young lady over there. Give her the mike, please.

Aisel Gereikhanova: Thank you.

Aisel Gereikhanova, Rossiyskaya Gazeta.

Mr President, why was the Constitution amended this year? Why now?

Vladimir Putin: You know, there is a proper time for everything. There is a proper time for fighting rising prices and there is a proper time for changes to the Fundamental Law. Many things were impossible before.

First of all, I would like to say that the fundamental provisions of our Constitution remain unchanged, which is very important. The 1993 Constitution was adopted in the difficult conditions of public opposition and, let’s face it, amidst the military action in the Russian capital, Moscow. People were killed; automatic weapons were used and tanks fired at the parliament building. Those were the circumstances in which the Constitution was adopted. Our minds are such that we try to forget the worst memories, but those events did happen and here at home. The Constitution was adopted under those conditions and, to a certain degree, it played a stabilising role and helped restore civil peace, and created a certain political foundation for development.

Now the situation is different. And we needed to change the Fundamental Law based on the current situation. We did not change it per se but made some corrections and amendments. Some of these things were not possible before. For example, social guarantees related to the necessary adjustment of pensions for inflation. What do I mean? Back in 1993, how could we include the government’s obligation to adjust pensions for inflation under the Constitution? Pensions were delayed for six months. Neither military pay nor pensions were paid. That actually happened.

Now things are different. Now we must make sure that our current and future leaders cannot shrug this off because the foundations of the Russian economy allow it. Therefore, this measure can and must be included in the country’s Fundamental Law, along with the problems related to alleviating poverty. Earlier, your colleague said that many Russian families are struggling. Yes, it is true. But the minimum monthly wage cannot be below the subsistence rate. Can we achieve that? I think we can. Therefore, this requirement was included in the Constitution.

There are other problems as well. I read the question about the janitor and the teacher. The cleaners who receive subsistence-level salaries saw their minimum wages go up, while the salaries for other categories of employees were not adjusted. However, the state will have to do this now, based on the Constitution, among other things, because the minimum wage cannot be lower than subsistence-level pay. You see, it is all related. Yes, efforts will have to be made to comply with the Constitution. This is the point behind these changes.

Alternatively, for example, we spoke about primacy. We enshrined the supremacy of Russian constitutional law over all sorts of international norms in the amendments to the Constitution. Or, take the inviolability of our territory. Could we do this with the state of our army in 1993? Well, we could. You can say anything you want. Could we ensure it? No. You cannot use a nuclear bomb in every conflict, can you? Our conventional armed forces were in shambles. I already mentioned this. We were unable to put together 50,000 capable troops from an army of over a million servicemen to fight international terrorists in the Caucasus.

Now, the situation has turned around, and even our opponents, as I call them, are saying, indeed, there are fewer of them, but they are much more efficient now. Russia has one of the most efficient armies in the world. We can now enshrine this in the Fundamental Law. This situation is ripe; we did it and did it at the right time.

By the way, how many amendments were there? We received thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of them. I want to thank our citizens for their participation and for the fact that we held an all-Russian vote on this issue. Many people came to the polling stations. In fact, it was a referendum. Citizens authored the amendments to the Fundamental Law of the Russian Federation. This is important. It had to be done, and I would like to once again express my gratitude to everyone who supported the amendments to the Constitution.

Dmitry Peskov: We have not heard from Stavropol yet. Stavropol, go ahead, please.

Pavel Krasnov: This is Stavropol, in the south of Russia. We could even compete with Rostov-on-Don for the title of the southernmost location today. The Southern Federal District is, of course, located there, but in geographical terms Russia’s southernmost point is in the Caucasus.

Here in this room we have journalists from the North Caucasus Federal District, and they are ready to ask their questions. If there are no objections, let’s give them the floor. Mr Peskov, if you delegate your authority to me…

Dmitry Peskov: Yes, please.

Pavel Krasnov: I think that the first to speak on behalf of the Caucasus should be a woman. Go ahead, please.

Zarina Cherchesova: Thank you.

Zarina Cherchesova, radio broadcasting service of the Alania State Television and Radio Company.

There is no getting away from coronavirus-related topics. It is stuck deep in our heads. All sectors have suffered during the pandemic, especially healthcare, although this sector was suffering even before the pandemic from low salaries and destructive optimisation policies. At the same time, the regions have started revising their priorities, and developing domestic tourism is one of the key tasks today, and this is very important for South Ossetia.

Mr President, with this in mind, I would like to know what your plans are for supporting this sector of the economy moving forward. In many countries this sector accounts for a substantial share of budget revenue, for example in Turkey where there are all kinds of various preferences.

I must say that South Ossetia has always been famous for its health resorts and unique springs. Today, South Ossetia has all it takes to develop tourism, including mountain skiing, gourmet tourism and most importantly, balneotherapy.

There is one issue, however, which is infrastructure, and the region cannot resolve this without federal support.

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: We started talking about this in relation to St Petersburg: they are waiting for the borders to reopen and foreign tourists to come. You probably heard part of my answer; I was saying I believe it is very important to give our people the opportunity… our people are mostly used to vacationing abroad; 32 million of them travel. It is no less important to develop domestic tourism, I fully agree with that. This year, as you can see, we are trying to use various incentives, including the so-called cashback– a partial refund of the cost of their trips.

But there is something you need to know. We have 15 billion rubles for this cashback – but only 1.2 billion have been spent. However, we agreed with the Government that we will not redistribute this money but will use at least the same amount next year, and will try to expand this kind of incentive. This offer was not promoted as much as we needed, so I would like to ask you and your colleagues, the media, those who work online: would you please support the development of domestic tourism, show and talk more often about the opportunities that our country and its various regions offer for our own citizens and guests from abroad.

I certainly know, I understand, and I see people who say, yes, it is so beautiful, but excuse me, there is no toilet, no place to wash our hands, no restaurants and poor roads to drive or walk on. We are perfectly aware of this; it takes time and, of course, huge investment. But first, of course, we assume the money will come from the businesses that operate in this area.

The government should provide the necessary support, of course, infrastructural primarily. We will allocate appropriate funds for this; the money has been earmarked. As I have said, we will support business in general, including regional businesses, and an agency is being created that is responsible for domestic tourism exclusively.

Very recently, the day before yesterday or even yesterday, I spoke with Dmitry Chernyshenko, who is responsible for this industry in our country, and he is very actively involved, he is fighting – in fact, he is your active supporter. We are aware of how important this is for the country as well.

You mentioned Turkey. It is close. For many decades, it was building a system and the state provided a lot of support for the industry. This is not an exception; I mentioned several examples. South Korea, for one, developed a whole system of government support for shipbuilding, through taxation. Later they brought everything back to normal and now it is South Korea that is building the largest capacity ships. Turkey did the same with its tourist industry. We will also move along a similar path. As for the funds that were allocated, let me repeat, the 15 billion for this year will be rolled over to the next one.

Dmitry Peskov: We have been going for more than two hours. Those who have disposable masks do not forget to change them. If you do not have one, our colleagues will provide you with fresh ones.

I promised to give the floor to NTV.

Vladimir Putin: Mr Peskov, just a second.

To follow up on the issue, let me say that we already had a question about the internet and the opportunities to study online. I have many questions: quality of communication and the internet – this is urgent, especially for those who study online. This is clear.

I have already said that we will introduce high-speed internet everywhere, at all schools in 2021. And, of course, it is very important to provide it in residential areas: before the end of 2021, a universal system of communications – both the telephone and the internet – must be created for residential areas of with 250 to 500 people. This is before the end of 2021. I will not go into detail at this point because there are many questions about it. The people in these residential areas sometimes ask odd questions: “Do we have to climb trees, really?” and so on. I understand all this; there are difficulties. But this problem must be resolved before the end of 2021. We are allocating 12.6 billion rubles for this purpose. It is envisaged in the budget and will be spent on this. I hope it will be spent in a way that makes people feel the change in quality.

By 2030, we will resolve this problem for residential areas with 100 to 250 people. This is a major expense, but we will do it all the same.

I said this to break up Mr Peskov’s dictate.

Dmitry Peskov: Now let us give the floor to NTV.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, do please.

Dmitry Peskov: Please, give him the microphone.

Sergey Kholoshevsky: Third time, lucky.

Good afternoon, Mr President.

Sergey Kholoshevsky, NTV television.

Vladimir Putin: Good afternoon.

Sergey Kholoshevsky: My question, with your permission, is about foreign policy and our so-called Western partners. Who of all world leaders, in your view, has been the most difficult negotiating partner and who was the most agreeable over the past four years? I, for example, remember you giving a geography lesson to Mr Macron and Ms Merkel at a G20 Summit in connection with the incident in the Kerch Strait. And what about Donald Trump? Or Recep Erdogan? You discussed Nagorno-Karabakh with him; he is an interesting person. To say nothing of Alexander Lukashenko – he must also be good company.

If you allow, I have another question regarding the Nord Stream 2 project. The United States is bringing unprecedented pressure to bear on Europe in connection with this project but, amazingly, Europe, in particular Germany, have stood up to this pressure.

What are the prospects for it do you think, will we finish the construction or not?

Vladimir Putin: Regarding convenient and agreeable or unpleasant partners, there are no such people. And I do not need to give lessons to anyone. All of these people are very knowledgeable. Believe me, these people have received top-level training. All of them seek to address the challenges facing their countries – and this comes first – through different methods, but still.

There is a well-known maxim: there are no good or bad interests, there are only national interests. The same with me: I do not divide people into good and bad. I work with everyone to secure the best results for Russia. Sometimes there is a need for compromise and sometimes it is necessary to stick to your position. It is always like this. Anything else is counterproductive.

You mentioned several, but not all countries with which we maintain comprehensive and complex relations. What about China? We have overlapping interests in many areas. Maybe this or maybe some personal vibes have contributed to the fact that I have good, business-like relations, above all, but at the same time very trusting and friendly relations with President Xi Jinping. This, of course, helps in our work.

We have different, occasionally opposing views on certain matters with President Erdogan. But he keeps his word like a real man. He does not wag his tail. If he thinks something is good for his country, he goes for it. This is about predictability. It is important to know whom you are dealing with.

Nord Stream 2 is undoubtedly beneficial for the EU’s economy in general and Germany’s in particular. Because the other option (buying more expensive primary energy source, US-produced liquefied gas at a 20 percent premium over our pipeline gas) means a dent in the German economy’s competitiveness and higher prices for households. That is all there is to it. This is obvious, and you do not need to be a gas expert or an economist to understand this. This is in line with the national interests of Europe and Germany. At least until now, representatives of the German economy have openly supported this project. We have many friends there, without any exaggeration, and Germany’s political leaders try not to interfere, since this is a purely economic project.

There are 160 kilometres left to build to complete the single line. Both lines are a little over 160, 165 or so, kilometres. That is it. It is almost completed. I think we will finish the job. I hope that the new administration will treat its partners and allies with respect, will not insist on them neglecting their national interests, and will return to fair competition in global markets. I believe this project will also be fully implemented.

Dmitry Peskov: We have not heard from the call centre in a long time. Let us go to the call centre.

Nailya Asker-Zade: We thought you forgot all about us, but there are many questions here, and their number continues to increase. Let me remind you that questions to the President can be asked on the moskva-putinu.ru website or mobile app. You can record a video or send a text message.

Let us get back to our volunteers. Sasha Pechenegin is here next to me now. During the pandemic, he and his colleagues processed more than 19,000 requests from people, including those for the delivery of medicines.

Sasha, could you tell us what questions you received today?

Alexander Pechenegin: Indeed, we have many questions now concerning benefits, social support measures, especially from mothers. People are interested whether there will be any new payments, because right now, people in various regions, such as Arkhangelsk, Ulyanovsk Region, and Tambov Region, I could list many regions, where people do not even know what they are entitled to, or where to go. In Moscow, for example, they complain about the integrated government service centres, which closed due to the coronavirus before people could apply for their benefits, and that service has been inactive on the gosuslugi.ru website. That is why people are concerned, because they do not know where to go.

In this regard, perhaps the most important question. Mr President, are any more child benefits planned for next year? Because more often than not, it is a problem, and the government assistance now being provided is actually the only help they get. Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: About child benefits.

I think I spoke about it at the beginning in some detail – how this work was organised, for children aged 0–1.5, then 1.5–3 and 3–7 years.

If people are telling you they do not know where to go, they have difficulties getting their benefits, then probably, everyone will agree with me that before thinking about any additional steps – we have a lot already happening on various tracks, I have listed just a few, but there are other forms of support, including for specific regions, and depending on the demographic situation in each region, there are specific support measures – so before we take any new steps, we need to streamline and ensure effective work of the support mechanisms already in place. I will definitely speak with the presidential plenipotentiary envoys to the regions and with the governors, and we will get back to this. This is done mainly through the Pension Fund and the integrated government service centres. But if they are closed somewhere, it means they need to make some other decisions on this score. I can only thank you for bringing this up, for responding to the people who asked you about this.

Alexander Pechenegin: Thank you very much.

Vladimir Putin: Thank you for what you are doing.

Alexander Pechenegin: The volunteers have indeed done important work here. We were able to talk personally to petitioners – in some cases it worked, in others it did not, but we clarified certain information. Thank you very much for this opportunity.

Vladimir Putin: It is strange. This sounds very strange and even alarming that people cannot properly exercise their rights. I assure you, we will definitely… Not even you, but I assure the people who spoke to you, we will definitely straighten this out.

There are many questions about the healthcare system, of course. Altai Territory, for example. A district hospital was shut down. The person who asked this question is Natalia Dubovikova. People are panicking. Ms Dubovikova, I will definitely look into it. And I would like to bring this to the attention of the Altai Territory Governor and the plenipotentiary envoy. This happens, and quite frequently, unfortunately, when a small-town medical facility or educational institution, a school, is closed because it is inefficient and so on. But if people have nowhere else to go, considering Russia’s vast territory, we must take this into account. We will absolutely try to straighten this out.

Please, let us move on.

Dmitry Peskov: Let us go back to the World Trade Centre. Andrei Kolesnikov.

Andrei Kolesnikov: Good afternoon, Kommersant daily.

Mr President, courtesy of Ms Valentina Tereshkova, an article appeared in the Constitution, which reset your time in presidential office to zero. That is, you can start all over again in 2024. What does this mean? Are you really ready to start all over again, or do you want to avoid becoming a lame duck, at least before time? What was on your mind when you went ahead with this idea? In the eyes of many people, including mine, it was a rather cruel thing to do to the Constitution.

Mr President, was it worth it?

One more question, if I may. An up-and-coming journalist taught us to ask two questions in a row (he is not really a beginner).

You spoke about Ivan Safronov’s case several days ago. The takeaway was that if he took information from open sources, he cannot be prosecuted under the treason article. This, as I understood, is what you believe. Did you have a chance to learn more about this case as you planned? What sources, for example, do the investigation authorities believe he got information from? Do you not feel that this grave article is being applied too readily and too frequently?

I have something else to say. Several media outlets simultaneously published information yesterday that he may have taken information from classified sources. Even if we believe that this was the case, well, okay, he may have made a false step. This may have been the perfect case of someone who did not know what he was doing. I am sure that given these circumstances, he could be forgiven. I know Ivan as well as I knew his father, a man who was honest to the bone. I am ready to vouch for Ivan Safronov right here and now. This will not happen again, Mr President. And if it does, we will go down together. Not you and I, but he and I.

Vladimir Putin: Regarding the question of whether this was worth doing as part of the constitutional amendments, you know, there is one rule I always follow: I consider whether what we do benefits the country or not. If this is not the case, it is not worth it, but if it does have benefits, then we must do it. I have not decided yet whether I will run in the 2024 presidential election. That said, ensuring national stability and development is invaluable. From a formal perspective, the people have spoken. Whether I will do it or not, we shall see. This is my answer to your first question.

As for Safronov, and whether he took information from open or classified sources, it is up to investigators to find out. After all, Andrei, he is not being prosecuted for his activity as a journalist. This is what these events are all about. He is not some kind of a dissident journalist fighting the government and being prosecuted and thrown into jail for doing it. This has nothing to do with his work as a journalist. It has to do with the rather long period of time when he worked as Rogozin’s aide or advisor at the Government and Roscosmos. This is not about journalism.

You said that this could have been a misstep on his behalf. Yes, this does happen. And he could be forgiven. This can happen as well. We have to consider the danger posed by his acts, and what the actual damage was. He is being accused of espionage, betrayal. But treason is the worst sin. Handing classified information over to foreign intelligence is an act of treason. I understand that this may not go down well with those who trusted this person, and still trust him and like him. You have my sympathy. Honestly, I also have sympathy for him, as strange as this may sound, if what he did was actually a misstep. However, if he intentionally gathered information over a long period of time and handed it over to intelligence officers and was remunerated for this, this reveals who he actually is. Let me reiterate that at the end of the day, it is up to the court to determine to what extent he posed a threat to society. The question of whether he can be forgiven and pardoned will come afterwards. So far, it is too early to talk about this.

Dmitry Peskov: Let us carry on here.

Let us talk about sports. Match TV, go ahead.

Vladimir Putin: All right.

Olga Bogoslovskaya: Thank you very much, Mr President.

Olga Bogoslovskaya, national sports television, Match TV.

First of all, I would like to thank you for noting our five-year anniversary, a really important landmark for us, and for praising the work of our professional team. Thank you.

My question to you is only partly related to sports because the issue is much broader. I am talking about the situation with one of our leading football players, Artyom Dzyuba. His personal video was posted online and there were many public repercussions. This incident was discussed practically by all media. Some people sympathised with him and others did not, forgetting that he did not upload this video himself but was “helped” by hackers, if we can say that the hackers helped him. Putting it mildly, they are truly dishonest people.

Why did I say that this issue is only partially related to sports? Because this time an athlete got into this situation but it can happen to anyone in the future.

This is my question to you: should this situation affect a professional career of not only an athlete but any person?

Thank you very much.

Vladimir Putin: The answer seems obvious: of course, it should not. Let him deal with his relationships and personal affairs but it is not appropriate for normal society to meddle in someone’s personal life.

Unfortunately, this will always happen and for celebrities – and he is still a celebrity – this was inevitable. But this is a good lesson for him and other people who lead a public life. Keep this in mind. This is my first point.

And my second point is that we should bear in mind that there are certain general rules and it is better to follow them.

But should such incidents affect professional careers? Definitely not.

Have you seen this video?

Olga Bogoslovskaya: You know, Mr President, I think the whole country saw it in some way. I did not watch it to the end but it was clear from the start what it was all about.

Vladimir Putin: I, for one, have not seen it.

Olga Bogoslovskaya: But you have probably heard about it.

Vladimir Putin: I have not seen it but I read different letters that are sent to me, in part, through call centres, as I have said.

For example, Yury Krasnyansky from Murmansk Region writes about the ambulance service in the village of Alakurtti. “We have one vehicle with one paramedic,” he writes, “You can get to the outpatient clinic on your own, if you are well enough to do it, that is. In the outpatient clinic, we have one general practitioner,” he continues. “She is 86 years old and can barely distinguish haemorrhoids from tonsillitis.” They do seem to have a problem with transport and medical care there.

So here is what I would like to say in this regard: Mr Krasnyansky, first, if this is all true, if your 86-year-old doctor still continues working, she is clearly a labour veteran, and this means that she needs to be treated with special respect – I would like to emphasise that this is exactly how it should be – it means that, first, she went on working no matter what, and the level of fundamental training of medical workers in Soviet times and even in tsarist Russia has always warranted respect. This is the first point.

Secondly – you might want to try to help her if she cannot distinguish haemorrhoids from a sore throat, help her somehow, support her, and we will try to support you.

I have already said that we have started purchasing vehicles, including for paramedical stations, even ahead of schedule this year. I will definitely ask the relevant government agencies and the Murmansk Region Governor to take care of this – of your village, of this paramedical centre, the ambulance service, service in this area, and of course, we will help with vehicles.

Dmitry Peskov: It is getting quite late in Vladivostok. Let us hear from Vladivostok again.

Dmitry Kaistro: Good evening.

It is almost midnight in the Far Eastern Federal District, and that is why our journalists’ patience, excitement and, most importantly, their unflagging energy are even more surprising. We have the best professionals of the Far East here, so it is very difficult to choose.

Mr Peskov, with your permission, allow me to do this.

Dmitry Peskov: Go ahead.

Dmitry Kaistro: Excuse me, all of you are great, but I think that the young woman in a yellow cape with a poster saying “Politics and people” has hit on a crucial element of our current reality.

Please, introduce yourself.

Oksana Kiselyova: Thank you. Oksana Kiselyova, PrimaMedia Agency.

I think that people in the Far East will remember the year 2020 not only because of the pandemic, which is raging in all other regions as well, but also the appointment of new governors in several regions, including in the Jewish Autonomous Region, Kamchatka and Khabarovsk Territory. The events in Khabarovsk Territory were especially memorable, and not only for local residents who spoke up in support of former Governor Sergei Furgal, because protest rallies were also held in Primorye Territory, Sakhalin, Kamchatka, Magadan Region, and so forth.

Mr President, the other day your Plenipotentiary Envoy to the Far East, Yury Trutnev, said in an interview with PrimaMedia that despite public sympathy for Furgal, he is responsible for botching several construction projects and was a difficult person to work with.

Here is my question: do you have fresh information from the investigative authorities that confirms the gravity of the charges brought against Furgal?

And about the protests: does public discontent over the decisions of some officials at different levels reach you? I am referring not just to political decisions, but also to their actions in the environment, culture and other spheres.

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Oksana, what can I tell you about Sergei Furgal? He is a member of a prominent party, which supported and continues supporting him. I had a good relationship with him, and, in general, he was loyal to the federal authorities. I had no problems with him. I am not aware of how Trutnev assessed him, but I think that he was working well, on the whole, doing his best as the leader of the region.

However, the charges brought against him are grave: he has been charged as a member of an organised criminal group that was guilty of eliminating its commercial rivals. We are talking about murder, not embezzlement, fraud or abuse of office, but murder. Look, this is a grave charge.

You asked if I have any additional information. The investigation is still underway. I do not phone them every day to demand additional information. Let us give them the opportunity to do their job in peace before taking the case to court.

I can understand the people who were disgruntled by the news of Sergei Furgal’s arrest and the charges brought against him. I can understand that, because they had voted for him and hoped that he would deliver on his election promises. But what should we do about the charges? This is not political persecution; this is a criminal case.

Similar action has been taken against representatives of other parties as well. Take United Russia: we remember that some regional party leaders, who committed crimes, have been convicted and sentenced to long prison terms. Some of them are still serving their sentences. Should we make exceptions for some parties?

Regrettably, such cases have been reported in all parts of the political community; this has happened with members of all political parties. Our law enforcement and judicial powers must forget about their political preferences and act without bias in all cases. This also goes for Furgal.

Dmitry Peskov: Let us move on to Novosibirsk.

Anton Vernitsky: They are starting to shout here. You know, Mr President, during your press conference, some people have not only changed their disposable masks, but also redrawn their posters. But there are still those who came without posters, so here is someone without a poster, a lady in a black mask, who changed it, but did not draw a poster.

Please introduce yourself.

Yelena Malyshkina: Yelena Malyshkina, Vesti-Irkutsk, State TV and Radio Company Irkutsk. Irkutsk Region, Baikal, meaning it is about the environment.

Mr President, good afternoon.

I would like to ask you the following question. Over the past year, several major environmental incidents have occurred, and you personally had to take measures in order to sort out these situations: one had to do with Norilsk, and another with Usolyekhimprom. What punishment do you think those responsible deserve? And do you support the idea of, shall we say, maximum fines for those who cause such huge damage to nature and the environment?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Look, Lena, we need to break this problem into two parts.

The first part concerns the so-called accumulated damage, which has been caused by the operations of certain industrial enterprises since Soviet times, but is not associated with the activity of any specific modern commercial or state companies. And for this, the responsible party is definitely the state, represented by government authorities at various levels – both federal and regional. And of course, we must react to this, and we will. This is the story in Krasny Bor near St Petersburg, Usolye-Sibirskoye, some other facilities, storage facilities, and so on. The sooner we can effectively sort this out, the better.

Then there are current problems and man-made accidents, and here the culprits should be identified by the relevant supervisory authorities, and those authorities will decide on the degree of their responsibility. This responsibility lies primarily with the polluters, and they must be held accountable. How seriously? The severity of punishment should correspond not to the threat posed, but to the amount of damage they caused to the environment and the people who live in a particular area.

Therefore, as far as Norilsk Nickel is concerned, I am not interfering. I just know that the requirements for Norilsk Nickel are very high, and they must bear responsibility for what has been done.

By the way, in the city of Norilsk, the company should definitely pay more attention to environmental issues and be more attentive to what is happening with emissions, even to what is happening with medicine. The company can certainly take on a certain share of the burden and responsibility for these areas of the region's life.

Dmitry Peskov: Let us have a question from the centre.

Mir, go ahead. Introduce yourself, please.

Nadezhda Seryozhkina: Nadezhda Seryozhkina, Mir International Television and Radio Company.

Mr President, the Commonwealth of Independent States will mark its 30^th anniversary in 2021. As we approach this anniversary, there is a feeling that the CIS is going through a midlife crisis: the President and Government in Kyrgyzstan had to step down; there were riots after the presidential election in Belarus, and Moldova’s president-elect Maia Sandu said or even demanded that Russian peacekeepers leave Transnistria.

Mr President, I have the following question in this regard: are you concerned that Russia could lose any of its CIS allies?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Nadya, you called it a “midlife crisis” and provided several examples, like Kyrgyzstan. But is this the first time it happened there? They are constantly playing musical chairs. I think that they are always trying to run ahead of the train in their attempts to fit their domestic policy into the mould of some Western countries. At the same time, they lack the level of political consciousness and institutional maturity of the kind, for example, France has.

Political systems in France or the Federal Republic took decades, if not centuries, to take shape. It would not be an exaggeration to say that it took centuries for the parliamentary form of government to come about or to have traditional political parties with steady political platforms that the voters understand. These are established political systems. But do countries in the post-Soviet space have all this?

For this reason, I would say that what happened does not result from short-term developments, but rather from the country’s efforts to find its own path, since we have to treat all our partners with respect. Therefore, I would not say that we have reached some kind of a fault line.

President-elect Maia Sandu, I wish her all the best, I wish her every success in her work, but, as a representative of a certain political force, she did not say anything new. We have long been hearing representatives of various Western countries telling us that we need to withdraw our peacekeeping contingent. And Maia Sandu is the President of Moldova, but she is also a citizen of Romania.

We have heard representatives of Western countries tell us we need to pull out, and in general, we are all for doing just that as soon as the appropriate situation develops, as soon as a normal dialogue is established between Transnistria and the rest of Moldova, as soon as they are on the path towards peace and reconciliation. We support this, and we were already very close to that with former President Voronin, but at the last moment, representatives of Western countries put pressure on him, too, and he refused, and withdrew from the previous agreements, and the solution of the Transnistrian issue was postponed indefinitely. We do not know why. Later, I asked my colleagues from the European Union, “Why did you do this?” – “Well, it just happened.”

I suggest we do not go into detail now, but sooner or later, this problem must be resolved.

Belarus – I have made repeated statements on this score. It is my belief that Belarusian people need to be given an opportunity to address their issues inside the country, and resolve them calmly.

President Lukashenko has also made statements on this score. I agree with him that this should be done in a calm and measured manner. He initiated amendments to the Constitution – let us see how it goes. The only thing that definitely needed to be achieved there was, I have already mentioned this in one way or another – it all needed be done without outside interference.

From what we can see now, unfortunately, this interference is taking place – the informational, political, and financial support for the opposition from abroad. Nothing good ever comes from abroad. You know, I can see through your mask that you are smiling, but this point is of the essence. Do you know what this essence is? The essence is that no matter how hard, difficult and even long this may take, it has to mature within society. Anything planted from the outside will never calm down the situation; rather, it will work as a bomb, a grenade, but it never helps. You just need to be patient and wait, and help all political forces avoid conflict with each other, but instead, encourage everyone to start a positive dialogue aimed at protecting people’s interests.

Therefore, we will soon have a CIS event at the end of the year; I think it will be very appropriate and useful. We will discuss with my colleagues what tasks we should tackle as a matter of priority.

Dmitry Peskov: Let us go to Yekaterinburg.

Olga Armyakova: Colleagues, in our neck of the woods, no one hollers from their seat, after all, the tough Urals character makes itself felt. However, there are clearly more signs now. The journalists made some more while we were busy talking in the news conference format. Let us hear what the young woman in the second row has to say. She has the word everyone had to learn this year. Please introduce yourself and go ahead with your question.

Yekaterina Tsygankova: Good afternoon, Channel 4, Yekaterinburg, Yekaterina Tsygankova.

I had the word “lockdown” written on my sign, which has probably become a household name by now. Here is my question: of course, the coronavirus has hurt the national economy, and our region is no exception. Unfortunately, this year, the budget had a shortfall in revenue of about 10 billion rubles, and revenue is down by 10 percent. Both small- and medium-sized businesses, as well as major industrial enterprises have felt the pinch. The unemployment numbers are up. Unfortunately, some enterprises are cutting staff, and some are laying off whole teams.

Of course, I would not say that the state has abandoned us to face this misfortune on our own. Significant funds have been allocated from the federal and regional budgets to support unemployed people and families with children. There were benefits for entrepreneurs as well. But the situation remains difficult nonetheless. My question is, how do you see the economy recovering from the coronavirus crisis? My second question is, when will we be able to return to the pre-crisis period? Is it perhaps related to the fact that you did not introduce lockdown in October and November that was there in the spring? Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: This is a legitimate question from Yekaterinburg, because Yekaterinburg and the Urals in general, is a major industrial centre. Of course, the restrictions caused by the coronavirus have affected, in one way or another, the Urals region, and the national economy as a whole.

I will spend a little more time discussing this issue, as it is of critical importance for our country.

Which industries were hit hardest? There are several such industries, including transport, primarily air transport, rail transport, especially passenger, retail trade in non-food products and the services sector, such as fitness centres, restaurants, cafes and the like.

When I said that the Government has worked very hard this year and, in conjunction with the Presidential Executive Office, worked out the necessary decisions to support households and the economy, I named several sectors. What has been done in these sectors?

First, we have postponed all payments, except VAT, until a later date.

Second, we provided grants twice, I think.

Third, we issued loans at zero interest rate.

Fourth, we issued a loan at a 2-percent interest with an option to write off the entire amount if 90 percent of the payroll remained in place, or writing off 50 percent of the debt if 80 percent of employees were retained.

We have postponed payments for state property lease. Finally, a far-reaching decision was made to reduce payments to social funds from 30 to 15 percent for small and medium-sized businesses. This is a permanent measure, and will outlast the pandemic.

It is a whole package of measures that have generally supported the affected industries. In addition to the affected industries, we also worked with representatives of the backbone industries. What industries am I referring to? The automotive, the aircraft construction industry, shipbuilding, agriculture and construction.

All our automotive programmes are progressing. You probably noted that the day before yesterday, the MS-21 powered by PD-14 engines, also produced domestically, took off on a flight. It is in fact already good enough for commercial production. A great achievement, among other things, for our engine builders and aircraft manufacturers. I congratulate them on this event. Yesterday, they also flew another Il-114, a completely new aircraft, practically a new modification. Also a great event. Congratulations!

Our civilian shipbuilding industry has grown by 30 percent, despite all the problems caused by the pandemic.

Construction. True, we built a little less this year, but in general, we supported the industry, and well enough. In fact, we supported both consumers and the industry at the same time, including through preferential mortgages at 6.2 percent. This was also a huge help to the economy.

Overall, 4.6 trillion rubles were allocated to support individuals and industry, and to fight the pandemic. It is unprecedented spending, at 4.5 percent of the country's GDP. I have already said, I have cited the figure; the government channeled 838 billion for the direct support of individuals.

We have developed a whole package of measures. They were planned, then initiated and formalised accordingly. This package of measures has also been used effectively.

Now we are thinking about what to do next. As you said, we need to make our way out of the crisis. Emerging from the crisis will depend on how well we cope with the pandemic itself, how quickly it will end, how quickly we launch nationwide vaccination, and subsequently lift all the restrictions that are still in place.

I expect that over the next six months, the situation will change for the better one way or another. As for the economy, according to various estimates, according to various calculations, we will overcome all these problems somewhere around the end of 2021 – the first quarter of 2022. Moreover, next year we expect to see positive trends in the country's GDP, the gross national product. But everyone needs to work hard. It is my belief that we will be able to achieve this goal and address these challenges.

Dmitry Peskov: Let us turn to the call centre.

Nailya Asker-Zade: (no sound)… did not receive benefits for her nine-month-old child in December.

Dmitry Peskov: Nailya, could you repeat that from the beginning? The sound was off.

Nailya Asker-Zade: During the pandemic with its challenges, this money is the only way to make ends meet. So the parents are asking whether new child benefits will be paid out next year.

Vladimir Putin: Please, repeat your question from the beginning.

Nailya Asker-Zade: The next application comes from Algiza Tuktarova in Bashkortostan. In November and December, she did not receive any benefits for her nine-month-old child, and does not know where to go. During the pandemic with its challenges, this money is the only way to make ends meet. Therefore, the parents are asking whether new child benefits will be paid out next year.

Vladimir Putin: I have already answered a question on the new payments. We are constantly monitoring the situation and what is going on. We are also thinking about paying out new benefits, and I will discuss this in a short while. However, if the woman that contacted you did not receive the payments for November and December, this means that the fault lies with the system for paying out these benefits that were designed to support people. We need to get it right and make sure that it works.

Could you please tell us who raised this issue, and where she lives? Please, share her address. This has to be done through the Pension Fund, and using the integrated state service centre as a one-stop-shop. We will definitely look into this issue. What was the region again?

Nailya Asker-Zade: Bashkortostan.

Vladimir Putin: Bashkortostan. The governor probably hears us. Where specifically in Bashkortostan?

Nailya Asker-Zade: We can find this request and share the details in a minute.

Vladimir Putin: Please do, since we need to know the specific location. I know that Bashkortostan has a young governor who is quite active and effective, although mishaps are always possible. Please tell us the exact community.

Nailya Asker-Zade: Yes, we will be back.

Dmitry Peskov: Let us now turn to Novo-Ogaryovo and the Kremlin pool. Please, show us Novo-Ogaryovo.

I think I see RT in the back row. Go ahead, please.

Igor Zhdanov: Igor Zhdanov, RT.

Mr President, I have a question on security, in particular on the terrorist threat. Russia has always condemned all terrorist acts and continues to do so, including those happening in Europe. For example, this year there were attacks related to the publication of cartoons depicting the Prophet Muhammad. Russia, in turn, does not support publishing these cartoons.

In your opinion, where does the freedom of expression as an inalienable human right end and become an insult to the feelings of religious people? Regarding Russia, what is being done to prevent us from following in Europe’s footsteps?

Thank you very much.

Vladimir Putin: Where does freedom end and become an offence? I will not tell you anything new, Igor. How can we draw a line between two freedoms? The answer is simple. A person’s freedom ends where another person’s freedom begins. This is a universal formula. Those who act without thinking and offend people of faith and hurt their feelings have to remember that there will be a response, one way or another.

On the other hand, this response should not be aggressive. No world religion, including Christianity and Islam, as I have recently quoted from the holy books – the Quran, the Bible and the Torah, and the Buddhist holy texts – mentions aggression. When someone’s rights are violated, including for people of faith, the response should not be killing the perpetrator, since it runs counter to the spirit of any world religion. God gives life, and only God can take it. This is something everyone should remember.

How does this apply to Russia? You asked me what we do to prevent this from happening. You know, from the outset Russia has been a multi-faith country. We have developed a certain culture of interaction between representatives of various faiths and ethnic groups. This is an essential element of the heritage our ancestors, the preceding generations passed on to us.

There were very many tragic, difficult and even black pages in the history of our country. Just take a look at the deportation of some ethnic groups after the Great Patriotic War. This is a painful subject, and we try to avoid speaking about it, but this did happen in our history. I am not going to assess those events now. But it is a fact that some members of the ethnic groups that were later persecuted had given a hospitable welcome to the occupiers – and there were such people among nearly all of the Soviet Union’s ethnic groups in the occupied territories. Do you agree? Yes, there were traitors everywhere. At the same time, other people, including, by the way, members of the ethnic groups that were later deported, had fought heroically for the interests of their country, and fought to the bitter end and until their last breath.

Why am I saying this now? There were no persecution campaigns on religious grounds; well, priests were indeed persecuted by the Soviet authorities, but it was only priests. Ordinary people were not persecuted because of their faith, never in our history, you see? This is extremely important.

What I mean is that the culture of relations between different religions, as well as between non-believers, developed in our country over centuries. This is why, thankfully, we never permitted and do not permit such offensive behaviour with regard to people of different faiths. I hope that this will never happen, and I am asking all of you to ensure that this never happens, because this would destroy the country from the inside. We must not allow this to happen.

As for what is taking place in some European countries, do you know the reason for it? For example, Muslims account for around 10 percent of the population in some European countries. But most of them are first, second- or third-generation immigrants, while in our country people of different religions live in their own country and have never had any other home countries. This is an extremely important feature, which explains the difference between relations that have developed and continue to develop among people of different faiths in our country and in Europe. This is why the multiculturalism project has ended in a fiasco, has failed there, something many of those who had advocated and promoted it had to admit. They had to admit that it failed. But it our country it has developed intrinsically over centuries and we treasure it.

Dmitry Peskov: We have undeservedly overlooked major news agencies.

Let us begin with TASS. You have the floor, please.

Veronika Ichotkina: Today, we do not have so many questions on the international agenda. I have a question on an international matter, namely, the conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh. For convenience, I will divide the question into three parts.

First. Why, in your opinion, did this long-standing conflict flare up so violently and why precisely now? Did this amount to objective conditions, or is it possible to blame one of the parties, or did someone toss the match from the outside?

Second, how did Turkey behave in this conflict? It is common knowledge that Ankara provided considerable military support to Baku during the conflict’s hot phase. It was decided to establish a monitoring centre following the ceasefire agreement. Ankara therefore shows that it has its own interests in this region. And what interests does Russia have in this region, and how do they intersect or even directly clash with those of Turkey?

And the situation in the vicinity of Gadrut is the last aspect. How great is the risk that ceasefire violations will continue in the region? And what will Russia do if these violations continue in the future? For example, is it possible to expand the peacekeeping contingent?

Here is another aspect dealing with Gadrut. Judging by statements and discussions in these countries, certain tensions arise because the parties interpret differently Clause 4 of the trilateral agreement, under which the Russian peacekeeping contingent is deployed as the Armenian forces withdraw. To the best of my knowledge, Baku sees this clause and interprets it in such a way that Armenian forces should completely leave Nagorno-Karabakh. In turn, Yerevan believes that, under this clause, they should leave only those territories that are being ceded under the agreement.

The Armenians therefore believe that they should leave only those territories they are ceding under the agreement, and the Azerbaijanis believe that Armenian forces should completely leave Nagorno-Karabakh.

I therefore would like to ask you the following question on this aspect: As a co-author of this trilateral document, could you explain what you, Aliyev and Pashinyan had in mind while approving this clause?

Thank you very much.

Vladimir Putin: You brought up so many issues. We could stay up all night discussing these.

Firstly, why exactly did it happen at this particular time? The situation spiraled out of control and lasted for many years. I do not think this was the result of outside interference. Friction, shootings and skirmishes had been happening for some time. In the end, it all led to a full-scale conflict.

Russia has invariably insisted that an agreement be reached without bloodshed. This is how we positioned ourselves in the Minsk Group, which Russia, the United States and France co-chair. We have for many years – I will reiterate our position – operated on the premise that Azerbaijan should get back the seven areas outside Nagorno-Karabakh. The very status of Nagorno-Karabakh should remain unchanged in the future. The status of Nagorno-Karabakh should be made permanent. However, Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenia should be able to maintain contact, so it was decided to create the “Lachin corridor,” that is, a physical connection between Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh. Why Lachin? Because the area this corridor passes through is called Lachin District. This is not complicated.

Turkey has publicly stated that it upheld, as they see it, the just cause of Azerbaijan, namely the return of the territories that were occupied in the 1990s. From an international legal standpoint, and I also mentioned this, these territories are an integral part of the Republic of Azerbaijan. I will say it again: Armenia did not recognise the independence of Nagorno-Karabakh, so in this respect, Nagorno-Karabakh is part of Azerbaijan from the perspective of international law.

However, I believe things are more complicated than straightforward regulations, including international legal ones. The roots go back to the ethnic conflict, which began in Sumgait and then spread to Nagorno-Karabakh. Here, each side has its own truth. The Armenians in Nagorno-Karabakh then took up arms to protect their lives and dignity, which led to the situation at the time the conflict escalated this year.

As you know, we agreed, in the trilateral statement, to stop the hostilities. Importantly, we agreed that the sides should stop at the positions they were holding at the time of signing the trilateral statement. This is where everyone has to stop.

In this connection, there are many technical, infrastructure-related matters. Incidentally, this agreement to cease hostilities was essential, as I have said, because it stopped the bloodshed and spared lives. This is what actually mattered the most, and all the rest fades in comparison. The main objective that we have been able to achieve was to preserve the lives and health of the people.

Since the armed forces stopped in their positions at the time of signing, certain infrastructure-related challenges had to be resolved, for both Azerbaijan and Armenia. But these matters have to be settled in a calm atmosphere, as part of the negotiating process. This trilateral statement provides the necessary framework and opportunities, since it states that once the ceasefire is in place, the next step will be to bring relations in the region back to normal by unlocking its economic and infrastructure potential, including roads and railway links, etc. This applies to the Nakhichevan Autonomous Republic, as well as transport links between Armenia’s north and south. The outbreak, the ceasefire violation happened only once. I hope that it will stay this way, and that the parties will sit down at the negotiating table, whether mediated by us or by the Minsk Group. It does not matter. What matters is that this process gets off the ground and comes to a positive conclusion.

As for what troops should be deployed and where, I have already answered this question.

We do hope that international mediators will move from words to action and start providing actual assistance to people who need help, primarily the refugees returning to Nagorno-Karabakh, so the humanitarian convoys do not come exclusively from Russia. International organisations should also make their presence felt, including UNICEF, UNESCO, and the United Nations World Food Programme. I hope that those willing to support the people in the conflict zone will respond via bilateral channels and move from words to actions. As for us, we are ready to carry on with these efforts.

Regarding the expansion of our peacekeeping force, it is possible, but only if all the parties agree to this, including Azerbaijan, since we agreed on the number of peacekeepers early on. This is a purely technical matter, so if everyone comes to the conclusion that it has to be done, we will do it.

If not, then we will not do it. That said, this is not just a matter of peacekeepers, but also how well Russia’s Emergencies Ministry and its staff, as well as the Border Guard Service of the Russian Federal Security Service operate there.

Dmitry Peskov: Let us move on to Nizhny Novgorod.

Yevgeny Khvan: I want to note that the news conference has been going on for over three hours. During this time, both the colours of the signs and the questions have changed. Our colleagues have prepared several questions and are trying to draw the President’s attention in various ways.

Mr Peskov, I have a proposal. In fact, being a journalist, I would also like to give everyone the opportunity to speak, but apparently there is simply not enough time, so maybe you can look at the signs our colleagues are holding up and pick a question yourself.

Dmitry Peskov: Penza, please. Pensions.

Yevgeny Khvan: Please, introduce yourself.

Yulia Izmailova: Good afternoon.

My name is Yulia Izmailova, I am editor-in-chief of Molodoi Leninets newspaper from Penza.

Mr President, the indexation of pensions for working pensioners was abandoned five years ago. It was said that it was a temporary and forced measure. Please, tell me, under what conditions will indexation be resumed?

Yevgeny Khvan: Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: The condition is quite simple: enough money in the budget. As you know, in the Soviet Union… It is good that being a Molodoi Leninets [Young follower of Lenin], you take care of the older generation. But Lenintsy know that in the Soviet Union, working pensioners did not receive any pension at all. Today, especially with the coronavirus pandemic and a drop in real income, indexation is very important. There are certain issues where several components of pension provision are lacking in the resulting sum for pensioners, and we definitely need to deal with this.

I would think also about certain categories of pensioners who need additional support from the state. Their incomes are not big and they work at jobs that other people do not want to work at. In fact, the state is interested in these pensioners taking these jobs.

Next year plans call for introducing indexation at a level higher than inflation, which is expected to be about 4 percent, maybe 4.1 percent. Pensions will be indexed by 6.3 percent. And we will do everything we can to meet this goal.

As for your question, we, of course, are thinking about it and we believe that pensioners deserve it.

Dmitry Peskov: Did you manage to find out anything at the call centre?

Nailya Asker-Zade: Can you hear us now?

Dmitry Peskov: Yes, you can speak.

Nailya Asker-Zade: We have found that question. Algiza Tuktarova from Kumertau, Bashkortostan, asks when will “Putin’s payments” be provided for November-December for children under three.

Vladimir Putin: All right, I wrote that down, thank you. We will answer it.

Nailya Asker-Zade: If I may, there is a question from a volunteer.

Dmitry Peskov: Go ahead.

Nailya Asker-Zade: Dmitry Bazhenov is joining us. Dmitry became a volunteer when he was still at school. During the pandemic, he has worked at Kommunarka Hospital. Dmitry, what questions have you received?

Dmitry Bazhenov: Good afternoon.

People are mostly concerned about water supplies. We have received questions from different parts of the country but Crimea is, of course, in the lead. The situation is particularly bad for the residents of Yevpatoria and Simferopol where the administration has already warned people that they may not have hot water until the end of the year. Not only the Crimean Peninsula but also many cities on the Black Sea coast suffer from lack of water during certain hours under a schedule, or not at all. At this point, I would like to read a question from Mikhail Masterkov, “Why is a water-supply schedule an emergency for Crimea but normal for Novorossiysk?”

Mr President, the Russian people want to know whether there is a plan to restore water supply and when it will put into action.

Vladimir Putin: There is a plan. I would like to respond to Mr Masterkov and all the people who asked about this. Yes, we know about this situation, and it is being dealt with at the Government and regional levels. As for Crimea, geological prospecting is being conducted there, as you know, and some water supply inlets are being redirected. I hope Sevastopol will not have these restrictions soon, and this applies to all of Crimea. There is every indication that Crimea has enough fresh water of its own. It just so happened that this problem was neglected in Soviet times, not to mention when Crimea was part of Ukraine. Now this plan is being carried out on a large scale. Some water is desalinated, but this may only be a limited alternative because desalination is quite expensive and the price might have to be included in the water rates. On the whole, the regional governor does not believe it will work on a broad scale.

There may be another alternative for Crimea. Specialists maintain that there may be large reserves of fresh water in the Sea of Azov water area adjacent to Crimea and under the Sea of Azov. Put together, all these measures give me grounds to say that we will resolve this problem and the required funds are being allocated for this purpose. There is no doubt that the state will not try to economise on this issue. I am one hundred percent sure, so do not have any doubt. This concerns not just Crimea, though it is the hardest hit area. I understand that people are concerned about this problem. this also applies to Novorossiysk and Gelendzhik. Here I have selected a question on water supply and wastewater disposal. We will treat these problems in the same way.

In Novorossiysk and Gelendzhik, they had a single waste water disposal system. Unfortunately, there was no separating of sewage disposal and storm water drainage. These two must be separated and then one system should be designed for one and later for the other and funding for construction should be provided. All this has been planned. Unfortunately, it is taking too long, I can see this both in Novorossiysk and Gelendzhik, and in other cities. But all this is planned and, I am sure, will be carried out.

Dmitry Peskov: We have somewhat neglected the foreign media. BBC, please. Steve, we have not heard from you or seen you for a while.

Steve Rosenberg: Steve Rosenberg, BBC News.

Mr President, we increasingly hear the phrase “New Cold War” to describe relations between Russia and the West. Russia regularly blames the tension on external forces, either America, Britain or NATO. But having been in power yourself for 20 years, don’t you think that you bear some of the responsibility for the woeful relations, especially considering Russia’s actions over the past years, from annexing Crimea to using chemical weapons on British soil, in Salisbury? Or not? Are Russian authorities “squeaky clean”?

And when it comes to chemical weapons – have you read the Bellingcat report that shows in detail that the attack on Alexei Navalny was orchestrated by the Russian state? Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: I have already discussed the assassination attempt against the famous Russian blogger. I can only add to what has already been said on multiple occasions. We are ready to launch an investigation. If someone holds information that a chemical weapon was used, in this case Novichok, as we keep hearing, we ask you, please share it with us. We suggested that our specialists go to Germany, Sweden and France so that they can look into this issue together with their colleagues. Or we ask you to come to us and bring the biological samples or at least share an official statement with us.

Steven, can you explain to me why, despite repeated requests from the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation, we have still not received even an official statement? The German authorities turned all the materials over to the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, and they refuse to share them with us, saying that Germany refused to authorise them to do so. Germany, in turn, tells us to inquire with the OPCW.

Can you explain this to me, Steven? Why can’t they even give us an official report on the use of this Novichok?

Steve Rosenberg: Are you asking me?

Vladimir Putin: Yes, I am asking you.

Steve Rosenberg: I am the journalist here, I am asking a question, and you answer it.

Vladimir Putin: Okay, fine. I apologise. Let me continue with my answer. Very well. Suppose this question remains hanging in the air. So be it.

Regarding whether we are “squeaky clean.” Do we feel any responsibility for what is going on? I feel responsible for what is going on in Russia and with its people. I will do everything in the interests of the Russian Federation. This applies to Crimea returning to the Russian Federation. I would like to draw your attention to the fact that this is how the people expressed their will.

In Kosovo, it was the parliament that took the decision, and you bought into it saying that this was the right way to go, everything is fine and democratic. In Crimea, people came to the polls and voted in a referendum, but for some reason, you do not like it. Let me remind you that democracy is the rule of the people, and you have to recognise this or stop using the term altogether.

Crimeans have been facing sanctions. What have you sanctioned them for? If they were annexed, they cannot be blamed. Why should they be punished? If they were not annexed, if this reflects the result of a vote, it has to be recognised that this is democracy and they should be left alone, together with the accusations against Russia of annexing Crimea.

Now, with regard to us being squeaky clean. Compared to you, yes, we are, indeed, squeaky clean, because we agreed to free the countries and peoples who wanted to be independent from a certain Soviet diktat. We heard your assurances that NATO would not expand eastward. However, you failed to keep your promises. Indeed, those promises were not made in writing; these were verbal statements, from NATO among others. However, you have done nothing in this regard. There have been two waves of expansion, and NATO's military infrastructure is moving closer to our borders. Should we not respond to this? Was it us who withdrew from the ABM Treaty? No, it was not us. So, we are forced to respond by creating innovative weapons systems that can nip these threats in the bud.

Later on, our colleagues withdrew from the INF Treaty. Mind you, not we, but our US partners did so. Accordingly, we said that we would not produce or deploy such weapons until US weapons are deployed in Europe. However, no one has responded to this so far. Then, they withdrew from the Open Skies Treaty. What were we supposed to do? I do not want to ask you this question, but what were we supposed to do in this regard? Leave it at that? So, as a NATO country, you will fly over our territory and make everything available to our US partners, whereas we would not be able to do the same with regard to US territory? You are intelligent people, what makes you think we are dumb? Why do you think we cannot analyse and understand these elementary things?

There are more issues that cause our concern. We are forced to respond to them. With all of that in place, we are facing the threat of the START Treaty expiring. Then, there will be no arms race restrictions, nothing at all. From day one, we have been calling on our partners to renew this treaty for at least another year and to conduct substantive, as diplomats say, talks on what to do next.

We understand that Russia has developed state-of-the-art hypersonic systems, which no one else in the world has access to. We are aware of that. We are not against taking this circumstance into account. But to this day, no one has spoken to us about this. Similar systems are being developed in Great Britain and the United States. They have not yet developed them, we understand this, but we are open to talks. However, no one is talking to us. So, go ahead and answer your question about who is “squeaky clean” and who is not.

We have two or three bases in Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Syria where the terrorist threat is quite real. The other side, the United States, operates a vast network of bases around the world.

Do you know the size of our military budget? It is 46 billion. Great Britain has a much bigger one. The US military budget is 770 billion. In terms of military spending, Russia ranks sixth internationally, after the United States, China, Saudi Arabia, Great Britain, France and Japan.

So, who is squeaky clean and who is aggressive? Well, aggressive is not about us, for sure. If not squeaky clean, then, at least, we are comely and committed to maintaining dialogue and seeking compromise solutions. I would like to quote Leopold the Cat from a Russian cartoon: “Let us be friends, guys!”

Dmitry Peskov: Let us move to Stavropol.

Vladimir Putin: Just a moment, there is a very important question I keep waiting for, but it has not been asked yet.

It is a question from Smolensk, or rather from Smolensk Region. Galina Klimova is asking about gas supply on behalf of the people in the villages of Kommuna and Myasoyedovo in Vyazma District, Smolensk Region. She writes that high-pressure gas lines were laid back in 2015, but the villagers still have no gas.

Ms Klimova, this is what I would like to say in this connection. First of all, this matter can and must be resolved, and we will certainly do that. Overall, provision of gas supply is estimated at 71.1 percent, and this year we allocated additional funds for this project. Gazprom has invested 22 billion rubles, and total investment is estimated at 56 billion rubles. It is important that 70 percent more gas lines are laid towards villages than to townships and towns. In other words, we are prioritising gas distribution for rural areas. I hope very much that the level of gas connectivity will reach approximately 90 percent by 2025, provided the technical capability is available. What does this mean? Laying gas lines to some areas is absolutely impossible because there are no gas deposits nearby or no infrastructure. But gas connections for Russia as a whole should reach some 90 percent by 2025. As for your villages, I promise to see to it that they are connected to the distribution system without delay.

Dmitry Peskov: Stavropol.

Pavel Krasnov: Thank you again. I suggest looking at the signs and posters prepared by my colleagues. As you can see, there is a great variety of subjects. Of course, this is a difficult choice, but frankly, I am attracted to a poster with the famous photograph by Yevgeny Khaldei, The Victory Banner over the Reichstag.

Leonid Nechepurenko: Good afternoon. Yes, this is a great picture and a great moment, probably a pivotal moment in our history and in the history of the world. Actually, my question is about the 75^th anniversary of the Great Victory, which we celebrated this year. Incidentally, Stavropol was one of the cities where a military parade was held.

I represent Stavropol. Leonid Nechepurenko, Svoyo TV Channel. I had the luck to attend that parade. It was a unique event and one of the highlights of the year.

It hurts even more to see some of the new tendencies, first of all probably on the part of our foreign partners who are trying to somehow revise the events of those years, question their significance – calling for a revision. The German Minister of Defence says that the only way to negotiate with Russia is “from a position of strength,” as if historical lessons have taught our partners nothing.

Actually, my question is: what can Russia do and will it do anything at all to prevent a rewriting of history and to preserve the historical memory of that event?

Vladimir Putin: To prevent a rewriting of history and, in general, any rewriting, we need to be self-sufficient, strong in every respect, primarily economically. We also need to develop our political system so that we feel confident in our country and that citizens understand where the country is headed and how it is progressing, and to build relationships with our partners in the international arena based on our interests and taking them into account. And of course, we should never forget about the feat of our ancestors, what they contributed to history not only during World War II and the Great Patriotic War, but also over the previous centuries. We have a lot to be proud of.

As for the Great Patriotic War, you know that we are unlocking archives now, and publishing archival materials; we are creating agencies that will do that on an ongoing basis.

I have said many times that all attempts to rewrite history are done for the sake of momentary political motives and will ultimately harm those who do it. This is especially true about the glorification of Nazism.

I would like to point out that the UN General Assembly today adopted a resolution (I mean today New York time, I do not know how they dated it, maybe yesterday) condemning the glorification of Nazism. There were only two countries that voted against it – the United States and Ukraine. I do not think this flatters them, to put it mildly. And it is not even clear why. Well, I mean, on the one hand, it is clear, but on the other hand, there are things of a fundamental nature, not part of any current political situation. But we, for our part, are proud of our fathers, mothers, our grandfathers, and grandmothers. We are proud of our country and its history, and we will do everything to ensure that this pride stays with us throughout our life and is passed on to our children.

Dmitry Peskov: Stavropol, will you please show us the room again. You have someone with a poster about Chechnya waging a war against somebody.

Madina Musayeva: Vainakh State Radio and Television Company, Chechen Republic. First, I would like to relay words of greeting, gratitude and deep respect from the residents of the Chechen Republic who love you and are looking forward to your coming to Grozny.

And now the question. The Chechen Republic today is a developed and safe region. This is largely due, among other things, to the efforts by the team, established with your support, by Hero of Russia Akhmat-Hajji Kadyrov, the first president of the Chechen Republic. After this national leader’s death you micromanaged the region and helped bring life back to normal. However, we face almost annual attacks by the United States of America against Ramzan Kadyrov and his team. Sanctions have been imposed many times on the Head of our region as well as his wife and children, and recently on a number of Chechen officials, sports organisations and a charity foundation named after our first president.

Mr President, what do you think is the objective pursued by the West, and why do they enact these sanctions against Ramzan Kadyrov’s team?

Vladimir Putin: Madina, is Mr Kadyrov the only one about whom sanctions and stories are made up about? I think they are made up about Russia in general. Ramzan Kadyrov defends the interests not only of Chechnya and the Chechen people but also of the entire nation. This is why it is one of the objectives for our so-called opponents abroad. There is nothing special or unusual here. I know that Ramzam Kadyrov also takes it in stride.

Some of my close associates, friends, or you might call them companions or teammates, even feel insulted by our partners if no sanctions are imposed on them. They say, “Why not, it looks almost humiliating and makes me wonder what we failed to do that we are not targeted by sanctions, as if to say that we have some peculiar relationship with them,” with our partners, as I say.

There is really nothing so bad about this. Russia is a self-sufficient country and so are the Chechen people. Chechnya is progressing despite the heavy wounds of the mid-1990s, and progressing fairly quickly with its new team, which is relatively young.

I know Mr Kadyrov, and I know him well. He has devoted his life to Chechnya, the people of Chechnya and Russia. My best wishes to him and all of you. I am certain that Chechnya as a whole will look just as good as Grozny does today.

Madina Mysayeva: Mr President, I am afraid that there will be no second chance, so I would like to ask you another question.

Dmitry Peskov: This is somewhat immodest. Let us move on…

Madina Mysayeva: You said that Russia is Islam’s best friend and quoted from the Quran, and you always support Muslims. In your opinion, how important is it to build closer ties with the Arab world and what role does Ramzan Kadyrov play in this regard?

Vladimir Putin: Regarding the Arab world, Ramzan Kadyrov’s role is just like that of any other head of a Russian region.

In fact, it is the Foreign Ministry of the Russian Federation that is in charge of foreign policy. Still, regions have always contributed to the Foreign Ministry’s efforts in meaningful ways.

As for the Arab world, and the Muslim world in general, we have long-standing ties with these organisations and countries. Russia has observer status with some of the prominent international Islamic organisations. Russia, the Soviet Union and today the Russian Federation have long maintained ties with the Arab world. We share strong and long-standing relations and are even witnessing a trend to further expand them. In Soviet times, there were ideological considerations at play, but now we have greatly expanded the geography of our cooperation with the Islamic world and the Arab world. We attach great importance to this and will keep moving in this direction and further develop these relations.

In fact, the Russian Direct Investment Fund works with almost all sovereign wealth funds around the world. We have even built a unique relationship with some of the Arab investment funds. They came to trust the Russian Direct Investment Fund to an extent that they decided to automatically approve co-financing projects it is involved in. This speaks volumes about the level of confidence and the quality of our cooperation.

Dmitry Peskov: Let us return to the World Trade Centre.

Interfax, please.

Lana Samsonia: Good afternoon, Mr President.

Lana Samsonia, Interfax news agency.

I will start with an economic issue. During the pandemic Russia has not used the National Welfare Fund (NWF). It has left it almost untapped, and is using loans to make up for the budget deficit. Does this mean that we are preparing for an upheaval in the raw materials markets in the near future? Should those who hoped to get a return on their investment in the NWF forget about it for now?

I would like to clarify one more point. Recently, talk of possibly suspending the results of privatisation has cropped up in the market. I would like to get a more specific answer to the following question: Is the state content with the current economic structure or can control of some major assets be returned either directly or through state-owned companies?

And one more quick question. It is impossible to avoid the pandemic. I would like to know what you think about the introduction of certificates for those who decide to be vaccinated. What is your attitude towards this?

Vladimir Putin: Once again please?

Lana Samsonia: To the introduction of international certificates for those who decide to be vaccinated.

Vladimir Putin: What are these certificates? I do not understand.

Lana Samsonia: They will allow people to travel freely, to visit other countries. Maybe, Russia could initiate the introduction of international certificates like this. This would help promote our vaccine on the international market and allow people to travel, not to go into lockdown when they are abroad, in part, in the US.

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: As for international certificates that would allow inoculated people to travel freely, we can probably discuss this, although, it is common knowledge, and I am not revealing anything new by saying that even vaccinated people can infect others. We simply have to keep this in mind.

They say that researchers have established a type of antibody with qualities that will not allow COVID to last long. The virus is quickly destroyed by the person’s immune system with these antibodies. But such questions require additional study. I do not know if it is possible to receive a certificate of this kind now.

Vaccination is all about protecting your individual health. To a certain extent, it will work as a barrier to the disease. This is also true. This is how herd immunity is acquired. Of course, we can discuss this with our colleagues.

Now about the National Wealth Fund. Indeed, it is up significantly, by 70 percent in ruble terms, I believe, which can also be accounted for by the exchange rate difference. This is a safety cushion. This does not mean that we are getting ready for more shocks. But we must have a safety cushion.

Look, we have a law under which we can spend money from the NWF if its volume exceeds 7 percent of GDP. We are now close to 7.1 percent of GDP in the NWF. Liquid NWF funds amount to 8.2 trillion rubles. What does liquid mean? This means that we are already investing a portion of it, including from the NWF.

This year, 60 billion was allocated to expand the so-called “eastern range,” that is, the Trans-Siberian Railway and the Baikal-Amur Railway. This year, we will use some of the funds from the NWF to cover current budget expenditures, primarily, payments to people, families with children, doctors and students of medical universities and colleges. This also includes supporting the affected sectors of the economy and major companies. The total amount of funds that we will allocate from the NWF this year will amount to 350 billion rubles, of which 250 billion has already been spent. Spending accelerates at the end of the year. I think 100 billion or so more may be spent before the year runs out.

Therefore, we are using it, but we must do so carefully. I have already mentioned that we will have 7.1 percent of GDP in the NWF next year. But the Finance Ministry always looks at these numbers from a three-year perspective, bearing in mind possible exchange rate differences, economic growth in the country and external events.

To reiterate, we are using every avenue to ensure budget stability and borrowing mainly on the domestic market, but we do take some money from the National Welfare Fund.

Dmitry Peskov: Let us give the floor to St Petersburg.

Olga Knyazeva: Thank you for coming back to us.

Mr President, I would like to draw your attention to the fact that this room looks like a chess board from high up. These are the magnificent interiors of the Yeltsin library. Who will make the next move? I would like to give the microphone to the discreet young lady in the blue vest. She has been focused on following the news conference for more than three hours now.

Arina Aksyonova: Thank you.

Good afternoon, Mr President.

My name is Arina Aksyonova, Novgorod Region TV.

My question is on education. I am from a small region, and we are eager to attract more young people to study here. Novgorod Region is doing a great deal in this regard. We have already invested over a billion rubles in our colleges and vocational training centres, and young people come to the region to study from 24 Russian regions. However, we are now facing a new challenge. We lack accommodation for them. Could it be possible to have a federal programme to upgrade and build new dormitories for colleges and vocational training schools?

Vladimir Putin: All higher education and vocational training institutions face this problem. We work on this on a case-by-case basis. Usually the budget chips in, but mostly these initiatives are part of the programmes carried out by the education institutions themselves. We keep coming back to this issue, it is a common concern for all educational institutions, and it became especially acute after the National Final School Exam was introduced. School graduates from across the Russian Federation who have high marks and are entitled to apply for the country’s top universities have started to use this right. So many students from the regions, from small communities have started moving to large educational centres. Novgorod Region may not be a major region, but it is an established educational centre. Students move there and need places to live. There are many ways this can be resolved, including renting and living in dorms. In some cases, students get their rental charges reimbursed. Some universities try to help students find additional sources of income. We are aware of this problem and we will work on it.

Dmitry Peskov: All right, let us go on.

Let us move to the World Trade Centre. Kultura TV channel. Let us give the floor to Kultura.

Yana Muzyka: Good afternoon.

My name is Yana Muzyka, Rossiya-Kultura TV channel.

We have a question about the promotion of the Russian language and culture. There are examples of business projects gaining an enormous audience and tremendous influence both in the country and beyond. Everyone remembers, for instance, the animated series Smeshariki [Kikoriki, known in the US as GoGoRiki] and Masha and the Bear. They have received enormous world recognition and have been such a great success that our colleagues have even made accusations that they were ordered by the Kremlin. Maybe there is something we do not know, and they were really ordered by you?

Seriously speaking, you are using private initiative in ‘soft power’. How can we make our official efforts to promote our language and culture so impressive, powerful and successful?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Look, what is ‘soft power’? Culture is, of course, one of its aspects. Education, culture, and humanitarian ties in general. In this sense, they are the most universal instruments of cooperation in the world, and they are certainly immune to any restrictions or sanctions. If someone tries to introduce any sanctions, this will be primarily counterproductive for the initiators of such activities.

There are some fundamental aspects in this respect. This is the foundation of the culture of the peoples of the Russian Federation – Russian culture and the culture of other peoples. These are the basic foundations of culture expressed in the level of culture in this country. By tradition, they are supported at the government level. I am referring to classical music, ballet and theatre art. No other country has such a school of theatre art. So many state-supported theatres certainly do not exist anywhere else in the world. They are our national asset. This is perfectly obvious. All of them have their own problems. There are many problems. However, this is still a powerful layer supported by the state.

There are absolutely private initiatives as well, the ones you mentioned, for instance. This is amazing animation created by our talented people based on a solid foundation. But here the support of the state is obviously in demand and is absolutely insufficient. Yes, we are proud and happy for the artistic groups that have created such impressive images that are remembered and popular in the world. But in general, animation needs support from the state and business structures. I will not go into details at this point. I discussed this with my colleagues only recently. We talked a lot about Soyuzmultfilm [Russian animation studio]. It has many outstanding problems that must be dealt with more thoroughly, especially with animation.

Why am I talking about this? Because whole generations of our children are being brought up on this animation. They must be brought up on things that small children understand, based on compassion, love for one’s country, family and friends, and nature. All these endless, crazy “shoot ’em up” games obviously attract the attention of small children, but I think that sometimes they may even do harm. So, one has to use extreme caution in this respect. As for everything positive, it certainly deserves greater support on behalf of the state than it has received up to now.

This is ‘soft power’ as well, but it cannot be ordered by the state in any way. Support is the only thing required from the state. This is exactly the case when fewer orders and commands must be made. It is simply necessary to provide more support.

Dmitry Peskov: Mr President, we have been going for four hours now. I suggest going to the call centre again, and then we will wait for you to decide how many more questions you are willing to take before we wrap it up. Bring on the call centre please.

Nailya Asker-Zade: The call centre has received some questions from children. In the past, they had videos with poems and songs, but this year they are asking adult-like serious questions, which volunteer Dzhemiyat Kurbanova, has put together.

Dzhemiyat, please read the questions.

Dzhemiyat Kurbanova: Good afternoon, Mr President.

Here is what Mikhail Yakovlev, 10, from Kursk wrote to us. He says he loves to watch the news. Recently, he realised that other countries do not like Russia. He is curious why. After all, we did nothing wrong to them.

Vladimir Putin: I can tell you straight away that people in many countries around the world love Russia. If we have discussions and arguments with big boys and girls, our colleagues, it is about adults sorting things out among themselves.

Of course, in one way or another, what is happening between adults affects the relations between them, but relations between nations, people and ordinary citizens in most countries are very stable, friendly and based on mutual respect.

Nailya Asker-Zade: We have more questions.

Dzhemiyat Kurbanova: Yes. Gavriil Lazovoy wants things to be fair and is asking why his brother Pyotr, an 8^th grade student, has been studying remotely for three months now, whereas he, a 5^th grader, has to go to school every day. Here is what the boy says, I quote: “Please, let me study remotely too, or let my brother go to school, otherwise it is unfair.”

Mr President, what would you say to that?

Vladimir Putin: I would say that, unfortunately, this is an involuntary measure and, indeed, it is unfair, I completely agree with you. Of course, your family should be together. However, we need to do as the doctors say, and they say that young children do not get this infection as much or as badly as older children and adults. It goes unnoticed for them. Therefore, it is okay if they get together in class. Older children get sick more often, so it is better for them to use remote learning. I strongly hope it will be over sooner or later.

There is something I noticed here, and I am happy for you and your brother, and want to thank your parents. Do you know what it is? It is special that you and your brother treat each other like that.

Nailya Asker-Zade: One more question. Yelena Vorontsova from Yekaterinburg asks, Mr President, what books do you read to your grandchildren?

Vladimir Putin: Marshak, for example.

Nailya Asker-Zade: Which ones?

Vladimir Putin: Twelve Months. There are other good books by Russian and Soviet writers. Our fairy tales are very good.

Nailya Asker-Zade: Thank you.

Dmitry Peskov: Let us continue here. We have not yet given the microphone to RIA Novosti. Go ahead with your question please.

Olga Samsonova: Mr President, good afternoon.

RIA Novosti, Olya Samsonova.

I would like to follow-up on one of the subjects you mentioned. I am referring to arms control, the future for the Open Skies Treaty and the INF Treaty.

It seems to me that the prospect for bringing these treaties back to life looks dim, even with the new administration. But what about the New START? If efforts to extend it fall through, could it be that Russia will face the threat of a new arms race that we will not be able to shoulder economically, especially considering the current situation?

This leads me to the second part of my question on hypersonic weapons. Can you tell us please, in your opinion has this transformed the global military and political balance? Have all the projects you mentioned, including in your 2018 address, been implemented, or are we to expect new arms systems to be developed in the future? Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Let us start at the beginning, as the saying goes. Regarding the New START, unless something happens, this treaty will cease to exist in February. I have already said during this news conference and have said in public many times that we are ready to continue the dialogue. I know that president-elect Biden said (this is at least how it sounded to me) that he was ready to continue this dialogue and preserve this fundamental treaty. We are ready for this, no problem, but we need our American partners to respond.

If this does not materialise, will there be an arms race? It is already on, no doubt about that. It all started when the United States withdrew from the ABM Treaty. This is how it all happened. One country started building an umbrella for itself. What did this mean? This would have made our nuclear capability completely irrelevant. What were we supposed to do? We had to do everything we could to prevent this: either build a missile defence shield on our own, or develop systems that would not be affected by these missile defences. This is what we did in developing hypersonic weapons, including Avangard. Let me remind you that this missile has a speed exceeding Mach 20 with global range, and it is not a ballistic missile, which means that it cannot be intercepted by any missile defence system.

Has the appearance of hypersonic missiles in Russia influenced… I am referring not only to Avangard but also Kinzhal [Dagger] and Zircon that are now being developed. The latter is a major weapon. Recently we subjected it to regular testing, which was very important for us. In effect, the work on this has been completed for the most part. It can exceed Mach 8 and has a long range. Importantly, it can be deployed as a fixed-base missile or stationed on ships, both surface ships and submarines. Where can these missiles be deployed? In neutral waters. If you calculate the range and speed, everything becomes clear. Does this influence the situation? Does it change anything? Of course, this influences the situation; it changes it.

Our American partners (they have developed a lightning disarming strike theory, that is, a precision weapon strike primarily at control centres) have precision weapons but they do not yet have hypersonic weapons. Of course, they will develop them sooner or later. This much is obvious. However, as I have said, we will be prepared for this. You asked me what we are working on now. In part, we are working on this, the technology to counter future hypersonic weapons from the other leading armies in other countries. I am sure we will develop this. We are on the right track and working hard.

Yes, we are also working on the other arms systems that I announced in my address, in one of my addresses. Some of them are already combat ready, for instance the Kinzhal and the Peresvet laser system. We are moving fast on the Sarmat heavy missile. In fact, we are in the final stages there. Work on the Poseidon system is going well. We are on plan in building a global range nuclear engine.

There are some technical issues, but not a single problem that calls into question any goal in our plan. We will do all of this; I am sure of it.

As for the arms race, as I have said, it is already underway. But look at how we have managed to deal with all this. We are sixth in the world in funding our army and defence industry but mostly the army, spending a bit over 46 billion as compared to 770 billion spent by the US. Yet, we have succeeded in developing what others do not have. Plus, we have a scientific and industrial base and school, the minds of our scientists and designers, talented engineers and workers. That will allow us to avoid engaging in an arms race. One executive in the US defence industry said recently, yes, they have reduced their numbers, their army has become more compact but they have become much more effective. This is true. This was our goal. We have not done everything we wanted. But we are on the right track and will continue our efforts to ensure the ultimate security of the Russian Federation and its people.

Dmitry Peskov: Mr President, what is your decision? Two or three more questions and we wrap it up?

Vladimir Putin: Let us take two or three more.

Dmitry Peskov: And then we will wrap up?

Vladimir Putin: And we will be finished.

Dmitry Peskov: Connect us with Rostov-on-Don, please.

Aina Nikolayeva: Greetings,

Thank you very much for coming back to us. We were anxiously looking forward to it; we have many distinct posters here, journalists from Kalmykia are wearing wonderful outfits. But our colleague in the front row is giving me a gesture with her hand across her throat indicating that she urgently wants to talk. Let us find out what all the urgency is about.

You have the floor; you may lower your mask, and will you please keep standing?

Vera Yuzhanskaya: Thank you very much.

Vera Yuzhanskaya, Nashe Vremya newspaper, a regional paper in Rostov Region.

Mr President, you see, I happened to attend all of your press conferences but I have not been able to ask a single question, so as a bonus, if I may, I have a two-part question. The two parts are different, though.

The first part refers to what has already been partially addressed – the harvest and prices. Rostov Region celebrated a record-breaking harvest this year, but soon people began complaining, of course, because the prices were a real surprise. This defies logical explanation.

I would like to ask why this happened. Obviously, you said the magic words to the Government and everyone started running around; now everything will be done right away. But why is this? Is it because we export too much or import too much? That is, we export grain, sunflower seed and import cattle breeding technology, many types of seeds; we import equipment for our food processing industry. What is the problem here?

I will ask the second part after you have answered the first one. It concerns a totally different subject, spiritual food.

Vladimir Putin: All right.

Yes, indeed, we must increase our independence. This includes some new technologies, seed and some areas of animal husbandry. But this is not related to prices. What do prices have to do with that? I have already clarified what it is related to; the prices are related to world markets.

For example, oil and sugar. The sugar harvest this year was a bit smaller but it meets domestic demand. However, sugar prices went up on the global market, and so it was immediately used for export. This is it, there is nothing unusual here. Meanwhile, domestic prices began climbing to match global pricing. This happened in the oil industry as well, by the way.

Manufacturers and exporters believe they should not be losing money with domestic prices. This is nonsense, of course, they must understand that they are not losing anything, they are producing things here. They are counting their lost opportunities since they are not exporting more. However, they forget how much the state has already invested and continues to invest in agriculture, and what they got from the budget in order to achieve these numbers.

We have developed a system for supporting and subsidising exports. Despite the fact that the situation on the global markets has changed and exports have become more lucrative, the state continued to subsidise exports. This was a mistake and a belated response from the corresponding government agencies. My colleagues and I discussed this in no uncertain terms. Again, I believe this will be corrected soon.

The same goes for bread and grains and everything that is produced from it, like pasta. A record-high harvest, 131 million or maybe even more – and bread prices are rising. This is nonsensical and is also related to exports and export incentives. To reiterate, these things may not be critical, but what is bad is that it affects our people. This is annoying. But it can be fixed. Most importantly, administrative actions should not be damaging to the industry. It is important to work within the market mechanism, including timely use of certain customs regulations when exporting food products.

Indeed, we must provide incentives in the areas that need support.

What was the second part of your question, Vera?

Vera Yuzhanskaya: It was on behalf of some of my colleagues in the audience. The question is about the small town of Bataysk, and a small local newspaper Vperyod, which made it to the top ten newspapers list in Russia. It is a no-nonsense newspaper that protects the townspeople. The editor received the title Editor of the Year. We all learned our trade from Lena Pivovarova; everyone knows her in the community and on other platforms. In early November, the Property Management Committee, which owns the newspaper, fired the editor without providing any reason.

People were indignant. No one should be fired for doing good work, and the newspaper is really good. Then, the people behind this decision began to make up reasons for firing the editor. They have sent an inspector there, after the editor was removed. Then, the security people come, seize documents and remove hard drives. Meanwhile, there is neither an accountant, nor an editor-in-chief there.

At the same time, “special” parallel media came in. We have ordinary media and “special media” that throw mud at the editor, and she instantly goes from a person who has been working for 23 years and only received awards, to being a bastard, a swindler, a bandit and everything else.

Aina Nikolayeva: What is your question?

Vera Yuzhanskaya: What is my question? Mr President, how do you see the end of this story? Now, watching this editor being rolled into the dirt, other editors at small municipal newspapers will hide and say, “Let us keep quiet and not tell anyone anything, and not do real journalism, because the outlet’s managers will be taken down like Pivovarova; clearly, this can happen to the best of us.” Or will there be a different outcome to this problem?

This is about soul and spirit because without normal media we cannot build a civil society.

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, I agree that we cannot build a civil society without proper media outlets. This is obvious because an effective and live press is part of civil society.

I do not know about the situation you have just described or about the work of Pivovarova, Editor-in-Chief of Vperyod Newspaper, but I believe you, I take your word for it, as they say.

You said that the property committee had fired her, right? We understand that agencies that manage property do it on behalf of the state. However, it is completely clear that this is an organisation that should not be dealing with content, as they say. They should only monitor that nothing is stolen and everything is in place, so that nothing is taken away from the state. I hope the paper clips, chairs and other editorial furniture are in place, so it is clear that it was not the property committee that did it, but someone who runs the Bataysk property committee.

Of course, I will ask the governor to deal with this. If he is not able to do it, I will help.

Vera Yuzhanskaya: Mr President, if you could, please do not simply involve the officials. Can you please involve the Russian Popular Front, too?

Vladimir Putin: Yes, this is a good proposal. I will do this. Agreed.

Dmitry Peskov: Thank you, Rostov-on-Don.

Let us return to the World Trade Centre. We have not taken any questions from that wing yet.

Yevgenia Avramenko: Good afternoon,

Yevgenia Avramenko, Federal News Agency.

Mr President, a lot has been done this year in the context of the pandemic to support Russian businesses, but small enterprises are still not quite healthy. Can small businesses, for example, individual entrepreneurs, expect any federal support next year?

In addition, on behalf of our agency I would like to thank you personally and perhaps Russia in general for not giving up on our compatriot – sociologist Maxim Shugalei. He and his interpreter spent about 18 months or even longer in a Libyan prison. We kept a close eye on this story, and it was a very cruel affair. We are happy that they are home for the New Year.

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: This takes us back to the question from Grozny on Russia’s cooperation with the Arab world. Among other factors, and perhaps most importantly, we have been able to do this through our cooperation with some of our Arab friends who have been helping us, and this case was no exception.

As for supporting SMEs, I have already listed the support measures, so there is no need to repeat all the measures we have developed and implemented for the affected sectors, primarily small and medium-sized businesses. We have allocated about a trillion rubles through various channels to the affected sectors. Independent business owners have suffered great damage, so this applied to them as well. The measures included returns on paid taxes, and reducing tax payments this year. These measures are well known, and people have been using them.

We are monitoring the situation, how it is unfolding and where it will take us in the near future. Of course, if the need arises, and it probably will, we will think about what else can be done to support the self-employed.

Dmitry Peskov: The President said very warm words about the Arab world. We have never had a journalist from Iceland ask a question at our new conference.

Please introduce yourself.

Haukur Hauksson: Haukur Hauksson, which translates as Falcon Son of Falcon.

Thank you for the opportunity. Thank you, Mr Peskov, for giving me the floor and the opportunity to ask questions on air.

This happens twice in Russia. Now, because of the coronavirus, there is no live broadcast, and journalists from all over the world can ask any question. So, this is good, and it is unique to Russia, where journalists and people can ask questions just like that.

Therefore, I would like to put forward an idea of an international round table discussion where other presidents and leaders of state would also be present. From Scandinavia, too. There are presidents and kings today. Comrade Rosenberg, however, is gone, and if the queen…

That is, when any person or a media member can ask questions, it is direct democracy. This is about grounding a leader, and this is actually very cool and very good. What is interesting is that comrades from other countries are teaching you democracy.

What do you think about holding a roundtable discussion around the world with you and other participants? Technically, it is a very simple thing to do.

The second part of my question is probably more fun. Happy upcoming New Year, Mr President! You once hinted that some day you would let us in on the secret of family happiness. You said it at a news conference. If you feel like it, you are welcome to do so now.

And the last thing: a boy, I do not remember, from Rostov, I think, said that the West does not like Russia. That is far from the truth. We love Russia with all our hearts. It is the media and the authorities such as the BBC, CNN and others, including the Icelandic press, that accuse you of very bad things. There is a big war underway against you personally. Apparently, someone is afraid of you. But people in the West do not hate or think badly about Russia.

So, thank you for the conference. Thanks go to technicians, interpreters, drivers and engineers.

Keep it up, Mr President, and stay in good health at all times.

Vladimir Putin: Thank you very much for your kind words. I rarely hear them. You will probably get in trouble for saying it later when you return and see your colleagues. But I think that putting up with things is part of the job.

With regard to the roundtable discussion idea. It is a good idea. But you see, we have to first realise another one of our proposals, that is, to have the leaders of the permanent member states of the UN Security Council meet to discuss the issues that are of concern to all of humankind. This includes, by the way, the pandemic, which French President Macron suggested we focus on; it also includes the disarmament agenda, and an issue that concerns all of us – the environment, definitely a key problem facing humankind, combating terrorism, ethnic intolerance and religious intolerance. We could have an entire package of issues to discuss. The very idea of holding a roundtable discussion, possibly online, is certainly possible. It is crucial, though, that your proposal be supported by my other colleagues.

As it happens, we have very good relations with Iceland, and not only at the people’s diplomacy level but also at the interstate level. We appreciate this and have respect for Iceland. Iceland has much to offer and to learn from. I mean energy, including hydro power. We cannot come close to your practices, although in some regions of the Russian Federation, Kamchatka in particular, we are studying and using it and hope that it will yield concrete practical results.

As to the secret of family happiness, it is love. But this is no secret. Everybody knows that; it is a universal notion, it must be a cornerstone of relations both in families, and – since you mentioned international relations, in relations between different peoples.

Dmitry Peskov: Mr President, the final question comes from Novo-Ogaryovo.

Vladimir Putin: All right. Please.

Dmitry Peskov: Stream Novo-Ogaryovo, please.

I see Izvestia. Izvestia, go ahead.

Viktor Sineok: Izvestia, Viktor Sineok.

Mr President, we have heard many questions about many different problems but mine is a little different. Over the past year we have understood, we really felt what it meant to have a very hard time, including emotionally. You said at the press conference a few years ago that you put your emotions into your work. Here is my question: what sort of emotions have you felt in recent years, including this difficult year of 2020? And which emotions would you like to wish us in the coming year? Maybe you already know how you will toast the New Year?

Vladimir Putin: Please, be seated.

As to which prevailed – the good or the bad… You know, each year brings issues we have to overcome, and each year brings us great joy – both family, and state, national achievements. Against all odds, we have great achievements that we can and should be proud of, and we are.

Yes, the year was complicated, but what would I like to draw your attention to? You know, this is what I thought about when you were asking me this question. Haven’t we faced difficulties in our recent history? Just now, in this meeting I remembered how hard life was in the 1990s and the early 2000s. It seemed at that time that there was no light at the end of the tunnel, that there was nothing. No army, no economy, a ruined social sphere and skyrocketing unemployment. One out of three lived below the poverty line, but look at what it is like now.

Yes, there are problems. Yes, people are still living a very hard life, and there are very many such people. That said, the foundations of Russian statehood, the pillars of the Russian economy, and the potential of the state are incomparable with what they were in the 1990s and the early 2000s. This gives us tools we have never had before. This gives us an opportunity to focus on resolving the most important, most urgent problems without forgetting about the strategic development goals of the Russian Federation.

As for toasts, like every person, every citizen, I always have toasts for the New Year. It is only important that the amount of champagne and other drinks you consume is limited. As for toasts, the number does not matter.

Of course, we will all raise toasts to the people in our lives, our family, friends and colleagues. But I, my family and friends always have one main toast – “To Russia.”

Not to finish my remarks on this pathetic note but on something heart-felt, I would like to say the following: during this meeting, some of my colleagues asked me what we were planning to do to support families with children and whether we have plans for this. This is what I would like to say. Some volunteers told me recently that they have various ideas and initiatives on supporting children before the New Year. Unfortunately, this year large events like children’s New Year parties have been cancelled due to the restrictions. Large events in theatres, children’s studios and so on have been cancelled as well.

But still, this is an unusual holiday. It comes with expectations and hopes for the future and, at the same time, with difficulties. Therefore, before coming here I consulted the Government and the Presidential Executive Office. We agreed that our country, our state will also give a gift to our children. It is a small, modest gift, but nevertheless, we will pay 5,000 rubles to all families with children under 7 years old; 5,000 will be paid for every child in this age group.

I would like to thank all of you for our common work. I would also like to wish you all the best. I hope we have not worn each other out. I would like to hope that the people who listened to us for more than four hours, for four and a half hours, have found this useful and interesting.

For my part, I would like to say that the meeting was very useful for me. We will do all we can to give the best possible response to all your questions, concerns and problems that are faced by the country and each Russian family.

All the best to you!

Thank you very much.

Dmitry Peskov: Thank you, Mr President.

All the best, goodbye.

Vladimir Putin: Goodbye.

* * *

Vladimir Putin: Go ahead, what are your questions?

Question: Have you had enough of self-isolation? How do you cope with it?

Vladimir Putin: First, I am not in complete self-isolation. As you see, we do meet from time to time. I have in-person communication with my colleagues.

And then there is one more way. I work with my colleagues from the Government and the Executive Office occasionally – no, in fact, regularly – but not at the same distance we have now with you. We just get seated farther from each other, three, four or five metres apart. However, this distance does not interfere with discussing current and future problems we are working on.

Question: Mr President, you have just recalled the 2000s. Meanwhile, now is the 20^th anniversary of the new version of the national anthem. Back then there were such heated debates, even overheated, and many people were against this anthem.

Do you think it has become a unifying symbol of the nation 20 years later?

Vladimir Putin: Sure, that is what it was, and it remains the same. I always said and I want to reiterate: We should never throw a baby out with bathwater.

We must feel that we are not, as they say in Russia, Ivans with no kith and kin. We should take along all the very best that unites us all. And this music by Alexandrov is amazing and wonderful, and the entire nation knew it. Why should we give it up?

Sure, the situation has changed, and yes, we changed the lyrics. I think there is nothing to worry about, everything proceeded in an absolutely natural way. And it is one of the symbols which unite the country.

Question: Mr President, as a Russia Today staff member, I cannot but ask you about the work of our channel and oftentimes about RT-affiliated projects on Western internet platforms. We constantly encounter some sort of hurdles, one can even call it censorship – one day they restrict access to RT Documentary, then they do something else of the kind.

Can you tell us, please, if any steps will be taken at the state level to protect not only us but all Russian media outlets that have to use these Western platforms such as YouTube, Facebook and so on?

Vladimir Putin: We have to develop these platforms ourselves – this is the best road to independence in this area, in the information area. Information independence is impossible if we depend on foreign platforms. It is truly impossible. They can shut everything down at a push of a button. And this is happening, we see it with our own eyes.

Is it possible to respond to that at the state level? Yes, it is possible to respond, and the Foreign Ministry does that. But how effective is that? It is not effective.

This is why we are obliged to and we will point that out to our partners who are particularly preoccupied with human rights and freedom of information. But let me repeat again – the key to ensuring independence in information space is developing technological and technical capabilities ourselves. This is what we will be doing.

Question: When answering the question about Navalny today, you said that stealing billing data of the Russian security services’ officers by Americans is a common thing, it is routine.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, the NSA [the US National Security Agency] does it, we are aware of that. It is their job, and they are not hiding it. What is wrong with that?

Remark: In this case personal data was also stolen and the names and photos were published. And CNN knocked on the door of the flat.

Vladimir Putin: Listen, it has been going on always and everywhere and it will go on. But we know it, they are not even concealing it. Some former NSA employees talk about this not only with respect to our country, but also with respect to other countries, with respect to their own citizens, the same thing happens. This is the way their intelligence agency works.

To be honest, I do not see anything special here. It is a compilation, a scrapheap where they keep dumping, dumping, dumping in the hope that it will somehow impress the public and will sow mistrust in the political leadership. This is a form of information warfare.

Question: Mr President, may I?

Zvezda TV channel.

You spoke about the 75^th anniversary of Victory and about historical memory. I do not know if you heard about the recent statement by German Defence Minister Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer that Russia should be spoken with only from a position of strength. Probably because we do not understand any other language. Do you think this is an reasonable statement from a defence minister?

Vladimir Putin: Of course, not. The lady became a defence minister and she probably wants to show how tough she is. In this case she repeated a fairly trite cliché which is being repeated in many NATO countries.

It is counterproductive for our inter-state relations. It is absolutely meaningless from the point of view of defence policy because… Because! Because they need to take a look at what the Russian Army is like today, that’s why.

To be honest, I would not think much of that, and we should not inflate this issue. I am not sure she is happy about making that statement, just as many responsible politicians in Germany. It is just a traditional cliché.

Question: What event are you most looking forward to in 2021?

Vladimir Putin: In 2021? Let us first wait for the New Year to arrive. We will see the New Year in and raise our toasts, including to Russia.

Question: How long will the pandemic last, Mr President?

Vladimir Putin: Nobody knows that. It will depend on the achievement of herd immunity and the vaccine efficiency. I said earlier that some Western partners have expressed readiness for joint work. This is very good.

It shows that professionals can find resolve to step beyond political limitations. I am not sure about political developments but I would very much wish the work were done at the professional level.

We also have an option – to design a light vaccine, as specialist call it, by the Gamaleya Centre: just one jab which will not be effective for as long, the protection level will be lower but the efficiency will stand at 85 percent anyway, but we will be able to produce tens of millions vaccine doses right away. This is also an option.

And we can design it ourselves or we can do it with our partners. There are many options here.

As to when it will end – nobody gives a straightforward answer to this question. Some vaccine producers, thank God, said frankly that things are not going so well, they have had some failures. But I do not see anything terrible here either. I do not think we should point fingers saying, “Hey, they can’t make anything” and gloat. No, this is not our way.

Question: How did China manage to defeat the pandemic so fast? As a follow-up on the topic.

Vladimir Putin: They had tough restrictive measures and the authorities were able to implement them.

Question: Do you fear that people are just going crazy now – cafes and restaurants are being closed before the New Year’s eve, that the people will just not be able to stand it?

Vladimir Putin: I do not think that closing cafes and restaurants is a critical matter for their visitors. However, from the point of view of business we need to think and look at the losses that emerge here. Because obviously the business plans included operation and revenues during the holiday season but it did not materialise. This is what needs to be considered.

Meanwhile, most people celebrate the New Year with their families. Although fatigue is growing, naturally. But people see and understand what is going on. One can be a COVID dissident or whatever until they themselves contract the disease.

Question: But there will be no lockdown?

Vladimir Putin: We are not planning a lockdown.

Question: As a man who has been vaccinated, I really want to ask you this. I took part in the third stage of the post-registration trials of the Gamaleya vaccine, had a jab, but I faced the fact that many of my friends and even family members did not understand why I had done it. A lot of people are not going to be vaccinated …

Vladimir Putin: We need to explain it to them, they need clarifications.

Remark: I do, I show them with my example.

Will we have a way to persuade people to get the vaccine? Because very many people will refuse if this continues to be voluntary. And the recovery period will be longer.

Vladimir Putin: It can only be done voluntarily. As to explaining and persuading, it must be done with your help and the help of your colleagues, representatives of the media, bloggers and specialists who must give the necessary information to the people in a clear and plain language so that it invokes their trust.

Question: What do you write there? (Points at the pad.)

Vladimir Putin: I put down what your colleagues were asking, the names of those who asked questions, the topic: Yana, culture, Olga, the New START, National Welfare Fund. So as not to forget a part of the question being asked.

Question: Did you note any governors following the results?

Vladimir Putin: You see, we keep records, everything. It is a case when nothing is lost. We will not lose anything

Question: What have you got in your mug, if it’s not a secret?

Vladimir Putin: Tea. It is not even tea, but an infusion of Siberian herbs.

Question: Has the composition changed over the years?

Vladimir Putin: No, it is a herbal tea brewed from Siberian herbs.

Question: Mr President, will you miss Ms Merkel?

Vladimir Putin: Ms Merkel? Well, she is not leaving yet, thank God, she is working. That is why I think it is not quite appropriate to tell me she has left and something will follow. They have a parliamentary government there.

I am aware of the developments in their domestic politics, I am aware of what can happen there in the nearest future. We have rather good personal relations with the Federal Chancellor, and the inter-state relations are of quite a high level.

The Federal Republic of Germany is one of our biggest trade and economic partners. It follows China, probably, coming in second, I need to see the latest data. Everything has gone down due to the pandemic, but German businesspeople are undoubtedly among the biggest investors in the Russian economy. Unlike other investors, they invest in the real sector. We highly appreciate this, let me stress it again, we really have a lot of friends there who trust us and we value their trust.

Question: What do you think your relationship with Mr Biden will be like?

Vladimir Putin: I do not know. It will largely depend on the new administration. Let me reiterate, he is an experienced person, he has been in politics all his life.

You know, there is a famous formula: the retinue makes the king. This is why it depends on who will make up his team. Actually, we already see candidates to the key positions, we know all of them and we have worked with them one way or another.

We are not expecting any surprises here. Nevertheless, we heard the statement by the president-elect that it would be reasonable to extend the New START. We will wait and see what that will amount to in practical terms. The New START expires in February.

Question: Mr President, can you guarantee that such restrictions …

Vladimir Putin: Come on, let us avoid such wording. (Laughter.)

Question: …promise that there will be no more restrictions like the tough ones in spring with many non-working days, restriction on retail centres, and closures of businesses?

Vladimir Putin: I can say that they are not in our plans. There is no need. The incidence of the disease is fairly high but according to specialists it has entered a plateau, which means that we do not see a sharp increase.

We proceed from the assumption that given the number of specialised beds that we have, provided we increase drug production, I hope that we will not have the negative developments you mentioned. We will monitor this more closely so that people will get the necessary drugs and be hospitalised when needed.

Here’s what you say: some people do not believe in vaccines and do not want to be vaccinated, or they do not believe anything at all; others are unhappy if they were not taken to hospital straight away; yet others are unhappy because they were not given the medications – all that must be reviewed carefully, calmly, in time, and we must give a timely response. If we do this, if we follow the rules and comply with requirements from the sanitary doctors, we will need no lockdowns.

Question: Could you give us a little clarification about Safronov, whatever there is, Ivan is still our colleague. You said he is accused among other things of working as Rogozin’s aide in the Government.

Vladimir Putin: Did I? No, I did not say that.

Remark: He has been working at Roscosmos for the past six months.

Vladimir Putin: Listen, I did not say that he was charged because he worked as an aide. I said that the investigation considers some elements of his activities to be illegal, they are connected not with his work as a Kommersant journalist, but with a long period of his life, including the period when he worked as Rogozin’s aide. That is all. But he gathered and passed information. That is what the investigators tell me.

Remark: That is, while he was a Kommersant journalist.

Vladimir Putin: No, not that alone. Also when he worked in other positions in other places. So what we need is the investigation to get to the bottom of the matter so that the case can go to court.

There are no people who want to persecute him. Do you think he has some enemies at the Federal Security Service or the Investigative Committee? There are no personal enemies there. Did he rub any of them the wrong way or accused of something? No, there was nothing of that.

The matter is different – whether what he did falls under the articulated clause and the crime he is charged with, or not.

Question: Can you say what exactly he is charged with?

Vladimir Putin: Passing classified information to intelligence agents of western countries. This is a straightforward charge. That is all there is to it.

Question: Did it also happen last year and the year before?

Vladimir Putin: I am not going to go into detail now. What is the point? To be honest, I do not know the details, and I should not make things up. I am not going to specify. What for? It is a sensitive matter, let the investigators do their job in peace.

He has no enemies, do you understand? But it is an obvious fact, isn’t it, that the man working in the sphere of information collected some sort of information which he should not have deliberately passed on to intelligence agencies but he still did. These are the facts.

If he, as a journalist, a free journalist, fulfilled his duties and signed a contract with someone, be it even a Western media outlet, that is a different matter regardless of whether the authorities like it or not. However, if he collected secret, classified information and passed it on to an intelligence agent, if he realised what he was doing and still did it – that is a completely different story, isn’t it? That is the point, and this is what it is about. There is no conspiracy there. Who cares about him anyway?

Remark: What if he is used to put pressure on Rogozin?

Vladimir Putin: Oh my God, this is total nonsense.

Rogozin – why should he be under pressure? He is an official, he works today. If he works well, let him. If he does not want to work or if he does not work well, we will replace him. There is nothing special about it.

By the way, he is getting ahead, progressing as Roscosmos head. There is no conspiracy theory here. It is pure nonsense, just get it out of your heads.

As I see it, he is your colleague, many of you knew or know him personally. But what can we do if he deliberately collected and deliberately passed on information, fully aware of who he was passing it to and what information it was? I am sorry, but in that case let him face the consequences. But the investigators and security services must prove that, that’s true. If they do, then the court will hear the case. If they do not, then they will apologise to him.

Question: Mr President, will the 5,000 ruble payments be paid out before the New Year and what is the procedure?

Vladimir Putin: Before the New Year. The procedure is standard, like the one when 10,000 rubles were given to children under 16.

Thank you, everyone,

Remark: Happy upcoming New Year!

Vladimir Putin’s annual news conference

2019-12-20T18:46:04+04:00

The news conference was broadcast live by Rossiya-1, Rossiya-24, Channel One, NTV television channels, as well as radio stations Mayak, Vesti FM and Radio Rossii.

President of Russia Vladimir Putin: Good afternoon,

We are holding our traditional end-of-year meeting to summarise the year’s results, to see what we have achieved and what we could not achieve and why.

I will refrain from lengthy opening remarks. As I see, there are many people who would like to ask their questions, and during today’s discussion, today’s meeting, I will try to use these questions to talk more about what is happening in our country and how.

Thank you for your keen interest in such meetings. Let us begin.

Please.

Presidential Press Secretary Dmitry Peskov: Thank you, Mr President.

Traditionally we give priority to the ‘veterans’ of the Kremlin pool of journalists, who have covered the President’s work for many years. I will continue this tradition.

Valery Sanfirov, Mayak. Please, pass the microphone.

Valery Sanfirov: Hello, Mr President. Valery Sanfirov, Mayak radio station.

Initially, I had a different question, but I changed my mind when I heard today’s weather forecast: there will be no snow until the end of December. And I wondered where you would tape your New Year address to the nation.

My question is not about the New Year tree but about climate change. Everyone is talking about it, but it looks as if nobody knows what to do about it. What are the risks? How can climate change damage Russia?

One more thing: Russia has joined the Paris Agreement this year, if I am not mistaken (the Government has adopted a resolution to this effect). Under the agreement, Russia must reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 25–30 percent by 2030.

However, you said at the recent VTB Russia Calling! forum that we would reduce the emissions by as much as 60 percent by that deadline. I wonder if you have made your first mistake or if you have something special in mind.

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: You have trapped me, you really have.

Indeed, Russia has joined the Paris Agreement. In fact, we announced our intention to do this much earlier, but this year we have formalised our decision by adopting a Government resolution. It does mention the reduction of 25–30 percent compared to the base year 1990. This is what all countries, including EU member states, do, they compare their reductions to 1990 or use it as the base year.

But if… How can I get out of your trap? If we take [the base figure] as 100 percent and subtract 30 percent from it, the remaining figure will be 70 percent, and bearing in mind the absorption capacity of our forests, the ultimate figure will be 60 percent of the base figure. Let us assume that this is what I had in mind. This is my first argument.

Second, Russia is not the world’s largest polluter. The biggest polluter according to the UN – many other organisations made such calculations, but according to the UN, the biggest polluters are the United States and China (16 percent of emissions each), the EU (11 percent), Russia (6 percent) and India (5 percent).

As you know, the Paris Agreement pursues efforts to limit the increase in global temperature to 1.5 percent. I do not know whether we will be able to achieve this together or not, because nobody really knows the causes of climate change, at least global climate change.

We know that in the history of the Earth there have been periods of warming and cooling, and this might depend on the global processes in the Universe. A small tilt of the Earth’s axis and its orbit around the Sun can lead to and have already led to very serious climate changes on the Earth, which had dramatic consequences – good or bad, they were still dramatic.

And it is happening again now. It is very difficult, if not impossible, to work out exactly how humankind affects climate change. But we cannot stay idle either, I agree with my colleagues. We should make our best efforts to prevent dramatic changes in the climate.

As for our country, this process is very crucial for us. The temperature in Russia is rising 2.5 times faster than the planet’s average. As you know, Russia is a northern country, and 70 percent of our territory is located in the north latitudes. Some of our cities were built north of the Arctic Circle, on the permafrost. If it begins to thaw, you can imagine what consequences it would have. It would be a disaster.

In addition, it is getting warmer in some places, for instance, here in Moscow we are now setting temperature records, but this might lead to desertification in certain areas, and we will be directly affected by it.

Climate change also means an increase in the number of various natural disasters such as wildfires, floods and so on. This also concerns us. Therefore, we are continuing to be proactive in our efforts to minimise the impact of these changes.

Dmitry Peskov: Let us continue. The regions. “Kamchatka has not asked a question for 15 years.” Okay, I see you.

Kamchatka.

Anastasia Ostrovskaya: Good afternoon, Mr President, Mr Peskov, colleagues,

It is true, Kamchatka has not been given the floor for over ten years. As you know, the residents of Kamchatka have to buy a plane ticket to get to the mainland. Unfortunately, not everyone can afford it. Yes, there is a wonderful flat fare programme by Aeroflot, a presidential programme to subsidise tickets for young people, pensioners and large families. But these tickets are snapped up in an instant. Not everyone can buy them. And Aeroflot said recently that it will probably abandon the flat fare tickets. It will mean that many Kamchatka residents will be trapped in their peninsula.

How do you think this problem could be solved?

And another short sub-question. Mr President, it has been a long time since you paid an official visit to Kamchatka. Is that because the tickets are too expensive?

Vladimir Putin: No, it is not because tickets to Kamchatka are too expensive, I belong to one of the groups you mentioned, you see. (Laughter in the audience.) But no, the reason is that it just hasn’t worked out so far.

There are many pressing issues in the region. But my trips are not called official visits. I make official visits to foreign countries. To Kamchatka, it is a working trip. It does not mean that Government or I simply forget about the region. We are constantly working with it. It is a very important region in terms of the economy, social sphere and defence, because as you know, it hosts one of the bases of our strategic subsurface launch platforms. Therefore, we are always paying attention to Kamchatka.

As for the tickets, no one is going to take away the flat air fares. Aeroflot is simply exaggerating, trying to squeeze money from the Government for these flights. We will keep these programmes in place. Moreover, this programme is being expanded to other regions, beyond the Far East. We will keep doing this too.

But in general, what should we aim for? We need to see the growth of people’s incomes, which – we will talk about this later – are growing very slowly, and also to reduce carriage costs. This is how we should also reduce railway ticket prices. But these programmes will stay in place as long as there are no radical changes in the situation.

I assure you, Aeroflot itself has some reserves. We discuss this matter with the Transport Minister, the Deputy Prime Minister who supervises this area, and the Aeroflot management.

Viktor Smirnov: Rubbish from St Petersburg is swamping the Leningrad Region.

Dmitry Peskov: Let’s … act as we have agreed.

Vladimir Putin: We will talk about St Petersburg, rubbish and other burning problems …

Dmitry Peskov: If we start shouting now… You do not respect all the others.

Vladimir Putin: Here is what we will do. I will answer your question by way of exception. Agreed? But please, do not do this again or else we will have an Oriental bazaar and no dialogue.

Let us talk about rubbish.

Viktor Smirnov: Viktor Smirnov, 47news. We write about the Leningrad Region.

As you know, the so-called rubbish reform has been launched in Russia, in all regions except Moscow, Sevastopol and St Petersburg, which have been given a respite until 2022. That is, they will be able to start when they are ready.

Speaking about St Petersburg and the surrounding Leningrad Region, the reform has begun in the region, and now rubbish from St Petersburg is being moved to the region. The regional authorities are working on it, but their work has not been coordinated. St Petersburg and the Leningrad Region depend on each other in this regard; logistics has been disrupted, and it is unclear which vehicles go there.

People in the region wonder why rubbish heaps, clearly brought from the city, are growing near their houses, and why so many vehicles are doing this stealthily. It all seems legal – on the outside. Can the city authorities be encouraged legislatively to hurry up?

Vladimir Putin: This can be done, but this is not the problem. What we need to do is talk directly with the people. People must know what rubbish is brought in and from where, on what grounds and what will happen to it next. Just look at it, we…

Sit down, please.

Viktor Smirnov: I have a request.

Vladimir Putin: A request? I have not answered your question yet, but yes, go ahead with your request.

Viktor Smirnov: Thank you. Can I ask for a 10-minute interview afterwards, while you walk to your car?

Vladimir Putin: This is possible. But you have not listened to my answer. It is too soon to thank me. As for an interview after the news conference, will it be this year or next year? We have not decided this yet, but yes, this is possible, in principle.

Getting back to rubbish, it is public knowledge that we produce 70 million tonnes of household waste a year. Seventy million! Can you imagine that? Incredible.

The Soviet Union and Russia did not have a rubbish recycling industry. We are creating it from scratch. The basic decisions have been made, overall: we have created a federal operator and over 200 regional operators, as well as a territorial planning scheme with regard to rubbish.

What is really lacking, as I see it, is direct communication with the people. We must tell them what we plan to do and how we will do it, where the recycling plants will be built and where rubbish will be stored until they are built.

Of course, we should completely get rid of all grey schemes and crime. Simple order should be restored. I will take advantage of your question – people are certainly outraged at a tariff increase. There was never a separate tariff for household waste, but now it appeared and immediately grew many times. This should be explained.

In order to explain these figures, it should be transparent and clear who pays and what for. In rural areas, the waste removal tariff grew many times, but in fact, waste was never removed there, it was just thrown away in a neighbouring forest. But this is also a violation.

Then, rubbish needs to be taken somewhere – and this also requires payment. It should be transparent, so that people understand what they are paying for – this is the main problem, I think.

By the way, there may be a similar situation in Leningrad and in the Leningrad Region. Why is waste transported from St Petersburg to the Leningrad Region? Well, okay, let us remove it somewhere closer to the Arctic Ocean, and then the tariff will increase once again by 10 times.

After all, the Leningrad Region and the city of St Petersburg, former Leningrad, are a single economic region. During the Soviet era, it was managed, in fact, by one body – by the Communist Party’s regional committee.

Now that we have such a separation, this single area but at the same time two Russian regions certainly have slightly different interests. But so that people…

By the way, many people from the Leningrad Region, as well as from the Moscow Region, work in St Petersburg, and they generate this waste there, in St Petersburg. This is the point, and then it is removed to where they live, basically. The whole process should be transparent, and it seems to me that the situation can and must change.

But, among other things, we need to develop the industry in terms of building the facilities. They are already under construction. The number of waste processing plants should be increased. And we must explain to the people what kind of facilities they are, how they will work, what the damage will be and whether there will be damage to the environment and whether they will create any problems for the people who will live next to these facilities.

Indeed, in cities around the world, for example, in Tokyo, waste processing plants are located directly in the city. But they do not emit smoke, they do not stink, excuse my language, they do not affect people’s lives or destroy the environment. If we use the latest technology, and this is exactly what we are going to do, then no problems will arise.

But we should do everything as agreed, and this requires public control and public organisations. I have already spoken with the leadership of the Russian Popular Front and I ask them once again to pay special attention to this issue. If we address this problem all together, we will resolve it.

Dmitry Peskov: Let us continue. I see a journalist from TV Centre. I recall we sort of neglected this channel in the past years. Please, take the floor.

Matvei Shestakov: Hello. I am Matvei Shestakov from TV Centre TV company.

The media often make the accusation that the real sector of the economy is currently based exclusively on the achievements of the Soviet era: plants and major roads were built in Soviet times, and the deposits were developed in the Soviet period. What is your response to these critics and what has been done in the past ten years? What roads, plants, maybe airports have been built? I know there is a relevant programme. Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Criticism is not always a bad thing; it makes us contemplate the issue in question.

As for the opinion that we are using Soviet achievements, we cannot neglect the legacy of the thousand-year-old Russian state, including its Soviet period. This is obvious. In the Soviet times, many things were done which we can be proud of and are proud of: Victory in the Great Patriotic War, the breakthrough in space exploration, and much more. We should be thankful to our ancestors, our fathers and grandfathers, who created such a huge and powerful state during the Soviet period.

As for today, I want to say just a few words to those who believe that nothing has changed.

First, 75 percent of the production capacity in the processing industry has been created since 2000. The average age of machinery and equipment in the processing industry is 12 years. Do you see what this means? It shows what has been done in recent decades.

But it is much more than that. You mentioned airports. Three new airports and 45 runways have been built. Speaking of transport in general, there are 12 new railway stations; dozens of railway stations have undergone modernisation, in-depth modernisation. The number of federal motorways has been doubled. Doubled! I believe there were some 39,000 kilometres of roads [percent – ed. note], and now there are more than 80,000 kilometres.

Agriculture is, of course, an excellent example. As you know, and there are many people from the older generation here who remember this well, the Soviet Union always was a purchaser of grain. We were among the largest importers of grain, wheat. Let me remind you that today Russia is the largest exporter of wheat to the global market. We are number one. We are ahead of both the United States and Canada.

They have bigger production, but they consume more, and we produce so much that we hold the first place in the wheat export to the international market. The agricultural growth is 46 percent.

Our exports have multiplied (I think they grew 2.6-fold). We sold $24 billion worth of agricultural products, including not just grain, which is the main source of foreign income in agriculture, but also livestock production, including poultry, pork and so on.

In total, all the ports of the Soviet Union transhipped (there were transhipping capacities) 600 million tonnes per year. Do you know how much Russia does now? 1.1 billion. All of this has been created over the recent decades.

Now to the mineral assets you have mentioned. There are about 600 new deposits, including 57 we plan to open this year. About 600 new deposits. And we can say the same for almost every industry. I am not even talking about such modern industries as nuclear energy, with eight blocks launched recently. I think there were 16 over the entire Soviet era. By the way, this gives us a big advantage in fighting climate change, because thanks to this, as well as hydropower and gas, we have the greenest energy structure in the world.

There are brand new spheres of energy as well, such as liquefied natural gas. Entire international-class complexes have been established, both in the Far East and the Arctic. A generation breakthrough has taken place in hydropower, a real breakthrough.

This is why those who believe we only use the old resources and capacities we inherited from the previous generations are mistaken.

Dmitry Peskov: Let's move to that side of the aisle. Interregional media, URA.RU. Give them a microphone, please.

Anton Olshannikov: URA.RU news agency. Mr President, my name is Anton Olshannikov.

I have a question about negative developments in medicine, as they are still relevant. The fact is that it may take up to a month to get a doctor’s appointment in the regions, and doctors’ salaries can be so low that doctors are quitting en masse. However, a head doctor may be paid hundreds of thousands of rubles a month, whereas, for example, a surgeon, gets about 50,000, if that.

You have held several meetings on primary care and healthcare in general this year. You said that the reforms should be carried out quickly and be meaningful. In this regard, I want to understand why the system remains at a standstill. The fact is that the reform is cosmetic, and there are no ground-breaking solutions that could make a difference. You got personally involved in dealing with this issue. I want to understand why. Perhaps, you think the country needs a different healthcare management model? Or does the state need to find resources to support what is available?

Vladimir Putin: First, it is best to let the model just be. It is evolving at a satisfactory pace, but there certainly are problems.

You mentioned one of them, salaries, but healthcare employees’ salaries are even higher than the salaries in other social spheres. Overall, the numbers outlined in the 2012 executive orders correspond to the planned salary benchmarks. Frankly, I cannot disagree with you, as these are average numbers as well.

You have just said that while head doctors may be earning high wages, rank-and-file doctors, even surgeons, are paid much less. This is one of those problems that we need to tackle. As far as pay levels are concerned, we need to look at the specific sector. After all, what are the approaches to getting things moving? There is no secret about it, and these solutions are quite simple. The first one is to simply increase Compulsory Health Insurance tariffs or change the way the tariffs are distributed within this system. Let me emphasise however that there is little that can be changed in terms of redistributing tariffs within the Compulsory Health Insurance system, since 70 percent of them already go towards salaries. If we change anything, there will be no money left for buying medicine or equipment.

What is the other option then? It consists of simply increasing the Compulsory Health Insurance tariffs. Can this be done? Yes, it can. However, at the end of the day it will be a burden for the entire economy, since all operators within it must pay for it, which will drive up prices and cause an overall increase in the rate of inflation. In such circumstances, any increase in salaries would be eaten up by inflation. So probably this is not the best option either.

But what can be done? Is there anything that can be done within the existing system? Of course, there is. Just look. First, as you have just said, a head doctor may have a big salary, much higher than ordinary doctors. The first thing that should be done is to eliminate this unfair differentiation. This is my first point.

There is no doubt that the base salary rate must be changed. In the regions, it is currently in the range of 35 to 50 percent. We need to have a single national approach to paying out incentives, so that people earn a specific amount for the number of patients they receive, for the number of patients they visit at home, etc. At the same time, there should be no question of cutting bonuses that are given for special working conditions, such as working holidays, working at night, and so on. I believe that even just putting this right would produce a positive effect.

Of course, this will not be enough. Salaries in the social services sector must grow alongside the economy, especially and even primarily in the healthcare industry. I do agree with that.

Dmitry Peskov: Thank you. Let us proceed.

Let us talk about sports, Match TV, if this is what you want to ask.

Olga Bogoslovskaya: Good afternoon, Mr President. Olga Bogoslovskaya, Match TV. I am from a sports channel, and so my question will be about sports, or more precisely, the difficult situation with Russian sports.

On December 9, the WADA Executive Committee adopted an unprecedentedly harsh decision to ban Russian athletes from participating in all major sports events, which include the summer and winter Olympic and Paralympic games.

The reason for that decision was the discrepancy between the data provided by the Moscow laboratory and the data provided by WADA informers. The Russian Anti-Doping Agency’s rights have been curtailed.

However, the sanctions have hit the innocent athletes especially hard. This brings me to my question: What should Russian athletes do in this situation, and how can Russian sports develop in this difficult situation?

Vladimir Putin: I will answer your question, but first I would like to say that I noticed that I did not answer the previous question in full.

I would like to say a few more words about the measures we plan to take in the field of primary medical care. We have agreed, after all, to increase healthcare allocations, in addition to what has been stipulated under the Healthcare project, by 550 billion rubles.

These funds will be used first of all to improve physical assets and to buy equipment and vehicles. We plan to improve or built 10,000 medical facilities and buy 37,000 vehicles and approximately 10,000 pieces of medical equipment. In this context, I hope that we will be able to implement all our plans very soon and that people will feel the change.

The second component, which is mostly stipulated under national projects, includes allocations to primary care, but the bulk of funds will be invested in fighting cancer. I hope we will see a positive result in this sphere as well.

We can report achievements in the field of cardiovascular diseases, where the figure is some 0.6 percent. The situation with tuberculosis has improved by 12 percent, and child mortality has decreased considerably. We must continue working in the same manner in all of these spheres.

As for WADA and its decisions, I believe that they are not only unjust, but also defy common sense and are illegal. Why? Because as far as doping is concerned, decisions have already been taken against Russian athletes who had to compete in a neutral status at the previous Olympics. Now it is happening all over again. There has never been anything of this kind in any of the world’s legal systems or in human history, and I hope nothing of this kind ever happens again. This is my first point.

Second, any sanctions must target specific, individual breaches. If someone was caught doing something illegal, sanctions are natural and fair. But if an overwhelming majority of Russian athletes are clean, how can they be sanctioned for someone else’s actions?

We have very young female athletes competing in figure skating, they are practically little girls. What do they have to do with doping? Nothing whatsoever. But they can do quadruple jumps, which so far no one can, or almost no one can do in women’s figure skating. This is how they make sure that these girls are kept off the ice. Can this be done? Yes, it can. But what for? Will this help international sports in any way? I do not think so.

Among other things, as I already said at the news conference in Paris, this decision by WADA runs counter to the Olympic Charter. A national team cannot and should not compete under a neutral flag when there are no claims against its Olympic Committee. This is what the Charter says. If WADA does not have any claims against the Russian Olympic Committee at this time, this means that the national team can compete under the Russian flag. Go after specific people, and of course we will be there to assist you in these efforts. We are doing everything to make our sport clean.

By the way, RUSADA was created in close contact with our WADA colleagues. We even selected its executive team based on their recommendations. I think that everything I said suggests that this decision was politically tainted, as sad as it sounds.

Dmitry Peskov: Let’s go to the middle [sector], to the federal media. I can see Channel One, pass on the microphone, please.

Konstantin Panyushkin: Thank you.

Good afternoon, Mr President. Konstantin Panyushkin, Channel One.

First of all, I would like to thank you on behalf of the Channel One journalists and perhaps many others for what you said at the news conference in Paris. After the news conference – we did a little eavesdropping when you were talking with Chancellor Merkel and President Macron, explaining, as far as we understood, problems concerning journalists’ work in Ukraine. Perhaps one day, thanks to the work in the Normandy Format, we will be able to work there confidently and calmly like Ukrainian journalists work in Russia, who, by the way, should also be here today.

So I have a question about Ukraine. After Paris, after everything your summit partners have said in the two weeks since then, and I mean Ukraine above all, do you think there is any point holding another meeting in four months, as you agreed? And what do you think are the Normandy Format’s prospects in general?

Also, do you think the Minsk Agreements and the Steinmeier Formula will survive the next four months or survive at all in the future? What do you think is the best-case scenario for the future of Donbass?

In addition, journalists were looking forward to your meeting with Zelensky and Russian-Ukrainian talks. What are the current prospects of a settlement in Russian-Ukrainian relations? Are there any problems or breakthroughs due to the change of administration?

And the last question, if I may. President Zelensky talked about you right there, in Paris. What do you think about President Vladimir Zelensky? Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Let’s begin with the last one. I always try to avoid such questions. I do not believe it is correct for me to answer them and to state my opinion of my colleagues. Perhaps you have noted that I don’t even describe former leaders who left their offices.

Let’s discuss historical figures. We can do this. I do not have the heart to talk about people who are in office today. Everybody has both positive and negative sides. But when people take such offices, this means they have passed through a serious selection process, so they are at least not ordinary people.

As for the Normandy format, the Minsk Agreements and so on, there is nothing more important than the Minsk Agreements. Of course, I was worried by the statement made by President Zelensky after he left Paris to the effect that they could be revised. If we revise the Minsk Agreements, the settlement process will hit a dead end, because the main element of the Minsk Agreements is a law on the special status of Donbass, which must be formalised in the Ukrainian Constitution. It has been extended for a year, but not permanently, although we keep saying – not only do I, but the other Normandy format leaders say so as well – that the law must be of unlimited duration and that its formula must be incorporated in the Constitution. However, it appears that neither the previous nor the current Ukrainian leadership wants this. But there is no way around it. This is the first point.

Second, there must be a direct dialogue with Donbass. There is none so far. It has been announced that amendments concerning decentralisation will be made. This is good. But is this meant to replace the Minsk Agreements? Or the law on the special status of Donbass? Can you imagine that? Yes. But the Minsk Agreements say that any actions that concern Donbass must be coordinated with Donbass. This initiative has not been coordinated with it. This, of course, is alarming.

As for the next meeting, for example, in April, it will only be relevant if we see positive change. Has there been any positive change? Yes, it is an objective fact. First, the law on the special status has been extended, and hence the basis for a settlement has not been destroyed. Second, troops have pulled back in several vital areas, although our Ukrainian partners are against disengagement along the entire contact line. I believe that they are making a mistake, but this is their position. That was my second point.

The number of artillery attacks has decreased, which is another achievement, although regrettably, they have not stopped altogether. There are positive things and there are alarming things. All this should be discussed. Overall, it is desirable to continue meetings in the Normandy format.

By the way, you mentioned our Ukrainian colleagues. Shall we give them the floor? Are any of them with us today?

Dmitry Peskov: Please let our traditional guest have the microphone.

Roman Tsymbalyuk: Good afternoon, my name is Roman Tsymbalyuk, and I represent the Ukrainian UNIAN news agency.

Vladimir Putin: Good afternoon.

Roman Tsymbalyuk: Indeed, we, and I personally, have no problem doing our work in Russia. Perhaps, if the Ukrainian tanks were in Kuban, you would have slightly different thoughts about us.

Vladimir Putin: Are you talking about the 72 or the 34 model? (Laughter.)

Roman Tsymbalyuk: T-64 is our staple combat tank made in Kharkov.

Vladimir Putin: T-64 is a Soviet tank as well.

Roman Tsymbalyuk: You also mentioned you are originally from the Soviet Union.

Vladimir Putin: Okay.

Roman Tsymbalyuk: As a follow-up to the Minsk talks, could you give the date of your decision to disband the occupation administrations in Lugansk and Donetsk? You refer to them as republics, but they are not mentioned in the Minsk Agreements.

Also, if I may, will there be a gas war? It appears that you are not about to give us back the $3 billion awarded to us by the arbitration court. You are talking about cheap gas, but we know that Russia’s cheap gas is the most expensive thing for Ukraine.

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: So, disbanding administrative bodies and gas. What else?

Roman Tsymbalyuk: Three billion.

Vladimir Putin: Three billion.

Here is my first point regarding the Minsk Agreements and disbanding, as you said, administrative bodies in the unrecognised republics.

Former president Petro Poroshenko who represented Ukraine at the Minsk talks, which were followed by the Minsk Agreements, insisted on having this document signed by the leaders of these two unrecognised republics. They just grabbed me by the throat, all three of them, and representatives of these unrecognised republics refused to sign. I am giving you, so to speak, the inside facts about our talks in Minsk. However, we managed to persuade them, and they signed the document. Thus, Ukraine itself recognised the existence of these authorities. This is the first part of the Ballet de la Merlaison, so to say.

The second part is that the elections were held there, and the people cast their votes. This, I believe, is a very democratic way of organising government bodies.

Third, the Minsk Agreements themselves outline explicitly the rights of these republics, and what they are entitled to claim. Everything is spelled out there about the language, the local police, and so on.

The next aspect has to do with what it is all about, and I am getting to the controversial part. I will not hide anything, and there is no need to do it. People in both Russia and Ukraine must know what these agreements are about.

There is a clause about withdrawing mercenaries and foreign troops and closing the border. Under the Minsk Agreements, the process of closing the border is to begin on the second day after an election takes place, and to be completed only after an inclusive political settlement is achieved, including amendments to the Ukrainian Constitution and these republics acquiring the rights as set forth in the Minsk Agreements. As soon as this is done, the border can be completely sealed.

Finally, let me respond to the question about the withdrawal of foreign troops. There are no foreign troops there. Yes, there are local militias, local self-defence forces staffed with local residents. I get questions all the time: Where did they get tanks or heavy artillery? Look, conflicts and hostilities of all kinds are unfolding in many hotspots around the world, involving tanks, artillery, etc. Where do they get them? Probably from those government agencies that sympathise with them. But let me emphasise that these weapons are theirs, not foreign.

As for the mercenaries, I have just said in Paris that there are French and Germans fighting there on both sides. We must address this issue of mercenaries, but they are not the bedrock of these armed groups.

You know what the main problem is? I will be completely honest with you. The most important problem is that there is a lack of willingness to resolve this question through dialogue with the people. We have yet to see any willingness to move in this direction, instead of trying to create favourable conditions for resolving the problem by force using tanks, artillery and air power. I said: air power was used. And the current President of Ukraine replied: What air power? He did not even remember or did not know this. But they did use air power, you see?

As soon as we, or rather the Ukrainian leadership, abandon what I believe to be a completely misguided approach to resolving this problem and move into dialogue mode, this is when there will be a path towards a solution. It is stated in the agreements that they need to restore economic and other infrastructure, but instead they just cut off this part of the country from the Ukrainian territory by imposing a blockade. Was Moscow the one who imposed this blockade? The Kiev authorities were the ones who did it.

However, we are seeing some positive shifts in this sphere, at least I hope we do. As you already know, there are some changes for the better there. At least there are crossing points, and the demining effort is underway. This is not enough. A lot has to be done to improve the lives of the people who live there. But it can be done.

If we proceed from this premise and focus on finding common ground and promoting dialogue, the problem will be resolved. If attempts to strangle them by force continue, I do not think that it can be done. There is a saying that people in Donbass never yield under pressure. It definitely has a ruffian and aggressive side to it, but this is how people feel deep inside. People who live there have a sense of pride, so this problem is unlikely to be resolved by force.

The gas war. You mentioned three billion. Let me point out that part of our reserve money from the Russian National Welfare Fund is invested in Ukrainian bonds: $3 billion, exactly. There is a court ruling from London on this, but it is not fulfilled.

Speaking about gas relations, it is a complicated and sensitive issue. We want to solve this problem. As someone who has a degree in law, I believe that this ruling of the Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce is not legal but more likely political. Here’s one of the grounds for this ruling (everyone here will find it strange, too, but it is interesting): “…due to the difficult economic situation in Ukraine.” That is nonsense. But it is written there. They should have refrained from writing such a phrase.

Well, we have the court decision, it is true, and we must proceed from this. We will proceed from this and look for a solution that would suit everyone, including Ukraine, while preserving transit through Ukraine, despite the construction of new facilities, such as Nord Stream 1, Nord Stream 2, and TurkStream. The question is what the volume of transit and contract duration will be.

Let me also note that we are not going to sign any contract to stop transit later. No, we are interested in this, we want to do this; it is a good route.

By the way, the Ukrainian route to Europe is longer than via the Baltic Sea. It is longer and more expensive for us. But it is a good and well-known route to Central and Southern Europe, and we are ready to preserve it. We would also be ready to provide Ukraine with a gas discount of 20–25 percent, as I have already mentioned, by the way. It can be done.

This would also mean decreasing costs for the end consumer instead of increasing them as you are planning now. Starting from January 1, 2020, all the discounts will be cancelled, as far as I know, and the average gas price will be $300 for all categories of consumers, including individuals.

I think we will come to an agreement. By the way, we are already making headway. We will try to make Ukraine happy with the agreement, too. We do not want escalations in the energy sector that can be used to affect the situation in Ukraine.

We are interested in Ukraine getting the resource properly, so that our consumers in Europe are calm about us having normal relations with our neighbours and that everything goes as planned.

Dmitry Peskov: Let us go to that sector. Omsk has the floor. I believe we have not given the floor to Omsk yet. I see a lady standing.

Remark from the audience.

Dmitry Peskov: I thought we agreed to respect each other. Thank you.

Omsk, go ahead.

Olga Korobova: Good afternoon. Olga Korobova, editor-in-chief, Argumenty i Fakty v Omske.

Mr President, my question concerns not only Omsk but probably the whole of the Trans-Ural area.

Vladimir Putin: Can you raise your hand, please? I do not see you. Thank you.

Olga Korobova: I have a question about demography and migration. It is a question about everything, that is, the social situation in the Trans-Urals.

Vladimir Putin: If it is a question about everything, it will be the last question today.

Olga Korobova: First of all, I would like to thank you for launching the Far Eastern Hectare and Far Eastern Mortgage projects. But people are also leaving Siberia for oversized Moscow and St Petersburg. It would be wonderful if such measures, in particular a mortgage project, were adopted for our region as well so that young, smart and talented people aged 30–45 would not leave but take out mortgages.

Has this possibility been discussed for Siberia, the Trans-Urals and, more precisely, Omsk?

Vladimir Putin: We have indeed adopted several such measures for the Far East, where the population is declining much more rapidly than in any other part or region of Russia.

Many people have taken advantage of the Far Eastern Hectare project. We have adjusted it so that it is available not only to locals but also to people from any other part of Russia who want to settle in the Far East. This land is being used for several purposes: housing, agriculture and other forms of business, including tourism. But we also see some drawbacks to this project, first of all the fact that these land plots are not always attractive because of their infrastructure, or rather, they lack roads, electricity and other infrastructure. Therefore, we must first of all implement these projects and plans in full in the Far East before turning to other regions.

As for the Trans-Urals, I assure you that we see what is happening there. We will revise our demographic projects to include the Trans-Urals. I am referring to assistance for households with children, primarily those that have a third baby.

As for other support measures, including a 2 percent mortgage rate, all this is possible, of course. But first we need to analyse progress in the Far East, calculate how much this will cost us, see how many people request such assistance, and review our budget expenditures before calmly taking any decisions on what to do next.

Dmitry Peskov: Let’s have a question from the centre.

Andrei Kolesnikov, one of the patriarchs of Russian journalism. As usual, he holds his hand up with great modesty, but he has been working with the President for many years.

Andrei Kolesnikov: Good afternoon. Andrei Kolesnikov, Kommersant newspaper.

Mr President, I have two questions on the recent meeting of the Council for Civil Society and Human Rights. You spoke out about Vladimir Ulyanov as never before. You even brought up his nicknames, such as “Old Man” and “Lenin.”

Vladimir Putin: A pseudonym.

Andrei Kolesnikov: You said nicknames.

Vladimir Putin: As a matter of fact, it is all one and the same.

Andrei Kolesnikov: Party nicknames.

You accused him of breaking down a 1,000-year-old state. When you were saying this, you facial expression was close to rage, it seemed to me. Will anything come out of your comment? What would be a logical follow-up to these words? Removing Lenin’s body from the Mausoleum, at long last?

And the second question. At the same meeting, you had a debate with Alexander Sokurov on the title of the Hero of Russia, regarding Ramzan Kadyrov’s case. At that point your facial expression simply showed tolerance. Would you like to say something in this regard?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: I prefer not to raise subjects of this kind, but since Mr Sokurov did, I had to respond, so now it seems that I have to set it out in more detail.

Regarding Lenin and his role in our history, and what I think about it, I believe that he was a revolutionary rather than a statesman.

When I talked about the 1,000-year history of our state, it was strictly centralised and unitary, as we all know. But what did Vladimir Lenin propose? He went even further than a federation and proposed a system that can be described as a confederation. It was his decision to tie ethnic groups to specific territories, so that they obtained the right to secede from the Soviet Union.

What happened was that a strictly centralised state was turned into a de facto confederation with the right of secession and with ethnic groups attached to specific territories. But these territories were divided in such a way that they did not always correspond and still do not correspond to where various ethnic groups traditionally lived. This is how cracks emerged that still linger in the relations between the former Soviet republics, and even within the Russian Federation. There are two thousand cracks of this kind, and letting them out of sight for even a second can have grave consequences. This is the first point I wanted to make.

By the way, Stalin was against such organisation. He even wrote an article on autonomy, but, eventually, adopted Lenin’s formula. The upshot? Just now, our colleague from Ukraine and I spoke about our relations. Back when the Soviet Union was created, original Russian territories that never had anything to do with Ukraine (the entire Black Sea region and Russia’s western lands) were transferred to Ukraine under a strange pretext of “increasing the percentage of the proletariat in Ukraine,” because Ukraine was a rural territory populated by petty-bourgeois-minded peasants, who were subjected to dispossession across the country. This was a somewhat odd decision. Nevertheless, it took place. We are now dealing with Vladimir Lenin’s legacy of state building.

What did they do? They tied the country’s future to their own party, and this tenet went from one Constitution to another. It was the main political force. As soon as the party started to crumble, the country followed. That is what I meant. I stick to this point of view to this day.

As you are aware, I worked in intelligence for a long time. It was an integral part of a much politicised organisation, the KGB, and I had my own ideas about our leaders and so on. But I know better today, and I understand that there are geopolitical considerations in addition to ideology. They were completely ignored during the creation of the Soviet Union. All this was much politicised at the time. To reiterate, the party began to fall apart, and that was the end of it – the country followed. This had to be prevented. This was a mistake. An absolute, cardinal and fundamental mistake in state building.

Now, with regard to the body. This is beside the point. I believe this subject should not be touched at all, at least as long as there are people, lots of them, who associate their lives and destinies, and certain achievements of the past, the Soviet years, with it. One way or another, the Soviet Union is certainly connected with Vladimir Lenin, the leader of the world proletariat. So, why delve deep into that? We just need to move forward and grow. That is all.

As for Kadyrov’s Hero of Russia title, you know I already spoke about it and I want to say it again. When I first met his father, the first President of the Chechen Republic, he came to me himself. He did not come to surrender, he came to build relations with Russia. It was before the active combat operation started in Chechnya and in the Caucasus. And he told me then, “We thought that we would be better off with other Islamic countries, but we realised that we were wrong because they tried to bend us to their will.” All those extremist, half-terrorist groups. He said, “We do not want it. I understand now that we will be better off with Russia. Russia has never had any issues with our religion or our everyday customs.” And so on. It was his choice. You know his fate. He died at the hands of terrorists. What did he die for? For Chechnya, the Chechen people, and for Russia. It was his decision. I still cannot forgive myself for letting him go home for the holidays, because he was in my office and I asked him to stay, but he said that he needed to be at home. And then he was killed in an explosion.

The current president, his son, is still exposed to danger every day. In addition, he personally takes part in various combat operations. The Federal Security Service Director was reporting to me once on the elimination of a terrorist group, and I suggested that his guys should be awarded state decorations. And he said, “It was not us.” I asked him who it was, and he said that it was Kadyrov and his men. I said, “I forbade him to do it!” But he is unstoppable, he is always out there in the field. So I always present such titles as Hero of Russia for a reason.

Look at what Grozny looks like now. Look at the photos taken several years ago featuring Minutka Square: Grozny looked like Stalingrad after the Battle of Stalingrad. Exactly like that. And look how it has changed.

Actually, we could present Kadyrov with the Hero of Labour title as well, but he is still young, he can wait. But the situation has really turned around there. So this is the answer to that part of your question.

Dmitry Peskov: By the way, I saw a journalist from Chechnya. Would you like to add anything? Central sector. Raise your hand, please, so that we can see you. Please, identify yourself and speak as concisely as possible.

Alkhazur Kerimov: Good afternoon, Mr President.

Vladimir Putin: Good afternoon.

Alkhazur Kerimov: Alkhazur Kerimov, Grozny TV.

It was very gratifying to me to hear you speak so warmly about the first president of the Chechen Republic and about our current leader. First of all, I would like to say that the Chechen Republic is developing rapidly in all spheres.

This became possible thanks to your decisions and all-round assistance and help. The people can see this, which is why your confidence rating in the republic is the highest throughout Russia. People in Chechnya love and respect you, and they look forward to your visit. Now, my question.

There has been much talk about building a road to Georgia via Chechnya. This would settle many strategic problems and unclog the alternative route, which is especially busy in winter, when cars stand for days in traffic jams.

The head of Chechnya raised this issue and commented on it many times, because building one more road would help increase trade and boost our economic progress through a rapid development of tourism in the region. What do you think about this initiative? How can it benefit the economies of Russia and Georgia? Do you support it?

One more thing. Some time ago the head of Chechnya proposed building a high-speed railway line from Krasnodar to Grozny and connecting it to the existing Moscow-Adler high-speed road. This would greatly increase the accessibility of the republics involved. What do you think about this project? Can we count on its implementation?

Vladimir Putin: I would like to say that there are several infrastructure projects for southern Russia, including Chechnya. We are working on them or considering them. Some of them are at a more advanced stage than others. I would not like to go into detail now, but I know about these plans.

We have recently discussed this in the Government; there are several options for connecting Chechnya with Krasnodar and the Black Sea coast. We will do this when the time comes. For now, we do not have any concrete or calibrated plans, but I agree that this is a rational idea.

What was the first part of your question about?

Alkhazur Kerimov: The road to Georgia.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, Georgia. Indeed, there are problems with communication with Georgia, especially in winter when there is a lot of snow. We are aware of this. What you mentioned is a good idea, but it is not on the Transport Ministry’s plans at the moment. Although, I repeat, we know about it and it is a viable project. Yes, it would be reasonable to implement it.

Dmitry Peskov: Let’s move over here. Dimitri Simes. Channel One, I guess?

Dimitri Simes: Bolshaya Igra, Channel One.

Dmitry Peskov: Please give him a microphone.

Dimitri Simes: Mr President, two days ago the US Congress passed bills on sanctions against Russia by such an overwhelming majority that it makes it difficult for President Trump to veto the bill.

And, as you probably know, the House of Representatives passed articles of impeachment yesterday. This is the context in which he has to make foreign policy decisions, and more specifically, those in relation to Russia.

In this situation, do you think you – and Russia – have any opportunity to try to maintain or strengthen dialogue with the United States before the end of Trump’s presidency? What can you do to enhance strategic stability, and more specifically, to extend the New START?

Vladimir Putin: As for the chances to continue our dialogue until the end of Trump’s presidency, you do sound like it is actually ending. I am not so sure about that. The decision still needs to pass through the Senate, where the Republicans, as far as I know, have the majority, and they are unlikely to want to remove the representative of their party from power for something I, personally, see as far-fetched.

This is just another move in that country’s domestic political campaigning, where one party that lost the election, the Democratic Party, is trying to achieve results they want through other means, such as charging Trump with conspiracy related to Russia. When it turned out there was no conspiracy, there was no longer a sufficient reason to impeach. Now they have invented pressure on Ukraine. I do not know what this is all about. But your Congresspeople certainly know better.

As for the decisions that were made with respect to Russia, they are being made by people who hardly have any responsibility for these decisions. These are not executive authorities, but representative authorities, and their job is to pass laws. They are making such decisions regarding Russia.

This will certainly affect the level of interstate relations. We are aware of their general approach – the United States will work with us in areas where they have an interest and profit, while at the same time restraining Russia with decisions like this. Knowing this, we too will mirror their steps, we will do just that. I am not saying this is a good thing. These are very unfriendly acts in relation to Russia.

They want to help Ukraine keep its transits. As I have just told a colleague from Ukraine, we also want to keep transits. In any case, this is what we are interested in, and this is what we will do. If they wanted to help, they should have given them money. How come they do not give any money to Ukraine? This would have enabled them to provide subsidies.

You see, they give almost nothing, only guarantees for future loans. But this is not actual money, so the support they are getting is not real. At the same time, the IMF, where the United States rules, demands that all energy subsidies be cancelled, including for natural gas. This will once again drive consumer prices up.

Others in the West, I mean, the EU, want round timber to be exported to Europe. If they do so, very soon, there will be nothing left of the Carpathian mountains, with only bare rock remaining. It could seem that they are supporting the current Ukrainian regime and its leaders, but at the same time I believe that they are seriously hurting it.

Now they are asking Ukraine to start selling land. Land is sacred for Ukrainians, and I can understand this, since these are “golden” soils. Of course, the opposition was instantly all over this issue and is now attacking Zelensky on the domestic policy front.

They blame us for some actions towards Ukraine and pretend to be willing to help, but in reality what they want is to have Russia support the Ukrainian budget. Go ahead and give them the money, help Ukraine, grant it subsidised loans with lengthy repayment periods. But there is nothing of the kind.

Still, we are interested in expanding and maintaining relations with the United States and will move in this direction regardless of who is in the White House or who controls the two chambers of Congress.

Do we see any potential in this? I think so. You have mentioned global security, including the New START, as one of the foundations of our relations. We put forward our proposals, as I have already said, and will repeat: we stand ready until the end of the year to extend the existing New START as is.

They can send it to us by post, or we can sign it and send it to Washington so that their senior officials, including the President, sign it, if they are ready to do so. So far we have not received a reply to any of our proposals. Without the New START there will be nothing left in the world to contain the arms race. I believe that there is nothing good about it.

Dmitry Peskov: MIR TV channel, you have the floor.

Elina Dashkuyeva: Thank you, Mr Peskov.

Good afternoon, Mr President, I am Elina Dashkuyeva from the MIR Interstate Television and Radio Broadcasting Company.

At the Ashgabat meeting of the CIS Heads of State Council you spoke about the celebration of the 75^th anniversary of Victory in the Great Patriotic War, and you said that this victory concerns every citizen of the Soviet Union. You invited CIS leaders to come here to take part in the commemorative events, and also agreed to hold joint events to mark this date.

Mr President, do you regret that the joint column of the victors will not include servicemen from some former Soviet republics, including Ukraine and Georgia?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: I regret that there is no Soviet Union anymore. As for their participation in the parade, it is their choice. But if someone misses the event due to some interstate relations, I think they will make a big mistake. Because it will mean that they do not show respect for the people who fought and gave their lives for the independence of their Motherland.

There is one thing I would like to draw attention to. Nazi Germany had these documents that said that part of the Slavic people should be used as workers, but the majority should be sent beyond the Urals, to the northern territories. What did they count on? On our extinction. So that fight, it was not just about preserving our statehood, but about preserving the East Slavic ethnic group, both Russians and Ukrainians. This is was it was about.

When I hear someone say that maybe it would have been better to abandon Leningrad to the enemy and so on, I want to say, are you out of your mind? You would not be alive today if they had done that. This is what it is all about. And, of course, the presence at the Moscow parade of the descendants of those who saved our statehood and independence, and who preserved our peoples, is a symbolic and important gesture, I think. We will be happy to see everyone who accepts our invitation.

By the way, Minsk wants to ask a question. Excuse me, Dmitry, I see a ‘Minsk, Belarus’ poster there.

Go ahead, please.

Remark: Can we ask a question about Iran?

Vladimir Putin: Yes, in a moment, please.

Maria Nagibina: Hello, Mr President.

Maria Nagibina, Ministry of Ideas TV channel.

I have a question for you that follows up on the topic of the Soviet Union.

Millions of people suffered from Gorbachev’s illegal actions in 1991. So here is the question: how about looking at what happened in 1991 from a legal perspective? This could make resolving questions regarding territorial integrity, including with Belarus, easier.

I also have a second question. Last year you talked about the Constitution of the Russian Federation and its Article 13, paragraph 2, which bans ideology. You said that this should be a matter of public debate. As we all know, there is a massive drive by community activists across the country to collect signatures, and 200,000 have already been collected and handed over to the Federation Council, State Duma and other government institutions. Do you think that this question was sufficiently debated by Russian society?

Vladimir Putin: Regarding a legal assessment of what Gorbachev or anyone else did, I do not know. I do not understand how this relates to territorial integrity. We have resolved all the questions we had, and all the documents are signed. I do not quite understand what a legal evaluation of these actions has to do with it. This is my first point.

Second, regarding the Constitution and what it says on ideology, I have already said that the Soviet Constitution had a very pronounced ideological component, and the only ideology that guided it was the ideology of the Communist Party. It is clear however what came out of it, as I have already said. Among other things, it served as one of the triggers that led a unified state to break down. Without a party, it started to crumble, and the country followed.

However, I believe that in today’s democratic society there can be only one ideology: patriotism in a broad, positive sense of the word. It should not be driven by politics, but rather designed to strengthen the inner foundations of the Russian state.

Dmitry Peskov: Let’s continue. It looks like we left out federal news agencies. I see ITAR-TASS on the right. Please remain seated. Let's show some respect for each other. This is a news conference after all.

Remark: I have a question about the 75^th anniversary of Victory.

Dmitry Peskov: Sit down, please.

Remark: All right.

Dmitry Peskov: Thank you very much.

Veronika Ichetkina: May I? Thank you.

Mr President, last year the news conference opened with a question from TASS about national projects. My question today is also about national projects, especially since this year our agency became an operator of a special website dedicated to this subject.

Here is my question. National projects have been implemented for almost a year now, and more and more experts from the regions are saying that the national projects’ goals are overly high and need to be revised.

Do you think we can say that national projects are stalling? Do you think the national projects’ goals should be revised? Or maybe it would make sense to develop additional measures to stimulate this work? Such as to establish additional personal responsibility of regional leaders for implementing national projects in terms of goals or deadlines? Or maybe decentralisation can help, such as expanding the powers of regional authorities, or municipal authorities, including redistribution of taxes, so that they have more money in their budgets and use it to more vigorously participate in national projects on the ground?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: First, I believe there is no need to revise anything fundamentally.

Second, personal responsibility has been introduced, but it can certainly be strengthened and detailed.

Third, national projects are, of course, a major undertaking, and we have not had anything like that before, we have not worked with such tools before, they simply did not exist. There were state programmes, but they are different. National projects pursue goals, and specific resources have been allocated to achieve these goals, and personal responsibility has been introduced and is being used. We should continue to move along these lines.

Are they stalling or not? Of course, mechanisms and the legislative framework should have been created from the get-go. I even got anxious at some point thinking about how this would continue to move forward. Look, we consider 26 goals achieved and 12 not achieved out of 38 goals planned for this year. With regard to an important area such as relocating residents from dilapidated housing, we went beyond meeting the target figure for the current year and exceeded it threefold. So, overall, the situation is under control. Of course, we need to look at what is happening in real life, analyse it, and, of course, some things will need to be adjusted. But on the whole, there is no need to revise anything.

Dmitry Peskov: Let’s continue. Federal agencies now.

I see Interfax. Pass the microphone to Interfax, please.

Ksenia Golovanova: Good afternoon, Mr President. Ksenia Golovanova, Interfax.

This year abounded in high-profile cases that caused public outcry. Members of the HRC talked to you about some of them at a meeting last week, and you did not comment on one of them, the case of Ivan Golunov.

During the Direct Line, you described this case, this situation with Golunov, as lawlessness and said that those responsible should be found. However, no one responsible has been found, the case file has been classified, and an investigation is underway with regard to unidentified persons.

It seems to me that the Golunov case is a reflection of something that is typical for our law enforcement system; something, everyone has probably dealt with, unfortunately – complete impunity and the we-don’t-betray-our-own principle.

I have two questions in this regard. Don’t you not think that maybe it is time to somehow reshuffle and purge our law enforcement bodies again. And can you guarantee that the Golunov case will eventually lead to a conviction, and will not be soft-pedalled? Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Earlier today I was thinking how I began my career as a security agent. When I joined, service veterans were still there, and some would hide in their offices when one old man would enter the building.

Who was that person? He served in 1936–1937. What did he do? That was a time of “purges” in law enforcement agencies, including security agencies. One could come to work in the morning, unsuspectingly, not knowing anything, but a criminal case had been initiated against them, and by the evening, their family was given the body just after they were executed. And that old man that everyone ran from was the one who carried out those sentences.

So, as far as “purges” are concerned, we have been through this, it happened in our not-so-distant history, and we had better avoid any further purges here.

The fact that we need to improve the system of law enforcement bodies’ work, to control what is happening there – I also mean public control – is completely obvious. All law enforcement agencies have their own security services, and those are working quite efficiently.

The we-don’t-betray-our-own phrase is just wrong. Because, indeed, probably, there may be cases where the chiefs want to cover up for someone, the immediate superiors, I mean. But, again, their own security services are effective. And a significant number of criminal cases – there are many cases brought against law enforcement officials – are based on the findings of their own security services.

As for the Golunov case (is this the name – Golunov?), indeed, it was decided to classify these materials, because the investigation raises questions related to the organisation of active search measures, and this is restricted information. But this does not mean the investigation is not proceeding as it should. I would like to inform you that five people have been suspended from the relevant services of the Interior Ministry. They have been fired from Interior Ministry bodies, and criminal cases have been initiated against them. The investigation is being conducted by the Investigative Committee, not the Interior Ministry.

Dmitry Peskov: RIA Novosti, on the right, please, go ahead.

Yelena Glushakova: Yelena Glushakova, RIA Novosti.

Since you mentioned that you are a lawyer, the first part of my question relates to legal matters, Mr President. My question will be on the Constitution. In your opinion, could it be that the time has come to amend the Constitution? These questions surface every now and then, and have recently been discussed. If the time has come, what part could be changed? Are you satisfied with the amendments that were introduced ten years ago to change some articles in our Constitution?

The second part of my question is about politics, and relates to the political system our country has. Within a few days, it will be 20 years since you came to the helm. Is there a need, in your opinion, to make changes, like maybe reassigning powers between the parliament, the government or even the president?

And my final question, if you allow me. Do we have competition in Russian politics, in your opinion?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Regarding the Constitution, this is a live tool that has to keep up with the evolution of society. However, it is my belief that we do not have to change the Constitution, I mean adopt a new one, especially since it sets forth some fundamental principles that we have yet to fully achieve. This refers to its first chapter. I believe this part to be sacrosanct.

All the other provisions can be amended in one way or another. I am aware of the ongoing debates on this subject; I see them and hear them. I understand the logic behind what others propose. This is related to possibly expanding the powers of parliament and changing to some extent the powers of the president and the government. But all this has to be well prepared, result from a meaningful debate within society, and be carried out with extreme caution.

Regarding the past amendments, as far as I know, they were related to the number of terms. What could be done in this respect? We could take out the mention of “consecutive” terms. We have this provision, and yours truly served for two consecutive terms, then left this office and had the constitutional right to once again become president, because this did not interfere with the “two consecutive terms” limit. Some political observers and civil society activists have voiced misgivings over this provision. We can probably remove it.

There are some other questions, but they are more about preferences rather than necessity.

I can once again mention the powers of parliament. I do understand political parties, especially those represented in parliament, that believe that we have reached a level in the development of parliamentarism in Russia when parliament could take on additional functions and assume greater responsibility. All we need is to give this idea serious thought.

As for competition in politics, 54 parties are registered in Russia, and four of them I believe are about to be dissolved. Still, 50 parties is a good number, and 12 of them operate at the federal level. I believe that this meets the standard for political competition.

Dmitry Peskov: We have not yet given the floor to the organisers of the broadcast of this conference – Rossiya-1. Give the microphone to the right sector. Raise your hand and stand up, please, Rossiya-1, now I see you. Go ahead, please.

Alexander Khristenko: Good afternoon.

Alexander Khristenko, Rossiya TV channel, VGTRK.

Mr President, our National Welfare Fund is growing, there…

Vladimir Putin: Thank God.

Alexander Khristenko: There are trillions there, and more is expected next year. But our financial officials always argue, including in this room not so long ago, whether it is better to save or to spend? Do you think that more should be spent, including in order to spur economic growth? And in connection with this, another question: why are we so afraid of inflation?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: I will start with the end of your question. We are not afraid of inflation, but we believe that it is necessary to target and reduce it, because rising inflation means declining real incomes. We already have issues here that require additional attention, to say the least. So why do we need inflation?

It means price increases, but we do not want price increases. This is one of the fundamental macroeconomic conditions for economic growth. Inflationary expectations undermine the investment process, that is the point. But we have good performance here.

Russia is certainly one of the leaders among emerging markets regarding the state of its financial and budgetary system. According to the latest data, this year’s inflation is 3.25 percent; this is a very good indicator for us, and at the beginning of next year it may well come down to 3 percent.

As for the reserve funds and the National Welfare Fund. Yes, it really has almost tripled this year. This is a very good indicator.

To spend or not to spend was your other question. Look, 20 percent of the National Welfare Fund has already made its way to the economy via a variety of tools, including through VEB. Of this 20 percent, 8 percent was spent directly to fund major infrastructure projects, such as the Central Ring Road in Moscow.

Rolling stock is being purchased for Russian Railways, which is good for transport, keeping jobs and developing transport engineering. Finally, the money was used to improve rail traffic on the Baikal-Amur Mainline and the Trans-Siberian Railway. I am aware of the miners’ concern about a bottleneck there, but the situation would be really bad if it weren’t for the money already invested in eliminating bottlenecks on the Baikal-Amur and Trans-Siberian railways.

Indeed, we are witnessing changes in the coal market, in Europe for example, and we need to ensure the development of the east, so we will go ahead and do this, possibly using the National Welfare Fund.

Last, we made a decision to freeze spending from the National Welfare Fund to allow it to grow to 7 percent of GDP. As a matter of fact, we are already there at 7.3 percent. Technically, this money will only reach the accounts in the summer of 2020, and we will then be able to use it more actively.

Notably, and most importantly, these funds have a higher purpose, to ensure national currency stability, which the fund is effectively doing. It is to a certain extent our safety bag.

As you may be aware, we honoured almost all of our social commitments in 2008 amid the serious international crisis and spent funds from accumulated reserves despite the sharp drop in federal budget revenue. We were able to accomplish this thanks to these reserve funds. Spending money left and right like a farmer sowing seeds oblivious to what could happen if energy prices fall is the easiest thing. But we will not do this, and will instead use the funds in accordance with the decisions adopted earlier.

Dmitry Peskov: Let’s move this way. Here is Yaroslavl, our colleagues from Yaroslavl. Stand up, please. Please, pass on the microphone there, on the left.

Arseny Kondratyev: Good afternoon, Mr President. Arseny Kondratyev, Yaroslavia State Television and Broadcasting Company, Yaroslavl Region.

My question continues Match TV’s topic about WADA, but it is not about sports – it’s about the development of the regions. Now that our athletes have been banned from participating in international competitions, other big events are under question, and Yaroslavl was the proposed venue for the 2022 Volleyball World Championship.

For Yaroslavl as well as other cities it is a unique opportunity to build new sports facilities and to develop transport and tourism infrastructure. Will we and other cities lose this opportunity now?

Vladimir Putin: I do not think so, because WADA did not prohibit the hosting of these events; let’s read this more closely: they recommend international federations not to host events. Let’s just say, the UEFA European Championship is still happening.

Recently I have had a meeting with the head of this organisation, who said directly: “The tickets are sold out.” Who will return them? WADA is not going to reimburse the tickets; this is nonsense. I think that the volleyball championship you mentioned will also take place.

You know, I think that we should calmly wait for the decisions, including the decisions by the Court of Arbitration for Sports, and then we will see where we are. However, Russian athletes have been preparing for all the competitions and will continue to do so. They are brilliant, and they will impress us with their victories many times.

Dmitry Peskov: I can see our largest state newspaper, Rossiyskaya Gazeta. Please. Stand up, please, so everyone can see you. Wait, where are they? One moment, I just saw Rossiyskaya Gazeta…

Vladimir Putin: While he is choosing…

Dmitry Peskov: Just a moment, please. Here we go.

Vladimir Putin: While he is choosing, let’s have question from CCTV. Go ahead, please.

Sun Yao: Good afternoon, Mr President.

I am a correspondent of China’s CCTV media corporation. I have two questions.

The first question is about Chinese-Russian relations. This year marks 70 years since the establishment of diplomatic relations between our countries. We can say that our bilateral ties have entered a new era. And my question is this: which results of our partnership do you see as the most significant, and what future cooperation potential do you see between our countries?

The other question is about international affairs. The global situation today is full of uncertainty and instability. Obviously, some countries pursue a policy to maintain a unipolar world and protectionism, undermining the foundations of international law and free trade, while China and Russia are both supporters of a multipolar world. So what steps do you think China and Russia could take to support the original principles of a multipolar system and free trade, and how could they effectively respond to external challenges?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: The most important thing that we have achieved in recent years, between Russia and the People’s Republic of China… The most important thing is not even the figures I will cite in a moment, or the industries in which we cooperate – the most important achievement is the unprecedented level of trust that has developed between our countries.

This is what forms the basis for our accomplishments in the economy (our bilateral trade has topped 100 billion, and we will certainly attain even 200 billion, we will reach that mark), and for our successful high-tech projects – in space exploration, the aircraft industry, and transport in general, and in many other areas.

Russian-Chinese cooperation is undoubtedly a major factor of international stability, including the strengthening of international law and the creation of a multipolar world.

As a matter of fact, it has already been created; a unipolar world no longer exists. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, there was an illusion that this system was possible and that it would last for a long time, but it was only an illusion. I always said so. The most recent events have indicated just that. When you say ‘some countries,’ you, first of all, mean the United States. The world’s multipolarity is a derivative of economic relations.

After World War II, the US share in world GDP was 50 percent. And now China’s share is higher than the US’s share, I may be mistaken, but China is ahead of the United States in its share of global GDP. And also in many other indicators. In terms of purchasing power parity, the Chinese economy has become larger than the American one.

This inevitably leads to changes in many other areas. And apart from that, the world simply cannot have a unipolar structure, with a single centre that governs the entire international community.

The role of our interaction with China is very important here. We will continue to strengthen our multilateral strategic ties. I am sure that this will benefit the people of China and the Russian Federation alike.

Dmitry Peskov: Rossiyskaya Gazeta, take the floor, please.

Remark: The Urals!

Vladimir Putin: Wait, wait.

Remark: Mr President, the Urals!

Vladimir Putin: One moment, keep it down, please. Come to the meeting then.

Remark: Please give money for schools and the metro.

Vladimir Putin: Alright, I understand.

Kira Latukhina: Kira Latukhina, Rossiyskaya Gazeta.

I would like to return to the issue of our Victory in the Great Patriotic War. Next year we will celebrate the anniversary – the 75^th anniversary, the Year of Memory and Glory. But at the same time, in September this year, the European Parliament adopted a resolution stating that Nazism and fascism are equated with the Soviet regime, having timed it with the anniversary of the outbreak of World War II. They are calling it totalitarianism and suggesting introducing a new international holiday to celebrate the day of heroes of the fight against totalitarianism on May 25. What do you think about it? What is your opinion?

Vladimir Putin: There is nothing good about totalitarianism, it is worthy of condemnation, without any doubt.

I know about the European Parliament’s decision. I consider it absolutely unacceptable and wrong, because you can condemn Stalinism and totalitarianism as a whole, and in some ways these will be well-deserved reproaches. Our people were the biggest victims of totalitarianism. We condemned it and the personality cult and so on.

But to equate the Soviet Union or to put the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany on one level is incredible cynicism. This means that people do not know history; they cannot read or write. Let them read the documents of that time, let them see how the so-called Munich Agreement was signed in 1938, when the heads of the leading countries – France, Great Britain – signed an agreement with Hitler on the partition of Czechoslovakia.

How did Poland behave in this situation, which, as one diplomat wrote at the time, “did everything possible to participate in the partition of Czechoslovakia?” How did the Soviet Union behave then, proposing to all participants in international life to create a united anti-Nazi front?

And how, by not creating it, they were really trying to push Hitler to aggression to the East, not realising then that Nazi Germany was interested not in Polish-German relations, but in expanding their living space to the East, that is, war against the Soviet Union.

You see, I mean to write an article about this event. I will definitely have it published because I asked my colleagues to select archive materials for me. When I read some of them, everything becomes clear: everything in the process of appeasing Hitler is sorted out by year, month, and almost by day.

Stalin did not stain himself with direct contact with Hitler whereas the French and British leaders met with him and signed some documents. Yes the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact and the secret protocols to it were signed.

Is it good or bad? I draw your attention to this – it is crucial – that the Soviet Union was the last country in Europe to sign a non-aggression pact with Germany. All the others had signed it earlier. And what was the Soviet Union supposed to do? Face it alone?

Yes, they say there were secret protocols, the division of Poland. Poland itself joined in dividing Czechoslovakia. It entered two regions – Tesin and another one. And that’s it. Poland took them over. They in fact gave an ultimatum and set up an entire group for the aggression. But it was not needed because Czechoslovakia surrendered under pressure and gave those territories away. But the Poles did the same.

By the way, yes, Soviet troops entered Poland under the protocols. I draw your attention to the following circumstance: the troops did enter but only after the Polish government lost control over their armed forces and over the developments in Poland while the government itself was somewhere near the Polish-Romanian border. There was no one to talk to about it. Do you see this?

Moreover, we talk about the heroic defenders of the Brest Fortress. Nazi troops captured Brest-Litovsk and then just abandoned it, and the Red Army moved in. Do you understand this or not? This is what I want to ask all those who adopt such resolutions in the European Parliament.

That means the Red Army did not invade those territories in Poland. German troops entered them and then left, and after that the Soviet troops entered. Does this mean anything? So I will definitely let you know about that. By the way, we are holding a CIS format meeting tomorrow, and I want to show my CIS colleagues some of our archival documents. Anyone interested is welcome to come and listen.

Dmitry Peskov: You know, I saw the upper part of the central sector: Irkutsk.

Yekaterina Machavariani: Yekaterina Machavariani, the Krasnaya Liniya TV channel.

Mr President, my question is not about Irkutsk, but about former Irkutsk Region Governor Sergei Levchenko, whose resignation you recently accepted.

Our correspondents have been in the region, in particular, in Tulun, since August, and they see a slightly different picture than the one shown by the federal media. And the figures achieved by Sergei Levchenko speak for themselves.

He is the only governor who managed to double the budget over three years and increase the speed of social housing construction six-fold and of the region’s economic development by six percent, which is higher than the world average.

Speaking about relief efforts following the floods, even your Plenipotentiary Envoy to the Siberian Federal District Sergei Menyailo praised their speed: today 98 percent of the victims have received either housing or housing certificates. There are only 46 people at the temporary housing centre, and almost all of them have housing certificates.

My question is why you accepted the resignation of such an effective governor? Is Tulun the real reason or is there something else? Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Listen, if you are hinting at his membership of the Communist Party, let me assure you that this has nothing to do with it. There are representatives of the Communist Party and other parties, including the Liberal Democratic Party of Russia, who won the elections and work as governors in other regions, too. This does not matter to me. The main thing is that the governor’s work is effective.

You have mentioned some figures. But I have different figures, which say that there are still many problems in Irkutsk. This is the first point.

Second, I cannot say that Governor Levchenko was bad at what he did. No. But the situation there was too difficult to work slowly, and the elections were approaching. I did not accept these resignations straight away; I looked into them. You said that everyone has housing. Is that really so? Winter has come. This is the second point.

Third, you may have noted what people said when I was there. Including “Send us different people.” I took my time and watched how the situation was developing.

So there are many problems there. You know, I do not want to throw stones at someone who has already left. Of course, he was working hard, especially in the beginning. But these conditions require a specialist who can work on the tasks that need addressing.

I believe the person we have chosen, a deputy emergencies minister, will resolve this challenge, especially with the support of the federal centre, which is allocating a lot of money for this.

Dmitry Peskov: We have undeservingly overlooked RBK.

RBK, please.

Polina Khimshiashvili: Good afternoon. Polina Khimshiashvili, RBK.

You mentioned your meeting tomorrow: you will meet with the President of Belarus. Tell me please, what do you think the Union State should be like? What should be shared in politics and in the economy? What specifically does Alexander Lukashenko dislike in your proposals? And if Belarus insists that gas prices should be the same as in Russia, does this mean that with the gas issue we can have a single state and in other issues we cannot?

And another question on the same subject. Many people are focusing on the year 2024 and think that hypothetically you will be able to head the Union State.

And, as a follow-up to my colleague’s question about Ivan Golunov: maybe you have been told who ordered the planting of drugs on him? Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: So far I do not have any information on who ordered that, just to answer this part of your question.

As for our relations with Belarus and energy resource prices: first, I think the decisions made to form the Union State were correct. The Russian and Belarussian peoples are, in my opinion, the same as the Ukrainian and Russian peoples; it is almost the same thing in terms of ethnicity and our history and spirituality. This is why I am very happy that we have such rapprochement with Belarus.

And we have achieved certain goals here, especially in the social area. However, the decisions taken on the creation of the Union State, the majority of the basic decisions have yet to be implemented. About 90 percent of each issue have not been done yet. Please read what is written there, this is not a classified document; there is almost nothing there.

A lot has been done already within the framework of the Eurasian Economic Union, and in some respects economic integration in the EAEU is more comprehensive than in the Union State. This is why I, and Alexander Lukashenko, decided to return to this and see what should be done to expedite the development of the Union State.

We have taken the relevant decisions in the EAEU on energy resources: to fulfil certain decisions, including establishing a common energy market and on oil and gas issues, by 2024. Indeed, we sell everything to Belarus duty free. This is the first thing.

Secondly, with regard to our energy exports, including gas to Europe and Belarus. Firstly, Belarus pays the lowest prices that are even possible for our foreign partners. Let me remind you that they pay $127 per 1,000 cubic metres. We sell to Europe for $200. So Gazprom’s profitability from sales to Europe and Belarus differs – do you know by how much? Four times. In Russia, the weighted average price of gas is $70 per 1,000 cubic metres – $70 is the weighted average, with $75 for industry and $62 for retail consumers.

Furthermore, the longer the distance from the production sites, the more we subsidise this price. Smolensk is located in a zone where subsidies are the highest. Smolensk consumes approximately 2 billion. We sell 20 billion to Belarus. And if we subsidise the entire Belarusian economy, it means that we, Russia, are subsidising a primary energy carrier such as natural gas for a whole country. But this, you see, sounds like a very strange idea. That Russia should subsidise another country as much as its most subsidised region – Smolensk. This would be just strange.

Is this even possible or not? It is. But what do we need for this? To do this, we would need general rules such as laws, including taxation laws, laws on the subsidy policy, and on support of certain industries through budgets of different levels. To do this, we would also need common supranational bodies – control and issuance bodies. Common rules should be applied in the field of antitrust policy, and maybe a common body would be needed. This is a huge job, and it can be done and realised only if there is political will and interest on both sides. Incidentally, we have such an interest. We are discussing this with our Belarusian partners, and we are making significant progress on that. But how far we will go is not yet clear. So it would be a mistake, on our part, to jump the gun and begin to subsidise Belarus. We are not ready to do so, given the unresolved issues in building this Union.

As you know, we also sell oil duty free, which entails a large shortfall for the Russian budget. We are now reconfiguring our tax system in this field, and gradually increasing the severance tax (mineral extraction tax) simultaneously reducing the export customs duties. Due to these changes, Belarus is indeed losing the premium it had from the zero customs duties and the subsequent export of oil products. This is our domestic policy.

This has nothing to do with Belarus. It depends on a number of other circumstances – the Government of the Russian Federation, the Ministry of Finance, and the Ministry of Energy consider it better for us to regulate the industry differently, in a different way, bearing in mind our budget losses arising from the activities of economic operators within the country. But we understand all these problems, and are conducting a dialogue with our colleagues and we will continue doing so.

Allow me to remind you that we support our Belarusian friends through so many channels. Belarus has received about $7 billion or so in loans alone, as far as I know. And we will continue to do this. But all this should be done through dialogue, and we are ready for this dialogue, and we are ready to open our market further. You know that Russia accounts for almost 90 percent of all agricultural exports from Belarus. And so on and so forth. This is just routine work; in fact, we are working very smoothly, doing balanced work in this area.

I repeat once again, we are close to agreement on some matters; on others, agreements have not been reached yet. We will continue working.

Dmitry Peskov: Let us move away from our European borders. I see Magadan over there. Go ahead, Magadan. Please stand up and introduce yourself.

(Remark from the audience.)

Vladimir Putin: Thank you very much.

Dmitry Peskov: Thank you. And now Magadan, please.

Olga Burlya: Good afternoon, I am Olga Burlya, Kolyma Plus regional TV company, Magadan. Thank you from Kolyma residents, Mr President, for your support for the Far East and care for the Magadan Region, in particular.

Let me go back to the Far East mortgage. Our colleagues from Omsk may have it, too, whereas the programme has already been launched in the Far Eastern Federal District, we already have the first borrowers. It is an excellent initiative with an attractive interest rate of two percent.

But could it happen that the banks start toughening the conditions and requirements for such unprofitable and inconvenient clients? We already know that problems can arise when using the maternity capital to make mortgage payments. Families with children are refused mortgages by large banks.

What are the guarantees for potential participants in such state-support programmes? Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Banks do not refuse to use maternity capital for resolving mortgage issues. It is just that the procedures for receiving the money are too complicated and create problems for people. You are absolutely right here. The situation undoubtedly must change. We have to cut the number of days needed to transfer the maternity capital as the down payment or as a mortgage payment and so on.

In general, such decisions are being made now, the number of days will be halved. But, as some of my colleagues think, this is also not enough. What do we need to do here? We have to expand the use of the so-called electronic turnover so that the relations between the bank’s client and the Pension Fund, which channels the maternity capital, and respective developers should not involve a person. Thus a person can just submit an application, and the banks will immediately take matters up with the Pension Fund regarding how much money and when they will receive. In this case, it can be done within one day, and we can and must do it. We discussed it quite recently with my colleagues, and we will do that.

Concerning the two percent mortgage interest rate for the Far East. Why should banks refuse? We subsidise that from the federal budget. This interest rate will not bring any losses to them; on the contrary, it is a state guarantee. So I do not expect any problems here. However, we will be monitoring the practice, the implementation of these measures.

Dmitry Peskov: Here are our colleagues from the foreign media. Introduce yourself, please.

Christian Esch: Good afternoon, Mr President!

My name is Christian Esch, I head Spiegel magazine’s Moscow office.

I have a question that concerns a matter that worries and annoys Germany, the murder of a citizen of Georgia of Chechen ethnicity, Zelimkhan Khangoshvili. The information coming from Moscow and Berlin is decidedly different.

Therefore, I wanted to ask you, first, about the killer. Germany says it did not receive proper information from Russia. It turned out that this person was identical to a person who had already been in prison in Russia. So there must be information about him.

The second question concerns the murder victim. You mentioned in Paris at a news conference following the Normandy meeting that Russia repeatedly asked for the extradition of this person. The German foreign minister recently confirmed that there have been no requests neither from Russia’s Interior Ministry nor through other channels. So who is right, you or him?

Vladimir Putin: Both of us, because these issues have been discussed at the special services level more than once. Indeed, there was no official request from the prosecutor’s office, because our authorities believed that doing so would be pointless, since they received a negative answer.

Once again, I will repeat what I said at the news conference in Paris. He was an absolute bloody killer. He killed 98 people, just think about that, 98 people in the Caucasus in one day. Many countries declare national mourning with many fewer deaths. He participated in bombings in the Moscow Metro. And the list of his crimes goes on. Indeed, we have repeatedly raised this issue at the special services level.

With regard to cooperation, I believe the main thing we should understand about this is that cooperation should be full and it should be a two-way street.

In Syria, we are witnessing developments in the camps and prisons where ISIS militants are held. Natives of Central Asia account for most of the foreigners there, followed by Russia. But there are many immigrants from Western Europe as well, including France and the Federal Republic of Germany.

We see that the people you just mentioned – terrorists and murderers – walk freely around European capitals. As far as I know, he was killed in central Berlin. Picture such a person strolling down the streets of a European capital. Would you like the prisoners from these camps to come to you? Will you also let them walk freely around your cities?

To avoid this, we must establish joint and highly effective work. This is what we are calling for. We hope it will be like that eventually. This does not mean that such work does not exist. It does. But its scope and nature are still insufficient.

Incidentally, at some point, we warned the Americans about the Tsarnaev brothers, or whatever their name is. We told them directly. First, we asked to extradite them, as well, and then told the Americans that they were a threat. They ignored us. The brothers then committed a notorious terrorist attack during the Boston marathon, and people died. Do you see my point? And you have bandits like that walking around Berlin.

Dmitry Peskov: Introduce yourself, please.

Svetlana Drobysheva: Svetlana Drobysheva, Editor-in-Chief of the School, Gymnasium, Lyceum magazine and author and former employee of Ogonyok, Rossiyaskaya Gazeta under the name Seregina, and even Pravda. I have worked everywhere, even in Tribuna. I have taken off my glasses, because I had lost the hope that I would get the floor.

Mr President, first of all, I would like to present to you a copy of the October 2000 edition of Ogonyok magazine, with my address to you. It is titled Where is the Monument to the Teacher? It is for the public and for you as the newly elected President.

First, thank you for your quick response. The monument was erected in the capital of Daghestan; my mother was an innovative teacher who gave 49 years of her life to teaching. I would like to be brief, but I have two questions about the war, for Victory Day.

Dmitry Peskov: Let us show consideration for our colleagues. Go ahead, please.

Svetlana Drobysheva: Yes, well, if I may, I will ask for your help to present my gift and ask all the questions I have.

I would like to ask you to pardon the person who erected this monument back in 2006. It is called Monument to a Russian Teacher, and it is 25 metres high. The man is Said Amirov, he is in prison now. According to numerous data, he was falsely accused. This is the first amnesty.

I have a second name here; it is the former head of Fryazino.

There are two questions regarding the spring of 1945. Perhaps we will touch upon May 9, the 75^th anniversary of Victory, and what awaits us.

First, I want to ask you, Mr President, to award the status of the Hero of Russia to Sofya Arakcheyeva, a scout of the Znamensky squad who was tortured to death in Orel Region in February 1942. I believe Sergei Mironov asked you about this.

Secondly, to immortalise her memory in films, music and television. Newspapers wrote about this a lot, thank you all. Thanks to Potomsky, former Governor of Orel Region, who erected a monument to Sofya Arakcheyeva in Orel Region.

If possible, I would like to ask for five or seven passes to the Victory Parade for those who collected signatures, such as teacher Israilov and Deputy Governor of Tambov Region: all the signatures were collected in 2013 for you.

And my second question. I will not take much time…

Dmitry Peskov: You know, I am sorry, but you have already done this.

Svetlana Drobysheva: Thank you. I am sorry.

Dmitry Peskov: Respect you colleagues. Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Speaking about the Heroes of Russia, I have to look into this; I do not have the materials at the moment. I will ask my colleagues to take your materials and look into the archives.

As for a pardon for Amirov, yes, I receive a lot of requests and I will look into this. But there is a court ruling, and his crimes were proven during the trial; in any case, there is no doubt. The pardon is a different thing, which is done on different grounds. I know about this and we will think about it.

Svetlana Drobysheva: (without microphone.)

Vladimir Putin: Do you want a dialogue or my answer? Let us see. Give us the materials, please.

As for your request about the Parade, please tell us who you want to bring and it will be our pleasure to work on this.

Dmitry Peskov: Good. Thank you.

We have Channel Five; I think I saw them here. Where is Channel Five? Raise your hand, please. No need to shout. Left side, Mr President, Channel Five, St Petersburg.

Yevgeny Gusev: Good afternoon, Mr President.

My name is Yevgeny Gusev. I represent the Izvestia multimedia information centre and Channel Five.

My question concerns sanctions and political pressure from the European Union. Here is one telling fact. Latvia recently banned several Russian channels, including Channel Five. The situation is very unpleasant. To be honest, our colleagues in Estonia are involved in a conflict now, and in other countries as well.

The situation has not improved of late, if anything, it has worsened. We can see this in the attitude towards Russia in the European Union. Do you think it can change for the better, especially since we all understand that these sanctions are pointless? And how much does this pressure affect Russia, and what impact will it have in the future?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: We have repeatedly discussed this topic. There are various assessments of the consequences of these sanctions for all participants in this unpleasant process, but they all boil down to the same thing. For the European Union, the losses amount to some of 50 billion euros. I do not remember exactly, but I believe the World Bank estimated around $50 million; for Germany, I believe, the losses amount to about 750 million a month or so.

These are major losses. This is not just about money, some abstract sums. This is about jobs, the loss of markets, including the Russian market. Other participants in international economic relations are coming to our market.

We actually support a full normalisation, especially since none of that really works effectively. Indeed, this policy causes us problems, but there are benefits, too, and they are also obvious. One of them is the development of agriculture, a leap in development: 24 billion in export revenue – this is simply unbelievable! No one would have believed this a few years ago. We spent a lot of money, trillions if we add up all sources, on import substitution, but we used it well. Just look at the result.

For example, Russia has never had its own helicopter engine industry. We have one now. We have built facilities, including the plant in St Petersburg – above all in St Petersburg. We did not make ship engines; there was simply no such industry in Russia. It is a whole separate industry now. We have it now, a next-generation industry, operating effectively. We have launched an entire industry, with its science base, school, and production. In the field of defence, we have made great strides. There is still work to do, but the breakthrough is very noticeable, obvious even.

Therefore, it would be better, of course, to eliminate politically motivated restrictions in economic activities. They result in huge damage to world trade and the global economy. There are analyses of this. Say, the US imposes restrictions on China – in reality they are also actually sanctions – this affects the overall world economy, and world trade levels promptly drop.

If this continues, trade will continue dropping. But there seems to be some progress, thank God, in their relations. We can also be harmed by this, because it affects us, it affects the demand for our major export commodities, etc.

So there is nothing good about this. But our economy – I can say this with full responsibility – has been able to adapt to external shock, while our national currency has actually become much more stable even with possible fuel price fluctuations. In this respect, our economy and our national currency are somewhat “detached” from world oil markets.

The defence industry. Go ahead, young lady, with what you have on the defence industry.

Lidia Novoseltseva: Good afternoon, Mr President.

My name is Lidia Novoseltseva, I am from Rostov Region.

Defence industry companies have been successfully operating in our region since Soviet times. The latest advances in military science and in the defence industry are quite capable of a technological breakthroughs. Can you tell us if there are measures under consideration…

I am sorry, I am very nervous.

Vladimir Putin: It is OK.

Lidia Novoseltseva: Are there additional short-term measures under consideration for the support and development of defence industry competitiveness?

And a wish, if I may. Next year is full of anniversaries, including the 75^th anniversary of the Great Victory, and the 450^th anniversary of the Cossacks’ allegiance to the Russian state. The city of Novocherkassk in Rostov Region will host the World Cossack Congress. You have always supported Rostov Region and the Cossacks. We would like to invite you to the event.

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Thank you for the invitation. This is very interesting. I will look into my schedule.

Regarding the defence industry and the developments there, first, the key is that we have not only maintained it but it is also progressing at a very fast and strong pace with the latest scientific and technological developments.

The first thing we did in this area was upgrade the manufacturing base. We allocated huge funds, I think it was 3 trillion rubles, to upgrade this industry. And we actually created cutting-edge weapons systems on this base using new design. We accomplished this expeditiously and consistently. And we have achieved positive results, as life and experience show.

One of the key issues now is the debt burden in the defence industry. I am not going to scare you with the numbers, but they are significant. It is a matter of billions of rubles. The Government, the Central Bank, all the shareholders in the process, including the defence industry companies and the government officials in charge, are now working to untangle this knot. There are feasible market solutions. I will not get ahead of myself.

Just a few days ago, I had another meeting with my colleagues on this issue, and I instructed them to draft the final version of the solution within a week. These are big issues for the people working in the defence industry, and for the overall economy, because the defence industry is to a certain degree a hi-tech industry driver. We will continue to develop it.

Dmitry Peskov: In the middle – Gazeta.Ru. The first row. Please, pass the microphone.

Margarita Gerasyukova: Good afternoon, Mr President.

I am Margarita Gerasyukova, from Gazeta.Ru.

This past May you said if anyone can establish a monopoly in artificial intelligence – the results will be clear – that person would rule the world. Can you describe Russia’s position today in the race for the development of artificial intelligence technologies? Where are we now – are we competitive or are we catching up? And in which future or maybe already achieved projects can the average Russian see the application of artificial intelligence technology?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: The average person can already see applications in banking, for example. Sberbank is active in applying digital technologies in its customer relations and it has a practical application.

In general, we have serious competitive advantages here too. I mean an advanced mathematics school and everything related to it: digital technologies based on mathematics. We have just discussed, your colleague asked and I answered, the use of maternal capital. If we develop these technologies, we will have fewer technical problems like this.

The modern concept of artificial intelligence is still being developed. There are several definitions of artificial intelligence and the highest is a spontaneously developing, so-called “thinking” intelligence.

We have made progress in some areas, and in some, we have not done enough. But there are some obvious things: apart from banking, there are, say, unmanned aircraft and autonomous vehicles. Our Yandex and KAMAZ vehicles have already logged over a million kilometers.

Yes, so far this is being done on a limited basis; yes, so far it is not being applied comprehensively in everyday life. However, these are the first steps, without which development is simply not possible. These are technologies that can be used in almost every area of manufacturing and life.

We believe, and I continue to believe that the most important question for our long-term development is the question of national security and the survival of the Russian state in general. This is because the capabilities of artificial intelligence will influence both defence and the pace of economic development.

We have drawn up a programme and created a special pool of potentially interested investors and participants in this process. Each has received an assignment, each knows what to do. There is a national project in this area and the resources for it have been allocated. Therefore, this is one of the most important of our development areas. I am not even talking about the obvious things related to the quality of manufacturing and labour productivity.

This is especially important for us, given our huge territory and relatively small population – 146 million; if we do not move in this direction, we will not be able even to guard our territory properly. This is the point. These are absolutely substantive things. This is one of the key areas of our development.

Dmitry Peskov: Perhaps let us get back to the foreign media. Turkey, Anadolu Agency, please.

Ali Cura: Thank you. Ali Jura, Anadolu Agency.

Russia has stressed many times that it supports the legitimate government, in particular, in Syria and other countries where a crisis situation remains. There is also a crisis in Libya. There is a legitimate government recognised by the international community there. The Western media say that Russia supports the so-called Libyan National Army, that Russian mercenaries support them.

Would you comment on this? Will you discuss this with President Erdogan, including the Syrian topic? What else will you discuss? Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Do you believe what is written in the Western media? Read what they write about Turkey and you will change your mind.

Seriously speaking, of course, we are aware of the situation. We know that various countries have relations with both sides in the conflict, and the levels of relations are different.

Russia actually maintains contacts with al-Sarraj’s government and stays in touch with Marshal Haftar. We have a constant dialogue with our partners, including those in Turkey, Europe, and other countries. We understand that this is a very acute issue.

You also know very well who drove the country to this state. Russia was against using military force in Libya, and the UN Security Council Resolution on this prohibited former President of Libya Muammar al-Gaddafi from using the aviation against the opposition, which was armed, by the way. Instead, the Western coalition started using its air force against Libya, perverting the UN Security Council Resolution. As a result of this, a prospering country whose quality of life was close to some European standards is now in ruins, in chaos, torn by an unending civil war. It is very difficult to determine who is right and who is wrong.

In fact, the Russian authorities are in touch with al-Sarraj and Haftar, as I have said. We think that the best solution for all the parties to the conflict would be one that would allow them to end the hostilities and come to an agreement on who, how and on what terms will run the country. I believe that Libya is interested in this.

This is what we will definitely discuss with our partners in Europe. I have just talked about this in a telephone conversation with the German chancellor and the President of France. President Erdogan and I have also discussed this. A Turkish delegation will arrive in Moscow in the next few daysfor a working visit, and their agenda will include this issue. I hope we will find solutions that will be accepted by Libya and the Libyan people, and I hope that together with Special Representative of the Secretary-General Ghassan Salame we will find the final solution.

Dmitry Peskov: PRIME Agency, they have the smallest sign.

Maria Balyuk: Maria Balyuk, PRIME Agency.

Mr President, my question is: why does the state change the pension system rules every several years, and why has it been freezing the pension contributions of citizens for several years? Maybe it is worth consolidating long-term rules that will not change anymore and that will support citizens’ trust in the pension system? And is it true that a new pension reform is coming?

Vladimir Putin: As for the pension system, all the decisions have been made and written into law, and no changes will be made there. No new pension reform is being developed or even discussed in the Government, the Executive Office or anywhere.

Certain proposals of the Finance Ministry in this area apply only to [pension] savings, which in fact can be considered investments. We are simply speaking about their protection.

Dmitry Peskov: You know, we have not yet given the floor to NTV. He has almost lost hope. You do not have to introduce yourself.

Vladimir Kondratyev: Thank you.

Mr President, I have a question on domestic policy. The demographic situation, as we know, was complicated this year, as well as last year, but this year we see a record negative result. This is connected, of course, primarily with the 1990s, with the low birth rate. But is it now necessary to make up for the population decline with an influx of immigrants from the former Soviet republics, especially from the southern republics? This does not please a significant part of Russians.

And how will the current Demography national project help here? Or maybe the state has other effective measures, for example, simplifying or, perhaps, easing legislation on granting citizenship to Russian-speaking compatriots?

Vladimir Putin: In my opinion, much more can be done concerning migration.

There are only two approaches (in the world and in general) to solving the demographic problem in the world. They are an increase in the birth rate, natural population growth, and immigration. In Canada, for example, a whole ministry deals with immigration, if I am not mistaken. But what do they do? They do not just accept everyone; they accept people of a certain age, with a certain health status and level of education. In fact, we also need to approach migration in this way.

Of course, it is easier for people who know and respect Russian culture and who speak Russian to adapt to the situation in Russia. This is why it is easier, for example, for Belarusians, Ukrainians and Moldovans, because it is simpler for them. And the locals take it easier. There are 3 million Ukrainians living in Russia, and almost the same number came after the tragic events in Donbass.

It is more difficult to adapt for those who come, for example, from Central Asia. What can we do? We have to introduce our education systems, open Russian language courses, Russian schools and university branches, so that those who come here feel more comfortable and do not irritate the locals, which can happen when they see disrespect for our culture and history. This is not only true for those who come from Central Asia but also for domestic migrants, for example, from the North Caucasus.

We were talking about Chechnya or any other republic, Daghestan, for example. Some people behave in a way they never would at home. This can be irritating, but it does not mean we should ban people from moving around. The economy requires an influx of immigrants, and the lack of qualified people in the labour market is an objective factor that holds the economy back today.

We must do this smartly, systematically. It is simply necessary that the people in the Russian regions work there, so that people who move from one Russian region to another feel comfortable and at the same time respect local traditions, laws and rules. I believe this can be done and must be done, if approached systematically.

Dmitry Peskov: We have been working for two and a half hours now.

Let us give Crimea a chance to ask a question. Please stand up. Stand up and raise your hand. No, not you. Yes, you, young lady, please, go ahead.

Irina Ivanchenko: Mr President,

First, Crimeans are expecting to see you next week in Crimea, where, we hear, you will be opening a railway across the Crimean Bridge.

Vladimir Putin: That is right.

Irina Ivanchenko: My question is about ill children. I am one of those Russians who start their mornings by sending out text messages collecting money for sick children’s treatments. I cannot sit back and watch the televised reports, they tear up my heart and soul, and it is impossible to live and breathe after watching them.

Please tell me whether it is possible to have Russian children treated and rehabilitated free of charge, without any preliminary conditions or benefits? Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: First of all, you are aware that healthcare is free in our country, just like education. There are segments covered by privately owned healthcare institutions. Therefore, we are talking about the need for significant changes in primary care, since people should be able to receive medical assistance free of charge. This applies to everyone, including children, especially children. This is what happens in the vast majority of cases. By the way, I already mentioned that we had significantly reduced child mortality. This is one way to resolve demographic problems.

I will get back to your question, as I have something to add to my answer.

You mentioned 1999. Look what happened then. I have already mentioned it many times, and the demographers are well aware of it. We had two major demographic troughs. It is a horrible thing to say, but the total birth rate stood at 1.1 in 1943–1944 and 1999, as if there was a war, the same rate. A major decline, indeed. We are now haunted by this. Every 20 years, a thin generation of those born in these years enters adulthood, the childbearing age, but by definition, there are few of them, both men and women.

Men do not give birth to children, women do. Therefore, I want to share the latest data with you. The number of women aged 20 to 29 has decreased by 4.5 million over the past few years. These are objective numbers. What we need to do is strive to ensure that the birth rate increases through second and third births, etc. We must create proper conditions for people with children, as their lives are not easy.

If there are more questions on this, I am ready to answer them. We have planned a system of measures to support families with the first child, and maternity capital – we have extended the legitimate uses of maternity capital – and made changes to the entitlement criteria for receiving child benefits. Before, it was one and a half minimum subsistence baskets per family member to be entitled to the benefit; now we have expanded to two minimun wages. This will dramatically increase the number of recipients of this benefit. And there is a package of benefits. But still, we are looking at what else can be done. As you know, we have made a decision on mortgages. If a third child is born, the state immediately gives 450,000 rubles so the family can apply for a mortgage.

We added some regions that previously were not included in this support for families with children, in the Urals and Siberia (answering questions from our colleagues from Siberia). Now, there too, people can receive additional support.

I know this is not enough; we need to generally increase living standards, on the whole, to achieve growth in wages and people’s real incomes. The general sentiment, family planning and broader planning horizons will depend on the economy.

Of course, we need to make sure that children are treated with special concern, and we are trying to do just that. With medicines, for example, we have separated children’s pharmaceuticals into a special category (which was not the case before). But this is far from the only thing we have done.

As for charitable activities such as crowdfunding calls on our leading channels, projects to help specific children – these calls and projects cannot be prohibited. Helping even one or two children matters. If this saves at least one life – it is great, and God will bless you when you appear before Him; it will be good. Yet, these activities change little in the bigger picture. What needs to be done is to improve children's healthcare and bring it to a higher level; this is true.

Dmitry Peskov: I see Life News over there.

Vladimir Putin: Hold on. Domestic violence. Do you want to ask about the law?

Dmitry Peskov: Go ahead. The third row in the centre.

Elina Zhgutova: Good afternoon. Mr President, Mr Peskov and the world watching us now.

It turns out that we do not have any problems more pressing today than domestic violence. The Federation Council drafted a law it posted on its official site.

And the Federation Council got more messages from citizens than it gets in one year. The Russian Orthodox Church is opposed to the draft law, but families with many children sign along. The LGBT community, feminist organisations and even the sex workers’ trade union are collecting signatures to support this law.

You said now that our demographics, the demography curve went into a tailspin …

Vladimir Putin: It is not a tailspin, but a predicted decline, an obvious trend.

Elina Zhgutova: We nevertheless say that we must somehow resolve demographic issues. However, this law contains provisions that allow officials to enter any family. That is, there is a certain number of scoundrels and sadists, but forgive me, we are being fed deliberately overblown numbers. I personally on behalf of my news agency sent an enquiry to the Interior Ministry’s Main Information and Analysis Centre and I was given the numbers that are totally at odds with what we are being fed by that infamous Anna Centre which is one of the main …

Vladimir Putin: Your question.

Elina Zhgutova: Your opinion. Have you read the text and do you think it will be the last nail in the coffin of our demographics? It actually containsprovisions for total control over the family.

The question is, what is your opinion? Have you read the draft law because it is the biggest… A poll conducted by the Federation Council shows that the majority of the 11,000 people polled are against it whereas VTSIOM states that 70 percent of citizens support it. However, the latter poll does not imply that the respondents read the draft law whereas the Federation Council poll presupposes it. People do not breed in captivity, we all know that.

Vladimir Putin: They do not breed in captivity, that is true.

Elina Zhgutova: I called it juvenile justice for adults.

Vladimir Putin: They do breed in captivity– babies are born in prison and in correctional facilities. But it does not matter. So you want my opinion, don’t you?

I have not read the draft law but Valentina Matviyenko briefed me in detail. What do I think about this matter? I have mixed feelings. One cannot be forced to love, first and foremost.

In the past people turned to their trade unions or party committees and demanded that these organisations bring order to families, rein in a spouse, mostly men, of course. But I am not aware if all that had any positive effect. But what I resolutely oppose is any violence, including in families, and of course, against children and women.

This is not just a sign of a very low level of general culture when a stronger person starts pushing for their rights with fists and crude physical violence. There is nothing good in it. Actually, a number of felonies and misdemeanours can be prosecuted by applying the existing legislative provisions, including hooliganism, battery and grave bodily harm. All that is provided for in the current legislation.

But indeed, you are right in saying that the overwhelming majority, over 70 percent of people support this law. I really do not understand if they support this law or they are opposed to violence.

Elina Zhgutova: Of course, exactly.

Vladimir Putin: I am also opposed to violence, just like those 70 plus percent of our citizens. Do we need this law? Let us discuss it reasonably, in public; it must go through this sort of a check. We must understand what is written in each of its articles, try to predict the results that would emerge after the adoption and application of the law, and then take the final decision.

Dmitry Peskov: Life News, the right side of the section.

Alexander Yunashev: Mr President, good afternoon.

On December 31, half the country, those who do not work shifts, do not work anyway but only pretend to be working. Perhaps it is time to make this a day off, for example, instead of a workday on Saturday? We will have time to prepare for the holiday, and our wives will thank you, perhaps like your future wife. A year ago, you said that you are a good man and will marry sometime. And you are a good man.

Vladimir Putin: You know, it would be better if your wives thank you. It will strengthen your family. Family is part of society.

Regarding a day off on December 31, I think this is of course logical. I completely agree with your reasoning. This is obvious. But I am not sure this should be done right now, impulsively, on the eve of the New Year.

Some employers have already announced that December 31 is not a workday. In fact, I cannot but welcome this, if they find it possible. Can we switch some non-work days for December 31? It is possible. We need to analyse everything and see if it affects the people who work in their gardens so we do not take an additional day away from them in May, when everyone is at their dachas. This can be solved as a matter of course. We will think about it.

Dmitry Peskov: Let us hear from RT. We have forgotten about them.

Ilya Petrenko: Mr President, Mr Peskov, colleagues,

Hello to everyone. I am Ilya Petrenko from RT. Thank you for this chance to ask a question.

RT has a new social project, which is called Not Face to Face, where my colleagues help solve topical problems in Russia. I can say that recently we have had a lot of stories related to the crisis and the lack of vital medicines.

The Health Ministry cannot agree with the purchasers on pricing, but it tries to reassure people saying that there are analogues, that everything is fine. However, we are really into these stories, and it turns out that not everything is fine; the analogues are often not of the same quality and people desperately search for medicines on the internet. This problem exists with various medicines; I can name two, Prednisolone and Frisium.

By the way, regarding Frisium, it looks like the problem has been dealt with in a hands-on manner. However, this medicine still has problems with registration. Another medicine – Fortum – is next in line. Problems are cropping up with this as well, and the list goes on.

Vladimir Putin: We do not need an endless list. The New Year is fast approaching.

Ilya Petrenko: Maybe this is good because, as you know, when people hear you, they begin to deal with problems quickly after the news conference as they are haunted by your menacing look. But this is not the most important thing; most importantly, we need a system-wide solution. Here is my question. Do you have a system-wide solution to this problem?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: The government has come up with a number of solutions, which are being implemented. One of them, which they themselves believe is very important, is about registering new prices for medicines during an auction. This change should be implemented soon. This decision has already been made. I mentioned children's medicines, and children's prescription drugs have been put on that list for the first time as well.

With regard to rare orphan diseases that require a high degree of subsidising, they are the most expensive, and some of them are purchased through official channels and some are not. But, of course, we should not deprive people of the opportunity to use these medicines, and they need to be registered.

We must not forget about developing our own pharmaceutical industry. Notably, the Soviet Union was buying medicines in large quantities mainly from Eastern Europe, the so-called countries of the people's democracy. We are currently developing our own pharmaceutical industry.

We are now exporting our medicines to 90 countries, which is unprecedented. Since we are exporting them, this means their quality is recognised as world-class, otherwise nobody would be buying them. I may be mistaken, but last year we sold over 700 million (780 actually, I think) of our medicines abroad.

There are things that need to be approached delicately. People get used to certain medicines, including foreign ones, and we must keep this in mind and let people use them. The Ministry of Healthcare has certain proposals, and I think they will be implemented soon. I mentioned some of them.

Dmitry Peskov: I can see a sign saying Ufa. Please stand up, show yourself. Give them the microphone.

Azat Gizzatullin: Good afternoon, Mr President.

Azat Gizzatullin, Bashinform News from Ufa, Bashkortostan.

This year the republic began to actively fight alcoholism. In particular, the sale of alcohol was restricted on some days, such as last school day and September 1.

Today our parliament adopted a law that restricts the sale of alcohol during the upcoming New Year holidays. Recently a survey was taken that showed that two thirds (about 10,000 people) support these restrictive measures.

There is another change: we are actively fighting those who sell illegally produced alcohol, and people can receive a reward for information on such sellers.

My question is that perhaps other effective measures are needed to fight this evil, alcoholism, in addition to the many restrictive measures we have? This year, thanks to these measures, the republic managed to save almost 100 lives. This might seem like a small number, but these are people who were not poisoned by alcohol.

Perhaps you think other measures are necessary in addition to these restrictions?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Such measures are being taken. Look, there has been in the past years and still is an anti-alcohol campaign underway. People do not even see it.

Recently I met with representatives from the German business community in Sochi; perhaps you saw this. It is noteworthy that, counting pure alcohol, Russians drink less than Germans. This is the result of the anti-alcohol campaign. According to World Health Organisation data, this is one reason that life expectancy in Russia is growing, and we have reached 73.4 years, which is higher than last year, and of course this is a notable achievement socially. This is because people drink less alcohol among other things.

Are any administrative restrictions necessary, like in the mid-1980s? This would not hurt, but we should proceed cautiously. Probably we should work on other areas, explain and give an opportunity to choose between different types of alcohol, with an emphasis on products with low alcohol content; I mean wine instead of hard liquor, for example. By the way, winemaking in Russia is developing quite impressively and effectively. This is why we have something to work with here without using further legal restrictions.

The main thing is we have results.

Dmitry Peskov: The left section please. I saw Vedomosti. Where is Vedomosti? Raise your hand please.

Svetlana Bocharova: Thank you very much.

Good afternoon, Mr President.

The newspaper Vedomosti, Svetlana Bocharova, correspondent.

You have repeatedly said that the state must stay with the freedom of the internet principle and provide ample opportunity for the exchange of information. Do you personally think our state still supports this principle, or are we moving towards some kind of sovereign internet?

And the second question. If you think the internet is still free in Russia, what can you say to the many users who are now afraid to be labelled foreign agents under the new law?

Vladimir Putin: A free internet and a sovereign internet are two concepts that are not mutually exclusive. The law you spoke about has only one goal: to prevent the negative consequences of Russia’s possible disconnection from the global network, which is largely governed from abroad. This is what it is about.

Herein lies our sovereignty – that we have our own resources we can always keep operating, so the internet is not cut off from us. The point of this law is just that. Therefore, no, there are no restrictions, and we are not moving towards suspending internet access and we will not do that.

Regarding individuals who may be recognised as foreign agents. I recently spoke at a meeting with human rights activists, and I would like to repeat – we did not invent the term “foreign agent.” This law has been in force in the US since the 1930s – it was adopted in 1938 or in 1939 (1938, if I remember correctly) and it works perfectly.

Recall a recent case where it was applied to an individual: our citizen Maria Butina – an individual – was arrested, and locked in jail without any reason. What kind of agent is she? Nothing of the kind is being done here. Not even close!

They put this woman in prison, and even threatened her with a longer prison term. Come on! There, this foreign agent, or whatever it is, is punished with a good prison term of up to five years. And we have only administrative penalties.

As for individuals, this is what is at stake. When the law was enacted because of organisations receiving money from abroad that were essentially engaged in domestic politics, every state – I want to emphasise this – makes an effort to limit foreign interference in domestic affairs. Therefore, our law is aimed precisely at that.

If you receive money from abroad, from foreign sources, in order to carry out domestic political activity, then just say so: as you know, he who pays the piper calls the tune. This is folk wisdom.

If you receive money from abroad, it is not unreasonable to assume that you are taking orders from those who pay you. But you are still welcome; we do not ban the organisation. In Russia there is no law prohibiting the receipt of money from abroad even for domestic political activity. But you have to at least declare it so that people know about it.

As for individuals. Law enforcement practice shows that, a) there are things to pay attention to and improve to avoid a broad interpretation. This is the most important thing. Because anything can be called political and domestic political activity: environmental work and work in clearly humanitarian areas, including in the healthcare sector. This cannot be allowed, and law enforcement practice needs to be improved. And if the law is written so that it allows this, it also needs to be improved.

But what did those bodies that were engaged in control over this type of activity face? When an organisation begins to fall under the criteria of a foreign agent, what did they start doing? An individual receives financing from abroad and then transfers the money to a legal entity, and it turns out that this legal entity, an organisation, generally does not receive any money from abroad. But the original source is understood – a foreign one. This is the only thing this is about.

Dmitry Peskov: We have not yet covered REN TV. REN TV, go ahead, please.

Andrei Dobrov: Izvestia Multimedia Information Centre, REN TV, Andrei Dobrov.

Mr President, a very simple question, and a very short one too. You were close, but for some reason no one has actually asked over all this time. It is about increasing people’s welfare. When will this actually happen? I would really like to know. We have been talking about this, in general, for a long time. It would be great to finally see an increase.

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: I have the latest data on all the main indicators. I understand what you are asking. Indeed, in recent years, we have seen a decrease in people’s real incomes, and this is not good. This is one of the problems that we must certainly resolve, but we must resolve it through higher labour productivity and GDP growth – this is completely obvious.

This is where we should channel our efforts, because everything else, including the distribution of money from our reserve funds or anything like that will lead nowhere, and the money will quickly run out. And if the situation in external markets, including oil, changes, then the source will run out. Therefore, we need to address fundamental issues of economic development and raise the level of wages on this basis.

The wage level has actually grown a little over the past year. Real incomes are also growing slightly. We have seen this in the third quarter. But this is not enough, of course.

Again, we need to work more on this. We have a lot of questions about salaries in education, and in healthcare. I just spoke about healthcare in detail – what steps I think need to be taken there first. We will certainly work on this, on everything that I have just mentioned.

Dmitry Peskov: Let us take a question from this side. Let Yamal ask their question.

Alisa Yarovskaya: Thank you.

My name is Alisa Yarovskaya, and Yamal Region is our television channel. You know, scientists say that one advantage of global warming is that the Northern Sea Route is expanding. It passes Yamal. This is why the port of Sabetta is developing now.

Vladimir Putin: It does not pass Yamal but runs through our territorial waters.

Alisa Yarovskaya: I agree.

The corresponding surface infrastructure is developing, including a railway line. But the bridge across the River Ob has not been mentioned often lately, and it is very important for us.

Our Governor, Dmitry Artyukhov, is doing everything possible for the project to be implemented, but we hear less and less about it and want to ask if the heavy “federal artillery” could get involved in this.

Vladimir Putin: You know, the development of transport infrastructure is set by plan. The governors, the Russian Government and the Transport Ministry all come to me with such proposals.

It would hardly be viable to just take one project out of the general context. Of course, the bridge you mentioned is an important infrastructure project, because it contributes to the development of that region.

The railway leading to the ports along the Northern Sea Route, as you have said, is very important for us. This must be synchronised with the volume of shipment along this route, and the infrastructure must develop accordingly. We understand and consider this.

Dmitry Peskov: Here is a seasoned journalist, Alexander Gamov.

Alexander Gamov: Thank you very much.

Alexander Gamov, Komsomolskaya Pravda website, radio and newspaper.

Mr Putin, you said you were writing an article on international affairs for Victory Day. Can we count on printing it? You can give it to Komsomolskaya Pravda and we will print it. We have a large circulation.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, of course.

Alexander Gamov: Good, thank you very much. I will take you up on that.

Here is my question. Someone already mentioned here that you became Acting President on December 31, 1999, and spent two decades on the post of President. I do not think there will be a separate news conference dedicated to this.

Vladimir Putin: No, you are mistaken; I was Prime Minister for four years.

Alexander Gamov: Prior to that, on August 9.

Vladimir Putin: No, why? You left out the period when I headed the Government.

Alexander Gamov: Do you want to subtract this period?

Vladimir Putin: The head of state and the head of government are different positions and different responsibilities.

Alexander Gamov: I meant that 20 years ago you were appointed Acting President.

Vladimir Putin: And?

Alexander Gamov: Can you share with us the most positive and the most negative moments in your life as President? This is my first question.

The second question is that sooner or later, we will have to come up with a so-called power transition formula. Could you make us part of it, so that we do not run into a surprise?

Vladimir Putin: You could be one of the candidates. Of course. Why not?

Alexander Gamov: Who can it be, in your opinion? How can all this happen? You are unlikely to want to change the Constitution, and we do not want to let you go.

My last question is that you mentioned the notion of a historical figure. Can Vladimir Putin already be called a historical figure?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: It is up to the next generations to give an answer to that question. I do not think that we, contemporaries, especially I personally, should be answering this question. In the future, the people will evaluate what has been done for the country, and maybe something has not been done. I think that public opinion is the best measure here. It will give the evaluation in the future.

With regard to the most outstanding and difficult events, I already mentioned them: the most difficult are the major terrorist attacks in Beslan (I will never forget that) and Dubrovka.

And the most striking, the most significant ones… We have been talking a lot about the need to raise the real incomes of the population, however, we have not completely solved the issue of poverty. I think we had the lowest level in 2014 – 11.3 percent of the total population, of the country’s citizens.

The number has grown a little since then; the figures are not so noticeable but there are real people behind them. So this is the most important issue we have to resolve.

But overall, I want to say that in general if we look at what the country was like back in the early 2000s and what it is now – these are almost two different countries. I am not even talking about security issues.

Truth be told, we must call things by their names: until 2006 there were combat hostilities – combat! – in the Caucasus with the use of tanks, aircraft and other heavy equipment. Do you understand? This is why I reacted so emotionally to the question at the meeting with human rights activists when a famous film director – whom I love and respect a lot – said, why do we not rewrite everything from the start.

You remember what I answered. We rewrote everything once in 1917, and we probably remember the lyrics – “We will destroy this world of violence down to the foundations, and then we will build our new world, he who was nothing will become everything.” And at present we are trying to identify the names of those who believed this, at the Butovo range and other sites of mass shootings. This is a very dangerous road.

That is why we now have internal stability and confidence that the country will keep progressing in this stable manner. This is probably the main thing. The economy has changed radically. Yes, we do have many unresolved issues in the economy, very many, and the key one is increasing labour productivity and on this base increasing the economic growth rate.

Yet this is incomparable to what we had. We now have one of the lowest foreign debts in the world. And how much was it then? Inflation stands at 3.25. In the 1990s, it was 200 to 300 percent. Can you imagine? We have forgotten what it was like. This is a totally different economy.

This foundation will let us resolve issues of ensuring our security. Take the Armed Forces, what have they become now? And let us recall the public sentiment when officers had their caps swept off in public transport. Have we forgotten that too? But this is what we had, and quite recently too.

And then it turned out that the state cannot be without the armed forces. And I believe we are all proud of the level of our Armed Forces. They have become one of the world’s most hi-tech forces.

All this combined, in my view, is not my achievement alone but our common achievement. Because what the Russian people and other peoples of the Russian Federation went through from the 1990s to early 2000s can be called a feat in itself.

Dmitry Peskov: Now our Japanese colleagues, Kyodo Tsushin. Here they are. Go ahead, please.

Hirofumi Sugizaki: Thank you, Mr Peskov.

Good afternoon, Mr Putin. Hirofumi Sugizaki from Kyodo Tsushin Japanese news agency.

My question to you is not about the islands, but about your attitude, about your vision, your view of nuclear war. You mentioned that the US is reluctant, at least for now, to extend START-3. When this treaty expires, there will be nothing to deter us from a new arms race and, possibly, an upcoming nuclear war.

What do you think?

Vladimir Putin: Curse the tongue that says it. An ‘upcoming nuclear war.’ What are you saying?

Hirofumi Sugizaki: But nowadays we are seriously concerned, although we are well aware that you are trying hard to at least maintain the status quo, urging the United States to keep up the moratorium and so on. However, you often warn of a mirror response. This sounds very scary to me. I think that trying to win a nuclear war is unacceptable and morally undue. What do you think about this?

I understand that armies do need to periodically modernise their equipment and weapons, but still there is the concept of sufficiently reasonable. This concept should help maintain a strategic balance. I think that probably, someday, in the near future, you will come forth with a comprehensive peace initiative. Maybe you are considering an opportunity to do this from Hiroshima?

Please, as I represent Japan, I will never be forgiven if I do not ask you about it. Recently, our peace treaty talks came to a standstill. One of the reasons for this is Russia’s concern about the Security Treaty between the US and Japan. You have repeatedly spoken out on this subject, so I will not repeat or go into any detail. Recently, because the INF Treaty (Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty) has expired, this has affected our relations because you have repeatedly said that the United States and Japan are discussing the possibility of deploying such missiles in Japan. On the other hand, you told us in Sochi that you are helping China to develop a unique early warning system. So we get the impression that Russia and China already have if not a military alliance, very close allied relations in the military technical field, as you put it. Please tell me if a block confrontation is already emerging with Northeast Asia – with Japan, the US and South Korea on the one hand, and Russia and China on the other.

And in this current situation, is it possible for us – Japan and Russia – to find a compromise for mutual understanding, for mutual trust, so that we could sign a peace treaty in the future? Thank you very much.

Vladimir Putin: As for military cooperation between Japan and the United States, you have right now practically answered this question yourself. We are not the ones who said that the United States was in negotiations with Japan over the deployment of its medium-range missiles. This news was reported by Japanese and American sources. How can we possibly fail to ignore this, including in the context of the islands issue? Are there any guarantees that tomorrow new American offensive weapon systems will not be deployed on these islands? Where are these guarantees? There is no way we could fail to discuss this subject. It seems to me that elementary formal logic suggests this.

Could we still be looking for a solution? We could. And we are doing this jointly with the current Japanese authorities. We have good trust-based relations with them and we are discussing all this in detail and honestly. Have we found a solution? Not yet. But, most importantly, I also spoke about this, we want to find one. This can be any solution. As I already mentioned some time ago, and my Japanese friends liked it, this should be a hikiwake – a draw – which is a term used in judo.

Is it possible to find a solution that the public will agree with? We have been looking for it for 70 years and have not found it yet. But we are ready to move further in this direction.

As for alliances, we do not have a military alliance with China and we do not plan to create one. But we see that East Asia is seeking to forge a military alliance, as well as some other countries, you have just named them all – the United States, Japan and South Korea – and we believe this to be counter-productive, as this does not bode well.

We are developing cooperation with China in the field of defence technology, among other things. Today, China is also a high-technology country but there are certain projects that take up a great deal of time to implement. I believe China is capable of creating a missile early warning radar system on its own but, with our help, it will do this faster. This system will add new quality to the defence capability of our strategic partner.

But this is not an offensive weapons system. You named it correctly and I was really surprised when you did so – surprised to hear you refer to it correctly. This is a missile early warning radar system, which means the system works when you are being attacked. It is true that this is a purely defensive system and so far, only the United States and Russia have systems like this. I would like to repeat that this system does not encourage aggression and is intended to protect one’s own territory.

Let us ask another of your colleagues – from the BBC. They are so fond of us, we really should give them the floor. I am eagerly anticipating your question. Please, go ahead.

Steve Rosenberg: I am Steve Rosenberg from BBC News.

Mr President, Boris Johnson said different things about you. At one time, he called you a merciless tyrant. He even compared you with Dobby from a Harry Potter book. What do you think of him? What is your impression of him? How do you think relations between our countries – the UK and Russia – will change after Brexit?

Now that people in the UK are waiting for the parliamentary report on Russia’s alleged interference in political processes in the country to be released, we hope, maybe, you will tell us all about it. Has Russia interfered or is it interfering in UK policy? Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Regarding statements by different politicians in various countries about Russia and about myself as the head of state, you see, I have long got used to having a certain attitude towards them. What kind of attitude is it? I know where my country’s interests lie. And whatever anyone might say to me, it has absolutely no relevance compared to the fundamental tasks Russia is interested in solving. (Applause.)

Nevertheless, we see, understand, hear and factor this in in our work. But I would like to make a small remark. It is one matter when a person speaks as he is striving for a position of power, and a different matter when he speaks being vested with that power. He has on his shoulders a responsibility for his country, the economy and so forth.

I think that with account of Brexit, which you mentioned, Great Britain is interested in developing economic ties with us. This view is also expressed by UK businesspeople who work in Russia and whom we consider to be our friends, not just partners but friends. Because they are investors who come, invest money in our economy and create jobs. We appreciate it and do everything to support them so that they can feel at home here.

Are there any other areas of common interest? There are. Quite recently we discussed with some European colleagues the possibility of engaging Britain in solving and discussing issues on the international agenda that have been voiced here too. I will not list them again. And Britain is interested in having a more active part in resolving them, including with Russia.

Regarding interference or non-interference. We keep on hearing numerous assessments of the developments in Russia from official bodies of power in different countries, including the UK. You yourself spoke about that now. Is that interference or not? You express your position on what is going on in our country. We reserve the right to behave similarly with regard to you. If you think it is interference, keep thinking it. But I do not believe it has anything to do with interference.

Concerning what is happening now. We can congratulate Mr Johnson as he is ultimately the winner. He had a better grasp of the sentiments in British society than his rivals, and that is why he won. I understand he is set to pursue all his plans regarding Brexit.

Dmitry Peskov: There was a question about agriculture here at the very top. Raise your hand, please. Go ahead.

Vladimir Putin: Siberia.

Marina Sevostyanova: Good afternoon, Mr President. Agriculture.

Vladimir Putin: Where are you?

Marina Sevostyanova: I am here, in the centre. Svetich Agrarian Media Holding. My name is Marina Sevostyanova. We have been participating in the news conference since 2007 and we always try to ask questions related to our sector, agriculture. In 2007, we were the first to bring over a poster with our name. As you see, the tradition took on.

Our question is the following. The readers of our magazine Niva Rossii and the newspaper Agrozhizn are concerned about the issues of support for upgrading the fleet of farm equipment.

Which priorities can you name? For example, the 1432 Programme is about subsidies for machine builders, federal leasing and cheap loans. Will financing be added? Is it possible to keep in place the instruments in this area for the next few years, since they are quite effective anyway? Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: I will not enumerate all these instruments because you spoke so confidently about this, which may mean that you know all of them. I believe we should use leasing more actively. It is a flexible instrument that allows our farmers to work on the domestic market and to promote their products abroad.

There are certain benefits, including within the framework of these instruments, such as the protection of our producers on the market, especially when it comes to purchasing under national programmes. We will definitely preserve these instruments.

Some of our EAEU partners aspire to become part of these state-subsidised acquisition programmes. In fact, this is partly taking place, but we nevertheless believe that domestic producers must have certain advantages. You know already about these advantages. Russian producers stand to gain even if prices go up a notch.

Some sectors use the ‘odd man out’ rule – I will not waste time trying to explain it; I believe it is clear to everyone. In other words, all these programmes, come what may, will definitely continue; none of them will be curtailed. In terms of support, the biggest allocations go to agriculture, including agricultural engineering.

Dmitry Peskov: Mr President, it has been three and a half hours.

Vladimir Putin: I can see over there “Siberia Is Suffocating.”

Yekaterina Nadolskaya: Good afternoon, Mr President. Yekaterina Nadolskaya, Russia News. I am from Siberia, but I live in St Petersburg now. First of all, I would like to thank you for the Universiade. It was unbelievable, our athletes are the best. Even despite the ill-wishers throwing mud at us, we have proved that we are the very best.

However, I would like to say a few words about life after the Universiade. As you know, Krasnoyarsk Territory is top of the list when it comes to air pollution.

Vladimir Putin: The city of Krasnoyarsk, not Krasnoyarsk Territory.

Yekaterina Nadolskaya: Yes, Krasnoyarsk, but the people of Krasnoyarsk Territory are not breathing easily either. They were suffocating from smoke from the forest fires last summer, but they are also choking due to toxic smog all year round. You probably felt it when you visited the Universiade.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, I did.

Yekaterina Nadolskaya: You are aware then that many factories are located within city limits in Krasnoyarsk. People hold demonstrations to point out that they are suffocating, many die – a third cancer centre is being built in Krasnoyarsk, yet the authorities do not seem to see the problem. Will any measures be taken to prevent a repetition of last summer’s inferno?

Since I live in St Petersburg, I would like to ask you about the Botkin Hospital. Dmitry Medvedev said recently that doctors should not have to practice in a barn. What is the Botkin Hospital, which is situated in the city centre and which the authorities have been promising to repair for several years now, if not a barn? Here are some pictures: broken glass, mice and cockroaches. And the doctors who are trying to help people there are paid 25,000–30,000 rubles. The authorities have promised to reconstruct the hospital, but nothing is being done. There is no infrastructure, only swans made of old car tires. And this is in the centre of the city. Foreigners love to take photos against these swans. Can anything be done to change this? We are talking about the centre of St Petersburg. Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: I know that the situation there is not good, dismal even. I do not know about the specific renovation plans for the Botkin Hospital. It is one of the oldest medical institutions in the city, I am well aware of this. I will definitely talk to the Governor about it. But I do not know whether the Botkin Hospital is included in one of our projects that we talked about today, as a primary care institution, or as part of the development of healthcare as a whole under the National Project. But I assure you, I will certainly discuss the situation with the Governor.

In addition to this hospital, St Petersburg has other world-class medical centres like, for example, the Almazov Centre. But this does not mean that, while respecting those who work at the Almazov centre, we can neglect those institutions where the situation is less favourable. I will definitely talk to my colleagues about it, I promise you. This is the first point.

The second concerns the environmental situation in Siberia and several other regions. Yes, indeed, the situation there is far from perfect.

As for the wildfires, we have indeed had a lot this year. What is worse, they occur in such places, I have to say, where it is very difficult to fight them: to begin with, it is an over 600-kilometre flight. Do you see what we have to deal with? It is a vast country. But the smoke emanates from there, and with the wind blowing in the direction of big cities, it easily reaches the cities, and it is hard to do anything about it.

Unfortunately, as a rule, all these fires are provoked by human activity; they are the result of illegal logging or even legal activities, where people believe they need to dispose of some industrial waste this way. Even in everyday life, people often burn grass, leaves, and so on. We need to work more often and more purposefully with people on this subject to prevent such situations.

We also need to improve the forest protection system, and we will do it now. We will partly transfer these responsibilities to the federal level, including, first of all, air-based forest protection, control and forest management – these functions will be returned to the federal level.

Incidentally, although forests take up a large area in Russia in per hectare terms, we are not the champions in this respect, ranking third after Canada and the United States. This does not mean we are doing so well – the problem is still there, but I mean it is typical for many countries, Russia included. Last year, we finally curbed some of the last wildfires in December, but in February, they flared up in other places – we have to do it non-stop, unfortunately, and this problem also has to do with climate change, among other factors. I spoke about this at the beginning of our meeting.

As regards environmental problems, you know that we are implementing – we have adopted a law on introducing modern technologies, something called BAT – the best available technology. At the first stage, 300 enterprises that have the greatest negative impact on the environment are required to adopt appropriate renovation programmes. This work is ongoing; 12 companies have had their programmes approved. Their effort has been recognised as meeting the requirements. I know this is not enough. The remaining companies of those 300, with the biggest emissions, will continue working on it.

Dedicated programmes were adopted for the twelve cities that face the most appalling conditions, including Krasnoyarsk. In these locations, industrialists will have to defend their development plans. The heads of the corresponding regions are also expected to play a role in this process.

There should be a plan of this kind for Krasnoyarsk as well. Let me assure you that we are keeping this matter on our radars, and we will work hard on it. This will be one of the national priorities in the near future.

Dmitry Peskov: I suggest that we turn to Tatarstan. You have recently visited this republic.

Vladimir Putin: Let us have a question on veterans.

Dmitry Peskov: A question on veterans and then Tatarstan.

Sergei Komkov: Mr Putin,

We are now preparing to mark the 75^th anniversary of Victory. As you are well aware, this is a major celebration.

Dmitry Peskov: May I ask you to please introduce yourself?

Sergei Komkov: Sergei Komkov, Editor-in-Chief of the newspaper President, and also President of the National Education Foundation, and your authorised representative during the 2000 election campaign.

I have just returned from Krasnodar Territory where our newspaper carried out a journalistic investigation on the situation regarding veterans of the Great Patriotic War, including disabled war veterans. We unearthed horrendous facts about the conditions these veterans live in in Krasnodar Territory in general and specifically in Sochi.

Sochi built special retirement homes for veterans to mark the 60^th anniversary of Victory. Today, these buildings have turned into slums or poorhouses. Veterans live there as if they were homeless, and the buildings are falling apart. Today, the city authorities are not only neglecting these properties, but also use them to their advantage. They earn money by housing outsiders there, which means that they operate a profitable business, while the veterans are suffering.

They came to the President newspaper’s editorial office and complained about their lives. At the same time, the city administration in Sochi is demolishing buildings that are well-built and in good condition, simply destroying them, while developers and investors in the city are saying, “We are ready to provide veterans with marvellous, well-equipped flats in these buildings, including disabled war veterans, while it would make more sense demolishing the slums in order to make room for new housing.”

In doing so, the city authorities in Sochi are referring to your instructions. I told locals who came to see me at my Editorial Office as Editor-in-Chief that I would never believe that the President of Russia could issue an instruction that would be at odds with the Constitution, defy common sense and run counter to the interests of veterans, including disabled war veterans. I think that you would agree with me.

I believe that it is high time that order be restored and high-handed officials in Sochi and Krasnodar Territory in general be brought to their senses.

Second, Mikhail Shchetinin’s unique school has been closed down and is about to be liquidated in Krasnodar Territory. You supported this institution back in 2010 when you issued an instruction to this effect. This is one of the best schools Russia has in terms of teaching patriotic values to the new generation of Russians. This school was part of the UNESCO Associated Schools Network.

This school is being destroyed by officials from Krasnodar Territory’s Education Ministry, with support from the federal Education Ministry. They literally hounded Mikhail Shchetinin to death. He passed away on November 10, and now they are destroying his school. Russian Federation Human Rights Commissioner Tatyana Moskalkova and all the human rights activists have become involved in this process.

Dmitry Peskov: Would you be so kind, your question, please?

Sergei Komkov: My question is simple. Is it not high time we put an end to all the outrages perpetrated by Krasnodar officials and put things right over there. For our part, we, as journalists, will monitor this process. The results of our journalistic investigation have been submitted to the Prosecutor General’s Office and the investigative agencies. And we will send them to you so that relevant measures are taken.

Mr Putin, I think we must put things right and do whatever we can for our veterans and those who educate our future rising generations, future patriots of our country, so that they do not suffer from outrages committed by officials, whom you rightly described at the 19^th Congress of the United Russia party as certain elements, who should be got rid of at the right time. Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Outrages, if they occur somewhere, must be eliminated, and not only in Krasnodar Territory, but wherever they occur, everywhere.

As for the veterans’ homes you have mentioned, I certainly know nothing about it. I do not interfere in city development projects, even in such big and interesting cities as Sochi. I simply know nothing about this. This is why you were right in saying that I am ignorant of this matter.

At the same time, I will make a point of talking about it with Venyamin Kondratyev, the Governor of Krasnodar Territory, and I will discuss the school with him as well – what is happening there. It is, of course, the first time I hear about it, too.

Well, as for cutting short outrages in Sochi, I think this is quite possible and must be done as soon as possible, if there are any violations, especially with regard to veterans and especially ahead of the 75^th anniversary of Victory. We have replaced the mayor there quite recently and an entirely new person has stepped in. We will certainly instruct him based on your materials, thank you very much for this.

There is a woman sitting quietly over there, “Building Bridges.”

Sergei Komkov: Mr Putin, do you remember when you were running for President, you published an article titled “In the First Person?” Later I wrote a book titled In the Third Person. Notes by the President’s Authorised Representative. I would like to give it to you.

Vladimir Putin: Thank you very much. They will take it now.

Please, what bridges are you building? Please, pass on the microphone.

Olga Fedorova: Good afternoon.

Samara State Television and Radio Company. My name is Olga Fedorova.

It is common knowledge that rivers divide, while bridges make us closer. A project to build a bridge across the Volga near Klimovka in Samara Region has been launched quite recently. You have supported this project. The bridge is being built from Klimovka on one side to Togliatti, on the other. We understand what this means for Samara. It is part of the Europe-Western China international transport corridor. In general, how will this project influence interstate cooperation?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: It will influence it in the best possible way, because, despite growing trade with China, despite the fact that we have the biggest volume of trade with our fraternal – in the direct sense of the word – republics of the former USSR and now independent states, infrastructure development is clearly inadequate.

I have already commented on this: we have, regrettably, fallen behind our friends in Kazakhstan. They have built their stretch of the road to China. We must do our part of the job. And we will certainly do it, including with regard to the bridge you have mentioned.

The “Heroes of Byelorussia” are over there. Let us go back to this, especially since we have just talked about the 75^th anniversary of Victory. Go ahead, please.

Ivan Afanasyev: Good afternoon, Mr President.

Thank you very much for the opportunity to ask this question. First of all, I would like to thank you…

Dmitry Peskov: Could you introduce yourself, please?

Ivan Afanasyev: Ivan Afanasyev, I represent Selmashevets from Gomel, Belarus.

Dmitry Peskov: What is your media outlet?

Ivan Afanasyev: Selmashevets is what the newspaper is called, it is affiliated with the Gomselmash holding company, which hopes to continue its work on the Russian market. I believe there will be enough work for both our friends from Rostov and for Gomselmash.

Vladimir Putin: Incidentally, our friends, Belarusian producers, sell a lot of their equipment on the Russian market, and Rostselmash is unable to sell even one piece of farming machinery on the Belarusian market.

Ivan Afanasyev: Mr President, there is a universal solution that has not been made public yet. My father headed the Gomselmash production association for 15 years, from 1972 until 1987. And today’s Gomselmash, as you know it, is the result of his work. If you do not mind, we will send this proposal to the executive offices of the Belarusian and Russian Presidents.

Vladimir Putin: Please, send it to them and to us.

Ivan Afanasyev: But, first of all, allow me to thank you for your history-making decision of February 2018, when you signed an executive order on awarding the Order of Zhukov to Major General Alexander Lizyukov, Commander of the 5^th Tank Army, who is my grandfather. Thank you very much for this.

Vladimir Putin: Congratulations on your grandfather, you have good genes.

Ivan Afanasyev: Thank you, Mr President.

Vladimir Putin: Is that all?

Ivan Afanasyev: I have not finished yet.

Vladimir Putin: Let the colleague say, please.

Ivan Afanasyev: Mr President, first of all, allow me to invite you to the city of Gomel, where a monument to Alexander Lizyukov and his two brothers was unveiled this year. This is the result of citizens’ diplomacy. We create these monuments when monuments are being desecrated outside Belarus and Russia, and when false heroes are being placed on the pedestal.

I know that you must visit Belarus, which probably sustained the greatest casualties during World War II in percentage to the population. And I strongly hope that you and Alexander Lukashenko will find time to pay tribute to the heroes of Gomel, those three brothers who gave their lives.

And here is another related question dealing with this matter. The public in Gomel Region and Voronezh Region have suggested holding a regional meeting of the leaders of those regions in the Russian Federation and the Republic of Belarus, where the heroic Gomel residents fought.

The administration of Gomel Region supported this idea and initiative. The leaders of Moscow, St Petersburg, Smolensk and Novgorod Region made this proposal prior to unveiling the monument.

We will voice this initiative once again, but if you support it, I believe that it will become highly probable that this initiative will be implemented next year, when we will mark Alexander Lizyukov’s 120^th birthday in March. We ask you to support this initiative. This is the first thing.

Second, allow me to present to you a book on Alexander Lizyukov. It will remind you of the person whom you brought back from historical oblivion. You have restored tremendous historical justice and reinstated this name in the great history of the Great Victory.

Vladimir Putin: Thank you. Let me have the book, please. Thank you for the book and for your initiative. We will certainly consider it.

That young woman over there, will you please stand up?

Dmitry Peskov: Please give the book to the colleague who handed you the microphone.

Vladimir Putin: Miss, take the microphone, please.

Wait a second, we will get to the Jews.

Dmitry Peskov: The young woman in a yellow top, just raise your hand and stand still, and someone will come over to you.

Vladimir Putin: Please, I am listening.

Farida Jafarova: Hello, Mr Putin.

I am very nervous. You probably noticed my poster “Yekaterinburg loves You!”

Vladimir Putin: Yes, I caught sight of it.

Farida Jafarova: We desperately need a metro system.

Vladimir Putin: Please, introduce yourself.

Farida Jafarova: My name is Farida Jafarova, FREEPRESSA, a web edition.

Mr Putin, we need a metro system really badly. Please help us to build one.

Vladimir Putin: Where?

Farida Jafarova: In Yekaterinburg!

Please help us to build a second metro line.

Vladimir Putin: Yekaterinburg is rapidly developing and emerging as an increasingly modern city. Of course, its infrastructure needs developing.

Some time ago now, it was decided that projects of this kind should be implemented based on regional capabilities and resources, but this is impossible. Therefore, these projects should be implemented jointly with the federal authorities and with federal support.

We were talking quite recently about similar plans to develop a metro system in Krasnoyarsk, where a metro system started to be built but subsequently the project was abandoned and frozen. As a first step, this must be done there, but I have no doubt that this type of transport will be of vital importance and popular in Yekaterinburg. What is really needed is to simply work with the authorities, the regional authorities, in the right manner. We will certainly do this.

It is hard to see. A question on women, please. You are next, all right? Settled.

Marina Volynkina: I am Marina Volynkina, from the Eurasian Women’s Community.

Mr Putin, numerous women’s fora have been held in Russia and elsewhere in recent years. These in effect show the world the huge, constructive, powerful female energy that really exists and is supported by the leaders of many countries, including our own country.

A female G20 has been established. Valentina Matviyenko has held two Eurasian Women’s Forums. This is, of course, an astounding force, which shows that women are creating the economy and are implementing many striking social projects and initiatives.

But primarily, of course, women are making peace; I mean they are establishing the communications that are highly needed for you, men, to find it easier and more comfortable to pursue economic, political and social policies.

My question to you, Mr Putin, is this. As a strategist, politician and an incredible man with an astonishing charisma, do you think that a woman could at some point assume the office of the President of Russia? If you do, what qualities should she possess?

Thank you very much.

Vladimir Putin: In terms of governance and responsibility for the country and its people, these requirements cannot be distinguished by some gender standards; the requirements are the same – competence, decency, and so on.

But women do introduce a certain feminine vibe into politics – less aggressive, I think. This will certainly be needed.

Dmitry Peskov: Mr Putin, do you know what suggestion I have? I saw a journalist from Estonia around here.

Vladimir Putin: Just a minute. I promised. Please bring the microphone over there.

Dmitry Peskov: Please fetch the mike to the centre.

Vladimir Shakhidjanyan: I can speak without a mike. Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Good.

Vladimir Shakhijanyan: Good afternoon, Mr Putin.

My name is Vladimir Shakhijanyan.

Vladimir Putin: Good afternoon, Mr Shakhijanyan.

Vladimir Shakhijanyan: Half of this room are my pupils. Some of them were trained at the Moscow University’s School of Journalism, where I taught for 35 years, some were even using my method to make children, population… There was a multi-million print-run of…

Vladimir Putin: Don’t we all use the same method? (Laughter)

Vladimir Shakhijanyan: No, my book, One Thousand and One Questions about This, was published in a multi-million print-run. It is about culture, upbringing, that one child in a family is not enough, but two or three is fine.

Vladimir Putin: Wonderful.

Vladimir Shakhijanyan: I continue to receive many letters. I need your support.

And lastly, about my ten-finger typing programme called SOLO: Touch Typing Tutor. You spoke about labour efficiency and digitalisation. I am grateful to Mr Minnikhanov and Mr Gref. These two people have supported me and have introduced my programme in Tatarstan and at Sberbank.

Besides, I have three files of unbelievable cursory replies. As your namesake, Vladimir Mayakovsky, wrote, “I’d rip out bureaucracy’s guts.” I need your help, so that ministries and agencies, doctors, teachers, police officers and FSB staff take care of their eyes and learn touch typing – Mr Peskov knows about this programme, or at least he heard about it. This will improve labour efficiency five- or six-fold.

And lastly, I wrote a book, which is now available online, about giving up smoking. It is one of our biggest problems. We must fight smoking. Personally, I smoked for 55 years, but I quit 11 years ago. By the way, I was in Leningrad during the siege, I went to the Luch cinema in Baskov Lane, and I remember everything very well.

Vladimir Putin: It is no coincidence that he is talking about this. I used to go there too.

Vladimir Shakhijanyan: Of course.

Vladimir Putin: I lived nearby.

Vladimir Shakhijanyan: If we resolve the problem of tobacco smoking in the country, we will have fewer problems with cancer, pneumonia, blood and liver diseases, birth disorders, infertility and very many other problems, because smoking affects everything.

I tried Veronika Skvortsova. Mr Gref wrote to her asking her to meet with me.

Vladimir Putin: What did you try to do with Ms Skvortsova?

Vladimir Shakhijanyan: I tried to meet with her. You can see what I mean, which is nice. If you understand me, other people will probably understand me as well.

All the very best and thank you. Good luck and happiness.

Vladimir Putin: Thank you very much.

Dmitry Peskov: Let us go on. Mr President, I saw a journalist from Estonia here. Is he with us? Please, stand up. There was a journalist from Estonia. So, it is Sputnik. Sputnik is a media outlet that is being harassed in Estonia.

Vladimir Putin: Harassed? Really?

Yelena Chernysheva: Good afternoon.

Yes, Mr President, harassed. Two months ago, Sputnik Estonia became the target of an economic blockade. Citing sanctions, local banks prohibited all and any money transfers to the accounts of our staff and contractors, as well as to the tax department. The transfer of our taxes has been suspended, and the money cannot reach the addressee. Special services have talked with our leaseholder and forced him to terminate our lease contract.

And lastly, two days ago our personnel received letters from the police informing them that Rossiya Segodnya is on the sanctions list and that therefore all its personnel can be held criminally liable. We have been notified that sanctions will be applied to us, starting January 2, unless we terminate our employment contracts with Rossiya Segodnya.

I believe that this is unacceptable for a country that claims to be a democracy. I am asking you for help. What can the Russian state do for Russian journalists who are fighting against Western censorship? And, please, what is your assessment of the Estonian authorities’ actions?

Vladimir Putin: Regrettably, there is not much we can do. I think that you are doing a great deal. The situation you have described cannot go unnoticed. When I hear about such events, I am at a loss what to think. Because while demonising us and accusing us of putting pressure on independent media outlets, they themselves are doing exactly what they are accusing us of doing. This is unbelievable cynicism.

Unfortunately, I have to tell you that acting on the state level and imposing restrictions and the like would be ineffective. All this would do is play into the hands of those who want to drive our countries and our peoples apart. We will not assist them in any way. As unpleasant as it may be, you have to find a way to work in countries that are afraid of your reporting, afraid of you and the truth that you deliver to your viewers and listeners. Otherwise, I do not see any reason for being afraid of your reporting or the influence you may have on the minds of the people.

Freedom of information is one of the fundamental freedoms in today’s democratic world. Unfortunately, not everyone wants to operate within this paradigm, guided by other rules that they write themselves.

There is nothing we can do about it. The world is complex and diverse. As far as we are concerned, we will do everything to support you no matter where you are, but we will use the available methods that do not interfere with Russia’s interstate relations.

We will see what else can be done here.

Dmitry Peskov: Mr Putin, we have been working for four hours now. I suggest that we have two more questions before we wrap up.

Vladimir Putin: Quiet please.

Let us have a question from the Land of Volunteers.

Laura Miziyeva: Hello,

The AZERROS multi-ethnic project. My name is Laura, and I represent the My Yediny! [We Stand United] news portal.

Mr Putin, in 2020 Russia will mark National Unity Day for the 15^th time. On this day, we celebrate the many generations of our ancestors who made it possible for us to come together on this day. What we have today is the legacy of our wise ancestors who sacrificed their lives to this cause. It is thanks to their efforts that today’s youth understands what it means to have a united country.

Mr Putin, thousands of people get a chance to attend a My Yediny! free concert titled on November 4 every year. It has been held for 15 years now. The kind words you said about our project at the Territory of Meanings forum was the most gratifying reward we could dream of. What could be better? Only your personal presence at the 15^th annual concert we will have at the MTC-Arena next year. We also invite all the guests from this room to join us. You will see what the young people of Putin’s generation are capable of.

Here is my question: Mr Putin, what do you think about youth initiatives of this kind?

And, I almost forgot to ask you how we can arrange your visit. Who should we talk to?

Vladimir Putin: Arrange what?

Laura Miziyeva: Your visit.

Vladimir Putin: The boss is here, you can talk to him.

We do support all initiatives of this kind and we will keep doing so. The volunteer movement is gaining momentum in Russia, with millions of people involved. This is simply incredible. As you well know, I have recently met with volunteers in Moscow. We will support this movement in every possible way, and in various areas. This includes veterans, helping veterans, sick children, ensuring that rights are respected in healthcare, construction and cleaning up territories.

For example, only recently, I think it was yesterday, we discussed this subject. Someone, I think it was the Russian Popular Front or some other organisation proposed cleaning up the banks of the Volga River. A million people showed up. They expected to have people in the tens of thousands, but almost a million came with 900,000 people cleaning up this territory. These are real efforts. We will definitely promote initiatives of this kind.

As for my schedule, you can ask him. Agreed?

There was a question on pensions, go ahead please.

Yulia Izmaylova: Good afternoon.

Yulia Izmailova, Molodoi Leninets newspaper, Penza.

Mr Putin, pensioners are worried: the federal law on pensions stipulates indexation of benefits ahead of the inflation level only until 2024. What will happen after that? Who could guarantee them further indexation? Would Russia have to raise the retirement age again?

Vladimir Putin: No. I have already said that no further increases in retirement age are planned or even discussed. As for the recent reform, it has not affected those people who are already retired in any way. The only way it had to do with them was the government’s effort to increase their incomes – pensions – faster. For example, next year, pensions are to grow by 6.6 percent, and inflation, as I said, is 3.25, for now at least. This means pensions will be indexed by a margin that is twice the inflation rate. This to a certain extent fulfils our earlier promises to retired Russians. And pensions will continue to be indexed after the period that you mentioned.

Dmitry Peskov: There was Altai somewhere in the back. Altai, stand up, please, and raise your hand, you will be given the floor.

And no, we are not ignoring Daghestan.

Emina Kudachina: I have this question. Good afternoon, Mr Putin. I am so nervous, I am sorry. I was told yesterday that issues that could not be streamlined in 30 years get resolved in 30 seconds here.

This is the question I have. There is only one school in one city in the Altai Republic for ethnic Altai children, where they are taught their native Altai language properly. The school was founded exactly 30 years ago, but it is housed in a rented building. They promise all the time that they will build a school, its own building, but it has not been done yet.

So, my question is actually a request. Please help us with the Altai school construction. Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Do you mean the Altai Republic?

Emina Kudachina: Yes.

Vladimir Putin: The Altai language is classified as one of the most ancient Turkic languages. In fact, it largely formed the basis for all other Turkic languages. Not even largely, but almost by 100 percent. And in general, I think, we should pay much more attention to the study of ethnic cultures, customs, and languages. So if your school is dilapidated, especially a school that teaches an ethnic language, it is certainly unacceptable.

You just told me, help us save and restore the school. I promise you we will do it.

Dmitry Peskov: This was the final question.

Vladimir Putin: Please give the floor to that young woman standing with the Family poster.

Dmitry Peskov: Please raise your hand, so that the staff would see you.

Farida Rustamova: Good afternoon.

Thank you for this chance to ask my question.

My name is Farida Rustamova, and I am a correspondent with the BBC Russian Service.

Here is my question. Four years ago, when my colleagues asked you about your relationship to your younger daughter, Yekaterina Tikhonova, you said that your children “do not engage in business or politics, just keep a low profile”. But the situation has changed since then, to say the least.

The company Innopraktika, headed by Yekaterina Tikhonova and established by a state budgetary institution of Lomonosov Moscow State University, earned 500 million rubles in 2018.

Nomeko, a company in which your older daughter Maria Vorontsova has a stake, is currently building one of the largest clinics in Leningrad Region using Sogaz funding.

Your old friends, managers of state companies, are helping these two women with their business operations. We can see that television channels have started showing them very often. Everyone knows them and what they look like today. This is an open secret.

Here is my question: Tell me, please, when will you admit that they are your children, and when will they open themselves to society, just like the children of other world leaders?

Vladimir Putin: You have just spoken about business-linked matters and mentioned one woman and another. You probably did not say everything. You mentioned their personal corporate stakes and the volume of this business. You said nothing and merely stated a fact. But this is not enough. You should delve into the matter, and you will realise what their real business is, whether there is any such business, who owns what, and who helps whom.

The question about Innopraktika came up a long time ago. This is the initiative of the Rector of Lomonosov Moscow State University. To the best of my knowledge, as Chairman of the University’s Board of Trustees, I can say that this is linked with a desire, an absolutely legal and correct desire of our higher education institutions to combine the capabilities of the national science and education system with the real needs of Russian producers and beneficiaries inside the Russian economy.

We often buy many goods abroad, including in the United Kingdom, goods that we can manufacture here. We should combine what can be generated here with the goods that our companies need while making certain purchases. In effect, Innopraktika and its entire activity deal with precisely this matter. This is the entire reason for establishing Innopraktika. It was Moscow State University that started all this.

They have many talented people who are ready to offer their innovations, but the Russian beneficiaries and business community need to find out about them, so that they would be able to take advantage of this. This is a link between science and education and the real economy. This is what they are doing. I strongly hope that they will succeed and achieve tangible results that all of us need.

Speaking of the second area, healthcare, as far as I know, their so-called share capital is now close to zero. But this is a highly interesting aspect linked with the use of cutting-edge medical technology at a time when the Russian population decreased by 260,000 in 2019. We consider these statistics to be unacceptable.

The Russian Federation prioritises everything linked with measures to reduce the mortality rate caused by external and domestic factors, and everything linked with the development of healthcare. I believe that we should only praise this work.

Over there, ‘Ethnic Issue’, go ahead, please.

Dmitry Kutyavin: Good afternoon, Mr Putin.

My name is Dmitry Kutyavin, editorial director of the First Russian ethnic TV channel. The channel was established at the initiative of the Presidential Council for Interethnic Relations to support interethnic communication.

My question is as follows. Almost seven years ago, you published an article, Russia: Ethnic Matters. In your opinion, has anything changed in ethnic matters over those seven years? What is your assessment of the current inter-ethnic relations in Russia? Are there problems in specific regions?

And a second question, if I may. A year ago, after your annual news conference, you issued instructions to support the First Russian ethnic TV channel, in terms of both content and methodology. We would like to ask you to continue, as a follow up – a lot has been done over the year, and the Government is helping significantly, and our curators too – we would like to make more energetic forays into the regions so that they also get involved, and the regional leaders cooperate more with us. Could you help?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: You just said you were getting help. Is this support not enough?

Interethnic relations in Russia are among the most important issues. We have mentioned here today the tragic events of the late 1990s – early 2000s, an actual civil war with active military operations in the Chechen Republic. How many people suffered then? That was also the result of unfavourable developments in the field of interethnic relations.

We know that, apart from the Caucasus, people in other regions that are constituent entities of the Federation also have in their historic memory unfair decisions such as deportations, when they were forcibly moved to places such as the steppes of Kazakhstan in cattle cars. How many people died on the way?

They have not forgotten. And that was also the result of interethnic relations. This is something we must do everything in our power to avoid, anything that might lead us to similar tragedies. It is very important.

The future generations of Russian politicians must also know that public opinion will not allow us to make any decisions that would destroy interethnic harmony. This is my first point.

Secondly, we will certainly support all entities – the media and public organisations – whose activity is aimed at smoothing out any disputes or relieving possible interethnic tension.

As you know, life is complex and diverse. Russia, too, has a complex structure, with so many ethnic groups living here. No wonder we forget about some things. Now, we are having disputes with Ukraine. There is a Ukrainian identity. Who shaped that identity? Count Pototsky, a prominent academic, researcher and author who first mentioned Ukrainians as a separate ethnic group.

However, other Polish studies later separated them even further, even removed them from among the Slavic peoples. They believed, they claimed that Ukrainians were the descendants of some nomadic peoples. But this is all complete nonsense, and we must know the truth. We must understand that some elements of a real ethnic identity emerged at some stage, and we must respect that. We are doing so and will continue doing so, especially domestically.

A journalist just mentioned problems with a school in Altai. Unfortunately, we do have many problems with the native languages of the peoples of Russia, with their cultures and customs. What kind of problems? We pay too little attention to this. And every person who lives in Russia should feel that this is their home, and they do not have any other home.

Thank you very much. I would like to wish you a Happy New Year. We definitely need to wrap this up now, we have taken so long.

Thank you.

* * *

Anton Zhelnov: Mr President, can I ask just one last question about Kotov, please?

Vladimir Putin: About what?

Anton Zhelnov: I would like to ask about the ‘Moscow case’, and to ask you to take note of the case of Konstantin Kotov, who has been given a four-year sentence under the ‘Moscow case’. He did not violate any laws, yet he has been sentenced under the same article as Dadin.

Vladimir Putin: I spoke with human rights activists when we met…

Anton Zhelnov: They did not mention Kotov’s case.

Vladimir Putin: Fine, I may look into it. I remember the name, Kotov.

Punishment for such violations is much harsher in many other countries. For example, unauthorised public actions, such as blocking the border, are punishable with up to 10 years in prison in some countries. Our sentences are much more lenient, although…

Anton Zhelnov: Mr Putin, he did not threaten anyone or throw anything at anyone, that is the problem. He simply took part in a demonstration.

Vladimir Putin: I am not talking about whether he threatened anyone or not. Maybe he did this many times before.

By the way, all legislation stipulates increased penalties for repeat offenders, with civil liability for first offenders and criminal punishment for repeat offenders.

Anyway, I will take a look at this.

Anton Zhelnov: Will you take a look at his case, please?

Vladimir Putin: Yes, I will. Thank you.

Meeting with heads of international news agencies

2019-06-17T13:16:28+04:00

Vladimir Putin met with heads of the world's leading news agencies. The meeting took place on the sidelines of the 2019 St Petersburg International Economic Forum for the sixth time.

The conversation with Vladimir Putin involved representatives of news agencies from Great Britain, Germany, Iran, Spain, Italy, China, the United States, France, and Japan; Russia was represented by TASS Director General Sergei Mikhailov.

Traditionally the main topics of the meeting were current issues of Russian domestic and foreign policy.

***

Transcript of meeting with heads of leading international news agencies

President of Russia Vladimir Putin: Ladies and gentlemen, good afternoon. I am very glad to see you all.

It is our tradition to meet regularly, at almost every St Petersburg forum. I would like to welcome you once again, to wish you a pleasant, successful and rewarding time in St Petersburg.

This year, my meetings with forum guests start with you. And this is a good thing because we will do a little warm-up today, will have a short discussion, which will give me an opportunity, perhaps, to sense what might be of interest to our other partners who have come to the forum this year.

I give the floor to Mr Mikhailov now, and then I will be happy to listen to each of you and, as far as possible, I will try to answer your questions.

Go ahead, please.

TASS Director General Sergei Mikhailov: Thank you.

Mr President,

We appreciate that you found the time in the packed schedule of the forum, as usual, for your annual meeting with the heads of the world's leading news agencies, which account for almost 90 percent of the global news landscape.

Colleagues, I am very grateful to you for your continued interest in the forum, and the city of St Petersburg. I am sure that our conversation today will be as memorable and fulfilling as all the previous ones – and we are meeting for the sixth time.

The St Petersburg International Economic Forum, which has had 21 years of glorious history, has kicked off once again. In the morning, we held a panel discussion, Mr President, where we talked about the role of the media in global conflicts.

As I said, we are now in our sixth meeting. Every year, the participants change a little. You can see our new colleagues attending this meeting for the first time – there are four of them, and I will introduce each of them as we go along. New blood in this circle always organically merges with the experience of old-timers, making our dialogue ever more fruitful.

Undoubtedly, our reporters appreciate the fact that you are meeting with them earlier in the day this time, not when it’s nearly dark, as you used to say, but before you give your speech tomorrow at the main plenary session of the forum. Special thanks for this.

I cannot fail to note that today, on June 6, we celebrate the 220^th birth anniversary of Alexander Pushkin. It is Russian Language Day, so the day is special for us and for the forum as well.

TASS, as usual, has studied the main topics that our foreign colleagues raised in writing or in conversations before their visit to Russia. There are many different and very interesting topics, and you will hear about them, as our colleagues will ask you questions.

But there is one thing that interests everyone without exception, so with your permission, I would like to ask a general question on behalf of TASS.

We always started our recent meetings by agreeing that our planet is going through the most dangerous period of confrontation: countries flare up, entire regions blaze, there are sanctions, trade wars, fake news – this is the content of nearly all news feeds from all world agencies. They are talking about a new cold war. Every country is certain that it knows who is to blame for that.

Why do we have to start our conversation in 2019 with the same question: why is the world not becoming any safer? Where is our civilisation going? Do you see the light at the end of the tunnel? What can the countries that are the main players in the political process do about it? This is a generalised question, Mr President.

Vladimir Putin: If we look around at the murals, at the frescoes, look up – there is war everywhere. Unfortunately, this has been the case for ages. Human history is full of stories of conflict. It is true that all conflicts were followed by periods of peace. But it would be better to avoid the conflicts altogether.

After the invention and creation of nuclear weapons, humanity has maintained a state of relative global peace for almost 75 years – relative, of course, with the exception of regional conflicts.

Let’s recall Winston Churchill, who first hated the Soviet Union, then called Stalin a great revolutionary when they had to fight Nazism, and then, after the Americans developed nuclear weapons, he practically called for the Soviet Union to be destroyed. Remember his speech at Fulton that kick-started the Cold War?

But as soon as the Soviet Union acquired nuclear weapons, Churchill initiated the coexistence of the two system concept. I do not think he was such an opportunist, but he worked with reality. He accepted reality. A clever man and a pragmatic politician.

Little has changed since that time. We should just keep in mind, should understand what kind of world we live in, and what threats and dangers might await us. If we do not keep this “fiery serpent” under control, if we let it out of the bottle, God forbid, this could lead to a global catastrophe.

Look, today everyone is addressing environmental issues, and they are right to do so, because there are global threats such as climate change, anthropogenic emissions, and so on. All this is correct. Even children are engaged in this, girls and boys all over the world.

But they do not realize, these young people, especially teenagers and children, they are not aware of the global threat and serious challenge posed by possible global conflicts. This is something adult men and women should think about.

However, I get the impression that these issues have somehow become commonplace, and have kind of been shifted to the background. This raises natural concerns.

Our US partners upped and withdrew from the ABM Treaty. So, ladies and gentlemen, I want to ask you: Did any one of you go out with a poster and protest?

No one, silence. As if this is the way it’s supposed to be. Incidentally, this was the first step towards a fundamental destabilisation of the global security framework, and a major step at that.

Now, we are talking about our American partners terminating, also unilaterally, their INF Treaty membership.

In the first case, they at least acted honestly and withdrew from the treaty unilaterally. However, in the second, apparently fully aware that they will bear responsibility for it, they try to blame Russia.

Listen: you and your readers, your audience should open the INF Treaty and read it. Its articles clearly stipulate that short- and medium-range missile launchers cannot be deployed on land. The treaty says so outright. However, they went ahead and deployed them in Romania and Poland which is a direct violation.

Check out what short-range and medium-range missiles are, and then compare them to UAVs. They are the same thing. Now, look at the specifications of the targets for the antimissiles. They are exactly medium- and short-range missiles.

Everyone is pretending to be deaf, blind or dyslexic. We have to react to this somehow, don’t we? Clearly, so. They immediately start looking for perpetrators in Russia. Of course, the threat is serious.

Renewing the START-3 Treaty is on our agenda. However, we can choose not to. Our latest systems guarantee Russia’s security for a fairly long period into the future, I mean we have made significant strides.

And, I must put it bluntly, we have outrun our competitors in terms of creating hyper-weapon systems. If no one is interested in renewing the START-3 Treaty, we will not renew it. We have already said a hundred times that we are ready to do so, but no one is willing to talk about it with us.

Please note that there is no formal negotiating process, and everything will expire in 2021. Mind you, there will be no more instruments to limit an arms race.

Or, for example, deploying weapons in outer space. Do we understand what this means or not? Ask the experts. It means that each of us will have to live at all times, say, under a nuclear weapon. Permanently! But we are doing this, and doing it quickly. Will anyone ever think about it, talk about it, or show any concern? No, complete silence.

Or, take low-yield nuclear weapons, or non-nuclear strategic missiles. What if a global-range strategic missile is launched from a submarine in the middle of the ocean? How do we know if it carries a nuclear charge or not? Do you realise how serious and dangerous this is?

What if the other side responds right away? What will happen then? I am deeply convinced that this should be the subject of an open and absolutely transparent professional discussion, and the international community should be involved in this process as much as is possible in matters of this kind. In any case, people have the right to know what is happening in this sphere.

To reiterate, we are ready to do this. Once again, we are confident in our security, but there is, of course, a concern about the complete dismantling of the entire mechanism of control over strategic armaments and non-proliferation.

What’s the solution? It is in cooperation, period. The most recent conversation I had with President Trump, I must say, inspires certain optimism, because Donald told me that he, too, was concerned about this. He is fully cognizant of the amount of arms-related expenses incurred by the United States and other countries. This money could be used for other purposes. I completely agree with him.

The US Secretary of State came here. We met in Sochi, and he spoke along the same lines. If they think so, we should take some practical steps towards making a joint effort.

Again, today, talks between the countries with the most powerful nuclear potential are the most important ones. However, on a personal note, I think that all nuclear countries should be involved, including official and unofficial.

Talking only with the officially recognised nuclear powers and leaving out the unofficial countries means they will continue to develop nuclear weapons. In the end, this process will grind to a halt even between the official nuclear states. So, by and large, we need to create a broad platform for discussion and decision-making.

In this sense, of course, this could be the light at the end of the tunnel.

Sergei Mikhailov: Thank you, Mr President.

Tradition is important and we in Russia always treat women with respect. Out of a dozen people here, Bloomberg's Executive Editor Rosalind Mathieson is again with us. Your question is the first.

Ms Mathieson is a prominent journalist and political scientist. She lived in Singapore for a long time and recently moved to London with her family. She became Bloomberg's Executive Editor in 2018 and is taking part in our meeting for the second time.

I will tell you a secret. Rosalind is fond of Muay Thai, refuting the joke by Faina Rayevskaya that women are like rotten boards. I hope we’re not wrong and that this is true.

Vladimir Putin: You are scaring me with boxing right away.

Sergei Mikhailov: Just a warning.

Rosalind, go ahead please.

Bloomberg News Executive Editor for International Government Rosalind Mathieson: Thank you, Mr President.

Muay Thai, I believe, has taught me the value and appreciation of fear and to confront and control fear, but I don’t believe I’d be brave enough to get in the ring with you.

I have a question about oil – two questions, actually. Russia’s deal with OPEC is up for renewal this month. Do you favour keeping production at current levels or is your preference – for Russia and for OPEC – to increase output as we go into the second half of the year? And given the importance of oil to your economy and to Russia more broadly, I wanted to ask you about the comments this week by US President Donald Trump, who said that he had been told that Russia is pulling its people out of Venezuela. Moscow has said that this is inaccurate. Is Donald Trump just getting bad information or are you still concerned that the ultimate goal of the US is regime change in Venezuela, and perhaps the ultimate goal beyond that is to have control of Venezuela’s oil assets? Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: I would like to say that I would not enter the ring with you myself. Not because you're a woman, but because everyone should paddle one's own canoe. I have never boxed. I can meet you on the tatami for some sparring, but there I'd have a solid advantage, I assure you.

As for your questions, let’s begin with the final one on whether we withdrew our people from Venezuela or not and if we are afraid of a regime change. We are generally against interference in the internal political affairs of other countries. We believe it leads to grievous if not tragic consequences. And the example of such countries as Libya and Iraq is the best proof here.

As you know, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. This is a well-known phrase and it’s obvious. So, it is necessary to be patient. It is possible to work with anyone, whether it is the opposition or the current authorities, but you cannot interfere in internal affairs.

It is all the more improper to use sanctions and so on because usually they hurt millions of common people who have nothing to do with the authorities. The global economy suffers.

Take, for example, the fact that Venezuela has cut its oil production in half over the past several years (in half!). If we look at the lives of the millions of people in Venezuela, who are they fighting: Maduro or the people?

This is why we do not approve but, on the contrary, condemn such actions. And more than that, military interventions are invariably a disaster. According to my information, even the US’ allies do not support military intervention, none of them. I do not know anyone who does among Venezuela’s neighbours and even those who condemn Maduro for his domestic political processes. God forbid anyone supports this idea or does anything like that.

About our people in Venezuela. We absolutely, officially sold weapons to Venezuela. We have not been doing so for quite a while now. You represent a publication and a television channel which deals with the economy.

Under the contracts, we are required to service these weapons, and we must fulfil our contractual obligations. Our technicians are doing this and have always done this in recent years.

Truth be told, not everything was technically clean there based on Venezuela’s priorities. There were things they wanted us to fix, and other things they did not want us to do. But we were obliged to do it under the contracts; otherwise we would face sanctions. That is all there is to it, nothing more.

It is quite likely that our specialists did some work there, not only defence specialists, but our people from the manufacturing industry as well. Some of them left, some, maybe, returned. We are not creating anything specific there, no core military bases. Nor are we sending troops there, this has never happened. However, we have always fulfilled and will continue to fulfil our contractual obligations as regards military technical cooperation. This is my second point.

The third point is about our relations with Venezuela and other oil producing countries. As I said, Venezuela cut production. This is due not only (you are probably aware of this) to the sanctions, but to the state of the oil and gas industry in Venezuela.

Venezuela’s credit exposure to Russia is about $3.5 billion, but there is no debt. Venezuela pays regularly and in full and is servicing its loan obligations properly.

Now let us move on to our relations with OPEC. We will continue maintaining these relations. We have no intention of joining OPEC, but we have developed a certain mechanism for cooperation and we will consolidate our positions to take a decision. Yes, indeed, there are some disagreements between us that stem from a different understanding of what can be called fair price. It is also natural, and there is no need either to speak about things you do not know.

Look at the price per barrel of oil that is used to calculate, say, the budget of Saudi Arabia. It is much higher than what we use. Ours is $40 per barrel, and their price is higher. That is why, of course, they want to keep the price higher. We do not need to do this, given, among other things, that our economy is more diversified.

Yes, we still heavily depend on oil and gas, but, of course, [our economy] is much more diversified than, say, the economy of the Persian Gulf countries. For this reason, our manufacturing sector is not interested in the oil price climbing too high.

The average price of $60-$65 per barrel suits us, and we do not need to drive it higher. We have quite a decent margin, budget-wise, given that our budget calculations are based on $40 per barrel, which allows us to replenish our gold and foreign currency reserves and, in general, the government’s and the Central Bank’s reserves.

So we have to consider all circumstances: the decline in oil production in Iran – by a million [barrels] – and Venezuela, as well as problems in Libya and Nigeria. We have to take all these factors into account, including the growth in consumption throughout summer.

We have reached certain agreements. I will not get ahead of myself and will not tell you now what we think we should do in the second half of the year. But our colleagues in OPEC and we will take a decision based on a consolidated position.

Sergei Mikhailov: Thank you, Mr President. Thank you, Rosalind.

Mr President, yesterday you and President Xi opened a concert at the Bolshoi Theatre marking the 70^th anniversary of diplomatic relations between Russia and China, and unveiled an exhibition prepared jointly by TASS and Xinhua for the anniversary. This year we will give our best wishes to our Chinese friends on the important date – the 70^th anniversary of the establishment of the People’s Republic of China.

I want to introduce our reliable partners and old friends – TASS and Xinhua have had relations for 60 years – this is my friend, Xinhua President Cai Mingzhao. This is the second time Mr Cai has attended the meeting.

You will remember that he had a big interview with you in 2016 which was widely and well quoted by the world’s media outlets. Xinhua takes part in annual St Petersburg meetings and the St Petersburg International Economic Forum.

I will tell you Mr Cai’s secret – he has a dream to create an evaluation system for Chinese restaurants around the globe by awarding them stars similar to Michelin’s. Nobody doubts the reputation of China’s chefs, the more so that in my opinion the best Chinese chef in Moscow is the one at the Xinhua cafeteria.

Please, Mr Cai, go ahead with your question.

President of Xinhua News Agency Cai Mingzhao (retranslated): Thank you very much, Mr President.

In June 2016, I interviewed you, and I still remember that time. Let me thank you again for visiting – together with President Xi – the photo exhibition dedicated to the 70^th anniversary of establishing diplomatic relations.

We know that this year’s main slogan at the St Petersburg forum is Creating a Sustainable Development Agenda. We know that you were involved in helping the Russian economy overcome the challenges it was facing, and it is beginning to recover.

I would like to know about your specific plans and measures for the further recovery of the Russian economy, plans for stepping up economic cooperation with China. Which key areas could you single out?

Vladimir Putin: As for our plans on Russia’s economic recovery, you said yourself that we have already overcome the difficulties that began several years ago for many reasons. The sanctions also played a role but there was more to it.

In fact, they did not play such a substantial role. Primarily, it was due to lower prices on our traditional export commodities, such as, of course, hydrocarbons, some metals and hence, on chemical products linked with this resource. Plus, of course, there was pressure of sanctions.

But we not only overcame the recession but also entered a path of sustainable growth. This was linked to the foreign economic environment but there was more to it. It was also linked with domestic economic factors and factors related to Russia’s economic policy, primarily the steady macroeconomic situation. Last year we had inflation of a little over 4 percent, this year (on an annual basis) we have a bit over 5 percent, and this was after the VAT increase. This is better than we expected.

Now I will explain why this is happening and what we hope for. You know that we decided to implement national programmes in key development areas. The main goal is to diversify the economy, move it towards an innovation track, make it more innovative.

There is a package of goals, measures and means of achieving these goals: improving the system of managing the economy and the country as a whole; digitalisation in economic management; introducing artificial intelligence in all areas of production and life in the country; improving the performance of medicine and biology, improving living standards, increasing life expectancy and birth rate, and so on – there is a whole package of measures. It is enough to just glance at the goals that we have set for ourselves to understand what we are counting on in the next few years.

As for gathering the resources… To begin with, these approaches can be estimated. The development of the infrastructure certainly includes the construction of roads, railways and port facilities.

Obviously, we primarily count on attracting both domestic and foreign investment. I am going to say something about capital flight now as such a question is sure to arise. But to secure the investment the state should contribute its own resources, mainly to infrastructure development, to improving business environment

I am going to start telling you, this is all we are going to talk about. I have a lot to tell you.

There are advances in every field. According to the World Bank Ease of Doing Business ranking, Russia stood in 120^th place for business environment, and now it is in 31^st place. So there is apparent progress.

We have now made a decision on major changes to the rules concerning inspection and oversight organisations. We want to shut down, to eliminate completely all obsolete and archaic requirements and rules that impede progress. Generally speaking, we will move on in this field to improve business climate conditions.

Regarding attracting capital and capital flight. Yes, indeed, last year we saw significant, though not the biggest in Russia’s contemporary history, capital flight of 66 billion, I think.

Yet the trade surplus is 131 billion. It more than covers the flight. And that disinvested capital is coming back, we also see that.

This is why we do not see any tragedy here, we take it as a natural process. Of course, business participants need only one thing – predictability and stability of the situation. This is obvious. We regularly meet with our partners, both Russian and European businesspeople, and I hope we are going to meet with our US colleagues soon.

By the way, our trade fell from $30 to $20 billion as far back as under President Obama. And even though President Trump broke all records on introducing various restrictions against Russia, under this president US-Russia trade grew by five billion. And it is also growing with European countries.

We meet regularly. I will repeat it again that I met with businesspeople from Great Britain, Germany, France and Italy recently. I will have many meetings here. Why am I telling you this? We try to listen to them and respond appropriately to changes in their working conditions here. We also expect our potential partners to continue to energetically work in this country.

As for the package of measures and the range of objectives that we set before ourselves, please look at our national projects. Let me repeat it again that these projects are about infrastructure, artificial intelligence, biology and, of course, agriculture and so on – there are plenty of them – and this allows us to believe and state that things will move forward. It is hard to say now how much we will be able to deliver.

When I said that the government would have to contribute to the implementation of these large-scale projects, primarily, to the upgrading of infrastructure, I meant we would have to see where the money could come from.

That is why after the protracted (really protracted as we argued, I mean different ministries and experts, for a year, making these calculations) discussion of the funding sources and the government’s obligations, we arrived at a decision that the least damage would be caused if one – not the only one but one – of the measures would be increasing VAT.

In so doing, we realised that at the initial stage this would be detrimental to the country’s economic growth, we understood this well. VAT increased, [economic] activity is scaling down and so on. But we expected the short-term effect to last for approximately six months, not longer, and then investment in the economy, including in infrastructure, would trigger economic growth. So far, our preliminary calculations have proved correct.

<…>

Meeting with representatives of Russian news agencies and print media

2019-02-21T13:53:52+04:00

Vladimir Putin held a meeting with representatives of Russian news agencies and print media.

President of Russia Vladimir Putin: Good evening,

I think you have managed to listen to at least a part of today’s Address [to the Federal Assembly]. Therefore, this is a good opportunity to discuss or explain some things in more detail. It covered a lot of different material, so let us use this chance to talk. I also invite you to have some lunch, so bon appetit. I am listening.

Alexei Abakumov: Mr President, the first question, if I may. I am Alexei Abakumov, RBK, television.

The question is as follows: everyone noted that today’s Address, this year’s Address, was very different from last year's. If last year’s Address was accompanied by the noise and even roar of missiles and artillery, this one was mostly accompanied by the whisper of banknotes – the money allocated to the social sphere, for pensioners above all, for disabled persons, to address social problems, for children and so forth.

Two questions. One is a bit simpler. First, why was there such a difference? And the second one: isn’t it time to define where our country is going, what are we moving towards and what should we expect in the medium term? Thank you.

President of Russia Vladimir Putin: First, I do not think that the previous address was accompanied by cannonades, as you said. We had to explain to the country where we had spent a lot of the resources and to calm people, because we had already announced that we were going to decrease defence spending. We are decreasing it now, and many people are worried that it may result in decreasing our defence capability. We have completed a range of projects, and it would be quite natural to speak of what we have done.

And last but not least, everything we did and continue to do is, to a degree, as I have already said, a response to the withdrawal of our American partners from the ABM Treaty. We needed to tell the nation that everyone can live calmly and feel secure, that we are responding to these events, and that we are doing this in the manner I have described.

As for today’s Address, it indeed focused on domestic matters and socioeconomic development. This is logical. The reason is that we are launching national projects and have earmarked huge funds for this, a total of 26.5 trillion rubles. We never allocated this much money in a targeted manner for nationwide goals before. Over the past nine or ten months, we were preparing to launch these mechanisms, defining goals and identifying sources of funding. I hope the initial results will be visible by the end of this year and that more will be achieved in 2020 and 2021.

However, we need to settle some obvious problems to be able to start these projects effectively. I have mentioned these problems today. It is vitally important to allocate 1 trillion rubles for fighting cancer, but our primary healthcare system needs additional funding and special attention from the state.

Take the demographic situation. It is very serious and, as I have said dozens of times before, there are objective reasons for this. We can say confidently that we have been doing our utmost to resolve the problem. But all our efforts were not enough because of the two demographic setbacks, one in 1942–1943 and the other in the early 1990s. We must deal with these setbacks by investing more funds. We can use a set of instruments, such as direct support, support to families to allow mothers to resume their careers as soon as possible, mortgages and the like. This set has taken a definite shape and can be applied now, which is why we are paying so much attention to this. Most importantly, these efforts must be made before we launch the national projects on a large scale. I believe that this is clear, logical and timely.

I would like to remind you that this address carried on from last year in terms of military and strategic aspects.

Alexei Abakumov: Mr President, about the path Russia is following.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, sorry, the path, the second part of your question. I would very much like people to hear about this development path today, the path towards accomplishing high-priority economic tasks, in the first place. You have probably noted, since you specialize in these matters, that, as I have already said, our economic success must become the key to resolving all these matters. This includes greater labour productivity, in the first place, as well as efforts to attract private investment, first and foremost. There is an entire range of matters linked with state-of-the-art technologies, and so on. These are the main tasks we intend to accomplish by implementing national projects. At the same time, we have never forgotten, and we will never forget the fact that, in order to feel confident, we must ensure our own security. We are doing this. I have said a few words about this today, but, to my mind, enough has been said.

Alexei Abakumov: Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Thank you for your question.

Komsomolskaya Pravda Editor in Chief Vladimir Sungorkin: Mr President, you have compared the Avangard system with the first near-Earth satellite today. Does this not seem to be an overstatement because the first satellite is a far cry from the Avangard system? What happened? Why did you use such a powerful comparison?

Vladimir Putin: I see, thank you for your question.

As you can see, I have made a reservation. This system absolutely compares with the first near-Earth satellite in terms of maintaining our security. I will explain. The launch of the first space satellite implied, in terms of ensuring security, that the Soviet Union had received systems, or ballistic missiles, for delivering nuclear warheads to the territory of the potential enemy. In effect, that launch ushered in an entire missile programme. Of course, that programme had been developing before that event, but, in effect, it began with that launch. This implies ballistic missiles. But our American friends invented the anti-ballistic missile defence system to safeguard against these ballistic missiles. Therefore, we had to provide an adequate, asymmetrical but serious response. What kind of a response is this? The Avangard system is our response. A winged glider vehicle moves at Mach 20-plus inside dense atmospheric layers; it was difficult to imagine this in the past. In terms of of our defence capability, this amounts to the same landmark achievement as the launch of the first space satellite. This is because that launch implied ballistic missiles, and we are now talking about a new strategic weapons system that moves along a flat trajectory inside dense atmospheric layers.

Remark: This is another delivery vehicle.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, of course, this amounts toanother delivery vehicle. But this is an absolute breakthrough in terms of modern technologies and materials. This winged glider vehicle’s nose section heats up to almost 3,000 degrees Celsius. Can you imagine this? What does 3,000 degrees feel like? The Sun’s surface heats up to 6,000 degrees, and here we are talking about 3,000 degrees. I have already mentioned the chocolate-coated ice cream effect, when the vehicle flies along and melts away as it goes. It is coated with a plasma layer, and its sides heat up to 1,900–2,000 degrees. At the same time, the vehicle is controlled accordingly.

You know, when I attended the latest tests and when I watched them, the operator said “Acknowledge message” which means that the vehicle had hit the bull’s eye, the target. The Russian science, engineering school and defence sector have scored an amazing success. Indeed, this is absolutely tremendous. Therefore, a comparison with the first near-Earth satellite is quite adequate and appropriate.

Nezavisimaya Gazeta Editor in Chief Konstantin Remchukov: Mr President, regarding the targeting of decision-making centres. I have two clarification questions. First, does this mean that Brussels and Washington can be such targets if we believe that the decisions are made there? It is my first question.

The second, does this mean that today you have declared the right to deliver a pre-emptive strike if we believe that the missiles deployed near us pose a real threat?

Vladimir Putin: We have a nuclear weapon strategy or concept that does not stipulate pre-emptive strikes. We are talking here about commensurate matters related to threats facing us, commensurate primarily in terms of time periods. If we have more time, we may not have to make pre-emptive strikes. It is in this connection and for this reason that I have asked our partners if they can count. Yes, they can, so let them calculate the speed and range of our future arms systems.

Here is another example. Professionals will understand this. I have not said this, but I can tell you now, not once again, but for the first time: they should look where these weapons will be deployed. I have said they will be sea-launched either from submarines or surface ships. We can do this, and given their speed and range we do not need to deploy them in territorial waters or even in the exclusive economic waters of a certain state. We can deploy them in neutral waters, in the world’s ocean. Nobody can prohibit warships and submarines from navigating in neutral waters. Plus, they will not be stationary, they will be on the go, making it more difficult to detect them. It cannot be very difficult to detect them, but it will not be very easy either. So, make your calculations. At a speed of Mach 9, these missiles can strike a target more than 1,000 km away. Under the Law of the Sea, the exclusive economic zone is defined at some 400 km or 200 miles. Do the maths. The distance of 1,000 at Mach 9. How soon, in how many minutes can these weapons reach their targets? This is it.

Just compare, the flight time to Moscow is between 10 and 12 minutes. How long would it take to reach the decision-making centres that are creating threats to us? The calculation is not in their favour, at least, not today. This is obvious. This is what I meant. Let them do their maths. It is not a threat. If they create threats to us, they should be aware of the potential consequences, so that they will not accuse us of unnecessary aggressiveness or whatever later. They have announced their decision; we know what can follow it. We tell them, “Do the maths. Can you count? So, do it before making any decisions that would create additional threats to you.” This is it. By the way, we have openly told them so behind closed doors long ago.

Remark: Did they get it?

Vladimir Putin: I do not know; ask them. They are grown-up people who can count, as I have already said. So, let them do the maths before making any decisions. I can say this again. We will see what happens.

Overall, we maintain good contacts between our militaries. There are things we can do together, and that professionals are doing together. We maintain regular contacts and hold meetings at the level of general staffs. They are working on Syria. Yes, there are problems. But they are creating more and more problems. There are joint mechanisms and instruments for dealing with these problems. I hope they will be used to prevent a new global crises such as the Cuban missile crisis. There are no reasons for this, no reasons for aggravating the international situation to this level.

Is there any harsh confrontation between two world systems, as it happened during the Cold War? Absolutely not. Yes, we do have mutual complaints and different approaches to problems, and the complaints are mutual. But this is no reason for aggravating this to the level of the Cuban missile crisis of the 1960s. Anyway, I think we do not want this. If somebody else wants this, they can do it. I have said today what will follow. Let them make their calculations.

Sergei Agafonov, Editor in Chief of Ogonyok magazine: Mr President, following this logic, trying to project a move from the other side – it could be a clue to Ukraine, or to Georgia. That is, if it happens there, then it is not a 12-minute flight, but six? What would our response be then?

Vladimir Putin: Well, make your calculations, I told you, you know how to count: the speed is Mach 9 and so many kilometres. How many minutes will it take? There you go…

Sergei Agafonov: No, I am talking about Georgia and Ukraine.

Vladimir Putin: So am I. It is as simple as ABC. Count how many minutes. Neither Georgia nor Ukraine will give the West any great advantage. All this will depend on the threat level that they create for us.

Vladimir Todorov, Editor in Chief of Lenta.ru: Mr President, you have devoted a lot of time and attention to the development of the digital economy and, in particular, the availability of high-speed internet. There has been much talk lately of a bill on the sustainable operation of Runet, and in this regard, I am interested in your opinion: is there really a threat that Russia will be cut off from the global net, as they say? In fact, it would be the first such precedent in history.

Vladimir Putin: You know, I cannot say for our partners what they have in mind. I think that it will cause them enormous damage, politically, let alone economically. But not only that; there are also the interests of their special services. It is their invention. They can see, hear, and read all that you say, and accumulate defence information. And that would no longer be possible. I think they will think a hundred times before doing this. But theoretically, anything is possible. Therefore, we must certainly create such segments that do not depend on anyone. This much is absolutely obvious. And technologically, of course, this can be done.

Vladimir Todorov: But would this not affect the functioning of the Russian internet, in particular, in terms of speed, something you spoke about today?

Vladimir Putin: You know, that is possible, too. Therefore, we need to develop our systems, we need to invest more in them, not cut any corners, keeping in mind that this is one of the key fields of development in the world in general, and for our country as well – that is what I already said in my Address today. Therefore, we must bear this in mind, but we are not going to cut ourselves off – we are simply not going to do this. But if they do this, I repeat, the damage for them will be great, if not enormous. In all spheres –their special services, the economy, and politics. But it must be borne in mind that theoretically, this is possible, and one needs to be ready for this anyway. Well, in general, the more sovereignty we have, including in the digital field, the better. And this is a very important area.

<…>